Loading...
1992-11-24 Planning Comm MinutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 24, 1992 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, November 24, 1992, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve. The meeting was called to order at 7:33 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Koll, Friel, Dreelan, Dwyer, Krebsbach, Duggan and Tilsen. Also present were Public Works Director Jim Danielson, Planning Consultant Tana Peterson-Sisley, Administrative Assistant Kevin Batchelder and Senior Secretary Kim Blaeser. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Koll moved to approve the October 27, 1992, Minutes. Commissioner Krebsbach seconded the motion. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 ABSTAIN: 2, DREELAN, DUGGAN CONTINUED HEARING: CASE NO. 92-31:. MAZZARA - SOMERSET PUD Chair Dwyer gave a brief summary of the October 24th Planning Commission meeting and explained the Commission had continued the public hearing until their November meeting to allow Mr. Mazzara sufficient time in preparing additional information on soil tests, septic system design, wetlands boundaries, trail easements, public right-of-way and private covenants. Chair Dwyer stated Commissioner Friel had phoned him during the day regarding criteria for PUD's as stated within the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Friel quoted an excerpt from Section 22.1, that a Planned Unit Development shall be defined as any project utilizing ten or more acres of contiguous land wherein there is (a) more than one principal building per lot, or (b) more than one use per lot. Commissioner Friel stated the requested PUD meets the criteria for a project utilizing ten or more acres but that the request does not meet the requirements for more than one principal building per lot ore more than one use per lot. Commissioner Friel inquired as to why the applicant has been proceeding with November 24, 1992 Page 2 the requested PUD if the Zoning Ordinance indicates the requirements necessary for a PUD which the applicant has not met. Public Works Director Danielson indicated there may be a typographical error within the Ordinance. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated the intent of the paragraph is unclear and that it will be researched. Batchelder stated he is not aware of any circumstances under which the City would desire to have two buildings on one lot and that is why this particular ordinance language is unclear. Chair Dwyer responded the City's Attorney office should review the paragraph and give an opinion on the intent of the language as stated within Section 22.1 regarding the purpose and definition of Planned Unit Developments. Mr. Gerald Mazzara, representing the buyers of the Harris property, distributed wetlands plans showing revised setbacks and house locations. He explained that Lot l's original wetland setback was indicated as a 110 foot setback and is now 100 feet. He explained Lot 2 would be adjusted to 100 feet from the wetlands and Lot 3 would be 150 feet from the wetlands. Commissioner Duggan stated he had walked the site earlier today and that he would agree with the setback as indicated for Lot 1. He noted his concerns for Lots 2 and 3 as the plan does not seem clear in the setback location as he had observed while at the site. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated that he and Planner Uban had visited the site on Monday, November 23, 1992 and noted stakes had been placed on the site to mark the edge of the wetlands. He stated the plans submitted by Mr. Mazzara tonight appear to be accurate but have not yet been verified. He stated there was evidence that soil borings had been done to define the edge of the wetlands. Commissioner Tilsen inquired if the exhibit presented tonight is a certified plan submitted by the surveyor. Mr. Mazzara stated the exhibit is not a certified plan of the wetlands. Commissioner Tilsen stated he had visited the site and the exhibit seems to be accurate but that he would like to see a certified copy of the plan to verify the accuracy of the wetlands boundaries. Commissioner Krebsbach inquired as to what percentage of land is wetlands verses percentage of non wetlands. Mr. Mazzara estimated twenty-two percent. Commissioner Krebsbach inquired if the calculation of land used for roads, houses, etc. is subtracted from the total amount of land needed to locate septic systems. Mr. Mazzara November 24, 1992 Page 3 briefly explained the proposed septic areas stating 10,000 square feet of land would be used which would allow enough room for two drainage fields per lot. Public Works Director Danielson informed the Commission that the area needed for septic systems depends upon the type of soil. There was a brief discussion regarding the water level table as indicated on the plans at 12 1/2 feet. Mr. Mazzara explained there are different ways of rating soils when constructing a drainage field system and the development of homes. He explained Lots 2 and 3 will need the construction of a mound system to help correct the soil conditions for the drainage fields. Chair Dwyer noted the soil reports, as submitted, were done 17 years ago. Mr. Mazzara stated the soil conditions have not changed. Commissioner Tilsen stated it appears that the water table is close to the elevation of the wetlands. He further stated a septic system can be within four feet of the water level. He further noted his concerns for long term reliability of septic systems constructed close to the wetlands. He wondered if people are educated in environmental issues regarding the use of septic systems and the potential hazards of those systems next to wetlands. Mr. Mazzara stated that one system per lot is mandatory and that they are planning for double capacity systems for each site. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. Mazzara explained the soil boring tests. He noted the test indicates that Lots 1, 2 and 4 is sand and Lot 3 is peat. Chair Dwyer responded there seems to be large gaps of knowledge regarding the soil borings and stated the Planning Commission is at a disadvantage in determining the veracity of information. In response to a question from Commissioner Krebsbach, Mr. Mazzara stated the building envelopes are 100' by 150'. In response to a question from Commissioner Dreelan, Mr. Mazzara stated trail easements are not shown on the plans as he has indicated he will provide the private easements as soon as he is told where it is appropriate. Mr. Mazzara stated private streets are preferred and that a dedication of utility easements of thirty feet (30') would be adequate. Commissioner Friel responded he is unpersuaded that a sixty foot (60') public right-of-way November 24, 1992 Page 4 is not needed. Mr. Mazzara stated it does not matter if there is a sixty foot (60') or thirty foot (30') right- of-way as long as it is a private easement. He stated the intentions are to protect the trees. Commissioner Friel stated a sixty foot public right-of- way gives access to the extent that it may be necessary for the City to install utilities. He stated a public right-of-way with private road over it would be fine. He stated it would not be necessary to remove any trees. He further stated private roads are not permitted in areas except where designated as a planned unit development. He stated this application does not meet the planned unit development requirements. As directed by Chair Dwyer, Public Works Director Danielson explained sixty feet (60') is a standard right- of-way width in which the City can construct a thirty- three foot (33') wide City street which would then be able to serve public and private utilities. He explained Mr. Mazzara is requesting private easements for utilities but not streets. He further stated there needs to be thirty-five feet (35') minimum to construct sanitary sewer and water utilities. He stated Mr. Mazzara is asking for twenty feet (20'). Commissioner Friel responded he would like to see a public right-of-way with a private street. Mr. Bill Burg, representing the owner's Mr. and Mrs. Harris, stated at the neighborhood meeting, the residents of the area unanimously responded to not having a public road constructed. Mr. Burg further read a letter submitted by the Harris' indicating their opposition to public roads in the area. Commissioner Duggan noted his concerns for removal of trees in the area. He stated some trees could be removed now should the public right-of-way come to light in the future. Commissioner Tilsen noted his concerns for the environmental impact of septic systems constructed near wetlands. Chair Dwyer opened the meeting to the public. Linda Garrett, 540 Wentworth Avenue, stated she lives next to the Harris property. She stated she is emotionally attached to the land in that there is beautiful vegetation and much wildlife existing on the property. She explained her home was constructed to be November 24, 1992 Page 5 compatible with the land and that the City should not ask for anything less of other builders. She stated the City needs clear guidelines for future property owners. She further submitted a petition to the Planning Commission noting the area residents do not want a public road and public right-of-way. She stated they would like to see a twenty foot (20') private easement on this particular case. She further stated the would like to see a minimum of 2 1/2 acres provided for septic systems and no more than 40 percent tree removal for all development in this area. She further stated a height limitation of thirty feet (30') should be placed on the homes constructed in the area. Mr. Garrett, 540 Wentworth Avenue, stated their concerns for public roads is safety. He stated a public road entering on Wentworth Avenue would be dangerous. He stated an easement for public roads in the future is very disturbing. Ted Weyerhaueser, 610 Wentworth Avenue, stated he supports the PUD proposal and he would like to see a better definition of the wetlands in the area. Jack Sjoholm, 1611 Delaware Avenue, stated he supports the petition as submitted and that he wants to see the character of the neighborhood preserved. Commissioner Krebsbach inquired if the potential buyers of the Harris property would consider resubmitting a new proposal showing two homes instead of three. Mr. Mazzara responded economics necessitate that three lots be developed. He further stated 2 1/2 acres per parcel can be done if the wetlands outlot was excluded. Commissioner Duggan stated that preserving the character of the neighborhood would be done if only two lots would be developed not three. Chair Dwyer stated that any construction of a house on the property will change the character of the land. He stated the Planning Commission cannot recommend approval given the lack of environmental information. He further stated City staff has not been given the information necessary to adequately inform the Planning Commission in forming a recommendation to the City Council. He stated this request is a significant issue to the neighbors and City. Commissioner Friel stated he is not interested in a public right-of-way through Marie Avenue. He further stated the City's ordinances have to be followed. He AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 November 24, 1992 Page 6 further stated he is not interested in having trees removed. He noted his concerns for the unclear wetlands boundaries. He further stated the City's ordinance establishes height limitations regarding building construction. He stated the superbiock area should be developed on a case by case basis. Mr. Mazzara stated his concerns about the recent planned unit development questions the Commission has indicated. He stated staff had directed him to proceed in this fashion. He stated that after months of work, he is now being told that this request cannot be a planned unit development. Chair Dwyer responded a legal opinion is needed. Mr. Mazzara stated the request, as submitted, is environmentally sound and respects the character of the neighborhood. Chair Dwyer responded the Planning Commission respects Mr. Mazzara's good faith efforts. Commissioner Duggan moved to continue the public hearing to January 26, 1993. Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. A brief discussion ensued over the continuance of the meeting to January. Commissioner Duggan withdrew his motion. Commissioner Friel moved to continue the hearing to December 22, 1992 at 7:30 o'clock P.M. Commissioner Krebsbach seconded the motion. Chair Dwyer informed Mr. Mazzara that he is to submit the required information in a timely fashion so that City staff can review the plans and then submit the appropriate information to the Planning Commission. Mr. Mazzara responded that he would. Chair Dwyer further stated he would like to see a legal interpretation on Section 22.1 of the Planned Unit Development section within the Zoning Ordinance. CASE NO. 92-34: GRILZ - VARIANCE Mr. Donald Grilz, 715 Decorah Lane, was present to discuss his request for a four foot (4') rear yard setback variance, to allow the construction of a home utility and storage facilities addition. November 24, 1992 Page 7 Mr. Grilz informed the Planning Commission that his wife had become disabled due to a stroke and that movement around the house is difficult. He stated he would like to have the utility area of his home located on one floor to better help his wife. In response to a question from Commissioner Tilsen, Mr. Grilz stated he could not consider reducing the addition by four feet as he needs to provide a larger garage area to help his wife move in and out of the car. Administrative Assistant Batchelder noted a 2.6 foot rear yard setback variance had been granted on September 21, 1991 three houses down from Mr. Grilz. Chair Dwyer stated all signatures of consent had been received. Chair Dwyer moved to waive the requirement for a public hearing. Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Duggan stated that Mr. Grilz had presented a practical difficulty in providing wider corridors in the utility area for handicapped movements and moved to recommend that the City Council approve a four foot (4') rear yard setback variance to allow construction of an addition to 715 Decorah Lane. Commissioner Koll seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 CASE NO. 92-35: RUEPPERS - VARIANCE Mr. Joseph Kueppers, 28 Somerset Road, was present to discuss his request for a variance to the setback required for an accessory structure, in the R-1 Zone. Mr. Kueppers explained that an older shed had existed on the property in the rear yard. He stated the old shed was torn down and he placed the new shed in the rear yard at the southeast corner of his property. He stated he thought the new placement of the shed was less obtrusive than the original shed. He stated he received signatures of consent from all of his neighbors. November 24, 1992 Page 8 Chair Dwyer confirmed that Mr. Kueppers had received the required signatures of consent. Chair Dwyer moved to waive the required public hearing. Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chair Dwyer stated it appears that there are other options available to Mr. Kueppers that would not require a variance. He further noted concerns for drainage as indicated by Planner Uban's report. He inquired, if the shed were to be re-oriented 90 degrees, would that interfere with a tennis game. In response to question from Commissioner Dreelan, Mr. Kueppers stated he would provide landscaping around the shed. Mr. Kueppers further explained there is a 4 x 4 base and that there is no easement for drainage on his lot. Commissioner Koll noted her concerns for drainage. She stated area residents had indicated to her that there has been flooding in the tennis court area in the past and that if landscaping were installed it could compound the problem. Commissioner Friel stated Mr. Kueppers has not demonstrated hardship or practical difficulty that would justify a variance. Planner Peterson-Sisley stated there is a fairly distinct swale located on Mr. Kueppers property and that if foliage were to build up due to the landscaping installed, it could cause additional drainage concerns. Mr. Kueppers stated he believes he has proven a hardship in that he does not want to block the view of his neighbors with a shed. He further stated the shed, as constructed, does not interfere with drainage. He further stated if the shed were rotated 90 degrees it would cause interference in a tennis game. Commissioner Friel moved to recommend that the City Council deny the requested variance to the required setback for an accessory structure in the R-1 Zoning based on lack of a demonstrated hardship or practical difficulty. Commissioner Tilsen seconded the motion. AYES: 5 NAYS: 2 CASE NO. PATRICK VARIANCE November 24, 1992 Page 9 , DUGGAN, DREELAN 92-25: AND LOT SPLIT Mr. Steve Patrick, owner of Outlot A Mendota Woods, was present to discuss his request for a variance for a lot without a public street and a lot split. Mr. Patrick explained he had previously platted a number of single family lots around Arbor Court. He stated as part of the plan, Centex Homes had planned to purchase two outlots for multi-family dwellings. He stated Centex Homes has indicated they do not intend on purchasing the outlots. He explained Outlot A has access to a private cul-de-sac, Brookview Lane. He explained this cul-de-sac is controlled by the Kensington Homeowners Association. He explained that now, he would like to develop the outlot for a single family dwelling. In response to a question from Chair Dwyer, Mr. Patrick stated he will not be constructing a driveway so there is no need for a wetlands permit as mentioned by Planner Uban in his report. He explained the existing driveway would be used with an easement given. He further explained the existing driveway would serve Lot 11. Commissioner Duggan inquired to the length and width of the driveway. He stated he would like the Fire Chief and Police Chief to review the driveway. He stated clarification should be given as to the location of the fire hydrants. Chair Dwyer stated he would like to see a wetlands boundary map submitted along with comments by the Police and Fire Chiefs at the December meeting. He stated clarification is necessary in order for the Commission to make a formal recommendation to the Council. Commissioner Tilsen questioned if a replat should be done as there is no public right-of-way on Outlot A. He further stated the Homeowner's Association should be approach again for street access. Commissioner Friel moved to continue the request variance and lot split to December 22, 1992. Commissioner Krebsbach seconded the motion. November 24, 1992 Page 10 AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 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 10:17 o'clock P.M. Respectfully submitted, Kimberlee K. Blaeser Senior Secretary