Loading...
1989-10-24 Planning Comm MinutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, OCTOBER 24, 1989 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October 24, 1989, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve. Chairman Morson called the meeting to order at 7:32 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Morson, Koll, Dwyer, Anderson, Krebsbach, Duggan and Tilsen. Also present were Acting City Administrator James Danielson and Planning Consultant Howard Dahlgren. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 CASE NO. 89-39 VISITATION CONVENT AND SCHOOL - SIGN AND FENCE VARIANCE Commissioner Koll moved approval of the minutes from September 26, 1989. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. Chairman Morson acknowledged a letter of resignation submitted by Commissioner Anderson. Chairman Morson stated that Commissioner Anderson was recently appointed to the Mendota Heights City Council. He further stated that Commissioner Anderson should be commended for all of the work he has done with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Krebsbach moved to commend Commissioner Anderson for his work done with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. Mr. John Dietrich, Damon, Farber and Associates, stated that he is representing the Convent of Visitation application for a variance for a sign at the end of Visitation Drive and Mendota Heights Road. He stated that at the present time the intention is to construct the entry monument signs. He further stated that the initial need for a sign is for increased readability, aesthetic and location improvement. He stated that the hope is to have the proposed sign clean up the intersection. In response to a concern regarding the fence height being too high and that it could be a October 24, 1989 Page 2 hazard for drivers on Mendota Heights Road, Mr. Dietrich stated that they are studying that problem and that at this time he asked the Commission to only consider the sign variance. Commissioner Tilsen stated that the sign does meet the setback requirements but he stated that he would like to see the sign moved back further off of Mendota Heights Road because he is concerned for the drivers coming down Visitation Drive and stopping short of Mendota Heights Road and having the sign impede their vision. In response to a question from Commissioner Tilsen, Mr. Dietrich stated that the sign is to the west of the natural gas pipe line. He stated that was another reason why fill would be placed so it does not encroach the gas line. Commissioner Duggan stated that his concern is visibility and that he would want to see a new drawing for the fence specifically from the west side. He stated that he thought that the new sign would be a nice addition to the intersection and that it would clean up the area. Mr. Dietrich stated that they plan on filling approximately four feet (4') so that the base of the sign will be at the same elevation as the road. Mr. Dietrich submitted photographs to the Commission showing the location of the proposed sign. Commissioner Anderson stated that he was a little concerned with the four feet (4') of fill. He stated that the size of the sign seemed appropriate and that it would be a great improvement. In response to a question from Commissioner Anderson, Mr. Dietrich stated that in the future, the intent is to have the entire grounds fenced. He stated that currently there is a chain link fence. Commissioner Dwyer stated that he is concerned with the sign being larger than it should be. He stated that he would like to see the sign scaled down. Mr Dietrich responded that the sign needs to be large for readability. He AYES: 6 NAYS: 1, Dwyer CASE NO. 89-41 LEXINGTON HTS. ASSOCIATION - SIGN VARIANCE October 24, 1989 Page 3 further stated that the columns can be scaled down and that they would look into doing that. Commissioner Koll stated that she had no problems with the sign and the pillars and that the sign would be a nice addition. Commissioner Koll moved to recommend that Council grant a sign size variance from twelve (12) square feet to twenty-two (22) square feet and that relative to the fence on the west side, that a recommendation be deferred until further details are submitted by the applicant. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. In response to a question from Commissioner Krebsbach, Planner Dahlgren stated that a variance is limited to the size of the sign. He stated that normally a support facility for a sign is not computed as part of the sign area, if it is within reason. Ms. Virgina Faulkner, Property Manager for Lexington Heights Apartments, explained their request for a sign variance. She briefly explained the design of the proposed sign. Commissioner Tilsen stated that he feels that the sign is extremely large. Ms. Faulkner stated that the size of the sign was determined because of the need for readability. Ms. Faulkner also responded that the pine trees near the site would be moved and will be placed in a different area on the property. In response to a question from Commissioner Duggan, Ms. Faulkner stated that there would not be a "vacancy/no vacancy sign" attached to the proposed sign. Commissioner Duggan further expressed his concerns for the maintenance of the sign. Commissioner Krebsbach stated that she is concerned with the size of the sign. She further stated that the variance for the largeness of the sign was to help facilitate rentals. Ms. Faulkner stated that the apartments are not at an occupancy which they need to be so they do need to facilitate October 24, 1989 Page 4 rentals. Commissioner Anderson stated that the size of the sign should help people and that the size of the letters may help bewildered people. He stated that he doesn't feel that the size of the sign is a safety factor. Commissioner Duggan moved to recommend to Council that a sign size variance from six (6) feet to sixty -three (63) square feet be granted. Commissioner Koll seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 1, Krebsbach CASE NO. 89 -37 J.A. DEVELOP- MENT - LOT SPLIT AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 CASE NO. 89 -38 BRUBER, WETLANDS PER. Mr. John Mathern, J.A. Development Company, explained that they have recently acquired the Victoria Townhomes Development. He stated that they propose to develop this according to the original architecture and footprint parameters of the pre- existing PUD. He stated that they are applying for Lot 1,2 and 3, Block 4 to be changed to allow J.A. Development to put up two townhouses where three would have been built. In response to a question from Chairman Morson, Mr. Mathern stated that he was unsure if this would be the only block that would be split. He stated that they are only asking for the lot splits as requested by their customers. He stated that it could happen again on the property and that he would come back if so requested. Commissioner Duggan moved to recommend to the City Council to waive the public hearing at the Planning Commission level and to grant the requested lot division with commendation. Commissioner Dwyer seconded the motion. Mr. Bill Devlin, architect representing Mr. and Mrs. Bruber, informed the Commission that he distributed a corrected survey showing the corrected topographic lines. Mr. Devlin stated that they are trying to create a walkout and that they are trying to minimize the dirt work. He stated that they are going to save as many trees as possible and that if October 24, 1989 Page 5 need be, they would transplant some of the trees along the side of the house. In response to a question from Commissioner Tilsen, Acting City Administrator Danielson stated that during the mass grading of the addition there were erosion control measures put in. Commissioner Tilsen stated that in this particular case there is a potential for erosion into the Wetlands. Acting Administrator Danielson responded that the erosion material is still at the site and they could salvage that and replace it to protect the wetlands from this particular construction site. Acting City Administrator Danielson stated that the plans submitted tonight are much improved. He stated that what still remains are the side slopes which were still illustrated as a 1 to 1 slope which is entirely too steep. He stated that typically the steepest slope would be 3 to 1. Mr. Devlin stated that they would be more than happy to change that. Planner Dahlgren briefly explained the purpose of the Wetlands Ordinance. Planner Dahlgren stated that the plans submitted tonight shows that the slope is 1 to 1 or a 45 degree slope. Planner Dahlgren stated that the plans submitted tonight are unrealistic with regards to the contour lines. Commissioner Tilsen moved to recommend to the Council to grant the Wetlands Permit with stipulations referring to the newly submitted October 24 plans: 1. That the grading won't go below elevation 932. 2. A maximum of 3 to 1 slopes be maintained realizing that adjacent to the retaining walls there is a very limited area that is steep. 3. Erosion control measures be taken and enforced through the building permit process. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 HEARING: CASE NO. 89-36 EAGAN POOL & SPA - CAO VARIANCE October 24, 1989 Page 6 4. Erosion control measures be maintained until ground cover is well established. Commissioner Dwyer seconded the motion. Mr. Ross Erickson, Eagan Pool and Spa and Ms. Susan Hall, 1755 Lexington Avenue, were present and had some revised plans. They requested the Commission to review their updated plans. After a brief discussion, the Commission felt that the hearing should again be continued to allow time for staff to review and report on the updated plans. Commissioner Anderson moved to continue the public hearing to November 28, 1989 at 7:45 P.M. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSTAIN: Morson HEARING: Commissioner Tilsen moved to continue the CASE NO. 89-34 public hearing to November 28, 1989 at 8:00 MINNESOTA P.M. INDOOR SOCCER Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. ARENA - ZONING AMENDMENT & CUP AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 VERBAL REVIEW Acting City Administrator Jim Danielson outlined the actions Council had taken on last months planning cases. ADJOURN There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 9:08 o'clock P.M. Respectfully submitted, Kimberlee K. Blaeser Senior Secretary