Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/16/19991. Call to Order 2. Roll Call Approval of Minutes a. August 2, 1999 4. Approval of Agenda MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, August 16, 1999, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 5, New Business a. US West Monopole Conditional Use Permit (1725 Kennard Street) b. Dege Garden Center Conditional Use Permit Revision (831 Century Avenue North) c. Minnesota Motors Conditional Use Permit Revision (135 Century Avenue North) 6. Visitor Presentations 7. Commission Presentations a. August 9 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler b. August 23 Council Meeting: Mr. Mueller c. September 13 Council Meeting: Mr. Ledvina 8. Staff Presentations a. Reschedule September 6, 1999 meeting (Labor Day) 9. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA AUGUST 16, 1999 I. CALLTO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Jack Frost Matt Ledvina Paul Mueller Gary Pearson William Rossbach Michael Seeber Milo Thompson Dale Trippler Present Present Present Present at 7:08 p.m. Absent Absent Present Present Present III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 2, 1999 Commissioner Frost moved approval of the minutes of August 2, 1999, as submitted. Commissioner Thompson seconded. Ayes--Fischer, Frost, Seeber, Thompson, Trippler Abstain--Ledvina The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OFAGENDA Commissioner Frost moved approval of the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Ledvina seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. V. NEW BUSINESS A. U.S. West Monopole Conditional Use Permit (1725 Kennard Street) Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Trippler asked about a resident concern that transmissions from the tower might interfere with television reception. Mr. Roberts said U.S. West previously did extensive testing in conjunction with constructing a tower in the vicinity of the 3M Company. 3M was satisfied from these tests that there would be no problem. This monopole has been up for over a year and there have been no complaints. Mr. Roberts further added that there have not been complaints about any interference from any of the towers within the city. Ken Nielsen was present representing U.S. West. He distributed a photograph that showed the new type of monopole that they are proposing for this location. Mr. Nielsen said initially they intended to mount the pole on the church itself. It was determined that this was not safe or feasible. This site is desirable for a pole because it is one of the larger in the area and the property is primarily on a hill. There are also mature, existing trees that screen the area. Mr. Nielsen gave the specifics of the pole and the equipment. Commissioner Trippler had asked Mr. Nielsen to provide a map showing the location of their towers in other communities, particularly North Oaks. Mr. Nielsen did not have such a map and felt the one provided with the report was relevant to this specific application. Dan Wiesenburger, radio systems design engineer with U.S. West Wireless, answered questions from the commission. He said, even though North Oaks is approximately the same size as the northern portion of Maplewood, they only have one tower within the city limits because of the larger lots and fewer homes. If Maplewood had the same density there would probably be a similar layout here. Mr. Wiesenburger said high density population areas are generally better served by numerous, Iow-profile, short towers because that matches U.S. West capacity. Commissioner Trippler asked about the possibility of collocating on the existing tower near Frost and English. Mr. Wiesenburger responded that this tower would only serve the western half of the coverage area that they are trying to cover. He said it saves "enormous costs" when collocating. Mr. Wiesenburger claimed that the hill at the Presentation Church site would block the signals from this tower to White Bear Avenue, an area where U.S. West needs coverage. Therefore, he ruled out the tower at Frost and English for "technical feasibility reasons." Commissioner Seeber inquired about the typical range of the tower and how much they overlap. Mr. Wiesenburger said the range in an urban area with high-foliage density is limited to about one-quarter mile in a residential area and up to one-half mile on a street like White Bear Avenue. He also said the overlap is very minimal. This tower will be about one or two feet lower than the cross on the Presentation Church. Commissioner Mueller wondered about how much communication occurs between competitors when planning their telecommunication needs. Mr. Wiesenburger replied that, if they see a competitor's tower in an area where they desire a new site, they will contact that company to see if they would like to lease space. He said they generally do not talk ahead of time. According to Mr. Wiesenburger, they have used several competitors' towers throughout the metropolitan area. In addition, others are allowed to use the U.S. West towers. Mr. Nielsen said U.S. West currently has master use agreements with more than half of the wireless carriers in the metropolitan area. Therefore, collocation is not uncommon in this area. Mr. Nielsen said the four-foot tall trees are to screen the equipment from the users of the church. He said the existing trees are approximately 40 to 55 feet tall to the north, west and south of the proposed pole. To the east there is the church between the proposed pole and the neighboring property. He also pointed out that only two objections were received from more than 60 notices sent to surrounding property owners. Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend: Adoption of the resolution which approves a conditional use permit to allow a 73-foot-tall telecommunications monopole and related equipment. This approval is for the property at 1725 Kennard Street. The city bases this approval on the findings required by the ordinance and is subject to the following conditions: 1. Ail construction shall follow the site plan approved by the city. The director of community development may approve minor changes. The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 3. The city council shall review this permit in one year. Planning Commission Minutes of 08-16-99 -3- Commissioner Ledvina seconded. Ayes--Fischer, Frost, Ledvina, Mueller, Seeber Thompson Nays--Trippler The motion passed. B. Dege Garden Center Conditional Use Permit Revision (831 Century Avenue North) Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. He said that the CUP was due for review and that Mr. Dege, the owner, was asking for a revision to his CUP for a temporary chain-link fence he had already installed. Mr. Roberts said a neighbor filed a complaint about the addition of the fenced-in area because they were concerned that if this was allowed by the city it would start the wheels to further expansion of Mr. Dege's commercial center nearer to the residential area. Mr. Roberts said staff recommends denial of the request to expand the site by allowing the fenced-in display area. Staff would recommend continuation of the conditional use permit subject to two conditions relating to the removal of the outdoor storage area. Mr. Roberts answered questions from the commissioners. Commissioner Thompson asked staff if a permit was required to put up a fence on a residential property. Staff said if the fence is six feet high or less a permit is not required. Commissioner Trippler asked if the city can levy a fine or fee against Mr. Dege for repeated violations of his CUP. Mr. Roberts said that the city would have to hold a public hearing first and the outcome could be either a revocation of the conditional use permit or being put on probation. Staff said that only the district courts can levy fines. Melinda Coleman, director of community development, said that the city would have to go through the review process to revoke the conditional use permit. If the CUP was revoked and Mr. Dege did not comply, he would be cited and it would go to district court. Commissioner Trippler wanted to clarify that the first conditional use permit is to allow parking in an R1 zone and if the owner continues to meet the revisions that were originally set he could continue to park in the R1 zone. Staff said that the revision requested was to allow the outdoor fenced storage area. Staff said that if the owner doesn't try to expand or cause other problems then they could continue to park in the R-1 zone. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if there were any other instances in the city where there is a commercial parking lot on an R1 zone with a conditional use permit. Staff said that if the city does, there are very few. Staff said they couldn't recall processing one in the last ten years. Staff said that Mr. Dege was not present because he was out of town and wouldn't be back until next week. Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend: Denial of the conditional use permit revision requested by George Dege to add a fenced-in outdoor storage area for plant materials on a portion of the parking lot at 831 N. Century Avenue. Denial is based on the following reasons: Approval would narrow the easterly drive lane in the parking lot to a width of 18 feet---code requires 24 feet for a two-way drive aisle. (The drive aisle is nonconforming already at 23 feet wide.) Planning Commission Minutes of 08-16-99 -4- Approval of this fencing would allow a material storage and retail use on property zoned R1 (single dwelling residential). This would be a violation of the R1 zoning requirements. Since the proposed fenced storage area is in the drive aisle it would potentially obstruct traffic flow. Continuation of the conditional use permit for Dege Garden Center, at 831 N. Century Avenue, subject to the following conditions: 1. Mr. Dege shall remove the outdoor, plant-material storage area behind the building within one month of this council action. If Mr. Dege does not remove this fencing as directed, the city council shall reconsider the continuation of this permit. If Mr. Dege removes the fencing as required within one month, the city council shall review this permit again in five years. Commissioner Trippler seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. Minnesota Motors Conditional Use Permit Revision (135 Century Avenue North) Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Frost asked about a similar issue that occurred at the Toyota dealership on Highway 61. He asked staff about the resolution of that matter. Mr. Roberts said this involved a paved trail along the highway that was required at the time Toyota was originally built. Toyota eventually started using this trail and asked for a revision of their conditional use permit. The city allowed them to expand their parking lot and move the curbline, keeping it all on their property. They also were directed to remove the trail and replace it with grass. Commissioner Thompson asked if enforcement of this issue was based on complaint or general enforcement of the policy. Mr. Roberts said this issue began with a complaint. He confirmed that a site inspection is done when a conditional use permit is due for review. Melinda Coleman, director of community development, said the city does not go looking for this type of violation but does take action when they see it. Glenn Dreher was present representing Minnesota Motors. He assured the commission that the only reason they paved this area was because it was a "mudhole." Mr. Dreher said this area has never had a curb on the outside of the grass and, therefore, people would simply pull up and park on the grass. He said posts were placed and one driveway eliminated to discourage vandalism. According to Mr. Dreher, no cars that are for sale are placed in this area. Commissioner Carlson wondered if the applicant had ever tried to put a fence in this area. Mr. Dreher did not like the appearance of a fence. He felt the only way to resolve this problem, if parking is not allowed in this paved area, is to install a curb to stop people from pulling up here. Commissioner Frost assumed it was illegal for cars to park on the boulevard grass. Ms. Coleman recalled two instances where parking was allowed in the Mn/DOT right-of-way. Mr. Frost questioned whether it was the applicant's problem or an issue that the city needed to resolve by getting the police involved. Ms. Coleman suggested putting no parking signs on the street. Mr. Dreher said there are now signs on the posts that face the grass area but they don't seem to stop people. Planning Commission Minutes of 08-16-99 -5- Commissioner Mueller suggested 4 x 4 posts similar to those used to stop people from entering parks. He didn't feel it was the applicant's responsibility to stop people from parking on city property, but thought that paving the area made it easier to park there. Commissioner Thompson thought if the applicant is required to remove the blacktop and restore the area, the city should put in concrete curb and "very obvious" no parking signs. He also suggested a very short retaining wall on the south edge of this property. Mr. Dreher asked about installing two of the city no parking signs in the pavement three or four feet out from the posts. They would not remove the blacktop. Commissioner Frost questioned if the issue was the blacktop on the public right-of-way or the parking illegally in the right-of-way. He thought putting the signs in the middle of the paved area would be a reasonable option. Commissioner Thompson asked about the applicant putting a directional sign at the western edge of his entrance to indicate the customer parking area. Commissioner Mueller felt it was the city's responsibility to enforce parking regulations. Commissioner Trippler said it appeared that the real issue was the paving of the boulevard. He thought the commission was being asked to recommend to the city council that the blacktop that was done by the applicant be removed from the boulevard and grass be restored because it was not his property. Ms. Coleman felt the commission could look at other solutions for the issue. Commissioner Ledvina agreed with Mr. Dreher that a curb is required to prevent the problem in the future. Mr. Roberts thought it would probably be up to the city council to direct the city to install a curb. The council could also direct the applicant to install a curb and no parking signs. Ms. Coleman said the city does not normally pay for curbing unless they are doing a city project. Chairperson Fischer asked it shrubs or other plantings would be permitted on a boulevard. Ms. Coleman said landscaping is allowed but there is a height maximum of about 36 inches. Mr. Roberts mentioned the potential for snowplow damage. Ms. Fischer suggested that petunias or other summer plantings would not be affected. Commissioner Mueller recommended that, if the staff recommendation is approved, the city council or whoever would find ways to also eliminate the illegal parking. Commissioner Trippler moved the Planning Commission recommend denial of Don Roemer's request for approval of his revised site plan for Minnesota Motors at 135 Century Avenue North. Denial is based on the following reasons: 1. The paving of the Brookview Drive boulevard is contrary to the approved site plan for Minnesota Motors. 2. Allowing parking on the boulevard would be contrary to city code requirements. 3. Allowing parking on the boulevard would set a precedent whereby other property owners in Maplewood may wish to do the same. The city council should require that Mr. Roemer remove the blacktop and restore this area with sod by October 15, 1999. The city should also encourage the installation of curbing and/or the planting of trees or shrubs on the boulevard to eliminate the problem of parking on the area in question. If the boulevard is not restored by that time, the city council shall consider the revocation of Mr. Roemer's conditional use permit. Commissioner Ledvina seconded. Commissioner Mueller didn't think it was prudent to be so specific with what should be put in the area. He preferred to have the recommendation say that the city is responsible to solve this Planning Commission Minutes of 08-16-99 -6- illegal parking problem on the boulevard by whatever means necessary. Chairperson Fischer asked if Mr. Trippler would accept a friendly amendment to say "the city should consider alternatives such as curbing..." Mr. Trippler and Mr. Ledvina were both agreeable to this amendment. Commissioner Thompson mentioned a previous instance where an applicant complained about trees destroying a sight line to his business. He thought this would happen in this case. Commissioner Ledvina had a problem with using a term like "encourage." He thought it was better to specifically require that the curbing be installed or some other technique. Commissioner Mueller changed the wording to say "the city council will develop ways to eliminate this illegal parking." Ms. Coleman said that if the recommendation was removal of the blacktop, it would make sense to look at landscaping and curbing. If removal was the commission's choice, it should be left up to staff to find alternative solutions. An alternative would be for staff to take another look at the issue and bring the item back to the next meeting. Commissioner Frost was not in favor of having the blacktop removed. Ms. Coleman said the complaint involved aesthetics as well as the illegal parking. Mr. Roberts said that the property owner normally maintains the boulevard but if they do not, then the city would do it. Mr. Thompson felt the owners of the property had been diligent in trying to control the parking during business hours. He added that what happens after business hours was somewhat beyond their control. Commissioner Seeber didn't think it was appropriate to have the applicant remove the blacktop. He felt the best solution was to place several posts farther north in this area to prevent the cars from parking there. Mr. Seeber also thought it was necessary to place several lower posts with "slightly larger signs" on them. Commissioner Trippler believed the applicant tried to correct the problem but did not consult the city. He was concerned that, because the applicant did this on property that did not belong to him, it might set a precedent for other boulevards throughout the city. Mr. Trippler thought the solution was to require that curbing be installed and the grass restored to the way it previously was. He said that if this works there may not be a need for shrubs, etc. Chairperson Fischer clarified that the motion was the staff recommendation through and including Item 3 and the following paragraph: The city council shall require that Mr. Roemer remove the blacktop and restore this area with sod by October 15, 1999. The city council should require the installation of curbing and consider alternatives such as the planting of trees and shrubs on the boulevard to eliminate the problem of parking in the area in question. If the boulevard is not restored by that time, the city council shall consider the revocation of Mr. Roemer's conditional use permit. Ayes--Fischer, Ledvina, Trippler Nays--Frost, Mueller, Thompson, Seeber The motion failed. Commissioner Frost moved the Planning Commission recommend that Mr. Roemer's request for approval of the revised site plan for Minnesota Motors at 135 Century Avenue North be approved. The approval is based on the following reasons: The intent was to eliminate an unsightly condition by paving the area. However, parking should be disallowed in this area and signs should be posted within this paved area indicating that no parking is allowed. This is contrary to city ordinances and police should monitor the area to Planning Commission Minutes of 08-16-99 -7- assure that no parking during nonworking hours is obeyed. This shall not set a precedent within the city of allowing parking and paving in the boulevard areas. This is not in accordance with city plans. Commissioner Thompson seconded. Melinda Coleman said that, according to Ken Haider (city engineer), there is not a code that says you cannot pave the right-of-way. She said parking is not allowed in the boulevard without special permission from the council. Driveways are allowed in the right-of-way with the city's approval. Ms. Coleman said the problem with the Minnesota Motors case was that they did not get the city's approval to pave the right-of-way. Ayes--Fischer, Frost, Mueller, Seeber, Thompson Nays--Ledvina, Trippler The motion passed. VI. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. VII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS A. August 9 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler reported on this meeting. B. August 23 Council Meeting: Mr. Mueller is scheduled to attend this meeting. C. September 13 Council Meeting: Mr. Ledvina is scheduled to attend this meeting. Commissioner Frost asked if people were allowed to store various objects in the right-of-way. Staff said this is not allowed and the Maplewood health official should be notified. Commissioner Thompson said he has seen a lot of residential cars parked on the unpaved boulevard. Melinda Coleman, director of community development, said that is a police issue and they should be called. Mr. Thompson commented that the city's "passive administrative attitude sometimes concerns me and sometimes amazes me." He said "enforcement officials are blind unless they get a telephone call complaining." Ms. Coleman told Mr. Thompson that his comments "were coming to the wrong person." She further stated that this was a matter for the police chief. Commissioner Frost mentioned that the Bruentrup farm home is still on the site. Ms. Coleman said the house will be left on the original site until the new foundation is completed so the building will only need to be relocated once. VIII. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Reschedule September 6, 1999 Meeting (Labor Day) The majority of commissioners would be available for a meeting on Tuesday, September 7, 1999. This date was selected. IX. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:48 p.m.