Loading...
1994-10-25 Planning Comm MinutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 25, 1994 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October 25, 1994, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Koll, Friel, Betlej, Dwyer, Lorberbaum, Duggan and Tilsen. Also present were Public Works Director Jim Danielson, Planning Consultant John Uban, Administrative Assistant Kevin Batchelder and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser. INTRODUCTION OF NEW MEMBER Chair Dwyer introduced new Planning Commissioner Sally Lorberbaum to the Commission and community. ANNOUNCEMENT Chair Dwyer announced that on October 26, 1994 the Metropolitan Airports Commission will conduct a public hearing on the MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan Alternative Document. He announced that the hearing will be held at Washburn High School, 201 West 49th Street, Minneapolis at 7:00 o'clock P.M. and that all interested community residents should attend this hearing as it relates to the future expansion options at MSP including the possible future construction of additional runways and terminal facilities. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Duggan moved to approve the September 27, 1994 minutes with corrections. Commissioner Tilsen seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSTAIN: 1, LORBERBAUM CASE NO. 94-34: SCHNEEMAN - VARIANCE TO FRONT YARD FENCE HEIGHT Mr. Chris Schneeman, of 1561 Park Circle, was present to discuss his request for a front yard fence height variance which would allow the construction of a fence 40 inches to 48 inches in height within his front yard. Planning Commission October 27, 1994 Page 2 Mr. Schneeman explained that his home is situated on a corner lot on an interior cul-de-sac in the Park Place neighborhood. He explained that due to his need to properly contain the family dog and to satisfactorily enclose his backyard area which contains gardens, a swing set and compost area, a fence of 48 inches will be necessary. He noted safety concerns regarding neighborhood children frequenting his yard to visit his dog. He further explained that the existing restriction creates a hardship on the full use of his property that property owners of other similarly sized lots enjoy. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. Schneeman explained that the rose arbor gate will be eight feet in height with a four foot wide gate. He stated that the color will be the same as the fence and that he will plant climbing roses. In response to a question from Commissioner Koll, Mr. Schneeman stated that they are constructing the fence around a blue spruce tree and that they have no specific plans to do additional landscaping. Commissioner Koll suggested that Mr. Schneeman consider planting shrubbery to help soften the appearance of the fence. Chair Dwyer noted that signatures of consent had been received. Commissioner Duggan moved to waive the public hearing. Commissioner Koll seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Koll moved to recommend that the City Council grant a fence height variance to allow a forty-eight inch (48") fence with an eight foot (8') high rose arbor, as proposed on site plans dated October 18, 1994. CASE NO. 94-32: HEAVER DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION - SUBDIVISION/LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT Mr. Keith Heaver, representing Mr. Jay Salmen owner of Lot 3, Sutcliff Circle, was present to discuss his request for a subdivision/lot line adjustment which would change lot lines to accommodate adjustments in the utilities that serve Lots 3 and 2 and building orientation which will allow more rear yard view orientation for Lot 3. (Mr. Heaver is the owner of Lots 1 and 2, Sutcliff). Planning Commission October 27, 1994 Page 3 Mr. Heaver explained that with the realignment of the lot lines, all the lots will still meet the minimums in both lot size and setback requirements. He explained that the utilities were originally offset to the west on Lot 3 and the lot line shift will correct this and line up the utilities better. Commissioner Tilsen noted that he would not be in favor of any encroachments, especially the corner lot on Sibley Memorial Highway, which will be compressed as a result of the lot line adjustment. He stated that he does not want to see a variance request for this corner lot in the future. He further stated that he does not want to create a hardship situation and that the developer should consider this when planning the construction of a home. Mr. Heaver responded that the width of Lot 1 will be 112 feet. He stated that he does not anticipate any problems in placing a house on the footprint of the lot. Commissioner Lorberbaum noted that the desirability of the lot should be considered and not just the marketability. Commissioner Friel inquired about the vacation of easements as a result of the lot line adjustment. Mr. Heaver stated that new easements of five feet on each side of the property line will be created. Commissioner Friel noted that the drainage and utility easements should be clarified on the map prior to City Council review. Chair Dwyer stated that all signatures of consent have been received. Commissioner Duggan moved to waive the public hearing. Commissioner Tilsen seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Tilsen moved to recommend that the City Council grant the subdivision/lot line adjustment as requested conditioned that the proper easements be provided for the new lots lines. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Planning Commission October 27, 1994 Page 4 HEARING: CASE NO. 94-31: MENDOTA HEIGHTS UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST - VARIANCE Ms. Jeanne Lufkin, representing Mendota Heights Church of Christ located at 680 Highway 110, was present to discuss a request for a sign variance which would allow an additional message board to the existing sign. Ms. Lufkin stated that they are proposing to add a message board to this sign so that events at the church can be publicly noted on the sign. She stated that many churches have message boards in addition to typical signage. Commissioner Duggan noted that he drives by the church daily and that if the right colors were chosen, the sign would be more visible from the highway. Planner Uban explained that the proposed addition to the church's permanent signage is two by eight feet for sixteen square feet on two surfaces for a total of thirty-two square feet. He stated that with these message boards attached to the existing signage the overall perceived impact on the neighborhood should be lessened. Planner Uban clarified that the church has already received a variance on the existing sign for size. Commissioner Friel stated that the Ordinance permits a 12 square foot sign in the "R" District and the church already has an 80 square foot sign and is now adding another 32 square feet. He stated that a hardship has not been presented, although he understands the problem. Commissioner Friel stated that churches within the "R" District should have sign standards instead of an ad hoc approach with variances. He further stated that the City should focus on revising its sign ordinance. Chair Dwyer stated that the Dodge Nature Center is the only abutting property owner and that Dr. Gregory Lee has informed the City that the Dodge Nature Center is not opposed to the proposed sign addition. Commissioner Duggan moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Tilsen seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Planning Commission October 27, 1994 Page 5 Commissioner Lorberbaum moved to recommend that the City Council grant the requested sign size variance to allow a temporary sign (Message Board) of thirty-two square feet, as proposed. Commissioner Betlej seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 1, FRIEL HEARING: CAO 94-05: WERTHAUSER - CRITICAL AREA VARIANCE Mr, Art Werthauser, owner of 1024 Sibley Memorial Highway, was present to discuss his request for a Critical Area Variance which would allow he construction of a wall within four feet of an existing wall with materials consisting of interlocking pre-cast concrete (Vers-Lok). Chair Dwyer explained that Mr. Werthauser received a Modified Site Plan approval to construct a single family home at 1024 Sibley Memorial Highway at the October 4 Council meeting. He explained that Mr. Werthauser desires to enhance access to his rear yard with the use of retaining walls. He stated that the proposed wall does not comply with some of the existing standards for retaining walls as stated in Section 2.5A(5) of the Critical Area Ordinance. He explained that according to the Ordinance, retaining walls are required to be separated by twenty feet (20'). Chair Dwyer stated that the Planning Commission is charged with only reviewing the request for the Critical Area Variance. He further stated that apparently there is a property line dispute between Mr. Werthauser and his neighbor and that the Planning Commission should not be involved in this matter. Mr. Werthauser explained that his home is being placed on the hillside and that retaining walls are needed. He stated that his property slopes from east to west. Werthauser explained that the home will be twelve feet (12') above the roadside which allows for a better view of the bluff and that the house will be high enough so he will not have to look at the retaining walls on Victoria. He stated the house will be at the same elevation as the house to the east. He further explained that this property was originally owned by Shiely and that they gouged the area out when fill was needed. Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 6 Mr. Werthauser submitted pictures of the retaining wall to the Planning Commission. He stated that by constructing the second wall, this will allow for removal of snow, handicap access and mowing. Commissioner Tilsen stated he had visited the site and noted there were six trucks hauling in material. He inquired how much material is needed to raise the house. Werthauser responded approximately 1,200 cubic yards. Tilsen inquired if a grading permit is needed. Public Works Director Danielson stated yes. Tilsen noted his concerns for drainage. He inquired if the walls are being constructed within the natural drainage area. Public Works Director Danielson stated no. Tilsen noted his concern for the Critical Area bluffline. He stated that there will quite a few trees removed. Werthauser responded that most of the trees are diseased and are also scrub trees. He further stated that he intends on replacing trees. Tilsen inquired if there are any other options other than constructing a second wall. He stated the house could be lowered which will require less fill. He noted that this would then lessen the view. Commissioner Duggan stated he visited the site and that he questions the concept of how well the view is from this site. He stated that he could only see condominiums and a water tower. He stated that by raising the house four feet, a better view is not being accomplished. He further noted his concern for drainage. He stated that the neighbors to the west have informed the City that they had water problems until drain tile was installed. Mr. Werthauser responded that all of the drainage from his property will flow down his property line. Werthauser stated that the retaining wall is located two feet from his property line. Duggan stated that the second wall will be four feet back from the first and three feet high. He stated that there will be another four feet to the garage. He stated that with the two walls there will be a drop of twelve feet (12') plus the garage wall. He stated that this will be a severe wall to look at. Commissioner Duggan stated that according to the Critical Area Ordinance, "the need for a variance should not be created by the applicant's design solution". Duggan suggested that evergreen trees are needed between the wall and garage. He stated that with this suggestion, there would no longer be a pathway. He further stated that the submittal of a landscape plan is required by the Critical Area Ordinance and that he had not seen a plan. Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 7 Commissioner Lorberbaum stated she had visited the site and that she is concerned about changing the contours and drainage. She inquired if the retaining wall will change the drainage and if so, where will the drainage go. She stated that the neighbor's yard is level and there was a lot of mud near the wall area. Planner Uban responded the natural slope is from the east to west and that the water comes across the property to the west. He stated that with the construction of the house, the drainage will be directed around the retaining wall. He stated the overall drainage amount will not change but will be concentrated around the retaining wall. He stated there will be minimal impact with water. He further stated that the muddy condition could have been created with the construction of the house and that erosion control measures should have been done. Mr. Werthauser stated that there should not be mud. In response to a question from Commissioner Betlej, Planner Uban stated that the Ordinance allows a setback of two feet (2') from the property line. He stated that this requirement is more than a fence setback requirement but less than the driveway setback requirement. Commissioner Betlej noted his concerns for drainage with the possibility of water accumulation near the wall area. He further stated that procedurally, this process appears to be handled incorrectly and with the substantial grading taking place, this should have triggered Planning Commission review prior to the building permit. Commissioner Koll stated the Critical Area Ordinance states that natural stone and wood are the allowable materials. She stated that over the years, materials have been improved. She inquired about the aesthetic value of poured concrete walls verses boulder and wood retaining walls. She further inquired if the Commission should be concerned, when referencing the Critical Area Ordinance, in monitoring aesthetic value or engineered value. Planner Uban responded that stone walls and large boulder walls need concrete footings. He explained that wood walls tend to rot. He stated that the integrity of the bluffline may be more important. He further stated that the new wall systems such as inter-locking decorative blocks have some aesthetic appeal. He further stated that these walls can be stepped or terraced and include landscaping. He stated that these new wall systems have a longer life span and that they are better engineered. Chair Dwyer stated there are several walls similar to this request on Mendota Heights Road. Planner Uban stated that retaining walls do help control slopes. Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 8 Commissioner Koll stated that the original rationale behind the ordinance was to use natural materials. She stated that the new concrete systems can be used to look natural. Koll further noted her concerns with the amount of fill and potential drainage problems. Mr. Werthauser stated with the construction of his home, there will be two homes on six acres in this area. He stated there is not a lot of runoff and that a lot of the drainage will be absorbed. He stated the water will go down hill to the highway storm sewer system. Commissioner Friel stated Mr. Werthauser has a steep lot and that he is proposing to replace the absorption with a driveway, house and swimming pool. Planner Uban stated that he was requested to review the variance request for a second retaining wall. He stated that with the construction of the second retaining wall, the drainage will not be changed but re-routed. He stated that he did not review the drainage as it had already been approved when City Council approved the house construction. Chair Dwyer opened the meeting to the public. Mr. and Mrs. Moore, 1028 Sibley Memorial Highway, submitted pictures of Mr. Werthauser's first wall to the Commission. Chair Dwyer acknowledged receipt of a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Moore, Mr. Moore stated the Council made a mistake in approving the building permit. He stated he would prefer no building on this site. Commissioner Tilsen stated there has been a building permit issued and that Mr. Werthauser has a right to construct the one retaining wall. Tilsen inquired what Mr. Werthauser would prefer, two retaining walls or one which would lower the elevation of the house. Mr. Moore inquired why the house cannot be lowered. He further stated he would like to see additional landscaping. Commissioner Duggan noted that according to the plans submitted, there appears to be a significant amount of woods. He stated that after grading the woods only exist on the east edge of the property. Commissioner Duggan inquired if Mr. Werthauser is using his neighbor's property to drain. Public Works Director Danielson stated that the conditions previous to construction of the house still exist. He stated that the contours on the map show a pre-existing low area. Mr. Moore stated there is standing water in his backyard. Commissioner Duggan suggested that maybe the existing drainage pipe does not work. Chair Dwyer stated that the proposal/issue is the retaining wall and that the Commission can express dissatisfaction with the City Council preempting their review. Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 9 Mrs. Moore inquired if Mr. Werthauser needs to receive a permit for hauling dirt. Commissioner Tilsen stated that the City Council will need to address this issue. Mrs. Moore inquired if the marketability of her house would be jeopardized with the construction of the retaining walls. She stated that the walls are nice looking. Mr. Max Hill, neighbor to the west, noted his concern for drainage coming across the Moore's property to his yard. He stated there has been water in his basement since the City installed the pond. He further stated he does not have a problem with the second wall. Public Works Director Danielson stated that if there is a problem, the City will work with Mr. Werthauser. Mrs. Moore stated there were some water problems in 1985 and since that time, drain tile has been installed and they have not experienced any problems. Commissioner Duggan moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Tilsen seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Friel moved to recommend that the City Council deny the variance request as it does not meet the requirements set forth in the Critical Area Ordinance - Section 5.4. He further stated that Mr. Werthauser consider other design solutions. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. Commissioner Tilsen stated that the applicant did indicate he would correct any drainage problems if created by his construction. He further noted that a grading permit may be required by City Council. Commissioner Friel amended his motion to suggest that the City Council consider reviewing the neighborhood issues of drainage and to further review grading permit issues. Commissioner Tilsen added that Council consider placing a diversion swale along the property line. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 HEARING: CASE NO. 94-33: GENERAL PUMP, INC. - VARIANCES Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 10 Mr. Del Erickson, representing General Pump, Inc. - 1174 Northland Drive, was present to discuss a request for three variances which would allow the construction of a shared driveway and adjustment of the driveway to better accommodate truck turning movements and a sign setback. Mr. Erickson stated that it was the desire of the City Council that General Pump construct a shared driveway as General Pump owns both lots. He further stated that normally the setback requirement for the truck turnaround area would be ten feet but the site has frontage on the Interstate 494 and that is why a variance is needed. He further stated that there will be berming and landscaping completed for this area. He further added that a twenty foot (20°) sign setback variance is request, similar to other signs in the business park. Commissioner Tilsen inquired about the proposed use of the other lot. Mr. Erickson responded he does not know. He further stated there will be 35 evergreen placed along the ten foot setback. Chair Dwyer acknowledged receipt of a plan submitted by Mr. Erickson regarding sign dimensions. Mr. Erickson described the sign material to be stone aggregate. In response to a question from Commissioner Friel, Mr. Erickson stated two lots were purchased by the owners and that the lot line runs through the center. Commissioner Friel inquired if there will be easements to control the shared driveway. He stated that with two separate platted lots, an easement or dedication will be required. Planner Uban concurred. Commissioner Friel stated that this is just the kind of circumstances that will need variances for undeveloped lots in the future. Chair Dwyer opened the meeting to the public. There was no one present to discuss this request. Commissioner Tilsen moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Tilsen stated that with any approval of a shared driveway be predicated upon the fact that no variances be granted for Lot 4 due to the driveway. Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 11 Commissioner Friel moved to recommend that City Council grant the following variances: 1. A ten foot (10') driveway setback variance along 1-494 to allow "bump out for truck maneuvering. 2. A twenty foot (20') front yard sign setback variance. 3. A ten foot (10') driveway side yard setback variance to allow for a common driveway between Lots 3 and 4, Block 1, Northland Plaza Addition all subject to the filing of an easement or dedication which establishes the shared driveway with the understanding that should the applicant desire to use the other parcel, a vacation could be sought. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Dwyer called a recess at 9:25 o'clock P.M. Chair Dwyer reconvened the meeting at 9:32 o'clock P.M. CONTINUED HEARING: CASE NO, 94-25: MENDOTA HOMES - REZONING AND CUP FOR PUD Mr. John Mathern, of Mendota Homes, and Mr. Bob Fors, of Childtime Day Care, were present to discuss their request for a Rezoning and a Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development which would allow the construction of 36 townhomes and day care facility at the southeast quadrant of Mendota Heights Road and Dodd Road. Chair Dwyer explained that the Mendota Homes PUD has been before the Planning Commission previously and has been continued so that the developer can make plan adjustments reflecting concerns of the Planning Commission and provide additional information requested in the ordinance. Dwyer explained that a petition was received by the City from the Bridgeview Shores neighborhood in August. He acknowledged receipt of letters received from Roxanne Wodarczyk, 2593 Lockwood Drive and Kenton Rinker, of 782 Pondhaven Lane regarding Mendota Homes' application. Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 12 Mr. Mathern explained that he is proposing a thirty six townhome development with one day care facility. He stated that both he and Childtime Day Care have responded to comments from the Planning Commission and Planner Uban's report. Chair Dwyer reviewed the October 24, 1994 report from Planner Uban regarding the Barton-Aschman traffic report and the concerns with stacking and turning movement delays. Mr. Mathern stated that this is not an uncommon traffic situation and that Barton Aschman is nationally recognized for its expertise in traffic analysis. Commissioner Duggan inquired if the driveway could be moved. Mr. Mathern responded that there is some flexibility to move it towards the townhomes. Commissioner Duggan stated he is concerned that this will still be inadequate. In response to a question from Commissioner Duggan regarding Barton-Aschman's traffic study and peak hours, Mr. Mathern stated that the identified peak hours, for the day care traffic, will be 7:00 A.M. to 9:00 A.M. and from 4:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. He stated that Barton-Aschman has indicated 61 trips, per hour, during peak hours. Planner Uban stated that he questioned Barton-Aschman's analysis and that Barton- Aschman provided him with an amended analysis. He informed the Commission that Barton-Aschman's analysis has been amended to Evening Peak Hour Trip Generation at 97 trips (45 in, 52 out) and Morning Peak Hour at 96 trips (52 in, 44 out). Planner Uban stated that these revised numbers do not change the perception of a traffic problem. In response to a question from Commissioner Betlej, Planner Uban stated that some of these trips include people already using the roadways. Commissioner Betlej stated that there may be a heavier traffic situation with the commercial trade area to the south of the day care. Planner Uban stated that people like to have their day care near their home and not their work. Commissioner Duggan stated the Commission should focus on the number of trips generated by the day care. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Planner Uban stated that there would be 100 cars in and out of the day care in peak period. He stated that peak hour periods are identified as two hours. He explained that when the traffic number is doubled, it is assumed that that number is split over each hour. In response to a question from Commissioner Tilsen, Planner Uban stated there are 26 parking stalls. Commissioner Duggan inquired if there is a formula for calculating parking. Duggan noted his concern for not enough parking as parents Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 13 will be escorting their children into the building and during peak hours, with one child every minute being escorted into the building, there will be traffic congestion with only 11 parking stalls available. Planner Uban stated that maybe not all staff members will be at the day care during peak hours and therefore more parking will be available. Commissioner Duggan stated that Mendota Heights Road is a dangerous roadway and that it is not a nice crossing as it exists now. Mr. Mathern stated that Childtime Day Care and Barton-Ashman have analyzed the traffic, signal lights and parking. He stated that there are a few variables in the analysis and that Barton-Ashman did not specifically focus on the intersection. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. Mathern stated there will be three lanes into the day care and two lanes out. He stated that he feels the proposed number of lanes in and out is reasonable and that movement through the intersection will work. Chair Dwyer stated that he travels through the Mendota Heights Road/Dodd Road intersection daily and that it is an unpleasant intersection. He stated that he does not have a lot of confidence in Barton-Ashman's report. Commissioner Friel stated that he has difficulty with the Barton-Ashman analysis. He inquired how to distinguish between the percentage of traffic already on the street system and the percentage generated by the immediate area. Friel stated with only 285 feet established for stacking, there will be stacking in the parking lot also. Planner Uban stated that no matter how many people leave the day care, stacking is the same. Planner Uban stated that the sequence of lights is two minutes and that most people will be going left to 1-494. He stated that people will be leaving the day care and joining the stream in its sequence. He stated to leave the day care may only take 30 seconds and as Barton-Ashman is reporting, the stacking-problem does not seem severe. He stated that we will not know until the signal lights are installed. Commissioner Friel stated that fifty percent more vehicles will stack into the parking lot. He further stated that he does not believe that there is less density in the southeast area than originally planned. Commissioner Duggan briefly discussed a 1993 report from MnDOT estimating the number of trips for one hour to be 100. He stated that is a twenty five percent increase, which is substantial. He stated that since 1993, there has been more units constructed on Mendota Heights Road and with an additional 36 townhomes and a day care, the traffic increase will be substantial. Planner Uban responded that some of these trips exist today and that the Barton-Ashman report Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 14 discounts this and assumes the worse case scenario. Uban stated that there will not be a 25 percent increase in traffic, that the increase will be in circulation with the left turns being increased. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Uban stated there will be an increase in congestion and that Barton-Ashman's report indicates it will be manageable. Chair Dwyer stated that an additional market analysis summary was submitted. He stated that the ChildTime, Inc. had denied review of the full market study as it is considered proprietary information. He stated that the City needs assurance the market is viable to maintain the day care's occupancy. Mr. Fors submitted background information from the 1990 Census. He indicated the main market in 1990 was over 340 children under the age of five and that 80 percent of adults in the community have Bachelor's Degree. He stated the City has highly educated people with families. He stated there is well over 400 children, now, under the age of five. He stated the day care would have difficulty serving a large area as the demand would be too great. Commissioner Duggan stated that by the year 2000, those children will be over 12 years old and then the day care's demographics will no longer be there. Mr. Fors responded the School District projects a continued growth in family. Commissioner Duggan stated he disputes the School District' projections and that the number of children under five will not always be there. Mr. Mathern stated that he believes people will like the site and that the market is viable for this type of facility. He stated that Childtime feels the market is reliable. Commissioner Tilsen acknowledged receipt of information submitted by Jackie Easton, Bridgeview Shores resident, regarding other day care facilities in the area. In response to a question from Commissioner Lorberbaum, Mr. Fors stated that Bright Start's capacity only allows for 80 children and that they do not provide full service meals. He stated that Childtime will be a larger facility with more services available. Commissioner Lorberbaum stated that if 13 parking spaces are available and during the winter time parents are undressing toddlers for about fifteen minutes, there could be only 52 people parking in an hour. She inquired how 100 arrivals will be handled. Mr. Fors stated that he believes the assumptions on the amount of time is inadequate. He further Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 15 stated that other day care facilities similar to Childtime offer less parking than what is proposed at this site. Chair Dwyer stated that some information has been provided regarding financial viability of Mendota Homes. Commissioner Betlej stated that if Mendota Homes intends to take down the land with cash and close on it, Mendota Homes° balance sheet does not give the appearance that this is feasible. Mr. Mathern responded that he is in the process of applying for construction loans and that at the time of final approval, the financing becomes final. He further stated that at the time of final platting, the project will move forward and Mr. Putnam will convey the property to Mendota Homes. He further stated that with public street improvements, assessments will be charged against each property. Commissioner Betlej inquired about how many projects Mendota Homes is currently developing. Mr. Mathern responded that there are two projects currently underway, one in Inver Grove which is thirty percent complete and the other in Lilydale. He stated that the Mendota Heights project will be their next project. Mathern further indicated that he will furnish the City with letters of credit for grading and landscaping. In response to a question from Commissioner Betlej regarding rising interest rates, Mr. Mathern stated that most buyers of these townhomes are on their third or fourth home. He stated that these people have equity within the community and that they sometimes put 100 percent down on their new home. Chair Dwyer briefly summarized the development schedule as submitted by Mr. Mathern. He stated that development may commence in January of 1995 with completion in 1996. He further indicated that the day care hopes to begin operation as early as 1995. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. Fors stated it is Childtime's intention to purchase the property from Mr. Putnam. In regards to the revised grading plan submitted, Commissioner Tilsen stated that some softening has been included but that he would like to see more. He stated he would like to see the swales softened by 1/2 percent and that the driveways be flattened. Mr. Mathern stated he has no difficulty with accommodating the grade changes as suggested by Commissioner Tilsen. Tilsen further stated that he would like to see the units tucked more into the rear of the property which would create more natural berming along the freeway. He further stated that the landscape plan shows the driveways different than the grading plan. Mr. Mathern responded that the Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 16 landscape plan is only a concept and that the intention was to provide information regarding numbers and types of trees. Commissioner Tilsen stated the plan has improved but that he would like to see everything lowered so there is a berming effect along the freeway. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer regarding drainage. Mr. Mathern stated that berming along Mendota Heights Road may cause a drainage problem. He stated that more trees than berming may help the situation. He stated that his first priority in developing the plans was to include backyard space. He further stated that people interested in these types of townhomes do not want steps. He stated that he would like to include backyard space without grades caused by berming. Commissioner Tilsen stated the question is whether or not walkouts or berming is wanted. Mr. Mathern responded that there is no reason for units to be walkout and that he can eliminate this idea with no problem. He stated that Lots 5,6 7 and 8 could be non-walkout and Lots 1,2 3 and 4 berm could be extended along Mendota Heights Road. In regards to the landscaping of the daycare, Mr. Mathern stated the daycare will be landscaped. He further stated the building has been moved to save some trees. He further stated there will some lower plantings around the exterior of the building and fence area. He stated that visibility is a key factor when landscaping a day care facility. Chair Dwyer inquired if the City Attorney has reviewed the Homeowner's Association documents. In response to a question from Commissioner Duggan, Mr. Mathern stated the play area will be located south and west of the building. Duggan responded that some of the property is sloped in the southwest corner. Mathern stated that area will have to be fenced and can be modified to accommodate the sloped area. Mr. Mathern briefly explained the number of trees which will be removed and replaced. He indicated that 17 trees will be destroyed and that some will be moved to be saved. He further stated that the backdrop trees will likely be saved and that the building area trees will be lost. Commissioner Duggan stated that there will be significant changes in the area and that a great effort in landscaping should be accomplished. He stated the replacement of trees should be monitored. Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 17 Chair Dwyer stated that street locations have not been changed. Mr. Mathern stated that street locations are appropriate. He explained that the exits are at the property lines on the western access. He stated that the eastern access is pointed at the side of Lot 5 with full plantings on the north side of the street. Commissioner Tilsen inquired if a full service day care is needed in the City. He stated that the availability of home care within the City should be valued. He further inquired if the City wants to encourage home care providers. He inquired if 15 staff members for 177 children is a direction the City wants to pursue. Planner Uban explained that for comparative information, he noted the impact on density if the 10,000 square foot lot average is met and if the 25 percent impervious surface is met. (Density allow 33.5 lots and 30 units are allowed by the requirements for 25 percent impervious surface). Commissioner Duggan briefly reviewed the calculations for density. He stated that the maximum is 33.5 and not 36, based on density. Commissioner Friel that the calculations for impervious surface comes up different. He stated that the 25 percent requirement is a hard number that neither the Planning Commission or City Council can grant a variance to. Chair Dwyer stated that Mr. Mathern is aware of this requirement, as per the October 12, 1994 letter from Mr. Mathern, and the despite the plan being good, it does exceed the impervious surface requirement. Commissioner Friel stated that even if a variance were justified, no hardship has been presented. Friel further noted that the corrections to the August Planning Commission minutes include that Mr. Mathern provide the Commission with information on the underlying subdivision variances. Mr. Mathern inquired if the City Council and Planning Commission have no authority to grant a variance to increase the units to 36. He inquired if this was set in "stone". He stated that he would not be wasting everybody's time if he had been aware of this. Commissioner Friel responded that there is no authority to grant a variance according to Section 22 of the Zoning Ordinance, Mr. Mathern stated he does not have the ability to reduce the impervious surface. Commissioner Tilsen stated that a fifty five foot (55') right- of-way may allow some gain in land. Mr. Mathern inquired if this would work in his favor. Planner Uban responded yes. 1 Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 18 Mr. Mathern explained that he is providing heavy landscaping with underground irrigation. He stated that he is providing one level units which use up land with large footprints which are marketable. He stated that he would like 36 units and he believes that this makes good use of this site. Commissioner Friel inquired if there is an economic advantage in keeping the development at 36 units. Mr. Mathern stated yes. Chair Dwyer opened the meeting to the public. Mr. Kent Rinker, 782 Pondhaven, apologize for his late delivery of his letter dated October 21, 1994. Rinker stated that the language within Sections 22.1B, 22.3(1) and 22.3(6)e are clear in that a variance is not allowed. He stated that even if a variance is allowed, it is not a five percent variance but a twenty percent variance. He further stated that according to Sections 22.1, 22.2 and 22.3(6)f, a density variance is prohibited for financial benefit. Rinker further inquired if there is really 10 acres of land. He further stated that Section 22.1b clearly states that PUD should consist of entirely residential, therefore a day care cannot be considered. He stated that another variance would need to be granted. Rinker stated that evidence of financial status has not been accurately met. He stated that the traffic report assumptions are questionable. He further stated that according to the Subdivision Control Ordinance land dedication or cash dedication be submitted. He stated that the day care site equals 10 percent of the site and that that site could remain open and serve as the park dedication. Mr. Kenneth Severson, 2496 Westview Terrace, stated he conducted a two hour survey of traffic on Mendota Heights Road. He stated he counted 525 cars in two hours. He noted his concerns for increased traffic. Ms. Jana Patrick, 2536 Arbor Court, stated that Bright Start has problems with parking and that they offer different types of programs on a regular basis. She further inquired if Childtime's report include stay at home children. She stated she would like to see single family homes constructed on this property. She stated this would generate less traffic. Commissioner Duggan inquired if there are parking restrictions enforced on Mendota Heights Road. Public Works Director Danielson responded not at this time. He further stated that a no parking zone should be considered with the construction of a new left turn lane. Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 19 Ms. Jackie Easton, Bridgeview Shore resident, reviewed information she submitted regarding day care facilities in the area. She commented that Visitation is the only day care facility with no openings. She further discussed the new Metro II site which serves as Extended Day for Kindergartners from ISD No. 197. She further stated that there are 12 individual day care providers in the area, which includes herself. She stated that cars come at scattered times or all at the same time. She further stated that Childtime did not research the use of Nanny's in the area. Mr. Mike Dumer, Arbor Court, stated he does not want to see the day care with the townhouses. He further stated that he feels that people buying the townhouses would not want a loud heavily trafficked day care next to their place of residency. He further stated that the City should review financial statements more thoroughly. Mr. Doug Rickert, 550 Abbey Way, stated that the traffic report does not include traffic from throughout the day. He stated that there are at least 300 cars between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. He further noted his concern for sight distances. He noted his concerns for families safety as related to traffic increase. He noted his concerns with the developer's financial ability in completing the work. Commissioner Tilsen moved to close the public hearing. Ms. Easton inquired if emergency vehicles would have enough access in and out. Mr. Mathern stated the fire marshal would review this information. Commissioner Betlej seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Friel moved to recommend that the City Council deny the rezoning request from R-1 to MR-PUD. He stated that it is unnecessary to rezone as all the applicant seeks to accomplish can be accomplished by proceeding as a PUD under Section 22 of the Ordinance and that application for a CUP for a PUD is before the City. Commissioner Friel further moved to recommend denial of the CUP for PUD because based on the record before the City it will adversely affect the public health safety and welfare and is not in compliance with the PUD Ordinance Section 22 in the ) following specific requests: Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 20 a. It fails to meet the impervious surface requirements of Section 22 and in fact exceeds them by 20 percent (22.1B). b. It fails to meet the density requirements of Section 22 utilizing for that purpose the calculation process of Section 22.3(3) and applying the MR-PUD requirement of not more than four units per calculated acre. c. Even assuming that a variance from the impervious surface requirements and/or the density requirements of Section 22 was permitted, the applicant has presented no evidence of hardship and in fact has advised the Planning Commission that his failure to meet those requirements is entirely for the economic advantage of additional units which our Ordinance clearly indicates is not a justification for variance. d. It is the finding of the Planning Commission based on the evidence before it that the traffic generated by a proposed day care center to serve 117 children and the proximity of its entrance to Highway 149 is inconsistent with the maintenance of public safety and health at the intersection of Mendota Heights Road and Dodd Road, and in fact creates a public safety problem. e. There is a clear lack of any hard evidence before the Planning Commission to support the requirement of Section 22 that adequate funding is available to the applicants to complete the project. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 DISCUSS ORDINANCE REVISIONS DETACHED GARAGES AND STADIUMS IN R-1 Due to the lateness of the meeting, the Commission continued this discussion to their November meeting. VERBAL REVIEW Public Works Director Danielson informed the Commission of City Council action on previous planning cases. Planning Commission October 25, 1994 Page 21 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Planning Commission moved to adjourn its meeting at 11:52 o'clock P.M. Respectfully submitted, Kimberlee K. Blaeser Senior Secretary