Loading...
1992-03-24 Planning Comm MinutesDRAFT CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 24, 1992 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, March 24, 1992, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 o'clock P.M. The following Commission members were present: Koll, Friel, Dreelan, Dwyer, Krebsbach and Duggan. Commissioner Tilsen had notified the Commission that he would be late. Also present were Public Works Director Jim Danielson, Planning Consultant John Uban, Administrative Assistant Kevin Batchelder and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Duggan moved approval of the February 25, 1992, Minutes with corrections Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 INFORMATION ON CABLECASTING OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS Ms. Judy Skeie-Voss, Northern Dakota County Cable Communications, gave a brief summary regarding the broadcasting of Planning Commission meetings. Ms. Voss submitted information regarding television etiquette and informed, the Commission that the meetings will be aired live starting at 7:30 o'clock P.M. beginning in April. CASE NO. 92-08: RAAK - VARIANCE Mr. and Mrs. John Raak were present to discuss their request for a simple lot split. Chair Dwyer explained that the Raak family owns two platted lots at 728 Wentworth Avenue. He stated that both lots meet the minimum,requirements of the Zoning Ordinance in terms of lot size • and lot width. He explained that Mr. Raak proposes to add twenty-five feet (25') from the larger eastern lot, where Mr. Raak's father's home is located, to the western lot for the purpose of creating two lots of equal dimension. Chair Dwyer explained that the newly created lot will have a single family home constructed on iwhere and Mrs. Raak propose to live. March 25, 1992 Page 2 In response to a question from Commissioner Dreelan, Mr. Raak explained they are proposing to construct a rambler style home. Mr. Raak submitted a book to the Commission showing the style of home they hope to construct. Chair Dwyer noted the Planner's concern of compatibility of the proposed house with the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Raak responded that they feel the proposed house is compatible as most homes on the street are ramblers. Commissioner Krebsbach stated she had driven by the site and noted that Mr. Raak's lot is rather deep and the Evergreen Knoll Addition is quite a distance away. Chair Dwyer noted, as per Mr. Raak's site plan and the Planner's report, that there is a screen-house and a landscape structure that infringe on the western side of the subject property. Chair Dwyer stated the Planner noted that the City should require some assurance that the adjacent property owner is not making any claim to the area of infringement before the granting of the lot split. Mr. Raak responded that he has spoken to and received signatures of consent with the property owners and the adjacent property as required by the City. He stated that the adjacent property owner did not indicate a problem as he signed the consent form. Chair Dwyer informed Mr. Raak that the width of the right-of-way for Wentworth Avenue is sixty feet (60'). He stated that because Wentworth Avenue is a County road, the County has requested an additional three feet of right-of-way. He stated the County is requesting that Mr. Raak dedicate an additional three feet (3') of right- of-way. Mr. Raak stated that he has no problem with the request. Commissioner Krebsbach moved to waive the subdivision fees and the public hearing. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Friel moved to recommend that the City Council grant the lot split with the condition that an additional three feet (3') be dedicated for the purpose of County right-of-way. Commissioner Krebsbach seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 March 24, 1992 Page 3 HEARING - CASE NO. 92-06: ANDERSON - CUP FOR PUD, WETLANDS PERMIT, SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE Ms. Kathleen Anderson and Mr. Robert Wicker were present to discuss Ms. Anderson's request for a Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development, Wetlands Permit, Subdivision and Variance for the purpose of constructing a single family home. Ms. Anderson explained that she would like to plat a 1.3 acre lot, which she is purchasing from Somerset 19 Condominiums. She explained she will not disturb the wetlands with the construction of the home. Chair Dwyer stated this property is included in the Somerset 19 Planned Unit Development. He stated that this property is part of an area designated for open space within the Somerset 19 Planned Unit Development. He stated he is not inclined to recommend approval of this development as there is nothing that compels the City to grant these changes. Ms. Anderson explained that initially when the Somerset 19 development was first approved, the project covered a smaller area. She explained that in 1975, land was added to the development which was designated for common open space. Mr. Wicker explained that because additional land was added to the open space within the planned unit development, there is an excess amount of land. He stated that the additional property is not needed to satisfy the open space requirement within the PUD. He stated the open space designated in 1971 satisfies the requirement within the PUD. Mr. Wicker stated the police department has notified Ms. Anderson that dumping is occurring on the site. He stated that this property has deteriorated in the past years and that constructing a home on this property will not only increase the City's tax revenue but also help beautify the area. He stated the proposed home will blend in with the existing neighborhood. Commissioner Friel cited Section 22.16(3) of the Zoning Ordinance stating that no changes may be made in an approved final development within a planned unit development plan subject to several conditions. He stated that he agrees with Chair Dwyer in that he has not seen or heard anything which gives a basis within the City's Zoning Ordinance for a recommendation to the City March 24, 1992 Page 4 Council to make a change to the Planned Unit Development. He stated that it appears the Planning Commission is being asked to ignore the provisions as stipulated within the Zoning Ordinance. He stated the Planning Commission and City Council need to see justification in the provisions of the Ordinance and at this point, they have not. Mr. Wicker responded that the parcel of land Ms. Anderson desires to subdivide is not the original open space of the planned unit development. He stated this parcel was an additional piece of land added to the Association's already designated open space requirement. He stated if that land is removed, there is still ample open space as required by the initial planned unit development. He stated it would be in the best interest of the community that this land be developed using Ms. Anderson's proposal for a single family home. Commissioner Friel responded that according to City staff and Planner, the additional land is include within the planned unit development as open space. Planner Uban concurred with Commissioner Friel, in stating that the Association added this parcel of land to the planned unit development and that it is on the tax rolls as open space. Commissioner Koll asked if Somerset 19 Association sought the selling of this property. Mr. Wicker responded that the Association has and that they would like to see the land developed as it will improve the value of the property. Mr. Guthmann, President of the Somerset 19 Association, explained the Association purchased the land in 1975 from the Wodke family. He explained the Association does not need the land and that it is in the Association's best interest to sell the land as the Association needs the income for their Maintenance Reserve Fund. He explained that he had discussed the possibility of selling the property with Planner Dahlgren several years ago, and at that time Planner Dahlgren indicated that developing the land for single family use could be considered. Commissioner Tilsen arrived at 8:08 o'clock P.M. In response to a question from Commissioner Friel, Mr. Guthmann stated the land in question is over two blocks away from the condominiums and that the proposed development would make better use of the property than what exists on it now. March 24, 1992 Page 5 Commissioner Krebsbach stated she would like to see the Planning Commission review the surrounding parcels to get a sense of direction as to what type of development is proposed, if any, within the areas of Wentworth Avenue/Dodd Road/First Avenue. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Ms. Anderson stated her request for a ten foot (10') variance is due to the lack of building room due to the wetlands. She stated she would like to have a backyard area as she is proposing a walkout home. Commissioner Krebsbach stated the Commission should find out what land is still available for residential development and park land development. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated there are a few parcels of land to the north that could still be subdivided but that most of the land in the immediate area has been developed or is park. Chair Dwyer opened the meeting to the public. Mrs. Wodke, adjacent property owner, asked for the definition of a planned unit development. She further commented that she was under the understanding the wetlands are a protected area and that no development can occur on wetlands. Chair Dwyer briefly summarized the definition of a planned unit development and the process of wetlands development. Mrs. Wodke stated that she and her husband had been considering subdividing their land. She stated that they were unsure as to how Ms. Anderson's application would impact their future considerations of their land. Commissioner Krebsbach stated that based on Mrs. Wodke's input, the Commission should get a better sense of what property owners, with acreage, are proposing to do with their land. Mrs. Wodke informed the Commission that she and her husband own one acre of land. Mr. Nelson, 698 Third Avenue, stated his concern for the water table should Ms. Anderson develop the land. Public Works Director Danielson informed Mr. Nelson that a soil survey was completed for the site and that survey indicates the soil to be adequate for construction. Mr. Linnell, 1407 Cherry Hill Road, noted his concern for the wetlands. Chair Dwyer acknowledged that the Planning Commission received a photo copy regarding the type of house Ms. Anderson is proposing. March 24, 1992 Page 6 Commissioner Friel moved to table the public hearing until the Planning Commission of April 28, 1992, at 7:45 o'clock P.M.. Commissioner Krebsbach amended the motion directing staff to send a letter to property owners communicating to them that the Planning Commission is interested in hearing their thoughts on the possibility of future development on properties that have not been developed. Commissioner Krebsbach seconded the amended motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 HEARING: CASE NO. 92-04: HENRY SIBLEY SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL - SIGN VARIANCE Ms. Lois Rockney, Director of Business Affairs for Independent School District No. 197, was present to discuss a request for a sign size variance to allow installation of a sign on the south wall of Henry Sibley High School in the form of individual plastic letters. Ms. Rockney explained the letters are to be four feet (4') in height and the sign is seventy-eight feet (78') in length, total square footage area 312 square feet. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Ms. Rockney explained that the sign is a donation from the Class of 1991 and that there is not enough funds, at this time, to light the sign. She stated that eventually, they would like the sign to be lit. In response to a question from Commissioner Duggan, Ms. Rockney stated the School District had not discussed the possibility of removing some of the flood lighting. She stated the present flood lights are there for security reasons and that she would consider reviewing the issue of removing some of the lights with the School District. Ms. Rockney informed the Commission that the intent of the sign request is to address the fact that the school is not easily identified from the Highway. She stated that many people (school teams, business associates, etc.) have difficulty in identifying where the school is. Commissioner Krebsbach stated that the School District needs to think of signage on a long term basis and have a comprehensive isgn plan for Henry Sibley High School. March 24, 1992 Page 7 She statedthis would help determine when enough signs are enough. Commissioner Friel explained that according to the City's Zoning Ordinance, in order for the Planning Commission to recommend approval of a variance, the applicant must present a case of hardship. Ms. Rockney stated that the existing signs on the property have been vandalized. She stated that it is anticipated that if this sign variance is approved, the sign located on the frontage road facing Highway 110 would be removed. Commissioner Dreelan inquired as to whether this proposed sign is the same as St. Thomas Academy's existing sign. Ms. Rockney stated that to her knowledge it is the same. Commissioner Krebsbach stated that it would be helpful to erect a sign on Highway 110 giving direction as to where the high school is located. Chair Dwyer opened the meeting to the public. Mr. Russ Wahl, 631 Callahan Place, stated that he sees no reason for the City to grant a variance. He stated his concern as a tax payer and that the School District is spending money on items that are not necessary. He stated that he agrees with Commissioner Krebsbach that there should be a directional sign placed on Highway 110 as to the location of the high school. Ms. Rockney stated the Class of 1991 chose to donate a sign to the school district. She stated the Class of 1991 felt that installing the sign would give the students a sense of identity. Ms. Marsha Knuth, Parents Committee Chair for the Class of 1991, stated that a new sign is needed as it is very difficult to find the school. She explained the Class of 1991 chose to donate the sign as it gives the students a real sense of identity and that it will be very helpful to those people who are unfamiliar with the location of the school. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. Wahl stated that the request for the sign will not interfere with his lifestyle as the sign will not be seen from his place of residence. March 24, 1992 Page 8 The Commission briefly discussed their concern over the size of the sign. Mr. Dick Kruse, Midway Sign Company, explained that the size of the sign is necessary as it will be seen from a distance. He stated the sign is much like St. Thomas' sign. He stated that no funding has been allocated for the lighting of the sign. He explained the frontage road sign is old and rotting, the monument sign has been vandalized and the sign over the main entrance of the school is unreadable. Planner Uban stated his concern for how the letters will be attached to the building. Mr. Kruse stated that the letters will not be caulked. He stated the letters could be stud mounted. He stated that the letters will not be raised as birds tend to make their nests and they may cause a great deal of mess. Mr. Kruse further stated that he did not install the north entrance sign. Commissioner Krebsbach asked if the proposed sign. and the sign above the north entrance will be similar in characteristics. Mr. Kruse stated that the color of the letters on the north sign are the wrong color for a sign that needs to be seen from a distance. In response to a question from Commissioner Tilsen, Mr Kruse stated the anticipated life span of the sign is 10 to 15 years. Mr. Jim Mazzoni, Callahan Place, stated that he has talked to various people inquiring whether they have a problem finding the school. He stated that their problem has been locating the parking lot and entrance of the school. He stated that it would be to the benefit of the School District if they were to look into installing a sign locating the parking and entrance of the high school. Administrative Assistant Batchelder submitted pictures and sample lettering of the sign to the Commission as submitted by Midway Sign Company. Commissioner Tilsen stated that the City should request the Department of Transportation to install directional signage on Highway 110. In response to a question from Commissioner Friel, Ms. Rockney stated that when the funding is available, the School District would like the sign to be lighted. Commissioner Koll moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 March 24, 1992 Page 9 Commissioner Friel stated that he believes there is a real problem in locating the parking and entrance of Sibley High School. He stated the Commission has had a problem in setting precedent with regards to the granting of sign variances. He stated he is concerned with the aesthetics of the sign and he is opposed to lighting the sign. He stated that lighting of signs in a residential area is obtrusive and inappropriate. Commissioner Duggan stated he has no objection with the proposed sign. He stated that he is against lighting the sign. Commissioner Roll moved to recommend that the City Council grant a variance to allow a total 312 square foot, lighted sign to be mounted on the south side of Henry Sibley Senior High School building. Commissioner Krebsbach moved to amend the motion adding that the School District consider coordinating the existing north sign and the proposed south sign designs, put forth an effort in installing directional signage on Highway 110 and directional signage on Delaware Avenue. Commissioner Krebsbach seconded the amended motion. Chair Dwyer stated that the School District has not proven hardship. He further stated that MnDOT would have to be contacted in order for the directional signage to be placed on Highway 110. Commissioner Dreelan moved to amend the motion stating that lighting of the sign is not included within the variance. Commissioner Koll accepted the amendment to her original motion. Commissioner Krebsbach seconded the amended motion. Commissioner Tilsen stated that he is opposed to the sign variance. He stated the Class of 1991 should look into a more appropriate use of the money donation. AYES: 5 NAYS: 2, DWYER, TILSEN March 24, 1992 Page 10 HEARING: CASE NO. 92-07: ANDREWS - WALGREEN COMPANY CUP Mr. Steven Andrews, Technician with the Walgreen Company, was present to discuss Walgreen Company's request for a conditional use permit to install a satellite dish antenna located at 2535 Pilot Knob Road, Suite 120. Mr. Andrews explained the purpose of installing the satellite dish is to provide the facility direct communications with other Walgreen facilities and the corporate headquarters located in Chicago. He explained the antenna is to be mounted on a pole at the north side of the building. He explained that the antenna dish will be six feet (6') in diameter. He further explained that the antenna will be mounted on a twenty-five feet (25') pole. Mr. Andrews stated the dish needs to be over the pitch of the roof. He explained that they would like to place the dish on the roof of the building, but the landlord will not allow Walgreen Company to do so. In response to a question from Commissioner Krebsbach, Mr. Andrews stated that Walgreen's has used satellite communications for over three years. He stated that over 90 percent of the stores use this communication and that their office is one of the last to convert. He stated that they have been using phone lines for communications and that it is getting very expensive to continue with this form of communication. He stated that the satellite will help assist in repairing equipment as most of the equipment is now sent out of this particular office for repairs. In response to a question from Commissioner Duggan, Mr. Andrews stated that the satellite communications system will only be available for Walgreen's use. Administrative Assistant Batchelder explained that there are satellite dishes within Mendota Heights. He stated that if a satellite dish is not mounted on the roof, it is considered an accessory structure under the Zoning Ordinance requirements. He stated that within the Industrial Zoning District accessory structures require Conditional Use Permits and that the height limitation is 45 feet. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 March 24, 1992 Page 11 Commissioner Friel stated that the Commission would be illadvised to take action on this application due to pending litigation on another matter regarding antenna height within the City. He moved to recommend that the Planning Commission table the request for a conditional use permit until April 28, 1992, at 8:00 o'clock P.M. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. Chair Dwyer stated City staff will discuss this matter with the City's attorney and will report back to the Commission in April. Chair Dwyer called at recess at 9:20 o'clock P.M. Chair Dwyer reconvened the meeting at 9:27 o'clock P.M. CONTINUED HEARING: CASE NO. 92-02: THE ROTTLUND HOMES Mr. Todd Stutz, Executive Vice President of Rottlund Homes, Mr. Don Jenssen, Rottlund Homes and Mr. John Bannigan, Attorney representing the applicant, were present to discuss The Rottlund Homes' request for a Rezoning, CUP for PUD and Subdivision to allow the construction of a 68 unit townhome development in the southeast quadrant of Mendota Heights Road and Dodd Road. Mr. Stutz explained to the Planning Commission that he and Mr. Jenssen have submitted revised drawings which identifies specific information the Planning Commission had requested at their February 25, 1992, meeting along with a letter specifically relating to additional information that the Commission, City staff and Police and Fire Department had requested. He stated that they believe the information, as submitted in letter form dated March 17, 1992, addresses all issues as discussed during the February 25th Planning Commission meeting and subsequent meetings with City staff and planning consultant. Mr. Stutz explained the total area of the Planned Unit Development is 10.52 acres. He explained that their proposed development will consist of 9.58 acres and the remaining .94 acre will remain under the ownership of R.A. Putnam and Associates who intends to develop the land as a day care facility. He explained that according to the letter from Mr. Putnam dated March 6, 1992, Mr. March 24, 1992 Page 12 Putnam is requesting only sketch plan approval at this time. Chair Dwyer stated that there seems to be inconsistencies between the Rottlund letter and Mr. Putnam's letter, specifically relating to the total acreage of the planned unit development. Mr. Stutz confirmed to the Commission that the total acreage of the planned unit development is 10.52 acres. Mr. Stutz explained that the 68 unit townhome complexes will consist of seven - eight unit buildings and one - twelve unit building. He explained that there will be berms constructed along Mendota Heights Road. He further explained that the buildings will be two story buildings with the total height (at the highest peak) twenty-eight feet (28'). Mr. Stutz explained, as per the Planning Commission's request, the listing of lenders references. He explained that Rottlund Homes is actively involved, throughout the Twin Cities area, in a lending relationship with specific lenders. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. Stutz explained that he is not able to specifically identify which lender will be financing the project as lenders will not review a proposed development until there is preliminary plat approval. He explained that submitting the list of lenders should prove that the Rottlund Company has the ability to undertake the development as proposed. Chair Dwyer stated that Rottlund Homes has not provided the Commission with the financial information needed as required by the City's Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Stutz responded that due to the proprietary nature of the Rottlund Company, corporate financial statements will not be provided to the Commission as this information would provide competitors with a potential competitive advantage. In response to a question from Commissioner Duggan, Mr. Stutz stated that the price range for each townhome will be $80,000 to $90,000. He explained that the retail price of this product is roughly $25,000 higher than the product Centex Homes is presently constructing in their nearby development. Mr. Stutz explained that the target market they hope to satisfy will be for empty nester age 55 and older. He explained the proposed townhomes will have a main floor master bedroom. He further explained that standard features within each home include wood floors, oak trim, ceramic baths with exterior materials March 24, 1992 Page 13 of brick and aluminum. He stated there will be upgrades available as each unit will be built specifically for the potential buyer. Mr. Stutz stated that the existing surveys show errors in the size of the exception shown on the plat because they are based on an erroneous centerline in Dodd Road. He stated an exact boundary survey is in process and will be supplied to the City prior to final plat approval. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. Stutz stated the approximate density of dwelling units is 7.1 units per acre. He stated that this density is within the Zoning Code requirements. Mr. Stutz explained that the exterior materials will be brick and aluminum with an upgrade in shingles. He stated that the siding will have a thirty year warranty and the shingles will have a twenty year warranty. He stated that through the Association dues, there will be money set aside for the maintenance of items not covered under a specific warranty. Commissioner Friel stated that under the development schedule, the development of the Outlot is not included. He further stated that no elevation and utility plans have been submitted with respect to the Outlot. He stated that the City's Zoning Ordinance requires that this specific information is to be submitted. Mr. Stutz stated that Mr. Putnam had made it clear that what he is asking of the Commission is a sketch plan approval. Commissioner Friel stated that the Outlot is a part of the planned unit development and that all of the required information must be submitted. Commissioner Friel noted that the minimum requirement for a day care center, according to the City's Zoning Ordinance, is one acre. Mr. Stutz explained that the estimated amount of developed open space including Outlot A is 236,338 square feet, 51 percent or 5.43 acres. He stated that the Rottlund parcel contains 49.4 percent open space. He stated all open space or common area will be governed by a homeowners association. He explained there will be automatic underground irrigations systems for all landscaped and sodded areas. Mr. Stutz explained that a copy of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Easements, Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation for the proposed homeowner's association March 24, 1992 Page 14 has been submitted for the Commission's review. Commissioner Friel stated that the only employment opportunities generated by this development will be that of construction workers on the site. He stated that, at this point, there is no way of determining what type of employment the day care facility will generate. Commissioner Duggan stated that according to his calculations, over 1/2 of the proposed development is hard surface or buildings. In response to a question from Commissioner Koll regarding the submitted Covenants, Mr. Stutz responded that it is not Rottlund's policy to develop property as rental units. He stated that the clause within the Association's Bylaws is to be fair to the residents who are unable to sell their property. Mr. Stutz explained that preserving and maintaining the development is an important priority. He explained that the exterior materials require no maintenance, the streets (although private) will be constructed to City standards, the landscaping will be maintained with an irrigation system. He explained that approximately $5.00, per unit, of the Association dues will be set aside for a Reserve Account. Commissioner Duggan stated that $5.00 per unit seems to be low. Commissioner Tilsen expressed his concerns with safety issues with respect to the Police and Fire Departments accessibility into the development. Mr. Stutz explained that Braun Engineering surveyed the site and indicated that conditions are adequate. He explained that they have conducted a tree survey. He explained that the species of trees located on the site are mostly boxelder and poplar. He stated that they will be relocating trees by using a tree spade. He stated that they have calculated to install approximately 270 trees. He further explained that the property to the east of the proposed development has the majority of trees which is owned by a Mendota Woods Subdivision resident. Mr. Stutz explained it is estimated the development will generate 476 trips per day based upon 7 trips per residential unit. He stated that the traffic that could be generated through the development of the outlot was not included in the estimates. March 24, 1992 Page 15 In response to a question from Commissioner Koll, Mr. Stutz explained that throughout the development site, there is a difference in topography. He explained that retaining walls are necessary. He stated the material used for the retaining walls will be keystone blocks and boulders at the entrance of the development. He further stated that drainage is taken into account with each retaining wall system. Mr. Stutz briefly explained the height of retaining walls along the east end of the development and along the 1-494 ramp. In response to a question from Commissioner Friel, Mr. Stutz explained that the dotted line, which appears on the grading/drainage plan represents an erosion control device which is used during the construction period. Mr. Stutz explained relative to the Police and Fire Department concerns, the circulation system now proceeds through the development with the linking of the cul-de- sacs with a loop drive. He further stated that street lighting will be used at the entrance and throughout the cul-de-sacs. He further stated that each dwelling will have exterior lights. Mr. Stutz stated that at this time, no entrance monument is proposed. He stated that signs will be limited to traffic signs and temporary marketing signage. Commissioner Tilsen expressed his concern with the proliferation of signage. He stated that one sign at each entrance (no parking signs) should be sufficient. Mr. Stutz responded that they would prefer to do that, however, minimum signage is often ignored. Chair Dwyer stated, according to the drawings, that there is proposed to be 30 off street parking stalls, 100 garage slots and 100 parking spaces in the front area of the garages for a total of 230 spaces. Chair Dwyer stated that according to his calculations, if 40 parking spots were removed due to the prohibiting of parking in front of garage stalls, the total amount of parking available is 130. Mr. Stutz responded that Rottlund Homes has complied with the requirements of parking as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Friel asked if Rottlund Homes is installing a four foot high fence between existing parking areas and adjacent developments. Mr. Stutz responded that a fence is not proposed. He stated that berms will be constructed. March 24, 1992 Page 16 Commissioner Friel stated that Ordinance 401, Seciton 12.5(2) states that no parking areas may be within 10 feet of the principle structure. Commissioner Friel stated that the private streets are too narrow. He inquired if the intention of having private narrow streets and parking stalls in front of the garage was to maximize the density. He stated with public streets there would be less units. Commissioner Friel stated that the City's Zoning Ordinance does not provide direction for private streets. Mr. Stutz responded that it would be up to the Planning Commission to review as part of the HR-PUD process. Commissioner Krebsbach stated that the proposed development seems to anticipate no children living within the development. She questioned where children would play. She stated there could be 120 children living within the development. Mr. Stutz stated children could play in the open space of the development such as the berm area and holding pond area. Commissioner Krebsbach questioned where the residents walk. She stated that the proposed development does not seem to take into account pedestrian safety. Mr. Stutz responded that the development is as safe as any other development in the City. He explained that there is not a lot of through traffic on private streets as opposed to public streets. He further stated that there is a trail way along Mendota Heights Road. Commissioner Krebsbach stated that Rottlund Homes is remiss in not having considered both children and pedestrian safety. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Planner Uban stated that it is very common to have segregated parking. He stated that they could designate off street parking. Chair Dwyer stated that the City could accommodate this factor but then there would be less green space within the development. In response to a question from Commissioner Tilsen, Mr. Stutz stated that twenty feet (20') is the depth of the shortest driveway. Commissioner Friel stated that the Subdivision Ordinance requires a 30 foot driveway. Mr. Stutz responded thta this is a proposed Planned Unit Development with private drives. Commissioner Duggan referred to the Fire Department's concerns regarding street design and turning radii. Commissioner Duggan questioned whether or not fire trucks are able to get out of this proposed development. Planner Uban stated the latest plan shows a hammerhead March 24, 1992 Page 17 design. He stated that he has not been able to compare the latest plan to the earlier plan. Mr. Stutz stated that the radius is more than adequate. He further stated that each building has interior sprinkler systems. In response to a question from Commissioner Krebsbach, Mr. Stutz stated there is 475 feet from Mendota Heights Road to the twelve unit building. Chair Dwyer opened the meeting to the public. Mr. Mike Wier, Bridgeview Shores resident, stated that the requirement for a planned unit development is 10 acres and this proposed development is only 9.5 acres. He expressed his concerns for property valuations, density and the amount of traffic that could be generated. Public Works Director briefly explained the process of applying for traffic signals. He explained that the City has requested the State to install traffic signals at Highway 149 and Mendota Heights Road several times. He explained the State has found that traffic signals, at this time, not warranted. Mr. Norm Linnell, Bridgeview Shores resident, stated the Commission should keep in mind that this area is currently zoned for single family homes. He stated his concern for private streets, the lack of park land. He stated his concerns for the lack of buffering between the proposed development and Mendota Woods. He stated more information should be obtained from Mr. Putnam regarding his development plans. He stated his concerns for property values should a commercial development be approved. A Mendota Woods resident, owner of Lot 2 Mendota Woods, stated her concerns for trees, traffic, children and pedestrian safety. She further stated her concerns for the lack of green space. She stated the Commission should request more detailed information regarding the day care facility. She stated she would like to see single family homes constructed on this site. She stated she would like to see the erosion devices clarified. Mr. Stutz responded that erosion measures have been taken into account as provided on the grading plan. He stated that measures are taken to protect sediment from going into the sewer system. He stated a special fabric cloth type fencing is used that allows water, but not sediment to filter through. March 24, 1992 Page 18 Mr. Stan Linnell, 1407 Cherry Hill Road, stated there is a very high percentage of hard surface within the development. He stated more transition is needed and that the roadways are too narrow. He further stated walkways should be provided. He stated additional screening should be provided at the northern end of the development. Mr. Stutz explained that buildings will have additional features to protect against airplane noise, meeting standard FHA requirements. He stated the outdoor noise levels to be in the range of 62 to 65 decibel range. Mr. Stutz explained that an additional $2,500 has been provided to the City for additional reviews required by this project. He stated the Rottlund Company is requesting that any monies not used, be return upon approval of the project. Commissioner Krebsbach moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Friel moved to recommend that the City Council deny the Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development, the rezoning to HR-PUD, and the Sketch Plan approval for the following reasons: 1. The proposal does not meet the criteria for a Planned Unit Development set forth in Sections 13 and 22 of the Zoning Ordinance in that it does not: a. preserve the natural and scenic qualities for open areas, b. limit development to a scale appropriate to the existing terrain and surrounding land use, c. result in an effective and unified treatment of the development possibilities on the project site, or d. harmonize with the existing and proposed development in the areas surrounding the site and, in fact, instead of preserving open areas and natural and scenic qualities, the proposed Planned Unit Development diminishes open space and maximizes densities by utilizing unsafe private streets of inappropriate widths, the consequence of which is to have a result March 24, 1992 Page 19 entirely opposite that which is contemplated in the utilization of a Planned Unit Development. 2. The Planned Unit Development does not meet the definitional requirements of Sections 22.1(a) and (b). 3. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit requested would have an adverse and detrimental effect upon the health, safety and welfare of the future occupants of the project site and on existing and future occupants of surrounding lands. It will seriously depreciate surrounding property value and the project is not therefore in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City Zoning Ordinance and, in particular, does not meet the requirements for a Conditional Use Permit specified in Sections 5.6(5) of the Zoning Ordinance. In particular, the private streets have the potential of creating health and safety problems, as evidenced by the concerns expressed, among others, by the reports of the fire and police departments of the City, even though it is recognized that apparently some changes were made in the plans in response to those reports. 4. The proposal before us fails to meet the following specific requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances of the City, among others: a. Outlot A, which calls for a day care center, does not meet the one -acre minimum specified by Section 7.2(8) or in the alternative there is an inconsistency between the site description and dimensions contained in the plans presented by the developer and the developer's March 17, 1992, letter. It fails in other respects as well to meet the requirements of Section 7.2(8) of the Zoning Ordinance in that the applicant is lacking evidence of registration with the State of Minnesota as required. b. The streets are private streets and are twenty -four feet (24') wide instead of the minimum thirty feet (30') required by Section 5.3(a) of the Subdivision Ordinance. Private street width provided for by the developer is the width permitted for private driveways only. It appears that the use of private streets was apparently utilized as a means to maximize housing units in the proposal and minimize open space, which is entirely inconsistent with the purposes for which a Planned Unit Development is permitted, particularly on such a small site. Such streets also have the potential for creating public March 24, 1992 Page 20 safety problems because of problems related to maintenance and snow removal. c. The Site Development Plan fails to comply with Sections 5.6(2)b6, 7 and 8; 5.6(2)c 3, 4 and 5; 5.7(2)a6, 7 and 8; 5.7(3)b 3, 4 and 5; 22.5(1) and 22.5(4) with respect to Outlot A; and in general with Sections 5.6(2)d6, 5.6(2)e3, 5.7(3)c6, 5.7(3)d3 and 12.5(7). d. The proposed parking outside, off street fails to comply with Section 12.5(2). e. There is no public street abutting Lots 2, 3 and 5 as required by Section 3.2(65) of the Zoning Ordinance. f. The Covenants of the Homeowner's Association which provide for rental of the units is inconsistent with the representation that these units are "for sale" units. g. Traffic studies have not taken into account the day care center traffic of the Planned Unit Development. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. Commissioner Krebsbach offered a friendly amendment stating that the proposed plan does not reflect open space area for both children and pedestrian travel. Commissioner Friel accepted the Friendly Amendment. Commissioner Friel moved to include within his motion that the plan fails to comply with the requirement of fencing as required by the Zoning Ordinance, on the north side of the property. Commissioner Tilsen offered a Friendly Amendment stating that private driveway length should be much less than 500 feet. Commissioner Friel accepted the Friendly Amendment. Commissioner Duggan seconded the Friendly Amendments and the addition to the original motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 March 24, 1992 Page 21 MISCELLANEOUS The Planning Commission briefly discussed the possibility of visiting the Kathleen Anderson site. Administrative Assistant Batchelder explained, with regards to Mr. Guthmann's comments regarding Planner Dahlgren, that City staff had informed the applicants and Somerset 19 that Planner Dahlgren did not have the authority in to approve planning requests and explained that only City Council has the authority to grant any planning approvals. VERBAL REVIEW ADJOURN AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Public Works Director Danielson provided a verbal review for the planning items at the previous City Council meeting. Commissioner Krebsbach moved to adjourn the Planning Commission to Saturday, March 28, 1992 at 9:00 o'clock A.M. for the purpose of visiting the Kathleen M. Anderson site located at the southwest quadrant of Third Avenue and Clement Street. Commissioner Krebsbach further directed City staff to send mailed notice to all property owners within 350 feet of the requested Planned Unit Development Amendment, Variance, Wetlands Permit and Subdivision. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. Commissioner Tilsen informed the Commission that he would not be able to attend the meeting. TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 11:45 o'clock P.M. Respectfully submitted, Kimberlee K. Blaeser Senior Secretary