Loading...
1992-04-28 Planning Comm MinutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 28, 1992 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 28, 1992, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 o'clock P.M. The following Commission members were present: Koll, Friel, Dreelan, Dwyer, Duggan and Tilsen. Commissioner Krebsbach was excused. Also present were Public Works Director Jim Danielson, Planning Consultant Tim Malloy, Administrative Assistant Kevin Batchelder and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Friel moved approval of the March 24, 1992, Minutes with corrections. Commissioner Koll seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 CASE NO. 92-10 ) CARROLL VARIANCE Mr. Joseph Carroll, of 650 Brookside Lane, was present to discuss his request for two front yard setback variances that would allow him to construct additions on two sides of his home. Mr. Carroll explained that he owns two 60' by 120' lots. He explained that the current home is a one bedroom home which is centered in the middle of one of his lots. He explained that the two additions would include living space and an additional garage which would make his garage a three car garage. Commissioner Dreelan questioned if the garage addition could be turned to access the alley thereby having windows facing the street. Mr. Carroll stated that it would be difficult as it could create a problem with the additional living space as proposed. He stated that the plan would have to be completely redrawn in order to accomplish the suggestion. In response to a question from Commissioner Tilsen, Mr. Carroll stated the redwood fence would be removed as it has deteriorated. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 April 28, 1992 Page 2 Commissioner Friel stated the property is a corner lot and the existing home and garage do not meet the required front yard setbacks from either of the adjacent streets. He stated the property is legally non-conforming. He questioned if there is a possibility of extending the home so as to not infringe any further on the non- conformity of the house. He questioned if a deck will be added to the home in the future. Mr. Carroll responded that he does not want to end up with a house that looks like it has been pieced together. He explained that he intends to construct a deck in the future. Mr. Carroll briefly reviewed his house plan showing elevations and floor plan. He pointed out where the additions to the home will be placed. He further noted that the old roof will be removed and the new roof line will be extended over both of the additions. Chair Dwyer acknowledged that Mr. Carroll has received signatures of consent. Commissioner Duggan moved to waive the public hearing. Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. Mr. Carroll explained that the two additions will mix in well with the surrounding homes in the neighborhood. In response to a question from the Commission, Planner Malloy explained that there is room for a deck addition in the future as it will extend from the rear of the house into the backyard. Commissioner Koll commended Mr. Carroll's endeavors in trying to integrate his home with the existing neighborhood. She stated the City is concerned with visual impacts of structures and conformity to the Zoning Ordinance. She stated the house is unique as it sits at the end of the street. She explained the topography of the land is low and that there are no homes that sit lower than Mr. Carroll's home. She stated the proposed enlarged home will fit nicely into the existing neighborhood. Commissioner Koll moved to recommend that the City Council grant a nine foot (9') variance to the side yard abutting a street setback requirement along Laura Avenue April 28, 1992 Page 3 and a fourteen foot (14') variance to the front yard setback requirement along Brookside Lane, Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. Commissioner Duggan offered a friendly amendment stating that the existing garage be removed before the new garage is added. Commissioner Tilsen offered a friendly amendment requiring that the existing driveway be removed. Commissioner Koll accepted both amendments. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 CASE NO. 92-11 UNITED PROPERTIES VARIANCES Mr. Dale Glowa, United Properties, was present to discuss a request for three variances in conjunction with the VGC Corporation Proposal. Mr. Glowa briefly explained the property is to be developed for an office/warehouse by VGC Corporation. He explained there is 220 acres within the Mendota Heights Business Park Plan. He stated that this project represents the third phase of development in the subdivision. Mr. Glowa explained the building is proposed to be 50,000 square feet and will be located just north of the Lennox site. Mr. Glowa explained that VGC Corporation is a worldwide corporation headquartered in Amsterdam. He explained that VGC sells and distributes graphics to printing companies worldwide. He stated that Ft. Lauderdale is where the United States headquarters is located. He stated the Mendota Heights location will be the upper midwest headquarters as well as the state's headquarters. Mr. Glowa briefly reviewed with the Planning Commission the Proof of Parking Plan revised as of April 21, 1992. Mr. Glowa explained United Properties' request for a twenty foot (20') sign setback variance. He explained that United Properties has received this variance on past projects. He explained the proposed sign is of the same characteristics as the previous signs installed in the Mendota Heights Business Park. April 28, 1992 Page 4 Mr. Glowa explained they are asking for a variance to allow a 4/1,000 parking ratio and a variance to allow 8 1/2 foot wide parking stalls. He explained that he has discussed with City staff the possibility of amending the ratio and parking requirements within the City's Ordinance. He stated the City's Industrial District seems to be in conflict with today's higher standards of open green space throughout developments. He explained that receiving these two variances would allow this development to have more open green space and less hard surface. He explained that if needed, they can add more parking spaces. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. Glowa explained that other companies in the area that have been granted these variances have not experienced problems both in parking stall width and parking space availability. Commissioner Tilsen commended Mr. Glowa on the plan presentation. He explained his concerns with the process, in the past, in variances being granted to United Properties. He stated he would like to see the Planning Commission become more involved in the preliminary stages of a development. He questioned if parking could go in the back of the building. Mr. Glowa responded that variances have always been processed through the Planning Commission. He also explained that it would be unusual to have parking in the rear of the building. Commissioner Friel stated that the Zoning Ordinance requires that hardship and practical difficulty be determined in order for a variance to be approved. He stated the Ordinance should include open space requirements. Commissioner Friel stated that United Properties can accomplish the same objective if a special permit were granted for these requests instead of variances. Mr. Glowa responded that a special permit would be satisfactory, but that he would prefer a variance as allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. He stated that the project stands for itself and that the site clearly has area to add space should it be necessary. Mr. Glowa stated that VGC Corporation has 58 employees and the spaces provided. Commissioner Duggan moved to waive the public hearing. Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. April 28, 1992 Page 5 AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Koll moved to recommend that the City Council grant a twenty foot (20') sign setback variance, a variance to allow a 4/1,000 parking ratio and a variance to allow 8 1/2 foot wide parking stalls. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. Commissioner Friel offered a friendly amendment stating a condition that the City reserves the right to implement the proof of parking plan (dated 10/29/92, revised 4/21/92) should the conditions change that require additional parking and/or should the ownership change. Commissioner Koll accepted the friendly amendment AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 CONTINUED HEARING CASE NO. 92-06: ANDERSON CUP FOR PUD, SUBDIVISION, WETLANDS PERMIT AND VARIANCE Ms. Kathleen Anderson was present to discuss her request for subdivision, wetlands permit and variance to allow the construction of a single family home. Ms. Anderson briefly explained that she is intending to purchase 1.302 acres of land from the Somerset 19 Condominium Association. She stated she intends to construct a split entry home on the west side of the property. She stated the front of the home will face the wetlands with the garage facing the street. She stated she does not believe in the use of chemicals on land. She stated there are several items that have been dumped into the wetlands and the construction of her home would not only increase the City's tax base but also help protect the wetlands from further dumping. She further stated that there seems to be a concern with the closeness of her home to the wetlands and pointed out that the house to the east of the property has been constructed very close to the wetlands. Chair Dwyer briefly informed the audience that at the March 24, 1992 Planning Commission meeting the Commission was under the impression that the property Ms. Anderson is seeking to purchase from the Somerset 19 Condominium April 28, 1992 Page 6 Association was a part of the Somerset 19 Planned Unit Development. He explained that the City staff received a letter from Mr. Howard Guthmann, President of the Somerset 19 Condominium Association, reviewed City files and found that the City never took action to add the Wodke property to the Somerset Planned Unit Development. He explained that the Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development request Ms. Anderson is seeking is no longer relevant. He stated the Planning Commission will be reviewing a request for subdivision, wetlands permit and variance. Commissioner Tilsen stated he has visited the site. He stated that with the construction of this home, a serious impact on the wetlands would occur. He stated the City needs to protect the wetlands and that this is not a proper location to construct a home. Commissioner Duggan concurred with Commissioner Tilsen by stating the house is not conducive to maintaining the wetlands. He further stated he is unsure that the setback presented is correct. Commissioner Duggan explained there are stakes, located on the property, that seem to be much closer to the wetlands than indicated on the site plan. Commissioner Dreelan suggested the City should refund Ms. Anderson's application fees in hopes of her finding another site to build on in the City. Commissioners Friel and Koll both stated their concerns with precedent setting in granting wetland permits so close to the wetlands. Ms. Anderson responded that she did not feel there was opposition from the neighborhood with her request. She stated that Somerset 19 Association relied on comments made by the City's Planner in 1987. She stated that according to the City's Wetlands Map, the house directly east of the property is located within the wetlands. Chair Dwyer stated the proposed house location is a major encroachment on the wetlands. Ms. Anderson responded that she does not intend to impact the wetlands. Chair Dwyer opened the meeting to the public. Ms. Lillian Wodke, Third Avenue, stated she is concerned with the angle of the proposed house and its location which could eventually impact the sale of her property. Ms. Anderson responded that Ms. Wodke does not live on April 28, 1992 Page 7 her property and that the proposed house does not face the street. Mr. Robert Wicker, a colleague of Ms. Anderson, questioned what the City's policy is regarding wetlands. Commissioner Tilsen responded the City reviews any construction within 100 feet of the designated wetlands for its impact. He stated that he does not recall recommending approval of wetlands permits with a setback less than 65'. He stated that Ms. Anderson's request a substantially less than 65 feet. In response to Mr. Wicker's statement regarding where the City draws the line in granting wetlands permits, Commissioner Duggan responded that the primary requirement for wetlands permit review is a 100' setback. He stated that the Commission has not seen an exact indication of where the setback location is of Ms. Anderson's proposed home. Commissioner Friel stated the Wetlands Ordinance requires a permit from City Council to grant a permit within 100' of the normal high water mark. He further explained the Wetlands Ordinance establishes criteria to be used in granting a Wetlands Permit. A brief discussion ensued between the Commission, Ms. Anderson and Mr. Wicker regarding what part of the Wetlands Ordinance the Planning Commission intends to use as a determining factor in recommending denial of the Wetlands Permit. Commissioner Dreelan moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Paul Larson, 717 Third Avenue, stated there has been a Dave Ross Realty sign on the lot for a year. He stated that someone should have notified Somerset 19 that they could not sell this parcel of land due to the wetlands. Mr. Mike Weiner, 1027 London Road, questioned how the Commission reviews wetland permit requests. He stated that he is present for the Arndt Subdivision request and there are wetlands involved in this case. Mr. Steve Carlson, 698 Third Avenue, stated that this site has been dumped on and that trash is all over the lot. He stated that the neighborhood has notified the police department of the problem. He stated that the dumping may be from Somerset 19. Mr. Wicker suggested that it is not Somerset 19 dumping, but the City of Mendota Heights. April 28, 1992 Page 8 Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion to close the public hearing. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Friel stated that the applicant has not proven hardship in seeking approval of the front yard setback variance. He stated the Commission is concerned with granting a wetlands permit based on the proximity of the home to the wetlands. Commissioner Friel moved to recommend to the City Council that they deny the requested front yard setback variance and wetlands permit. Commissioner Dreelan seconded the motion. Commissioner Duggan offered a friendly amendment stating that the Planning Commission suggests that Ms. Anderson be reimbursed planning fees not expended. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 CONTINUED HEARING CASE NO. 92-07 ANDREWS (WALGREENS CO) CUP Commissioner Duggan moved to close the public hearing and acknowledge the withdrawl of the request for a Conditional Use Permit by the Walgreen's Company. Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 HEARING: CASE NO. 92-09 ARNDT SUBDIVISION Mr. Paul McGinley, land surveyor and owner of Paul R. McLagan and Son, was present representing Eleanor Arndt to request a subdivision of 5.3 acres of land located north of Butler Avenue and west of Kirchner Avenue. Mr. McGinley explained Ms. Arndt is proposing to subdivide her property into 13 lots. He further explained that through this subdivision, London Road and Ivy Falls Avenue will be extended to create through April 28, 1992 Page 9 streets. Mr. McGinley stated the Parks and Recreation Commission had recently reviewed the subdivision request with respect to park dedication. He briefly explained that Commissioner Spicer expressed his concern for the lack of parking space for Ivy Park and suggested that a land dedication be given to create more parking space for that park. Mr. McGinley explained that Chair Huber, of the Parks Commission, expressed his concern for land dedication being used solely for parking spaces. Mr. McGinley explained that in 1985, when the City's parks were reevaluated, it was determined at that time that no expansion of Ivy Park was necessary. Mr. McGinley briefly explained there is a historic drainage way that runs north and south on the property. He explained that this drainage way no longer functions since the City installed storm sewers in the area. He stated that when the Wetlands Map was created, this drainage way was included on the map. He stated the area is no longer a wetland area and that it no longer serves the purpose for drainage. He stated that City staff has confirmed that the drainage area no longer functions. Chair Dwyer pointed out to Mr. McGinley that the wetlands area is still designated as wetland area on the map. Mr. McGinley responded that wetland areas are of a concern especially relating to vegetation. He explained there are significant numbers of trees along the eastern boundary of the property and they are valuable. He stated that a tree inventory has been submitted to the Planning Commission for their review. He explained there are a number of trees on the property that are not desirable. He stated that the valuable trees will remain along the homestead site and that the existing home may be removed. Mr. McGinley briefly explained the street layout of the property. He stated that the connection of London Road to Ivy Hill Drive was a plan recommended by the City and City Engineer, Ed Kishel, in 1974. He stated with the connection of London Road and Ivy Hill Drive it will take pressure off of Sylvandale Road. He further explained three other options, which were reviewed by the City in 1974. He stated that the option to connect London Road and Ivy Hill Drive provides reasonably functional safety access for the police and fire departments. Mr. McGinley briefly explained that they will be requesting, from the City Council, a street vacation. He April 28, 1992 Page 10 explained that Kirchner Avenue abuts the Arndt property to the north half. He stated that it was staff's opinion that there will never be a need to extend Kirchner Avenue to Butler Avenue. He stated that it seems to make sense to request a street vacation. He further stated that they plan to request from Council street vacations of streets that were proposed back in the 1800's for the Mechanics Addition (the Arndt property). As requested by Chair Dwyer, Planner Malloy briefly explained what the role of the Planning Commission is in reviewing the requested subdivision. He explained that there is a wetlands designation as indicated on City maps and a wetlands permit should be reviewed. He reminded the Planning Commission of the criteria of reviewing wetlands requests. Chair Dwyer took an informal poll of residents present for the Arndt Subdivision request. It was determined that there were residents present from each of the surrounding neighborhoods. Commissioner Tilsen stated he has visited the site. He stated that the plan does not show curb openings at the street entrance of Kirchner Avenue. He further noted that the legend, as indicated on the map, is incorrect in that the proposed grade lines and silt fence lines are reversed. He stated he would like to see a sidewalk installed for better access to Ivy Park. He further stated that he did not see standing water infiltrating on the site. He stated that he would like to see a different way in handling the wetlands question with respect to this property. He suggested that the City update their wetlands map. Mr. McGinley stated that the subdivision plans, as submitted, would be the most preferred plan by the City and the public safety departments. He explained that if the City would require cul-de-sacs within this plan, it could be considered but that it would reduce the number of lots to be sold. He stated that the applicants could be open to other possibilities. In response to a question from Commissioner Duggan, Mr. McGinley stated the barn would be removed along with the other out-buildings located on the property when development occurs. Commissioner Duggan stated that he is uncomfortable with the plans as submitted to the Planning Commission. He stated that the lots, as proposed, barely meet the April 28, 1992 Page 11 minimum square footage for lot sizes. He stated his concerns for the loss of trees which will occur with the construction of the subdivision. He suggested that the applicants could be more creative and should consider combining Lots 7, 8 and 9. Commissioner Duggan further stated he would like to see park land for this area. He stated that he is unhappy with the idea of extending London Road. He stated that he would be in favor of using the land for a park. In response to a question regarding street access from Chair Dwyer, Mr. McGinley stated that Lot 6 would be a walk out lot and that the driveway would be built diagonally to the southwest to Valley Lane and Kirchner. Mr. McGinley stated that if Kirchner Avenue is vacated, thirty feet would then accrue to the lot on Kirchner Avenue. Mr. McGinley stated there would be minimal grading done to the land and that the slopes would be the same as the existing slopes. There was a brief discussion regarding the creation of cul-de-sacs for the development and the possibility of closing Butler Avenue rather than extending London Road. Mr. McGinley referred to the restrictions regarding length of cul-de-sacs within the City. He stated that, as proposed, there would be four houses fronting Butler Avenue. In response to a question from Commissioner Duggan, Mr. McGinley stated that trees will be left on the far east side of the property, roughly about a 20 ft. to 30 ft. strip wide of trees. He further stated that there will be storm water drainage adequate enough to help the drainage through the property. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. McGinley explained that the price of homes have not been determined. He stated that the price of homes will be determined based upon the market. He stated that it is hoped that the homes will be valued near the existing homes in the area. He stated at this point, a developer has not been retained. Commissioner Dreelan pointed out that no soil analysis has been submitted and that the tree legend is unclear. Mr. McGinley pointed out that the wide heavy dashed line appearing on the plans indicates where the trees are located on the property. April 28, 1992 Page 12 Commissioner Friel expressed his concern with respect to the length of cul-de-sacs and the possible conflict with the Ordinance. Commissioner Koll questioned the density of the proposed development, lot sizes and comparison to the existing neighborhoods. In response to a question from Commissioner Koll, Public Works Director Danielson explained that the City is currently reviewing the possibility of improving Ivy Creek. He explained that the erosion problem needs to be reduced. Mr. McGinley stated that with the development of the Arndt property, there would not be any additional runoff caused by the development. There was a brief discussion regarding grade and elevations of existing properties located near the proposed development. The Planning Commission briefly discussed the grade and slope on London Road and the safety standards required. Chair Dwyer opened the meeting to the public. Mr. Bill Menke, 1017 London Road, stated his concern with the proposed collector street idea. He stated he moved to Mendota Heights because he wanted to get away from the collector streets of St. Paul. He stated that he has a real concern with the amount of traffic these through streets will generate. He further stated there has been no problem with the public safety personnel in getting to the area with the existing cul-de-sacs. He stated that he likes the idea of this property becoming park land. Mr. Tom Junnila, 1024 Downing Street, stated he has no problem with the Arndts wanting to develop the land. He stated his concerns with the proposed collector streets. He stated he would prefer cul-de-sacs in this development as it would be more in line with the existing developments. He stated his concern for safety for children in the area. He stated his concerns for the trees in the area. Mr. John Markert, 1020 London Road, stated his brother's concern for the wetlands. He further stated he would like to see the area used for park land and that this is the last opportunity the City may have in acquiring park land for the north end of the City. He stated he likes the walkway idea as suggested by Commissioner Tilsen. Mr. Markert expressed his concerns for the collector street idea and the heavy traffic the streets will generate. He stated the idea is unsafe and that it will put the whole neighborhood in an "uproar". He stated the April 28, 1992 Page 13 City's first priorities should be considering the wetlands and the need for a park. Mr. Richard Nadler, 610 Kirchner Avenue, stated he would like to see the land developed as a park. He stated that the north end of the City has been shorted of parks. He stated it would be nice to keep the old barn and the trees on the property to continue the natural wave of land which make Mendota Heights a nice place to live. He stated that a fair market price should be offered to the Arndts so the City could obtain more park land. He suggested a bike path would be nice. He further stated his concerns for the high water table level and his concern for super storms. He suggested that further testing should be done on the soils. Mr. Harold Blechinger, 605 West Butler, stated he has lived in Mendota Heights for 25 years. He stated there is a lot of wildlife in the area. He stated his concerns for uprooting the wildlife. Mr. Mike Weiner, 1027 London Road, stated he would like to see the property developed as park. He stated he has no objection to the development of the site as homes if cul-de-sacs were proposed. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Public Works Director Danielson stated the City Public Works crews are in the process of repairing potholes in the City. He stated the City Council is in the process of reviewing a street rehabilitation policy. Mr. Dan Kilduff, 584 West Butler, stated his concern for traffic that will be generated due to the extension of London Road. He stated his concern with the grade of Butler presently. He stated that speeding is a real problem and that there is a very dangerous intersection at View Lane. Mr. John Greenman, 1097 Ivy Hill Drive, stated he would like to see a park developed in this area. He stated he would prefer to see cul-de-sacs in this area. Ms. Elizabeth Jordan, 1092 Ivy Hill Drive, stated she would like to see the land developed as a park. Mr. Donald Woods, 1022 Brompton Place, stated he sees that there is no problem presently with accessibility as far as the public safety personnel are concerned. He stated he does not want to see traffic increased in the area. April 28, 1992 Page 14 Steve, 1014 London Road, stated that emergency vehicles are able to get into his development with no problem. He stated that the proposed through streets could cause a problem with increased traffic and the that safety of children is a real concern. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. McGinley stated a traffic study has not been completed. Chair Dwyer stated that with a new development, safety of residents is a real concern. He stated he is unsure of how realistic a park for this area is. Commissioner Tilsen presented a suggested plan, as drawn by himself during the meeting, would look if cul-de-sacs were the preferred option. He stated that the community would benefit if cul-de-sacs were developed in this area. He suggested to Mr. McGinley that he go back to the drawing board and creative a different plan showing cul- de-sacs. Mr. McGinley stated that the Arndts are open to reviewing other options. Commissioner Friel stated that he does not oppose cul-de- sacs but that he opposes the long length of cul-de-sacs. He further stated that a survey was done prior to the park referendum several years ago, and that what parks were constructed were parks that were wanted by the community. Mr. Tom Dolan, 1083 Ivy Hill Drive, stated he would like to see cul-de-sacs in this area. Commissioner Duggan questioned if the Arndts have considered this land as park land. He stated that City staff should review how the City is doing for parks in the north end. Mr. Charlene Arndt Dunst, representing the Arndt family, stated that she was told that eventually London Road would be extended. She stated that her family bought the land in 1941 and she had lived there when there was no developments surrounding her family's homestead and her family has watched everyone else develop their land around them. She stated her family can consider the park issue. She stated her family wants the best return for their money. Mr. Mike Newman, 1006 Downing Avenue, stated if this development is constructed, he would like to see better access to Ivy Park. Commissioner Koll inquired if that there is a compelling April 28, 1992 Page 15 argument for continuing London Road through. She questioned, with the expense involved, does the City need the thoroughfare? Planner Malloy responded that in 1974 Midwest Planning prepared a report with the concept of providing enough through streets to spread the load of traffic both in and out of the development. He stated that this concept has been altered by the introduction of cul-de-sacs in the area. He stated that the idea of extending London Road was to ease some of the traffic both in and out of the development for residents on Sylvandale, Wachtler, and other roads that are currently bearing the traffic burden. Mr. McGinley briefly explained the street vacations that would occur due to the platting of the Arndt property. Commissioner Friel moved to table the hearing until May 26, 1992 at 8:15 P.M. because of the indication from Mr. McGinley and Ms. Arndt have given in possibly reviewing other options. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion with a friendly amendment directing staff to determine a fair representation of parks in the north end of the City and to determine a per capita park evaluation. Commissioner Friel added a friendly amendment directing staff to look at the wetlands issue relating to the Arndt property. Commissioner Tilsen stated that there may be a possibility for trail connection to be incorporated into the plat. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 Chair Dwyer called a recess at 11:30 o'clock P.M. Chair Dwyer reconvened the meeting at 11:35 o'clock P.M. HOUSEKEEPING VARIANCES Administrative Assistant Batchelder briefly explained that the City Council received the recommendation from the Planning Commission suggesting that the City continue to process all housekeeping variances. He explained the Council was of the opinion that the City not process housekeeping variances. He explained the City Council April 28, 1992 Page 16 felt that many housekeeping variances are not related to proposed construction and that it may be overly burdensome for residents who had to get a building permit. He explained the Council directed the matter of housekeeping variances back to the Planning Commission to establish guidelines for determining when or when not to process a housekeeping variance. Batchelder explained City staff suggests the following: "Upon review of a building permit by the Code Enforcement Officers, if it is determined that a structure or use is nonconforming, no building permit will be issued until such time as the applicant meets with the City Planner during office hours. The City Planner and staff shall then review the proposed plans and determine if there is an extension or intensification of the nonconforming use. If there is no extension or intensification impact, planning staff will authorize the Code Enforcement Officers to issue the building permit. If it is determined that there is an extension or intensification, planning staff will follow the established procedures for processing a variance". Administrative Assistant Batchelder gave examples of housekeeping variances that the Planning Commission recently reviewed such as the Carroll variance and Schuster variance. Chair Dwyer questioned what would happen if a neighbor disagrees with staff's interpretation. Commissioner Friel stated that the Ordinance does not define housekeeping variances. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated staff's interpretation is from a specific section within the Ordinance. Chair Dwyer suggested that the policy should be added to the Ordinance. Batchelder responded that the policy is contained in staff's Planning Procedures Policy. Commissioner Friel stated the Ordinance should be amended or clarified. He stated that he does not have a problem having housekeeping variances handled administratively. He stated his concern is with the policy being so general that it includes non-residential properties (Commerical, Industrial and multi-family). Chair Dwyer suggested that this policy could be limited to just residential and include it within the Zoning Ordinance. April 28, 1992 Page 17 Commissioner Tilsen stated he would still like to see neighbors know what type of construction is going on next to them so they are able to express their opinions formally. He stated the City would still have some control. He stated that the neighbors could sign off on the request and if they do not sign off, the Planning Commission would then review the request. He stated that this suggestion could be added to the policy. Commissioner Friel stated he would like to see a change in the Ordinance which defines housekeeping variances. Commissioner Dwyer directed staff to return to the May Planning Commission meeting with a contrast study of existing procedures and proposed procedures relating to housekeeping variances. JOINT WORKSHOP WITH THE CITY COUNCIL Administrative Assistant Batchelder explained that the City Council conducted a Target Goal session in April and that the City Council would like to invite the Parks and Recreation Commission and Planning Commission to a workshop to discuss the Target Goals. Commissioner Friel stated the Commissions and Council should look into making changes within the Zoning Ordinance, Wetlands Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. He further stated he attended the League of Minnesota Cities "Beyond the Basics" Seminar regarding current issues on zoning, conditional uses, variances, etc. He stated the session was very helpful and recommended that Commissioners either appointed or reappointed to the Planning Commission could find attending these seminars helpful. Commissioner Tilsen stated he would like the Commission to be a part of preliminary development inquiries. He further commented that the Lafayette and Mendota Bridges will be closed eventually. He stated that due to the closing of these bridges, I-35E will become terribly congested. He stated that the City should send a message on improving the I-35E route into St. Paul. Chair Dwyer stated that the Commission is very interested in meeting with the Council but that they would like a better idea as to what type of information the Council is looking for from the Commission to discuss. ) April 28, 1992 Page 18 Commissioner Koll stated she would like to have an update on past and future developments. Commissioner Tilsen stated the Commission should be kept current with the Dodd Road/Hwy 110 downtown ringroad discussions. Commissioner Friel suggested that the workshop be conducted during the winter months. Commissioner Friel stated that zoning standards regarding impervious surface limitations should be addressed at the workshop. MISCELLANEOUS Public Works Director Danielson briefly reviewed the Mendota Interchange Project with the Commission. VERBAL REVIEW Public Works Director Danielson provided a verbal review for the planning items at the previous City Council meeting. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned its meeting at 12:25 o'clock P.M. Respectfully submitted, Kimberlee K. Blaeser Senior Secretary