Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-09-18 PC Packet AGENDA MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday,September 18,2012 7:00PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a.August 21,2012 5.Public Hearings 6.New Business a.Ordinance Revision—Reinforced-Turf Parking Ordinance for Residential Properties b.Resolution of Appreciation for Gary Pearson 7.Unfinished Business 8.Visitor Presentations 9.Commission Presentations a.Commission report for the city council meeting of August 27,2012. Commissioner Durrand was scheduled to attend. The items reviewed were the wetland setback variance for 1978 Kennard Street and the RSI Recycling conditional use permit. Staff will present the city council actions taken. b.Commission report for the city council meeting of September 10, 2012. Commissioner Bierbaum was scheduled to attend. There wereno planning commission items scheduled for review at this meeting. c.Upcoming city council meeting of September24, 2012. Commissioner Fischeris scheduled to attend. The resolution of appreciation for Gary Pearson will be presented at this meeting. 10.Staff Presentations a.Update about Improvements at the Gladstone Savanah and Public Safety Training Center (no report) 11.Adjournment DRAFT MINUTESOF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, AUGUST 21, 2012 1.CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the Commissionwas held in the City Hall Council Chambers and was called to order at 7:00p.m.by Chairperson Fischer. 2.ROLL CALL Paul Arbuckle, CommissionerPresent Al Bierbaum, CommissionerPresent Absent Joseph Boeser, Commissioner Tushar Desai,CommissionerPresent Larry Durand, CommissionerPresent Lorraine Fischer, ChairpersonPresent Absent-Resigned Gary Pearson, Commissioner Dale Trippler, CommissionerPresent Stephen Wensman, CommissionerPresent Staff Present: Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner ENR Commissioners: Randee Edmundson, Ann Palzer, Dale Trippler 3.APPROVAL OF AGENDA Staff removed5.a. the CUP Revision for Edgerton Elementary School, 1929 Edgerton Street because the application was withdrawn. CommissionerTripplermoved to approve the agenda as amended. Seconded by CommissionerArbuckle.Ayes–All The motion passed. 4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Trippler requested that it be reflectedin the minutes that no one addressed the commission for the public hearing. CommissionerTripplermoved to approve theJuly 17, 2012,minutes as amended. Seconded by CommissionerWensman.Ayes –All The motion passed. August 21, 2012 1 Planning CommissionMeetingMinutes 5.PUBLIC HEARING a.Conditional Use Permit Revision for Edgerton Elementary School, 1929 Edgerton Street Staff stated that because the applicant withdrew theirapplication there would not be apublic hearing. b.Wetland Buffer Variance for Michael and Kathleen Bryan, 1978 Kennard Street i.Senior Planner, Tom Ekstrand introduced members of the ENR Commission. Commission members Edmundson, Palzer and Tripplerwere present forthe public hearing.Mr. Ekstrand gave the report for the Wetland Buffer Variance for 1978 Kennard Street and answered questions of the commission. Chairperson Fischer opened the public hearing. The applicants, Michael and Kathleen Bryan, 1978 Kennard Street addressed and made a presentationto the commission and answered questions from the planning commission and the environmental commission members. The following personaddressed the commission for the public hearing: 1.Luke Weinhagen, a neighbor who was in favor of the proposal addressed the commission. Chairperson Fischer closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tripplermoved to approve the resolutionapproving a wetland buffer variance from the Manage B wetland on the east side of the site. Approval is based on the following reasons: 1.Strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause the applicant practical difficulties because complying with the wetland buffer requirement stipulated by the ordinance would prohibit the building of any permanent structures, substantially diminishing the potential of this lot. 2.Approval of the requested wetland buffer variance would benefit the adjacent wetland because the site will be planted with additional buffer plantings. 3.Approval would meet the spirit and intent of the ordinance since the proposed swimming pool would be built in an area that is already maintained as lawn, which is also allowed by ordinance. 4.The Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District has reviewed the applicant’s plans and had no concerns and does not require a permit. Approval of the wetland buffer variance shall be subject to complying with all of the conditions of approval in the Engineering Review report by Randy Lindblom and the comments made by Dave Fisher, Maplewood Building Official and Shann Finwall, Maplewood Environmental Planner, made within this report. Seconded by Commissioner Arbuckle.Ayes –All The motion passed. August 21, 2012 2 Planning CommissionMeetingMinutes The motion made by Commissioner Trippler was also approved by ENR Commission members Randee Edmundson and Ann Palzer representing the ENR. This item goes to the city council on August 27, 2012. c.Conditional Use Permit Revision for RSI Recycling, 1255 Cope Avenue i.Senior Planner, Tom Ekstrand gave the report and answered questions of commission for the Conditional Use Permit Revision for RSI Recycling, 1255 Cope Avenue. Chairperson Fischer opened the public hearing. The applicant Troy Halverson, RSI Recycling Service addressed and answered questions of the commission. The following people addressed thecommission regarding the public hearingopposed to the project in this location: 1.Tom Shads 2.Roger Franz 3.Gary and Debby Flasch 4.Mr. Weglittner 5.Tracy Mincher Chairperson Fischer closed the public hearing. Commissioner Wensmanmoved to approve the resolution approving a conditional use permit revision for 1255 Cope Avenue to allow a materials recycling facility. Approval is based on the findings required by ordinance and subject to the following conditions (additions are underlined and deletions are crossed out): 1.All construction must comply with the site plan, received by the city on September 24, 1990. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The city council must review major changes. 2.The city council shall review this permit one year from the date of approval, based on the procedures in the city code. 3.There shall be no outside storage of good, materials or trash. 4.The owner shall have the roof-top equipment screened as required by code. 5.The owner shall keep the pole light, atthe northwest corner of the site off or reorient it so it will not glare onto streets or other properties. 6.The canopy shall not be illuminated. 7.The hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m. to 7 p.m. Monday –Friday; 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays and 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on Sundays. 8.There shall be no overnight parking of trucks. August 21, 2012 3 Planning CommissionMeetingMinutes 9.Grade and sod the weedy strip next to Englewood Shops by July 1, 1991. Sod the entire lawn by September 15 if the owner cannot control the weeds by then. 10.Irrigationshall be made operational if present. 1.All construction shall follow the site plan date-stamped August 15, 2012. Staff may approve minor changes. 2.The city council shall review this permit in one year. 3.The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year after council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 4.The permitted hours of operation shall be 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8 to noon on Saturday. Extended hours may be considered by the city council should the applicant wish to add a second shift. 5.If vehicle stacking into the street becomes a problem, the applicant should revise their internal traffic flow or make other suitable changes to prevent this from happening. 6.Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened if required by code. 7.Site lighting shall comply with city lighting requirements. Pole height is exempt if they exceed 25 feet in height. 8.The applicant shall work with the police department to monitor and guardagainst the potential for stolen materials being sold at the proposed facility. 9.The applicant shall install an eight-foot tall concrete screening wall on the north, west and south sides of the outdoor dumpster bin area as shown on the plan. The followingvariations shall be required as well: The southerly wall shall be extended around the south and east sides of the trash and cardboard recycling area to provide screening for those dumpsters and to help conceal the activity at the roll-off dumpsters. The construction of the westerly section of screening wall may be postponed until the city has vacated the Atlantic Street right-of-way since the applicant proposes to acquire this for his site. This would avoid the costs of construction of the wall justto demolish it for later expansion. The deadline for this land acquisition and completion of the screening wall shall be two years from the date of this CUP approval. The city may require the installation of a temporary fence of the interim based on disturbances, unsightliness and complaints. 10.The landscaping plan shall be resubmitted for design board approval providing for: Removal of the deciduous trees along Cope Avenue and replacement with eight-foot-tall spruce trees. Matching landscaping on thewest side of the screening wall to match the landscaping proposed on the south side. Except for these items, the landscaping plan is approved with the other landscaping details proposed. August 21, 2012 4 Planning CommissionMeetingMinutes Seconded by CommissionerBierbaum.Ayes –Chairperson Fischer, Commissioner’s Bierbaum, Desai & Durand Nays–Commissioner’s Arbuckle &Trippler The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on August 27, 2012. 6.NEW BUSINESS None. 7.UNFINISHEDBUSINESS None. 8.VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. 9.COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a.Commissioner report for the city council meeting of July 23, 2012. Commissioner Desai was scheduled to attendbut his attendance was not needed. The items reviewed were the resolution of appreciation for Tanya Nuss and the second reading of the Turf Parking Ordinance. b.Commissioner report for the city council meeting of August 13, 2012. Commissioner Arbuckle attended. The items reviewed were the Keller Golf Course conditional use permit and the wetland buffer waiver for restoration at the former Maplewood Dumpwhich passed by the city council. c.Upcoming city council meeting of August 27, 2012. Commissioner Durand is scheduled to attend. The scheduled items for discussion are RSI Recycling and the wetland variance for 1978 Kennard Street. 10.STAFFPRESENTATIONS Staff will be working on visitor parking for townhome developments and on street parking for visitors which have been an issue for some areas in the Legacy development area. 11.ADJOURNMENT Chairperson Fischer adjourned the meeting at 9:13p.m. August 21, 2012 5 Planning CommissionMeetingMinutes MEMORANDUM TO:James Antonen, City Manager FROM:Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Chuck Ahl, Assistant City Manager Ordinance Amendment Regarding Reinforced-Turf Parking Lotsfor SUBJECT: Residential Parking—Section 44-17 DATE: September 4, 2012 INTRODUCTION On July 23, 2012, the city council approved an ordinance amendment to allow reinforced-turf parking lots as a limited-use option for temporary, over-flow parking lots. The city council also directed staff to study allowing reinforced-turf parking as an option for residential parking needs. Request Consider whether the city ordinance should allow reinforced-turf as a parking surface for residential use. The residential parking ordinance is in the back of this memorandum in the Reference section. BACKGROUND The recently amended turf-parking ordinance applies to non-residential parking circumstances and reads as follows: Sec. 44-17.Off-Street Parking. (e) All parking lots and associated driveways shall have a surface of bituminous material or concrete and striped parkingspaces. The city council may permit the alternative parking method of reinforced-turf parking when it would meet the following criteria: When the need for overflow parking is infrequent or limited to occasional parking events. Where there is already hard-surfaced parking that provides for handicap-accessible parking needs. Where the turf parking lot would meet setback and screening requirements. Where the parking need is seasonal (non winter) so snow plowing is not needed. Where there would be an environmental benefit due to storm water management or meeting shoreland/wetland/flood plain ordinance impact needs. Where the turf-parking plan meets the approval of the city engineer from the standpoint of using proven construction materials engineered for durability and aesthetics. Where the turf-parking plan meets the approval of the police and fire chief from the standpoint of meeting public safety requirements. This parking surface alternative shall not apply tosingle and double dwelling residential properties which are governed under Section 44-17 (j), the residential parking ordinance apply. DISCUSSION Staff appreciates the environmental benefit that reinforced-turf parking provides. However, in residential applications,it isnota proper fit. The main problems would be abuse and enforcement. A constant complaint the city’s code enforcement staff deals with is parking on grass. The problems are: Unsightliness—worn and rutted grass. Setback violations—crowding a lot line by parked cars or RVs. Tall grass in and around the parking area. Poor appearance—without a defined hard surface for parking, there is no way to know whether a grass parking area is a permitted one. A neighbor would only see that thenearby home has cars on the lawn. Furthermore, a resident could enlarge a turf parking area without any knowledge or approval by the city staff. Another aspect that could come upis whether turf-parking surfaces should be considered for entire driveways or simply on a limited basis for things like an RV, aboat or an extra car. Staff is concerned that even if a properly installed reinforced-turf parking surface is installed, it will still give the appearance that the homeowner is merely parking on the grasswhich would be a code violation. Furthermore, a person in violation of parking on the grass could feel that the city isenforcing them unfairly when it appears that staff is ignoring a neighbor that is “properly” parking on the grass. 2 Conclusion As a way to keep neighborhoods looking neat, maintained and orderly, staff does not support a code amendment that would allow reinforced-turf parking areas for residential properties. RECOMMENDATION 1.If the planning commission supports reinforced-turf parking as an option for residential properties, please give staff your recommendations on wording you would like to have in a residential turf-parking ordinance. Staff will then bring back an ordinance amendment for consideration. 2.If the planning commission does not recommend reinforced-turf parking for residential use, please make a motion to that effect for staff to forward to the city council. 3 REFERENCE (j)Off-street parking in residential areas shall be in accordance with the following: (1)Purpose.The purpose of this subsection is to control, through nuisance and zoning regulations, certain land uses and activities that have a direct and detrimental effect on the character of the city's residential neighborhoods. As such, the city council finds that, in order to accommodate the off-street parking needs of residents while protecting the interests of the public, regulations and performance standards are desirable and necessary for off-street parking areas in residential zoning districts. (2)Findings.To the purposes listed in subsection (j)(1) of this section, the city council finds that the use and possession of vehicles are an important factor in the lives of many residents of the city. The city council also finds that the number of vehicles, the improper storage of vehicles and the parking of and storage of excessive numbers of vehicles can be a nuisance and can affect the neighborhood character as well as the public health, safety and welfare, property values and the reasonable use and enjoyment of neighboring properties. The city council further finds that the establishment of the regulations in this subsection furthers the goals in the city comprehensive plan relative to the establishment and enhancement of residential neighborhoods and similar goals. In making these findings, the city council accepts the recommendations of city staff and planning commission that have studied the experiences of other suburban cities that have reviewed and regulated off-street parking in residential areas. The city council establishes the regulations in this subsection as a means to balance the interests of the owners of vehicles, nearby residents and the public. (3)Goals.Goals in adopting this subsection include the following: a.Preserving neighborhood character, public health, safety and welfare and property values. b.Allowing all residents a reasonable use of and a chance to enjoy their property. c.Minimizing the nuisances and the adverse effects of off-street vehicle parking through careful site design standards. 4 d.Requiring the owners and builders of residential driveways and parking areas to design and build them to reasonable standards. e.Avoiding nuisances and potential damage to adjacent properties from off-street vehicle parking and parking areas through design standards and setback requirements. (4)Off-street parking standards for single-family and two-family dwellings.The following standards shall apply to off-street parking for single-family and two-family residential properties in the RE-40, RE-30, RE-20, F, R-1, R-1S and R-2 zoning districts: a.Vehicle parking in the front yard setback area (the area between the front of the residential structure and the street right-of-way line) of single-family and two-family residences shall only be on a hard-surface driveway or on improved and designated parking areas. Such a hard surface shall include bituminous, concrete, brick, gravel or crushed rock or another hard surface approved by city staff. b.The city prohibits vehicle parking or storage in the front yard on grass, unimproved areas or areas without a hard surface. c.Driveways and parking areas shall be at least five feet from a side property line, and parking areas shall not be in the street right-of-way or on other public property. d.No owner or operator shall park a vehicle that would block a sidewalk. e.All vehicles parked or stored outside on a residential property shall not be abandoned, as defined insection 18- 67, shall have a current license and registration and shall be in operable condition. Also see sections18-67and18- 68 5 f.The total area inthe front yard setback area of a single dwelling lot improved for parking and driveway purposes shall not exceed 40 percent of the front yard setback area. The total area in the front yard setback area of a duplex or double dwelling lot improved for parking and driveway purposes shall not exceed 50 percent of the front yard setback area. g. The city may approve an increase in front yard driveway coverage, a different driveway setback or a different driveway surface for a single or double dwelling by administrative review of minor construction plans as outlined insection 2-285. The city may approve an increase in front yard driveway coverage, a different driveway setback or a different driveway surface where such approval would meet the standards required by code for unique circumstances and where the above standards do not fit or where they would create a hardship for the property owner. As part of such an approval, the city may require the property owner or applicant to add screening next to or around the parking area or driveway. The city may require such screening to help hide the parking area and vehicles from the view of adjacent residential properties or from the view from the public street. The property owner or applicant may use a privacy fence, additional landscaping or other means to meet the screening requirement. City staff shall approve and inspect all such screening. p:\ORD\Parking\Turf Parking Ordinance AmendmentResidential Parking Provisions 912 te 6 MEMORANDUM TO:James Antonen, City Manager FROM:Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner Chuck Ahl, Assistant City Manger Resolution of Appreciation for Gary Pearson SUBJECT: DATE:September 4, 2012 INTRODUCTION Gary Pearson hassubmitted his resignationas a member of the Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority and as a member of the Planning Commission.Gary has served the city on the HRA since November 13, 1989 and the planning commission since December 10, 1990. RECOMMENDATION Accept the attached resolution of appreciation for Commissioner Pearson and forward this acknowledgement to the city council for their approval. P:Planning Commission\Resolution of Appreciation for Gary Pearson September 2012 te Attachment: Resolution of Appreciationfor Gary Pearson JOINT RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION WHEREAS, Gary Pearson has been a member of the Maplewood Housing and Redevelopment Authority sinceNovember 13, 1989and has served faithfully in that capacity; and WHEREAS, Gary Pearson has been a member of the Maplewood Planning Commission since December 10, 1990 and has served faithfully in that capacity as well; and WHEREAS, Gary has freely given of his time and energy, without compensation, for the betterment of the City of Maplewood; and WHEREAS, the membership of both commissions have appreciatedthe experience, insights and good judgmentGary has provided over these many years; and WHEREAS, Garyhas shown sincerededication to hisrduties and has consistently contributed hisleadership, timeand effort for the benefit of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED for and on behalf of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, and its citizens that Gary Pearsonis hereby extended our gratitude and appreciation for hisdedicated service. Passed by the Maplewood City Council on ___________, 2012 ____________________________________ Will Rossbach, Mayor Passed by the Maplewood Planning Commission On_____________, 2012 ____________________________________ Lorraine Fischer, Chairperson Attest: ________________________________ Karen Guilfoile, City Clerk