Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/19/2006 MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesdav, December 19, 2006, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. December 5, 2006 5. Public Hearings 7:00 Saint Clair Hills Development (Carver Avenue, east of 1- 494) Development Moratorium Variance Rezoning (R-1 (R) to R-1) 6. New Business None 7. Unfinished Business None 9. Visitor Presentations 10. Commission Presentations December 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Grover December 18 Council Meeting: Mr. Yarwood January 8 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson January 22 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler? 11. Staff Presentations a. Reschedule January 1 Meeting - Tuesday January 2 or Wednesday January 3? b. Reschedule January 15 Meeting - Tuesday January 16 or Wednesday January 1 n c. Possible permanent meeting night change - Tuesdays or Wednesdays? 12. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2006 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Commissioner Mary Dierich Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Michael Grover Commissioner Harland Hess Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner Dale Trippler Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood Staff Present: Absent Present Present Present at 7:03 p.m. Present Absent Present Absent Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Trippler made a request to discuss the Rice Street Corridor Task Force during Commission Presentations. Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the agenda as amended. Commissioner Hess seconded. The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ayes - Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Hess, Trippler Approval of the planning commission minutes for December 5, 2006. Commissioner Trippler had one correction on page 5, under b. Carmax discussion, in the 2nd paragraph, sixth sentence, first word, should be too instead oftwe. Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the planning commission minutes for December 5, 2006, as amended. Commissioner Hess seconded. Ayes - Fischer, Hess, Trippler Abstentions - Dierich & Grover Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -2- V. PUBLIC HEARING Saint Clair Hills Development (Carver Avenue, east of 1-494) (Development Moratorium Variance and Rezoning (R-1(R) to R-1) (7:06 - 8:24 p.m.) Mr. Roberts said Mr. Jamie Jensen, representing Tyrus Land Company, is requesting city approval of a variance to a moratorium and a zoning map change. He is asking the city for these approvals for the undeveloped property on the south side of Carver Avenue east of Sterling Street. On November 13, 2006, the city council gave second reading to a moratorium ordinance for many of the properties south of Carver Avenue. The adoption of this ordinance by the city council prohibits any development or subdivision of any property south of Carver Avenue that the city has zoned F (farm residence) and R-1 (R) (rural residential). This moratorium includes the properties in this request. Mr. Jensen is requesting a variance to the moratorium so the city may consider a zoning map change for the property. The city cannot consider the zoning map change for the property with the moratorium that is now in place unless the city approves a variance to the moratorium. Mr. Roberts added that the state statue requires the city to notify residents within 350 feet of a project site but staff extended the area to all those within 500 feet from this proposal and to all those on Carver Avenue between 1-494 and Century Avenue. Staff received one comment forthe proposal and 24 responses against the proposal including the e-mail that was handed out prior to the start of the planning commission meeting from Joe and Michael Bailey. Chairperson Fischer asked if the planning commissioners had any questions for staff? No questions were asked of staff. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Mr. Jamie Jensen, Developer, Tyrus Land Company, 2483 _15th St NW, Suite C, New Brighton, addressed the commission. He said he's here to request the change in the zoning from R-1 (R) to R and the removal of moratorium in south Maplewood. It is his position to find out what the city requirements are in order to develop property in Maplewood. He said if he meets the requirements he should be allowed to develop his property in Maplewood. He said in this case he thinks he meets the requirements and should be able to proceed with development. The zoning requirement is R-1 (R) which requires a 2-acre minimum for the development. He read from page 5 of the south Maplewood sewer study the proposed land uses in south Maplewood assuming that the area will be served with sanitary sewer. In areas where sanitary seweris notinstalled, the city may want to consider modifying the land use to more of a rural residential use with the minimum lot size as discussed before. The first step is to get sanitary sewer, if you can't get sewer than you look to the larger lot size. Then you would ask, what has the city told developers as far as the import of sanitary sewer? Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -3- Mr. Jensen said the first thing he looked at was the city utility code which reads at 40.96 any building used for human habitation or for human occupancy located on property lying inside the city shall be connected to the municipal sanitary sewer system within one year from the time that a connection is available to any such property. Additionally, all buildings constructed within the city on property adjacent to a sewer main or in a block through which the sewer extends shall be provided with a connection to the municipal sanitary sewer system for the disposal of all human waste. Sanitary sewer is number one. They're not looking for individual sewer systems. Looking further under the rules of subdivision 34-10 section 11, it states: Before an individual sewer treatment system may be installed, the city manager decides that city sanitary sewer is not available. He said that is another indication that the sanitary sewer system comes first, when available. Sanitary sewer is available to this property and staff has indicated that the sewer connect is about 400 feet away from the property in question. Mr. Jensen put a map on the overhead showing this area in (sewer area 70 as shown on the Maplewood sewer map). He put the sewer as-builts on the overhead to represent where the end of the city sanitary sewer line and where the water main extends. (To him this represented that the sanitary sewer line and water main are available to his property.) He said he went to the engineering department with this plan when he first proposed it and the engineering department said the sewer and water services are well within the proximity to the property. Mr. Jensen said under the City of Maplewood's ordinances, as the developer he is required to use the city sanitary sewer and water services if there is a sewer line to the property. He said this map is from 1996, 7 years before the R-1 (R) designation was even put in. Why is this area indicated as R-1 (R)? Why is there a two lot minimum in this area? This would have come from the sewer study in 2003. The city map shows this area as sewer area 70. Mr. Jensen said the south Maplewood sewer study on page 2 states, there are 8 districts within this study area which include sewer district 50, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57 and 58. Sewer district 70 is not part of the south Maplewood sewer study and shouldn't have been made R-1 (R). However, it was touched on when the sewer study was done. In an earlier memo from Ken Roberts, it states for district area 70 a gravity sewer can serve district 70 and the sanitary sewer flows from the 240-acre Bailey Nursery parcel in Woodbury and Newport serve it. When the city or a developer extends the municipal sanitary sewer services to serve district 70, the new pipe must be sized large enough to serve the 240-acre parcel of Bailey Nursery. The Carver Lake interceptor is large enough and the interceptor can be attached. Now he has a property where the city requires the developer to use sanitary sewer, it's zoned for 2 acre lot minimums, which you don't use sanitary sewers for. Now he is stuck between a rock and a hard place. This property should never have been zoned R-1 (R) and should have remained zoned R-1 and must follow the Maplewood rules regarding the utilities and subdivisions and use sanitary sewer. Then we come to the south Maplewood moratorium question of whether or not this property should be removed from the south Maplewood moratorium or left alone. The question is that the moratorium is put in place to study the area to find out what it should be and in this particular case there is nothing else the property could be zoned. The zoning rule 44.9 gives 7 different zoning districts. The zoning districts are (F) Farm, (R-1 (R) if that ever gets put in), R-1, R-1 (S), R-2, R-3 R-E. This property has to be zoned either R-1, R-1 (S), R-2 or R-3 for single family, twin homes or multi-family. He said at this point he is asking for the lowest density allowed where sanitary sewer and water are prese nt. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -4- Mr. Jensen said with the moratorium the question becomes, what can this property ever be which is R-1 (R). Because of the sanitary sewer it will have to be zoned R-1, it is not going to end up being R-E or R-1 (R) because if it is, then you will have to have individual sewer systems where sewer and water are available which would violate the city code. Mr. Jensen said he's looking to be steered one way or the other. The Maplewood rules say you have to use the sewer and water connection because it is there, if the sewer is available, you can't use individual sewer systems, and if you don't use individual sewer systems, you have an R-1 (R) district. A delay would be expensive to sit on property for 1 year to wait for the moratorium to be lifted when nothing is going to change. He would request that the zoning be changed from R-1 (R) to R-1 and that the moratorium be lifted from this area. Commissioner Trippler said in the research that you did, did you read any language that says the city is required to have lots smaller than 2 acre lots whether there is sewer there or not? Mr. Jensen said he hadn't read such language, he has looked for something that would be that abundantly clear, but he couldn't find anything. Commissioner Trippler asked if he thought the city had the authority and the right to create a zone that allows 2 acre lots? Mr. Jensen said yes, where there is no sewer or water service. Commissioner Trippler asked where the code makes that distinction? Mr. Jensen said it doesn't make it that clear, it would be nice. It would be inferred from the language that he read from the south Maplewood sewer study, the proposed residential land uses assume that the areas will be served with sanitary sewer. In areas where sanitary sewer is not installed, the city may want to consider modifying the land use to a more rural residential use. That is a back door way of trying to get there. It's sort of assumed, which is always a mistake, then you are going to have an R-1 zoning where there is city sewer and water. Where there is no city sewer and water you can't have R-1 zoning, but it doesn't say here is sewer so you can't have a 2-acre lot. People can buy land and put city sewer and water in but it wouldn't be anticipated that would be the case. He wished it was that clear. Commissioner Trippler said if you acquired a piece of property in this area which was a 2 acre lot and you built a house on it and you put in city sewer and water would that be a possibility? Mr. Jensen said yes it's possible, but it's enormously expensive. Commissioner Trippler said the development you are proposing doesn't in any way, shape or form fit in with R-1 (R) zoning designation; it doesn't fit in with the neighborhood, orwith this area of Maplewood. Why wouldn't you make a proposal if you wanted to develop this property to have 2 acre lots with a house on each 2 acre lot? Mr. Jensen said that would not make financial sense. He knows the city can disregard any financial considerations but it's no secret that he's in it for the commercial purpose. He is trying to bring the property, as any developer would, to its highest and best use. Having two 2 acre lot minimums with sanitary sewer is nowhere near its highest use. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -5- Mr. Jensen said in the future, the Bailey Nursery property is going to develop into many parcels and if they go with R-1 zoning that would be 720 homes within several hundred feet of this property. If they go with higher than R-1 (R) zoning they could build over 1,000 homes. Mr. Jensen said everything in the city's documentation says, the Bailey Nursery property development is coming, be ready for it and be ready with the sewer system. This Bailey Nursery property isn't even in Maplewood but your documentation says "be ready for it". But the documentation says lets get ready for the future development. He's on the road "to" the future Bailey property and he would like to get started. What Maplewood is saying is you are going to be required to have 2 acre minimum lots until the Bailey family decides to sell, then Maplewood will bring the sewer line up to the property and charge you (the developer) for it. When the sewer line goes "by" his property he will be assessed as it goes up to Bailey Nursery property, but in the interim he has to sit on 2 acre lots and he said that isn't fair. Commissioner Trippler said Mr. Jensen is jumping the gun considerably. The purpose of the moratorium as he understands it's to give the city the opportunity to look at the R-1 (R) zoning classification and decide if it applies, if the city wants to maintain the R-1 (R) zoning in this area of Maplewood then the city council will do that. It's very likely he thinks, given the tone of the city currently, that the R-1 (R) zoning will remain in south Maplewood whether there is sewer here or not. He firmly believes the comprehensive plan is going to be changed to reflect the R-1 (R) zoning which should have been changed in 2003 when it was first proposed and put into place. Whether or not the Bailey Nursery property becomes the next downtown or not is beyond Maplewood's control. That property is located in Woodbury, not in Maplewood. What we do have control over is this area of south Maplewood where Mr. Jensen wants R-1 zoning in an area the city has zoned R-1 (R). In Mr. Jensen's letter all he read was a justification for why it should be zoned R-1 and he didn't see any justification as to why it should be given a variance from the moratorium. Mr. Jensen said there were two letters, and he asked if the commission got the second letter? Mr. Roberts said the latest letter from Mr. Jensen is on page 12-14 of the staff report. Commissioner Trippler said the letter he sees in the staff report is dated November 14, 2006, number 1., application for zoning change, number 2., variance regarding south Maplewood moratorium. Commissioner Dierich asked if this property went from (F)Farm to R-1 (R) zoning? Mr. Roberts said he couldn't recall what the property was zoned in 2003. Commissioner Dierich remembered that was what it was zoned. Which means when Mr. Jensen bought this property he knew it was zoned R-1 (R) right? Mr. Jensen said correct. Commissioner Dierich said when she proposed the first moratorium in south Maplewood in 2003 as a planning commissioner the commission thought this property should be zoned R-1 (R) rather than (F) Farm. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -6- Commissioner Dierich asked if there was any reason why as the developer you would have purchased this property thinking you could come to the city and tell the planning commission that the City of Maplewood would "have" to connect your property to the sewer line when the planning commission had no intention of doing that? We did the south sewer study to make sure that the city was correct in assuming that there was not going to be sewer in that area and that is why sewer area 70 was not included. Mr. Jensen said he doesn't know what this panel had in mind at that time but the Maplewood written code says iflhere is sewer available, you connect to it. Commissioner Dierich said that is correct, "if' there is sewer "to" the property, you connect to it. But there "isn't" sewer "to" this property, so there is no reason for the city to hook you up to the city sewer and water. She said she doesn't understand your rational or your logic for that. Mr. Jensen said the sewer connection is within 400 feet of this property, which means it is accessible to the property. Commissioner Dierich said it's accessible but it is not "on" the property and there is no requirement for the city to hook you up. Mr. Jensen said you as the city are not allowed to put sewer "on" my property without my permission so there would never be sewer on my property. You would put it "near" my property and I could connect to it. Commissioner Dierich said the sewer would be put in the street in front of your property and currently it is not in the street in front of your property. The planning commission intended when we decided on this zoning to keep the property "rural" in character and you knew that coming into this. In her mind, Mr. Jensen either has to wait the moratorium out or sell this property. The city would love to let you do whatever you want to do with this property but we have put a moratorium in place to study this to make sure we as a city are doing the correct thing for this particular area. In her mind he has not given her or the commission any rational as to why we should let you have an exception to the moratorium and nobody else. Mr. Jensen said you mentioned keeping the property "rural" in character. He said he has been through the code and couldn't find any definition of what "rural character". If Maplewood has elements of "rural character" in the code he would like to see it. Commissioner Dierich said she lived three houses down from this property for 20 years and she knows it's rural in character, so don't tell her it isn't. Mr. Jensen said he is not speaking to her personally, he is just stating the city code does not specify a rural character. Commissioner Dierich said the city has a rural code and has put that in place. We have zoned these particular pieces rural, whether you found it on the website or not, it's there. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -7- Mr. Jensen said he has read the entire Maplewood code and it's not in there. Commissioner Dierich asked staff for assistance. Chairperson Fischer asked if it's in the code or if that is one of the pieces we were having the moratorium to put into place properly? Mr. Roberts said the R-1 (R) zoning code was adopted in August of2003 and whether it has been put in all the updates and put on the website he can't speak to that. Mr. Jensen said he has looked and looked for that. Mayor Longrie had relied on the wording semi rural character and when that became part of the R-1 (R) zoning in 2003 the wording said in order to maintain the semi rural character of the property. Being an attorney himself, and knowing to look for that, the rule is; iflhere is a conclusion there must be a finding offact, iflhere is a finding of fact there had to have been a study, if there was a study there must be somebody that requested it. So he went back to look for it and discovered there were no conclusions made, there were no findings of fact, there was no study, there was no one that requested it, there is no semi rural character law in Maplewood. It's a declaration, but if this were to go to a court the court would say as every court has ever done, if Maplewood says there is a rural character, show us the definition of rural character in Maplewood. There is none so the courts would say, if you the City of Maplewood have this in your R-1 (R) zoning, what does semi-rural character mean? The city didn't study it, you didn't conclude it, and therefore there is no "rural" character. Commissioner Dierich asked if Mr. Jensen owned this property in 2003? Mr. Jensen said no. Commissioner Dierich said then you don't know about the three or four meetings the planning commission had where they discussed this rural character and the rational behind it. The planning commission looked at this code and passed it on to the city council. Mr. Jensen said there is no "rural character" in Maplewood. Commissioner Dierich said that's your opinion. Mr. Jensen said he would ask for the findings then. Commissioner Dierich said the information is available in the planning commission minutes from the meeting in 2003. As an attorney you did a great job finding the codes so far. You can go back and look for the 2003 planning commission minutes and the city council minutes and you will see that. Chairperson Fischer asked staff where this information may be in writing? Mr. Roberts said the planning commission and city council minutes would be available on the internet and there should be copies of the staff reports available. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -8- Commissioner Grover said it sounds like you aren't going to find a favorable planning commission for this request. He said there is a difference of opinion here. Mr. Jensen thinks that having sewer and water accessible 400 feet away from where he wants to build means the city should connect him to the utilities. He asked what the city's responsibility is in terms of sewer and water connection for a development. Mr. Roberts said the Engineering department told staff that a feasibility study would have to be done to see where things are now and how the sewer and water would need to be expanded there and at what depth and size the pipe would need to be. That level of detail has not been done yet. Commissioner Grover asked how long a study like that would take? Mr. Roberts said he would guess three to four months. As a caveat the feasibility study would need to be ordered by the city council. The city Engineering department can't just start a feasibility study on their own. Commissioner Hess said the overhead showed the diagram of a sewer profile in the area or as- builts and Mr. Jensen was saying the 400 foot differential was more like 50 feet from there. Mr. Jensen said he was only guessing, he didn't have a ruler on that map. That was based on how wide his property is and how wide the neighboring property is and was only an estimation. That was the as-built map. You would have to get the original size from the engineers and use an engineer's ruler. This is a reduced sized map that was used for faxing and is not to scale. Commissioner Hess said regarding the south Maplewood moratorium, one of the items listed in the staff report regarding the findings for a variance is item b. which states The application for a variance shall set forth special circumstances or conditions that the applicant alleges to exist and shall demonstrate that the proposed subdivision or development is compatible with existing or proposed land use and zoning. Based on the current zoning and the code as it is, what is it that you the developer felt was an undue special circumstance for the variance request? Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -9- Mr. Jensen said the special circumstance was that the utilities were brought up to the property. This property is within the City of Maplewood yet there is constant reference to the Bailey Nursery property even though it isn't part of the study area the 240-acre parcel located southeast of Carver Lake was reviewed to determine the sewer service should be provided from Maplewood. The parcel is owned by Baileys Nursery and is located in Woodbury. So what Maplewood is saying is we are going to set a sewer line for property that isn't even located in Maplewood to do not what "you the developer" wants but whatever the "future" Bailey Nursery property owner wants. If the future developer wants to build high rises they can do that and Maplewood will supply them with the sewer connection. But as the developer of this property in Maplewood you have to get your own sewer connection and these need to be 2 acre lots which is an expensive option and not financially feasible for him and Maplewood isn't going to allow you to take this property to the highest and best use. The city staff has stated a feasibility study will have to be done. Yes, there would have to be a feasibility study if the "city" put the services in. If he as the "developer" puts the sewer service in there would be no need for a feasibility study and he could move forward. Mr. Jensen said he came to the Maplewood Engineering department and said he wants to put the sewer in and the city said "they" would prefer to put the city sewer and water in because the city has the Bailey Nursery property in mind. If he would be delayed 6 months due to the need for a feasibility study, then he will move forward on his own. He said he doesn't need a feasibility study to tell him if this can be done or not. Commissioner Hess asked Mr. Jensen if he had a copy of the ordinance from August of2003 that shows the R-1 (R) zoning designation? Mr. Jensen said yes. Commissioner Hess said on page 11, Section 44, discusses lot sizes. He said it seemed odd to him that Mr. Jensen subdivided the parcels into 1410ts that should have been proposed as two 2- acre lots. Mr. Jensen said yes. On page 10, 44-117, states this zoning district is for the areas of Maplewood that are not suitable for suburban or track development because of topography, vegetation or other factors that make the installation of municipal sanitary sewer unlikely. So, once again the city is stating if there is sewer available we connect to sewer, if we don't have sewer then we follow R-1 (R) zoning. Commissioner Hess said he thinks you have to look at the "character" of this land. Mr. Jensen said you can look at the character if the city has a written rule about character, but they don't. Commissioner Hess said he thinks that is what the R-1 (R) zoning states. Commissioner Grover said iflhere isn't sewer available the zoning is R-1 (R) and that's what we have here. Who would pay for the sewer and water connection for development if this connection was extended all the way to Woodbury? Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -10- Mr. Roberts said the size and location of the sewer pipe would be studied as part of the feasibility study. The connection may not be extended all the way to Woodbury but if the connection were extended farther east, the pipe may have to be sized and set at a certain depth so that the connection could easily be extended in the future without tearing up any recently installed pipe. So in 5 or 10 years from now, iflhere was a need for the sewer and water connection, it would be ready to connect. As far as who pays for the sewer and water connection, the sewer users pay, the benefiting property owners pay, and the city pays the Metropolitan Council who runs the metro area sewer system. As Mr. Jensen said, there is a sewer interceptor under Carver Avenue and the sewer pipes would be extensions from that, which would also require permits from the Metropolitan Council for those extensions. Commissioner Grover said in terms of developments throughout the city, is it the policy of the Public Works department to allow developers to do their own sewer work? Mr. Roberts said in more recent years it has been the city's policy and direction that the city does the sewer improvements and extensions where there are public improvements on public streets. Iflhere are developments on private streets like a townhome development, the policy has been more to allow the developer to install the private sewer system because the sewer system would be maintained by a private association. The direction for public extensions and public streets would be done as a public improvement project with the city coordinating the work. Commissioner Trippler asked staff to put the zoning map on the overhead screen. He asked Mr. Jensen if he knew what (F) zoning was? Mr. Jensen said yes, (F) stands for the Farm zoning district. Commissioner Trippler asked Mr. Jensen if he would agree Farm zoning is associated with more rural areas then downtown central business district areas? Mr. Jensen said as I stand out on the street, I would agree, but looking at the law, I wouldn't agree. The (F) Farm you have in Maplewood has no lot limit which could mean a lot 10 X 10. There is no requirement for size, frontage, depth, size of house, length of driveway, or anything. Commissioner Trippler said even though the zoning map shows (F)Farm zoning surrounding this property you still contend that this has no "rural" characteristics whatsoever? Mr. Jensen said you indicate "rural" characterization as something we should all "get". A city is not permitted to just "get" it, it has to be a written rule. He has to be able to refer to the city code and say what is the definition of "rural" in character and show him what is the written code for rural. There is very little of it in here anyway. There is no written law. If you were to say "rural" character he would say there has to be a cow or something on the property, it has to be a farm, or wording like that but Maplewood has no such thing. When he looked at the property to purchase it he saw semi-rural character. He asked himself what is rural character, what is semi-rural character, there is none. Commission members keep referring to minutes that represent what was discussed but minutes are not laws, and discussions are not laws either. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -11- Commissioner Trippler said only an attorney could look at lots zoned (F) Farm and conclude that it has no "rural" character to it. Chairperson Fischer asked if one of the reasons we went to the moratorium in south Maplewood was that some of the intent, zoning, and terminology were not in sync with each other and the moratorium gave the city more time to put that together. Mr. Roberts said that is part of what will be studied. Commissioner Dierich said she is having trouble understanding why we are arguing about sewers connections and whether this is rural or not rural. The city made a decision to have R-1 (R) zoning here and made a decision not to put sewer or water in that area at this point and have upheld that decision for a fairly long time now. Her mind has not changed since the city made that decision. The same houses are in the same neighborhood, things look the same there and the question she has is shall we break the moratorium or not? It's wonderful Mr. Jensen that you are able to link together obscure pieces of the ordinances in order to try and make your case and hope this goes your way. But you haven't made your case for the planning commission to break the moratorium. Unless she hears something that makes the commission want to break the moratorium she isn't sure why we are discussing the other things peripheral to the issue. Commissioner Trippler asked iflhere was anything in the Maplewood ordinance that require the only application of R-1 (R) is in areas where there are no sewers? Mr. Roberts said he didn't know if it was specifically written like that. Clearly the intent for the R- 1 (R) zoning was for non-sewered areas. It could be applied elsewhere, but that was the primary intent for it. Commissioner Trippler asked if it was written in any of the Maplewood ordinances that if you have sewers you can't have R-1 (R) zoning? Mr. Roberts said no. Mr. Jensen said all the rules relative to development have to be America is the Land of the Free. He said this is his property to do with what he wants, subject to the city of Maplewood's reasonable "written" rules. Commissioner Dierich said the rules are written. Staff will have to dig them out and give them to you Mr. Jensen. Mr. Jensen said those rules can be upheld as long as they are reasonable. Once there is sewer to the property and once you come up with R-1 (R) zoning that says "where sewer is not available", you have the larger lot size. It then becomes incumbent on the city to say why he can't have it, then the burden changes. At this point he said he is requesting the change in zoning and the removal of the moratorium. He said he can see where his request is going. He turned to the audience and said the audience came to comment on this request. Chairperson Fischer asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak regarding this proposal. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -12- Mr. Jim Kerriqan, 2620 Carver Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission. His letter is attached in the staff report on page 10. He said he is opposed to the request to remove the moratorium and the request to change the zoning. Mr. Kerrigan said part of the reason for the moratorium is to take a look at the area and the zoning and determine iflhere needs to be a new zoning classification. Mr. Jensen said there are too many limitations on this property. City's need to look at their land use laws and see what is best for the area. Mr. Jensen said he is being treated unfairly. If Mr. Jensen can prove that in court he doesn't think Mr. Jensen would win his case. Commissioner Grover asked if the city had ever granted a variance in any other area in the city that had a moratorium? Mr. Roberts said a variance was granted in 2001 for a parcel of land by Maplewood Mall where the old Bennigan's Restaurant is. There was a moratorium on property from the east side South lawn Drive to the west side of Hazelwood Avenue and from Beam Avenue to County Road D. The parcel was an outlot that was part of the shopping center and the city council felt the use was consistent and nothing was going to change and the council granted the variance request. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if there were any moratoriums that ended early or iflhere were any moratoriums that went longer than anticipated? Mr. Roberts said most of the moratoriums have gone the full length of time and some moratoriums have even gone longer. Mr. David Ledo, 14511 Oakhill Road N., Scandia, addressed the commission. He is the personal representative for the Ledo family that own the five acres immediately to the west of the proposed development. At the present time he is neither for nor against the moratorium because this property isn't for sale, but in the next few years it will be. His aunt is in a living trust and when the trust is dissolved he will be forced to sell. His question is, has anything been started to study the area for the moratorium yet? Mr. Roberts said the moratorium was put in place in November. Staff is preparing to start on this and doesn't think anything substantial would be completed for at least 6 months. Commissioner Grover asked if that precluded the Ledo family from selling the property? Mr. Roberts said the Ledo family can sell their property; they just need to be aware of the moratorium. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -13- Mr. Ron Cockriel, 943 Century Avenue N., Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said thank you for putting the moratorium in place and suggesting this to the city council. There are many issues with this property in south Maplewood. Everyone with property in this area wants to know what they can do to maintain what property they do have in this area or sell it to be developed. These are real questions that hopefully the moratorium will address these questions. Let's get the information out there and spend the time to determine what the highest and best use of this property is and what the city wants done with this property. As property owners will need to know what they can do and if they can afford the taxes on their property. There was a Ramsey County Open Space sign on this property for about 30 years and recently that sign as well as other open space signs are now down and he wondered what happened to the signs. He wants to make sure the moratorium remains so the city can study the area and determine what is best for the property owners. Mr. Mark Weiqel, 2720 Carver Avenue. Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said part of the reason for the moratorium is to answer the questions that are being raised. How is the moratorium study going to be done and are the neighbors going to be part of this study? The developer has also stated this property isn't rural in character because a highway runs through the property and there are supposedly planes flying overhead. Mr. Roberts said staff doesn't have the full report regarding how this moratorium study would be done. There are many interested people in the area so the city would be silly to not include these people in the process. It has not been decided yet how the study would be done or who would be involved in the study. The city is aware there are many people very concerned and the neighbors have a lot of good ideas and know things that would be good for the city to be aware of. Mr. Weigel said he would suggest the city widen their range of notifying the neighbors in the area to keep everyone involved and aware of the study and the plans for the area. Commissioner Dierich said staff needs to look at the property behind Mr. Weigel, those people behind Mr. Weigel have an easement for sewer from the Bailey property, as do the people down the hill and the people down the hill from those people. Before the city can begin to think about putting sewers in here we need to think about disturbing all these property owners. She doesn't see this happening. Especially since Joe Bailey stated he is not selling his property and has no intention of selling at this point. Mr. Mark Bonitz. 1635 Sterlinq Street South. Maplewood, addressed the commission. His letter is on page 31 of the staff report. He requested that the city continue to move forward with the moratorium and deny the variance request. There is a lot of work ahead and a lot of work behind us. At this point, to do anything else would do a discredit. He said he grows tired of developers like Mr. Jensen. They have a right to develop property, but when they purchase property knowing what the zoning is, it seems there is this attitude of entitlement and that gets him riled up. Mr. Bonitz said there has been no effort that he has seen on Mr. Jensen's behalf to engage the neighborhood why doesn't he say "let's work together and figure out howwe can make something better", so this doesn't sit well with him. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -14- Mr. Georqe Gonzalez, 2359 Heiqhts Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He lives in the moratorium area but he knew nothing about this application, proposal or tonight's meeting until he heard about it by word of mouth. The 500 foot notification area in a rural neighborhood like this is a problem. There could have been a lot more than 20 people here tonight if all the residents in Maplewood would have been notified about this meeting and been given a chance to respond. The Bailey family couldn't be here tonight because of a funeral in California. He thanked Commissioner Trippler for his knowledge of the zoning laws and the raw character of this land. He hopes the city will keep the moratorium in place. To lift the moratorium for one developer would only mean other developers will be asking for the same thing. Commissioner Grover asked how many people live in the moratorium area? Would it be too difficult to notify a larger area regarding upcoming proposals? Mr. Roberts said it wouldn't be "impossible" to do. Commissioner Trippler said it occurred to him that many of the people communicated to staff through e-mail. He recently logged on to the city website and he was able to go through the government notification process where you can get notices sent to you via email each time there is a notice put on the city website. He asked staff if it would be possible to set something similar up like that for people who live in this area of the moratorium so they could log in and request notices are sent via e-mail to them whenever something comes up? Mr. Roberts said staff would have to check with the IT staff regarding that. Commissioner Trippler said it's a free service. He said as much as it would be nice to notify everyone in the city of Maplewood that can be an enormous expense at .39 cents a piece. If the city could send something electronically that could be a good way of handling that. Commissioner Hess asked if there is something that we can put in the language to expand from the notification area from 500 foot property for large parcel areas like this where the lots are large in order to alert more people because he has heard that complaint during other proposals too. Mr. Roberts said state law only requires the city to notify people within 350 feet ofa site. The city policy has been to expand that notification area to 500 feet. Whether its 600 feet or 2 miles there are people that think they should be notified about a proposal. He has heard there are people that are interested in knowing what is going to happen in the moratorium area. He has a hard time understanding the direct concern of people living on Haller Lane regarding a development on Carver Avenue. Mr. Roberts said he understands how it affects the people that live within the moratorium but the people that live in the area that is zoned RE-40 and are not subject to the moratorium. The land around them is subject to the moratorium and the area could change as development mayor may not develop in the future. We as a staff have to make judgments as to who to mail information to. Word of mouth has been a great way to spread the news. If there are people that want to be added to the mailing list they should let staff know. There may be a way to notify people electronically, staff doesn't know but could check with IT. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -15- Commissioner Dierich said if staff would have stayed within the 500 feet notification area that would have included 5 neighbors. She reminded staff that people in south Maplewood don't have cable and internet access is not as easy as you would like to believe. Mr. Vince Bastiani. 2513 Haller Lane. Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said he's in support of the moratorium and he agreed with staff's comments and conclusions. Mr. Jensen mentioned in his proposal that there are two airports that have flight patterns over this neighborhood, which isn't true. He said he's a private pilot himself and those flight paths go over the refinery in Cottage Grove and this area doesn't see jet planes. Only small business jets fly in and out of the downtown St. Paul airport. We aren't even in the defined area for FAA for the downtown St. Paul airport. He noticed a month ago during the hearing for the moratorium that Mr. Jensen said he didn't have a problem with the moratorium. Now a month later he's back "requesting" a variance as the developer of this property. Mr. Jensen said he's a private pilot as well and the runways that serve downtown Minneapolis are class B airspace which is 5 miles on either side of the center line so it would be within it, it is not within the class D airspace of St. Paul but it is within the flight plan of that district. He said he did not have trouble with the moratorium at the previous hearing. Mr. Greq Thompson. 1528 Haller Court S.. Maplewood, addressed the commission. He's in favor of the moratorium. We are concerned not only for the rural character of the area but for the traffic in the area as well. There are two ways in and two ways out of this area. One is on Sterling Avenue and the other is Carver Avenue. If we put this many houses on this street and then other development is added, soon you will have 400 to 500 houses in this area. Mr. Thompson said Haller Lane is already dangerous when you come out onto Sterling Street and he said he couldn't imagine if another 60 houses were built with additional cars driving on this stretch of road with a speed limit of 35 mph even though people drive faster than that. Chairperson Fischer asked if anybody else in the audience wanted to speak regarding the public hearing. Nobody came forward. The chair closed the public hearing at 8:23 p.m. Commissioner Grover moved to deny the request of Jamie Jensen for a variance from the development moratorium for the property south of Carver Avenue and east of Sterling Street. This variance would allow the city to consider a rezoning request for the properties in question. City staff is recommending this denial because: 1. Strict enforcement of the moratorium ordinance would not cause an undue hardship to the property or to the property owner. 2. There is no special circumstance or conditions in this case that warrant the city approving a variance to the moratorium. 3. The proposed rezoning (and then the proposed subdivision) would be premature and would not be compatible with the land use and zoning designations. 4. The proposed rezoning and subdivision would not meet the spirit and intent of the moratorium ordinance. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -16- Commissioner Grover moved to deny the proposed zoning map change for the proposed Saint Clair Hills development on Carver Avenue. City staff is recommending denial because: 1. The request does not meet all the criteria required by the city for a zoning map change. This is because the city cannot determine if the proposed zoning change would have any negative effect upon the logical, efficient, and economical extension of public services and facilities. 2. Staff is recommending that the city not grant the variance to the moratorium. The moratorium prohibits the city from considering rezoning or development requests, unless the city approves a variance to the moratorium. Commissioner Trippler seconded. Ayes - Dierich, Fischer, Grover, Hess, Trippler The motion to deny passed. Chairperson Fischer said the planning commission makes the recommendation to the city council and the city council makes the final decision. This item is tentatively scheduled to go to the city council on January 8, 2007. VI. NEW BUSINESS None. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Grover was the planning commission representative at the December 11, 2006, city council meeting. Planning commission items that were discussed included the Alley Vacation for Judy Driscoll, south of Frost Avenue and east of Walter Street, which the city council passed. Other items included the Walgreens proposal at the northeast corner of White Bear Avenue and Beam Avenue for a land use plan amendment from LBC to BC, a zoning map change from LBC to BC and a Lot Division, was passed by the city council. The Resolution of Appreciation for former planning commission member, Jim Kaczrowski was passed by the city council. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -17- b. Mr. Yarwood was scheduled to be the planning commission representative at the December 18, 2006, city council meeting, but did not attend. Mr. Roberts gave the report of the December 18, 2006, city council meeting. Mr. Roberts reported the planning commission items that were discussed included the Carmax Auto Superstore (Northeast Corner of Highway 61 and Beam Avenue) for a preliminary plat and a conditional use permit for planned unit development, which the city council recommended go back before the CDRB to finalize the building elevation changes the board had recommended. They also discussed the easement vacation for Jensen Estates (north of Hoyt Avenue), which was passed by the city council. The city council adopted the Gladstone redevelopment plan 3-2 with a few corrections. More information will follow regarding the Gladstone plan and when the final plan is available for people to see staff will let the commission know how to get a copy. c. Chairperson Fischer received a telephone message from Commissioner Pearson requesting to trade planning commission meeting dates with one of the other commissioners for the January 8, 2007, city council meeting. Commissioner Trippler volunteered to trade planning commission representative dates with Commissioner Pearson. The only planning commission item to discuss at this time is the Saint Clair Hills Development, off Carver Avenue, east of 1-494 for a Development Moratorium Variance and the Rezoning from (R-1 (R) to R-1) d. Commissioner Pearson will cover the January 22,2007, city council meeting. e. Rice Street Corridor Task Force discussion Mr. Roberts said Ramsey County is forming a task force to study land uses and other issues for the Rice Street corridor from Larpenteur Avenue through Shoreview to Highway 96. The areas affected include Maplewood, Little Canada and Shoreview. There are some bottleneck interchanges and intersections and the task force is going to look at how to eliminate those problems. Ramsey County was looking for representatives from the affected cities to serve on this task force. Chuck Ahl put together some names which include, Mr. Schroeder from Schroeder Milk, Michael Grover from the planning commission, and Kathleen Juenemann from the city council serving as a citizen representative of Maplewood. Commissioner Trippler said the reason he wanted to discuss this isn't because he has a problem with anyone on the task force. The problem he had was that historically over the 8 years he has served on the planning commission, when a task force is put together if the planning commission is to be involved staff comes to the commission with the request to put forth a candidate. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -18- Commissioner Trippler said it took him by surprise that somebody within the city would decide for the planning commission who they want to have as their advisor on this Rice Street Corridor Task Force. He thinks someone from the planning commission should be on any task force when it comes to discussing development or planning issues. Having someone decide who they want to be on the task force is an overstretching of management in his opinion. When management starts dictating how the planning commission should operate and what the commission does then he thinks the commission loses their ability to advise and he hopes this doesn't become a standard operating procedure. 1. Miscellaneous Planning Commission Discussions Commissioner Dierich asked if staff knew about the open space signs that disappeared that are now under private hands? Mr. Roberts said he isn't aware of any publicly owned open space that sold and went private. Open space signs may be missing but he would think the city would have been notified by Ramsey County if they sold Ramsey County open space. He thinks it's just a case of missing signs rather than a change of ownership. Commissioner Dierich said in the absence of Bruce Anderson, former Park and Recreation Director, who was so instrumental in protecting the land, who is going to be the new representative or advocate in Bruce's absence? Chuck Ahl is "for" development and Bruce Anderson always said lets step back, look at things and make sure we are preserving the quality of Maplewood. She is very concerned about losing a staff member like Bruce Anderson. Mr. Roberts said clearly there is a lost voice with the resignation of Bruce Anderson. The city recently appointed an Environmental and Natural Resources Commission who will take a close interest in the open spaces whether they are city or county open spaces, as well as looking at the wetland and tree ordinance. It was staffs understanding that DuWayne Konewko was going to be the staff liaison as the Environmental Manager overseeing the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission. As part of the reorganization atthe city, funds have been put into the budget to hire a code enforcement officer specifically for these concerns. The advocacy will shift from Bruce to DuWayne and the new commission. Commissioner Dierich suspected that the new commission will be heard about as much as the planning commission? Mr. Roberts said he wasn't sure. Commissioner Dierich said publicly there would not be the quality of life in Maplewood without Bruce Anderson working for the City of Maplewood all these years. This is a huge loss! She wanted to say thank you to him for everything he did for Maplewood She would hope a lot of people would write in to the city and say how much they appreciated his work on Maplewood's behalf. He was a true visionary and it's a great loss losing Bruce Anderson after all these years. Mr. Roberts said his last day is today, December 19, 2006. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -19- Commissioner Dierich said she feels bad regarding what happened to him. Bruce will get to do some exciting things, but for the people of Maplewood it's a real loss. Chairperson Fischer said there are a few planning commissioners whose terms are expiring December 31 , 2006, do you know what the process will be when their terms expire? Are they still members of the planning commission until the city council does their interviews? Mr. Roberts said that is his understanding. There will be an application process for current members and new applicants and then interviews will be done by the city council. Chairperson Fischer said Mary Dierich, Harland Hess and Dale Trippler have terms expiring December 31,2006. Mr. Roberts said he is assuming that will be the process until he hears differently. Commissioner Hess said he received a letter letting him know he has to go through the interview process. His letter stated the forms needed to be returned by December 29, 2006, and that he will be notified of interview schedule with the city council. Mr. Roberts said we will need a quorum for the planning commission so until you have heard something different please come to the planning commission meetings. Commissioner Hess said he would like to echo the comments made by Commissioner Dierich regarding the loss of Bruce Anderson from the Parks Department. He worked with Bruce on a project for the Four Seasons Park next to his house on Flandrau Street. Bruce was a great advocate and went further than he needed to as a city employee and this is a great loss. Regarding the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission, he asked how many applicants they had and are there any openings still? Mr. Roberts said the city council had 11 applicants and the city council chose 7 people to serve on the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission. Commissioner Trippler said he was one of the applicants and the city council interviewed 10 applicants and they chose 7 people to serve on the commission. x. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Reschedule the Monday, January 1, 2007, planning commission meeting because of the New Years Day holiday to either Tuesday, January 2,2007, or Wednesday, January 3,2007. If the meeting were scheduled for Tuesday, January 2, 2007, Michael Grover, Harland Hess and Tushar Desai could not be present. The planning commissioners that were present preferred to meet on Wednesday, January 3,2007. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -20- Gary Pearson spoke to the recording secretary via the telephone after the planning commission meeting date and said either date would work for him. Jeremy Yarwood was out of town but will be available after the Christmas holiday. b. Reschedule the Monday, January 15, 2007, planning commission meeting because of the Martin Luther King holiday to either Tuesday, January 16, 2007, or Wednesday, January 17, 2007. Planning commissioners Mary Dierich, Dale Trippler, Lorraine Fischer, and Michael Grover said Tuesday, January 16, 2007, worked forthem. Harland Hess said Wednesday, January 17,2007, worked better for him. c. Possible permanent meeting night change from Monday evenings to Tuesday or Wednesday evenings. Mr. Roberts said the city manager requested that staff check with the planning commission to see about the possibility of a permanent meeting night change. The city council meetings have been ending very late and they may have to meet every week and would like to have every Monday available for their meetings. Such a change by the council would require moving the planning commission meeting night. If the city council needs every Monday evening to hold additional meetings we would need to meet either Tuesday or Wednesday evening. The goal of the city manager and some of the city council is to get more of the commission meeting's cable cast. Only the city council chamber is set up to televise meetings. Groups like the Natural Resource and Environmental Commission and the Park and Recreation Commission meetings are not currently televised and the city manager and the city council would like those meetings televised as well. Staff is looking for input from the commissioners to bring back to the city manager. Michael Grover said it would be difficult for him to serve on the planning commission if the meeting was moved to Tuesday or Wednesday night so he would prefer to keep the planning commission meetings on Monday night. Having the planning commission meeting on a Monday evening was one of the things that attracted him to wanting to serve on the planning commission. Lorraine Fischer and Harland Hess said if the planning commission meeting had to be moved from Monday nights they would both prefer the planning commission meeting be Wednesday night. Mary Dierich said she would prefer the planning commission meeting remain on Monday evenings but if it has to be moved she would prefer Wednesday. Because the planning commission met with a bare quorum with the absence ofTushar Desai, Gary Pearson, and Jeremy Yarwood, no decision was made at this time regarding which night would work better. We will discuss this issue again at the next planning commission meeting, however the consensus of the planning commissioners seemed to be they preferred to keep the planning commission meeting on Monday evenings or on Wednesday evening. Planning Commission Minutes of 12-19-06 -21- Chairperson Fischer pointed out that moving the meeting to later in the week affects the recording secretary because she'll have a shorter time to get the minutes done. Chairperson Fischer said it also affects staffs ability to get the planning commission packet done and the department secretary has a shorter time to copy and mail the packets out so commissioners can visit the sites before the planning commission meeting. XI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:01 p.m.