Loading...
1985-09-10 Council minutesPage No. 2341 September 10, 1985 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Special Joint Planning Commission/ City Council Meeting Held Tuesday, September 10, 1985 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the special joint meeting of the Mendota Heights City Council and Planning Commission was held on September 10, 1985, at City Hall,, 750 South Plaza Drive, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. Mayor Lockwood called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M. The following members were present: Mayor Lockwood, Councilmembers Blesener, Cummins, Hartmann and Witt. Also present were Commission members Kruse, Burke, McMonigal, Morson, Frank, and Henning. Absent was Stefani. AGENDA ADOPTION Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 SOUTH EAST AREA STUDY Councilmember Hartmann moved adoption of the agenda as submitted. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. City Planner Dahlgren gave a presentation on statistics on those of age 60 and older and 75 and older in suburban areas. He pointed out that their representation in the suburbs had grown very dramatically in the last few years, and that the last census showed almost 20% of the Mendota Heights population is in the 55 and over category. He said that because of the large numbers of single family homes, unmarried couples, and older citizens, there had been a considerably increased demand for rental housing. Providing apartments such as Jim Riley is requesting is really a matter of whether or not we want to provide that kind of housing alternative in the community. Planner Dahlgren also presented some aerial photographs of a single family development in Woodbury which is built around a pond similar to that proposed by Tandem Corporation for the Opus property. He pointed out the pathways around the ponds. With regard to the South East Area Study, it was noted that Commissioner Joe Stefani had sent a letter indicating that he was generally in favor of Concept B-2. Councilmember Witt said that she personally did not feel that there was a need for the neighborhood commercial development in the south east area. Councilmember Blesener added that perhaps the City should rather try to encourage people to shop in the 110/149 area, if we want to build that up as our central commercial area. Planner Dahlgren responded that the city's long range planning has always been to concentrate commercial development in that area. Page No. 2342 September 10, 1985 Commissioner Henning asked about the densities that would be allowed under the MR designation. Planner Dahlgren responded that that would be a new designation in the city's Comprehensive Plan, and would be in the 3-4 unit per acre category. He added that the City's existing R-2 zoning district allows duplexes on 15,000 square foot lots and R-3 is up to 10 units per acre. Councilmember Cummins asked if the Commission and Council had a general concensus on one of the concepts, would it be possible to delay specific rezoning for a case by case basis. Planner Dahlgren responded that the way to control specific development is through the approval of plats and planned unit development agreements. He added that it really is important that the City "do things right" by adopting a long range plan that can be clearly understood by the developers and surrounding citizens. Planner Dahlgren reported that after the City would adopt any change in its comprehensive plan, it would be sent to the Metropolitan Council, who has up to 10 days to make a "negative declaration" that the proposed change does not have significant impact on a metropolitan system. Councilmember Witt asked if it would be possible to change the comprehensive plan once again, should the conditions leading to the current discussion change. Mr. Dahlgren responded that the Council would be free to change the comprehensive plan any time it wanted to. City Administrator Frazell reported on a discussion he had had with City Attorney Tom Hart regarding comprehensive land use designation versus zoning. He said that while current state statute is clear that the zoning is the prevailing designation, that legislation might be changed in the 1986 legislature. Mr. Frazell said that there had also been court cases that had gone both ways on which was the prevailing designation. In general, he said, that it was the City Attorney's opinion that any court review of an issue would hinge on whether the Council had been reasonable in its deliberations or whether it was arbit- rary and capricious. He cautioned theCouncil and Commission that if a change in designation is made in the Comprehensive Plan, that would imply a commitment to give reasonable consideration to a proposal that was consistent with that designation, whether or not the rezoning had actually taken place. Councilmember Cummins asked whether it might be possible to move the proposed park site further south into that area proposed for apartments, then make the park site a single family neighborhood. Planner Dahlgren responded that the particular site now owned by School District No. 197 had been selected, because it is relatively flat land Page No. 2343 September 10, 1985 which would accommodate the types of active play fields that are needed. He said that it is usually preferable to have residential neighborhoods completely surrounding a park, rather than having it next door to the freeway. Mayor Lockwood said that he felt that there was general concensus on the B-1/B-1A designation for the Visitation/ Tousignant property west of Dodd Road, and everyone seemed to agree that all of the area south of Mendota Heights Road and eat of Dodd Road should generally be residential. Commissioner Henning said that he thought the airport noise would be a problem for large lot uses in the area. Councilmember Hartmann added that he did not expect that the airport noise situation was going to get any better in the near future. Mayor Lockwood said that the potential of adding 590 apartment units in this area was shocking to some. Councilmember Blesener said that she thought the Council and Commission should be looking at what the City wants, and not just reacting to specific development proposals which have been presented. Commissioner Kruse said that he thought there should be some concern about the total density increase in the area, and that it might be a wise process to narrow in on just how much density the City wanted to accommodate in the area. Councilmember Cummins asked if there was any reason that the far south east corner couldn't be shown as low density residential also, rather than medium density. Planner 1 Dahlgren responded that the proposed use was a transition zone, both from the freeway and from the apartments to the west. City Administrator Frazell added that there was also the concern with consistency with the Metropolitan Council noise contour zoning. Planner Dahlgren reiterated that many older people are selling their homes, and choosing to rent apartments as opposed to buying condominiums or townhomes. He said that approach seems to make more sense in times of low inflation. He added that the subject land is about the only parcel in Mendota Heights that would make any sense at all for development of rental units, and that the land was relatively isolated for access and could be accommodated with- out disturbing existing single family neighborhoods. Councilmember Cummins said that he wouldn't personally support a wholesale rezoning as a part of this project, and would prefer to use the planned unit development approach on a case by case basis. Commissioner Henning responded Page No. 2344 September 10, 1985 that the question of a preferred pattern of land use was still a decision that had to be made. Commissioner Kruse said that he feels there is a place for apartments in this area, primarily because of airport and freeway noise, and he was in favor of developing some. Commissioner Frank added that he really didn't think anyone would want to use this land to build a single family home, and the question may really be one of allowing apartment development or expecting the land to remain vacant. Commissioner Henning added that if the development did not take place by Jim Riley, there would likely be someone else coming in with a similar proposal in the future. Planner Dahlgren cautioned that the City would not want the wrong land use pattern to get started in this area, which could happen if one large lot house was built out here. He indicated it was important to make the best use of what you have, and that this land seemed to be ideally suited for multi-family residential. He said there was definitely a strong market for apartments in the area, as evidenced by how quickly Lexington Heights had filled up. Commissioner Henning said that he generally liked the B-2 concept, and saw little problem with it. Mayor Lockwood noted that the staff report had shown that the high density residential use would provide a net tax gain to the City. Commissioner Kruse said that he generally agreed with the high density residential and neighborhood commercial desig- nations in Concept B-2. Councilmember Blesener said that she was in favor of putting the denser uses in the area next to the freeway, but not necessarily in favor of going as high as 10 units per acre. Councilmember Hartmann said that he could support the high density residential designation, and personally had no problem with the neighborhood commercial designation, since there was no other practical use for that land. Councilmember Cummins said that he would like to see the low density residential designation go as far south as Mendota Heights Road, and not show MR north of it. He said that he would like to get some neighborhood feedback on the proposed commercial development, and suggested that the Council and Commission not try to make any final decisions until after a public hearing. For the purpose of a public hearing and comment, Councilmember Cummins said that the B-2 Concept was generally OK with him, but he would like to see the LR designation moved all the way south to Mendota Heights Road. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 ADJOURN Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 2345 September 10, 1985 Councilmember Witt said that she would be willing to throw out Concept B-2 for public comment, but was not personally in favor of the neighborhood commercial area. Commissioner Kruse said that the Tandem proposal is before the Planning Commission at its next meeting, and questioned whether it might be possible for the Commission to go ahead and give preliminary approval to their first platted area, since that portion did not seem to be much in dispute. There was a general concensus that the Commission could do so, conditioned upon the Council and Commission later deciding to make appropriate changes in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Witt moved to set a public hearing for September 24, at 8:00 P.M. Councilmember Hartmann seconded the motion. Commissioner Kruse indicated that the Planning Commission would hold its regular meeting at 6:30 P.M. so as to try to be done in time for the 8:00 o'clock public hearing. Developer Jim Riley questioned the appropriateness of the line that had been shown between the MR and HR districts. The Council and Commission indicated that the present meeting was not a public hearing, and they were not amenable to getting into the details at this time. There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Hartmann moved that the meeting be adjourned to 7:00 P.M, Sept. 11, for budget discussions. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 9:46 o'clock P.M. ATTEST: Robert G. Lockwood Mayor Kevin D. Frazell City Administrator