Loading...
1999-04-27 Planning Comm MinutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 27, 1999 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 27, 1999, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Duggan, Friel, Koll, Lorberbaum, Tilsen, Betlej, and Kleinglass. Also present were Theresa Greenfield of MFRA, Public Works Director Jim Danielson, Senior Secretary Linda Shipton and Administrative Assistant Patrick C. Hollister. Mr. Hollister took the minutes. MINUTES Commissioner Duggan moved to approve the March 23, 1999 minutes with revisions. Chair Lorberbaum seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 PLANNING CASE #99 -10 MENDOTA HOMES, INC. WETLANDS PERMIT Erin Mathern of Mendota Homes re- introduced herself and her application for a Wetlands Permit for a new home at 990 Diego Lane. Ms. Mathern said that at the previous meeting of the Planning Commission there had been some confusion about whether or not the depression on the site actually constituted a wetland. Ms. Mathern said that she had hired a wetland delineator per the Planing Commission's direction and that the delineator had deteuuined that there was no wetland on the property. Ms. Mathern referred the Planning Commission to the wetland delineation report in their agenda packet. Commissioner Friel asked Mr. Danielson why the City had thought that there was a wetland on the property in the first place. Mr. Danielson said that the City's official wetland map was based on aerial photos taken in the 1970s and that the map showed a wetland on the Mendota Homes site. Commissioner Lorberbaum suggested that the Council may see fit to refund the application fee to Mendota Homes. Commissioner Tilsen moved to re -open the continued public hearing on this application. 1 Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Duggan asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to comment on this application. There was no -one in the audience to comment on this application. Commissioner Tilsen moved to close the public hearing on this application. Commissioner Betlej seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Friel moved to recommend to the Council that they determine that there is no wetland on the Mendota Homes site at 990 Diego Lane, and that they refund the Wetlands Permit application fee previously paid by Mendota Homes. Commissioner Betlej seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Duggan advised Ms. Mathern to provide the same information to Council, including the wetland delineation and information regarding trees, soil removal, and contours. CASE 99 -11: NORTHERN STATES POWER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Mr. Hollister explained to the Commission that at the request of a citizens' group within Sunfish Lake, the state Environmental Quality Board had required NSP to complete an Environmental Assessment Worksheet on their substation expansion. Mr. Hollister added that this meant that NSP was prohibited from seeking any approvals from the City until the EAW had been completed, probably in August of 1999. Mr. Hollister said that the City would resume the public hearing process at that time, and that the 60 -day review period would restart when the application process resumed. Mr. Hollister also said that all of the appropriate neighbors would be re- notified for a public hearing when the application process resumed. Chair Duggan asked for a motion to open the continued public hearing on the NSP application. Commissioner Kleinglass moved to open the public hearing on the NSP application. Commissioner Betlej seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABST: 1 (Friel) Commissioner Friel explained that he will abstain from any vote on the NSP case and will recuse himself from discussion of the NSP case due to a potential conflict of interest stemming from ties between his law firm and NSP. Chair Duggan asked if anyone in the audience wished to comment on this application. Mr. David Harig of Huber Drive asked the Commission if the neighborhoods would get re- notified when the application process resumed. Mr. Hollister said that that was the case. Chair Duggan asked if anyone else was present to comment on this application. There was no -one else present to comment on this application. Chair Duggan asked for a motion to close the public hearing. Commissioner Kleinglass moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Betlej seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABST: 1 (Friel) Commissioner Lorberbaum said that when discussion of this application resumes, she would like clarification on some points. Commissioner Lorberbaum said that she was confused about how many poles would be changed and where those poles were located. Commissioner Lorberbaum added that some residents who got notice of the first public hearing did not get notice of NSP's open house. Commissioner Duggan said that Staff should update the community on the status of NSP's application in the next issue of Heights Hilites, assuming that the timing of the next issue is appropriate. 3 Commissioner Betlej suggested that Staff also inform the community of the public comment process for the EAW process itself. PLANNING CASE FILE #99 -12: VARIANCE WILL SALZ, 1084 AVANTI DRIVE Mr. Salz introduced himself and his application to the Planning Commission. Mr. Salz said that he was asking for a front yard setback variance for a garage expansion. Mr. Salz said that when he built his house 22 years ago, he did not realize until it was too late how steep his driveway would be. Mr. Salz said that the base of his garage was six feet higher than the curb. Mr. Salz said that since he was approaching retirement, it was time that he did something to correct the problem. Mr. Salz said that the driveway is particularly dangerous in the winter for him, his wife, and his mother -in -law, who lives with them. Mr. Salz said that after discussing possible solutions with a few contractors, he had decided to extend his garage ten feet towards the front lot line , thereby cutting the height of the driveway down 3.5 feet. Mr. Salz said that his house is currently 42 feet from the front property line and that only 30 feet is required by ordinance, but that extending the garage forward 10 feet would require a variance because of the position of the two houses on either side of his house. Commissioner Tilsen said that since the house on the east of Mr. Salz' house faces a different street, he did not think that it's position should be relevant. Commissioner Tilsen asked Planner Greenfield for her response. Planner Greenfield said that she could go along with Mr. Tilsen's interpretation. Commissioner Friel said that he agreed with Commissioner Tilsen on this point. Commissioner Friel moved to recommend to the Council that they make a finding that Mr. Salz does not need a front yard setback variance for this garage addition and should refund Mr. Salz' application fee. Commissioner Tilsen seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Friel moved that if the Council does find that Mr. Salz does need a variance, the Planning Commission recommends that the variance be granted. Commissioner Koll seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 4 VERBAL REVIEW Chair Duggan asked Mr. Danielson to provide the verbal review at this time. Mr. Danielson provided the verbal review of previous planning cases. PLANNING CASE FILE #99 -13 DAKOTA COUNTY HRA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Chair Duggan reminded the Commission that Dakota County HRA had already been through the Concept Plan stage with both the Planning Commission and the Council. Chair Duggan said that the Dakota County HRA was applying for a Rezoning, a Conditional Use Permit for Land Reclamation, and a Conditional Use Peunit for a Planned Unit Development. Chair Duggan said that he was concerned about the size and number of parking spaces, the signage and lighting, the trail provisions, the laundry lines, and wind dispersal. Ms. Kari Gill of Dakota County HRA introduced herself and gave a brief overview of the proposal. Ms. Gill said that the HRA owns slightly less than 1% interest in each affordable housing project they build. Ms. Gill said that the roles that the HRA plays in each housing project are that of General Partner, Lender, and Long -Term Manager. Chair Duggan asked if there was any possibility that the housing could convert to owner- occupied. Ms. Gill said that as part of the HRA's contract with the private partner, the housing must stay rental housing for a minimum of 30 years. Ms. Gill showed several charts relating to rental housing in Dakota County. MS. Gill showed that rental vacancy rates are low and that average rents are high. Ms. Gill said that the average rent for one of these units would be $440 -$460 for a two bedroom and $490 -$510 for a two bedroom. Ms. Gill said that the average family in one of these households would be earning $24,300 and that the average household size would be 3.3 people. Ms. Gill said that 3.3% of the tenants may not be working because they are on disability. Ms. Gill showed a photo of Pleasant Ridge Townhomes in Hastings and said that the HRA development in Mendota Heights would be similar in appearance. Chair Duggan asked if the office shown on the plans would eventually be converted into a housing unit. Ms. Gill said that it would not. Ms. Gill provided a summary of the proposed site plan. Ms. Gill said that based upon the comments the HRA received from the Planning Commission and the City Council, the HRA had reduced the number of home from 26 to 24. MS. Gill said that there would be six buildings, each with four residential units. Ms. Gill said that each unit would have a single car garage, and that the building materials 5 would be masonry and brick. Ms. Gill then introduced Kim Bretheim, architect for the project. Mr. Bretheim said that the County Highway Department had insisted that the HRA only be allowed one access onto Lexington Avenue, and thus HRA had placed the access point in the middle of the project. Mr. Bretheim said that each of the six residential buildings is somewhat different from each other. Mr. Bretheim said that in response to the Planning Commission and Council's comments, he revised the site plan to utilize more of the existing grades on the site. Mr. Bretheim said that the access road is at the low point of the site. Mr. Bretheim then described the interior floor plans of the various residential units, and said that a variety of floor plans would be provided. Mr. Bretheim said that the tot lot would be controlled and owned by the development, and would not be for the use of the general public. Mr. Bretheim said that the development would provide one parking stall per unit within each garage, one stall per unit in each driveway and half as many stalls as units in separate parking areas for a total of 2.5 spaces per dwelling. Chair Duggan said that he was concerned about the parking stalls being only 8' x 20', especially because vehicles are becoming larger and larger. Mr. Bretheim said that the HRA now plans to make all of the parking stalls 9' x 20'. Mr. Bretheim continued that the grading plans and utility plans were included in the Planning Commission's packet and that a NURP pond was planned for the northeast corner of the site, which is currently a ditch. Chair Duggan asked Mr. Bretheim if he knew about the trail extension and if so where it would be located. Mr. Bretheim said that he was aware of plans for the trail extension and that the City would have to deteluuine the exact alignment of the trail on the HRA site. Mr. Bretheim said that the HRA was willing to grade for the trail on a preliminary basis. Commissioner Tilsen asked Mr. Bretheim if the HRA planned to give the County more right -of -way for the trail. Mr. Bretheim said that the HRA did not intend to replat the lot, but would be willing to grant a trail easement to the County for the trail. Commissioner Tilsen asked Mr. Danielson what the City would want from the HRA for the trail. Mr. Danielson said that the City should require either an easement or enough right -of- way to construct the trail. Mr. Bretheim said that the HRA plans to reserve the western 20' feet of the parcel along Lexington Avenue for the trail. Mr. Bretheim then showed the elevations of the buildings 6 and said that that two buildings that face Lexington Avenue would have brick and vinyl siding. Chair Duggan said that he would like to see exterior materials for this housing project of equal quality to the materials used for the senior building built in Mendota Heights by the HRA two years ago. Chair Duggan said that the siding may deteriorate after 15 years, and that with less than 1% ownership the HRA may not be concerned with the maintenance of the housing units. Chair Duggan asked what provisions were made for the eventual replacement of siding. Ms. Gill said that the HRA puts reserves aside for siding replacement, and that the HRA keeps an ongoing Capital Improvement Plan for other types of maintenance. Mr. Bretheim referred the Planning Commission to the details provided by Wolverine siding at the end of their Planning Commission packets. Commissioner Betlej noted that the siding manufacturer is concerned about runs of siding more than 50 feet long, and that it appeared that some of the units had runs of siding that long or longer. Mr. Bretheim said that the longest run of siding on any of the units is 22 feet. Mr. Bretheim said that the HRA had tried to avoid long runs of siding as much as possible. Mr. Bretheim said that for a color scheme the HRA preferred tan siding with brick accents. Commissioner Koll asked if the units would have multiple colors. Ms. Gill said that no, the colors would be consistent between all of the units. Commissioner Lorberbaum asked if the Pleasant Ridge townhomes also had white siding. Ms. Gill said that those townhomes were also tan with brick. Ms. Gill said that she would be able to bring material samples to the Council meeting to show them the colors. Mr. Bretheim said that he actually prefers white but that the HRA prefers other colors. Mr. Bretheim finished describing the interior floor plans of the three bedroom units. Commissioner Tiisen asked how much storage each unit would have. Mr. Bretheim said that the garages would be deeper than usual with storage shelves in the back. Chair Duggan said that the HRA should have worked more with the existing terrain. 7 Mr. Bretheim said that the dirt moving would not be that great, and that the HRA would be basically taking two feet off of the highest point and adding it to the lowest point. Chair Duggan asked if the pond could be an attractive nuisance for kids playing in the playground. Mr. Bretheim said that it was possible, but that the Eagan development had a similar pond and that this had not been a problem. Commissioner Lorberbaum asked about the handicapped access to the handicapped units. Mr. Bretheim explained the access. Commissioner Lorberbaum said that the mechanical room for one of the units was in the floodplain. Commissioner Lorberbaum showed an HRA calendar which showed other HRA housing projects. Commissioner Lorberbaum said that she had expected more shrubbery based on the housing projects featured in the calendar. Commissioner Lorberbaum said that she appreciated the trees that HRA proposed, but that she would like to see some greenery and bushes beyond that. Chair Duggan asked about the implications of having only one access point for fire protection. Mr. Bretheim said that he had spoken to the fire department and that they had told him that if the access point was sufficiently wide, it would not be a problem. Chair Duggan said that the HRA should add more trees to the development. Commissioner Lorberbaum agreed, saying that foundation plantings in the rears of the buildings would be nice. Commissioner Lorberbaum asked why the flooring in the mechanical areas were vinyl instead of gyp - crete. Mr. Bretheim said that gyp -crete is generally used for apartment buildings. Commissioner Tilsen said that the HRA should work with the City engineering department for a more efficient utility plan. Commissioner Tilsen said that the HRA could save money on sewer connections with a better arrangement. Commissioner Tilsen asked Ms. Gill if she was familiar with the Multi - Housing Crime Project in which the police work with homeowners on crime issues. Ms. Gill said that she was familiar with this program. Commissioner Tilsen recommended that the residents of this project participate in this program. 8 Commissioner Koll said that she felt that not enough parking spaces had been provided. Ms. Gill said that the same parking /unit ratio had been used in previous HRA developments and has worked well. Chair Duggan asked Planner Greenfield how she came up with the number of required parking spaces. Ms. Greenfield said that she was substituting that evening and could not answer the question. Commissioner Koll said that she was concerned that it would be an eyesore if too many people had to park their vehicles outside. Commissioner Friel asked Ms. Gill what the County's rationale was for insisting on no more than one access to the project. Ms. Gill said that the main reasons were safety and the County's spacing guidelines for access points. Commissioner Friel asked if the terms of the HRA's partnership had been determined. Ms. Gill said that the terms were still in the works. Commissioner Friel said that whether legal access for the trail was granted by the HRA through ROW or through an easement, this right should be secured at the time of project approval and not left to afterwards. Commissioner Friel added that the trail should be constructed before anyone moves in to the project to avoid neighborhood resistance later. Commissioner Friel said that he had three questions for Staff. The first questions was why this development was being processed as a PUD when the parcel size is less than five acres. The second question was regarding green space. Commission Friel said that the zoning ordinance only allows 25% impervious surface and that the HRA was adding 37.1% of impervious surface. Commissioner Friel's third question was regarding air noise. Commissioner Friel said that the HRA development is inconsistent with the City's own noise ordinance. Mr. Hollister said that regarding Commissioner Friel's first question, the Council had instructed the HRA to apply for a PUD. Mr. Hollister added that regarding the second and third questions, Staff could review those issues and report to the Planning Commission next month. Ms. Gill said that the HRA is talking to the Metropolitan Council about air noise regulations and that the HRA was confident that they could meet the air noise attenuation requirements. 9 Mr. Bretheim said that regarding the 25% impervious surface requirement, this applied to commercial PUDs, not residential PUDs. Chair Duggan asked if anyone in the audience would like to comment on this application. There was no -one in the audience to comment on this application. Commissioner Kleinglass moved to open and close the public hearing on the HRA application. Commissioner Betlej seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Duggan suggested tabling discussion of this application to the next Planning Commission meeting to provide the applicant and Staff time to answer questions regarding landscaping, impervious surface, and the five acre PUD minimum. Commissioner Friel moved to table discussion of this application to the June meeting of the Planning Commission in order to provide Staff and the applicant time to address concerns about landscaping, impervious surface, air noise, and that five -acre minimum for PUDs. Commissioner Koll seconded the motion AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 RECESS Chair Duggan called for a five minutes recess. PLANNING CASE FILE #99 -146 JOHN JACOBS, 1766 LANSFORD LANE Mr. Jacobs introduced himself to the Planning Commission. Mr. Jacobs said that he currently has a 12' x 16' shed in his backyard which he built without a peimit and which would require a Conditional Use Permit Mr. Jacobs said that this shed was a temporary arrangement and that he would take it down as soon as he is finished with his addition to the rear of his home. Commissioner Friel asked how far the shed was from the deck. Mr. Jacobs said that it was roughly 3' from the deck. 10 Commissioner Friel said that the zoning ordinance requires the shed to be at least 5' from the deck. Commissioner Tilsen said that Conditional Use Peniiits sometimes have time limits attached to them. Commissioner Tilsen asked how much time Mr. Jacobs would need to complete his home addition. Mr. Jacobs said that he would like permission to keep the shed for one year to provide enough time to finish the home addition. Commissioner Koll said that the shed was an eyesore. Commissioner Koll asked why Mr. Jacobs needed a full year before he could take it down. Mr. Jacobs said that contractors were hard to find and that it could take one year to get the work on the addition done. Commissioner Duggan opened the pubic hearing on this application and invited members of the audience to step forward. Tim Malchow, 721 Roundhill Road, said that he had lived in his house since 1969. Mr. Malchow noted that many of his neighbors were present at the meeting that evening to object to either the shed in the back yard, the trailer in the driveway, or both. Mr. Malchow said that Mr. Jacobs has been in violation of the zoning ordinance since December of 1998 and that the shed is unsightly. Mr. Malchow said that one year is too long a time period to allow Mr. Jacobs to keep this shed. Mr. Malchow said that he believed that some reasonable time period to get rid of the shed would be acceptable to most of the neighbors, but that it had to be less than one year. Mr. Kevin Howe, 1763 Lansford Lane, agreed with Mr. Malchow that the neighbors would be OK with a reasonable time frame to get rid of the shed, and that the neighbors were also upset about the trailer and the garbage cans on the driveway. Carol Gilke, 1780 Sutton Lane, said that although these issues are not directly related to the shed, she would be remiss if she didn't point out that Mr. Jacobs is also fond of gunning the engine on his Harley Davidson to the disturbance of the neighbors, and that Mr. Jacobs also allows his big white dog to run free and defecate on the neighbors' lawns. Mr. Malchow added that due to the topography of the neighborhood, Mr. Jacobs back yard tends to flood and the shed could float onto someone else's property during a heavy rain. Commissioner Kleinglass moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Betlej seconded the motion. 11 AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Lorberbaum asked if September 1, 1999 would be a reasonable time frame to remove the shed. Mr. Jacobs said that a September 1 deadline would be acceptable to him. Commissioner Duggan suggested that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council grant a Conditional Use Permit to Mr. Jacobs for the shed on the following conditions: 1. The shed must be removed by September 15, 1999 2. The shed must be immediately painted to match the house 3. Mr. Jacobs must keep his property clean with no outdoor tarps 4. Mr. Jacobs must remove the trailer from his driveway. 5. Mr. Jacobs must refrain from gunning up his Harley Davidson. Commissioner Friel said that as much as he sympathized with these other concerns by the neighbors, the City had no authority to impose conditions for this CUP that do not relate directly to the structure. Commissioner Friel said that these other matters, such as general maintenance of the yard and property and noise pollution were already controlled by other City ordinances. Commissioner Friel moved to recommend that the Council grant a Conditional Use Permit for this shed on the following conditions: 1. That the shed be removed or brought into confoiuiance with the zoning ordinance by September 15, 1999 2. That the shed be painted to match the house within two weeks Commissioner Tilsen seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 1 (Duggan) Chair Duggan instructed Mr. Jacobs to appear before the next meeting of the City Council. ADJOURN Motion made to adjourn by Betlej and seconded by Kleinglass. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Patrick C. Hollister 12