Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/05/2007 MAPlEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION . Tuesdav. June 5, 2007, 8:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road BEast 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes May 21, 2007 5. Public Hearings None 6. New Business None 7. Unfinished Business Conditional Use Permit Revision - Keller Lake Convenience (2228 Maplewood Drive) 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations June 4 Special Meeting: South Maplewood Study June 11 Council Meeting: Mr. Walton June 25 Council Meeting: Mr. Desai July 9 Council Meeting: Mr. Hess July 23 Council Meeting: Mr. Pearson July 30: Annual Tour 10. Staff Presentations 11. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE MAPlEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPlEWOOD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, JUNE 5, 2007 I. CAll TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. II. ROll CALL Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Harland Hess Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner Dale Trippler Commissioner Joe Walton Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood Present Present Present Present Present Absent Present Staff Present: Ken Roberts, Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Trippler seconded. Ayes - Desai, Fischer, Hess, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for May 21, 2007. Commissioner Trippler had corrections on pages 6 and 8, and a clarification to page 15. On page 6, in the seventh paragraph, second line, change the word if to is. On page 8, in the ninth paragraph, first line, after the word follow, insert the word and. On page 15, in the fifth paragraph, fourth line, Mr. Trippler wanted to clarify that councilmember Kathleen Juenemann hadn't left the meeting early; she just left the meeting before the conclusion of business. Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the planning commission minutes for May 21,2007, as amended. Commissioner Hess seconded. Ayes - Desai, Fischer, Hess, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood V. PUBLIC HEARING None. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-05-07 -2- VI. NEW BUSINESS None. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Conditional Use Permit Revision - Keller lake Convenience Store (2228 Maplewood Drive) Mr. Roberts said Roger Logan, the owner of the Keller Lake Convenience store, is proposing a revision to the conditional use permit (CUP) for the property at 2228 Maplewood Drive. This permit allows a motor fuel station to be within 350 feet of a residential zoning district. The proposed revision to this permit is for the expansion of a nonconforming use. This station is nonconforming because it is within 350 feet of a residential property. The proposed permit revision is necessary to allow the LP (liquid propane) retail dispensing facility that is on the property to remain on the site. The city approved a permit for the installation of the LP dispensing facility about one year ago. The contractor installed the tank about 15 feet from the east property line of the site (exceeding the ten-foot setback requirement of the state fire code). Unfortunately, the city issued the permit for the tank in error since the city code requires the owners or contractors that install such tanks to usually keep them at least 350 feet from a residential property. City staff is working with the owner/operator of the store, Mr. Logan, to resolve this matter. Mr. Roberts said on May 1, 2007, the planning commission first reviewed this proposal. The planning commission, after much discussion, tabled this matter to allow staff to research several questions. These included safety and setback standards for propane dispensing facilities. After the May 1,2007, planning commission meeting, staff sent seven questions to the Fire Marshal, Assistant Fire Chief, Butch Gervais, and his answer is in bold below the question. What would likely happen if the tank developed a leak? Where would the propane QO? What safety features does that tank have to help minimize the risks to the neiQhbors? Propane is heavier than air so it would stay low and can be controlled with water spray. What could cause a tank like that one to explode? How often, if ever, do such commercial LP tanks explode? If it did explode, what miQht happen? If there was heavy fire impinging and relief valves did not work containers can act like a rocket. Is it necessary or even practical to have a concrete safety barrier or wall installed on the east side of the tank (to help protect the house that is about 133 feet to the east of the tank)? I don't believe it would be necessary. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-05-07 -3- Are there state or federal codes or safety standards for the installation and operation of such tanks that yOU could provide to me that I could share with the PC and with the City Council? Butch Gervais gave the attached information to staff to include in the staff report for the commission and council. How is the safety or risk level of this tank compared to other hazards in the world - fires, car accidents, accidents in the home, etc? There is a risk with everything but I see no big issue with this tank. Bottom Line - is this a safe place for the tank and does this installation pose much risk for the homes to the east? I feel everything should be okay. Also, does it matter where the underQround fuel tanks for the station are on that site and does their location pose any special concern on this property? I am not aware of any concerns. Commissioner Hess said based on the guidelines researched by staff for the various cities, Oakdale has a 50-foot setback from a residential zoning boundary, Woodbury has a 110-foot setback, Roseville has a 50-foot setback from the front property line, a 40-foot setback from the property line and a 1 OO-foot setback from the rear property line. White Bear Lake and Inver Grove Heights do not have a setback and Stillwater follows the state requirements. Commissioner Hess wondered if the 350-foot setback for Maplewood seemed unrealistic and should the city take a look at modifying that setback after knowing what other municipalities use as the setback? Mr. Roberts said that would be a good discussion point for the commission, There are two different setbacks to keep in mind, One is the setback of a similar LP facility from a property line on commercial property and secondly, the setback for the same facility from an adjacent residential structure. Commissioner Hess said one of the caveats might be the size of the LP tank itself and how it's implemented, whether it's an above or below ground tank, Mr. Roberts said if you want to request that the city council consider a code amendment, the planning commission could make that a separate motion. If the commission has some details they want staff to look into as part of that, the commission could include that in the motion. Commissioner Hess said that's the direction he's heading towards to see if the city council wants to reconsider the 350-foot setback, Commissioner Trippler said that was the direction he was going as well. It seemed that the only reason the commission is hearing this item is that the applicant was granted a permit from the city that shouldn't have been approved based on the setback ordinance. However, if the city had a 100-foot setback instead of a 350-foot setback, then this would not be an issue. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-05-07 -4- Mr. Roberts said that would depend on how the city defines the 1 OO-foot setback. If the 100-foot setback is to the structure, then yes, if the 100-foot setback is to the property line, then no, Commissioner Trippler said based on the information that staff had provided and looking at the data regarding what the setbacks are for LP tanks throughout the state. He said he doesn't like supporting a variance when the ordinance doesn't make sense and in his opinion that is where this is right now. The city has an ordinance that doesn't seem to fit the data compared to what other municipalities are doing. Rather than issuing a variance he said he would rather see the city council change the ordinance to make the ordinance meaningful. He thinks that it's important that people see ordinances as being applicable and meaningful and not just something the city council passed just because they can, because if that happens, people tend to ignore the ordinances then. Chairperson Fischer said when this item was discussed last time, staff referred to the 350-foot setback as a commonly used factor in some of the city's ordinances. She asked if the city has other ordinances that have 350-foot setbacks as the limiting factor that should be looked at in view of today's conditions? Mr. Roberts said besides the current LP tank requirement there is the 350-foot setback for a motor fuel station and an auto maintenance facility cannot be within 350 feet of residential. The 350-foot setback was put in about 1992. The concern with motor fuel stations and maintenance garages was for potential noise from air tools and the possibility of fuel tank fumes that could affect nearby residential. The city council thought at the time if there was a separation between residential that would minimize any negative affects on nearby residences. Staff didn't know why LP tanks were included in 1992, but it was. The record isn't very clear. There may be other uses that require a 350-foot setback as well. Chairperson Fischer asked if it was possible that the city didn't know about or think about other setbacks when the ordinances were written that could now fall under an area of concern and should be less than the 350-feet setback? Mr. Roberts said things are always changing. At one time the city didn't have an ordinance for cell phone towers so when cell phones became popular the city had to write a new ordinance for the installation of cell phone towers, Things change, habits change, people change, and the city has to amend the ordinances on a regular basis to keep up with the changing times. Commissioner Pearson said he feels the 350-foot setback should not be applied to this LP tank, it doesn't fit and it's overkill, but he feels the 350-foot setback ordinance was a part of the commercial property study to prevent encroachment on R-1 neighborhoods. So, before the city council would change that 350-foot setback, the city may want to review the ordinance and see what the affect is since the city passed the ordinance to prevent encroachment on R-1 neighborhoods. Mr. Roberts said that would be a big study to do. Commissioner Yarwood said he appreciated the information that the staff put together in the staff report which was very helpful. He said he felt more comfortable with this after seeing what other cities are doing. One issue is the safety of LP tanks, and the second issue is the aesthetics of LP tanks. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-05-07 -5- Commissioner Yarwood said propane tanks are more common in rural areas and not so common in residential areas of the city. He too would rather see the ordinance changed. When the ordinance is changed the city needs to keep in mind the safety aspects, but also the value of the home. Commissioner Trippler said it would've been nice to have the fire marshal here because the in the material it states that a complete failure of the tank, which would be an explosion of the tank, is highly unlikely, because of the valves that are built in to release the pressure before that happens but he would have liked to ask the fire marshal what the impact of an explosion would have been. Mr. Roberts said Butch Gervais, Fire Marshal, Assistant Fire Chief, planned to be here after his meeting at 7:00 p.m. at the fire station. Staff had hoped he would be here between 8: 15 and 8:30 p.m. If the commission has the information they needed to vote on they could do that as well. Commissioner Trippler said he believes he has all the information he needs. Commissioner Desai asked if the commission were to turn this recommendation down and ask for an amendment change, how long is the process in terms of getting an amendment change? Mr. Roberts said a lot of that would depend on the city council. City council may not take that direction; they may want staff to do something different. If this went to the city council and they said this looks like a good idea and gives this study to staff he guessed that would be at least a 60-to-90 day process by doing more research and bringing a proposed code amendment back to the commission for the review and then to the city council. Commissioner Desai asked if in the mean time this LP tank permit would continue to operate as is? Mr. Roberts said yes. Commissioner Trippler moved to adopt the resolution starting on page 38 (attachment 9) of the staff report. This resolution approves a conditional use permit revision for the existing motor fuel station and for a LP (liquid propane) distribution facility on the property at 2228 Maplewood Drive. The city bases the approval of the permit revision on the findings required by the code. This permit shall be subject to the following conditions (the deletions are crossed out, new conditions are underlined and any additions are in bold and underlined): 1. The planninQ commission recommended that the city council ask staff to revise the city ordinance that allows LP tanks 350 feet from a residential lot line and thus dropped the recommended condition number 1. 2. Tho site shall be kept free or rubble, junk, or inoper:Jble motor vehicles and debris :Jnd they shall keep the non paved araas planted with gr:Jss and mowed on :J regular basis. 2. The owner or operator shall keep the property free of iunk, or inoperable motor vehicles and debris and they shall keep the non-paved areas planted with Qrass and mowed on a reQular basis. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-05-07 -6- 3, There shall be no light or glare onto the homo to the cast. 3. The owner or operator shall ensure that there is no Iiqht or liqht qlare from the site on the residential property to the east. If the owner or operator wants to add liqhts or make any chanoes to the exterior liohtinq on the site, they shall submit to the city a detailed site-Iiqhtinq plan that includes fixture desiqn, pole heiqhts and liqht-spread intensities at residential lot lines. This plan shall ensure that residential neiqhbors cannot see any liqht bulbs or lenses directly and that Iiqht intensity and liqht spread meet the parameters of the city's Iiqhtinq ordinance. The owner or operator shall submit this plan to the city for staff approval. 1. ^ny sound from exterior speal<ers shall not bo audible at the easterly property line. 4. The owner or operator shall ensure that any sound from exterior speakers is not audible at the easterly property line of the site, 5, There sh;)1I be no gas deliveries bdore 7:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p,m, 5. There shall be no motor fuel. propane or other deliveries to the site between 10:00 p.m, and 7:00 a.m, 6, Construction of a six foot high fence ;)Iong the cast side of the site. 6. The owner or applicant shall maintain a screeninq fence that is at least six-feet tall and 100 percent opaque around the east and north sides of the property. The owner shall maintain and repair the fence so that it remains in qood condition and so it is 100 percent opaque. 7. Hours operation shall be from 6:00 ;).m, to 11 :00 p,m. 7. The hours of operation for the store and business shall be limited to the hours between 6:00 a.m. and 11 :00 p.m. 8. The city council shall review this permit revision in one year. Commissioner Yarwood seconded. Ayes - Desai, Fischer, Hess, Pearson, Trippler, Yarwood The motion passed. This item will be heard by the city council June 25, 2007, or July 9,2007. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS Ms. Kelly Smith, the property manager at Wyngate townhomes, at 1750 and 1752 Village Trail East, Maplewood, addressed the commission. She said these are tax credit properties with 50- three and four bedroom units. She said she read the minutes from this development approval and saw there was a picnic area, a playground, and other things shown on the master plan, She said there are also 800 townhomes in the area. She asked what the status of building the playground was? Planning Commission Minutes of 06-05-07 -7- Ms. Smith said the kids living here throw rocks, run through the shrubs, and cause problems. She said there are over 100 children living in these town homes getting into mischief, so the playground is definitely needed as soon as possible. Mr. Roberts said he believed the playground was shown on the master plan but staff didn't know what the timeframe was for the playground to be built. Legacy Village has the sculpture park and on the west side of Kennard where the trail goes under Kennard, there is supposed to be a playground as part of the master plan. The time of the installation is the question. Staff doesn't have an answer to that and because the City of Maplewood doesn't have a Park and Recreation Director, he would recommend she speak to Chuck Ahl, the Public Works Director, who is doing park development for the city so maybe he can give you further information. Otherwise, staff would recommend attending a city council meeting and ask the question during visitor presentations. Mr. Roger Logan spoke regarding his concerns about the Keller Lake Convenience Store LP tank and the neighbors living next to his business who have concerns. Commissioner Trippler said the commission had recommended approval of the CUP to the city council. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. South Maplewood Study Mr. Trippler said he attended the fourth south Maplewood study meeting that was held June 4, 2007, at Carver Elementary School. He said the consultants put together a very good presentation. They looked at two alternatives that were put forth; they had maps and people put dots on the maps representing areas where there were concerns. The consultants provided sheets of paper to write their concerns or comments on relating to the dots that people put on the map. It was well organized and a very concise presentation. Mr. Roberts said the consultants studied the area south of Carver Avenue and studied various land uses and zoning scenarios. They did an analysis to see how much development could occur if all the current zoning was followed and if the current land use designations were followed. The consultants made up two scenarios based on common practice and more innovative development styles. They looked at the number of units each of those innovative development styles would generate and high and Low ranges depending on the density for high, medium and low housing. The two scenarios the consultants made up were the ones they were soliciting comments for. Mr. Roberts said for example, if you built senior housing here and town homes in another area at 4-units per acre or 6-units per acre, and then asked what the concerns were. It will be interesting to see a summary of the comments to see if there is a consensus regarding the pros and cons. Mr. Roberts said from that, staff expects that the consultant will start putting together some recommendations. The moratorium on south Maplewood ends in November so the city has to keep moving forward if the city is going to make changes to the comprehensive plan, the zoning map, changes to the ordinances, or all of those, the city has to form some recommendations and get some direction and bring that to the commission to get those implemented by November 2007. There were 25 to 30 interested citizens that came to the meeting. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-05-07 -8- Commissioner Trippler said he found it extremely interesting that when that was looked at, the land use in the comprehensive plan which is the legally controlling document for the south Maplewood area using gross acreage there could be over 1,700 units in that area of south Maplewood. Mr. Roberts said that would be for undeveloped property, staying out of the wetlands, staying off of slopes, and using gross acreage to get the higher density assuming there would be sewer on the properties. Commissioner Trippler said if you use "net" acreage instead of gross acreage the unit count was reduced to 900 units. If you used the zoning map, it reduced the units to between 500 and 700 units. If scenario number 2 is used, it reduced the unit count to 300 to 400 units. He said he also found it extremely interesting that the consultants looked at the met council's projected housing unit increase over the next 30 years and they project Maplewood will add 1,900 additional housing units between the year 2007 and 2030. The City of Maplewood would have 450 to 600 units in the Gladstone area alone if the Gladstone area gets redeveloped. If you look at the infill units for Maplewood, the city has been averaging 50 to 100 units each year for infill. If the Hillcrest area gets redeveloped that could be another 200 to 300 units. He said he thought there was no great pressure to cram housing units into the south leg of Maplewood because it doesn't look like Maplewood is in risk of not having 1,900 housing units by 2030. The Metro Urban Service Area calculated that there should be between 3 and 5 units per acre. Maplewood has 6.3 units per acre, so Maplewood is already over the minimum housing units required. Chairperson Fischer asked if staff thought the city council would be looking at the gross acreage versus net acreage when it comes to units per acre? Mr. Roberts said anything is possible and it will be interesting to see if the consultants recommend that as part of the study. Staff doesn't know what other cities do. Staff thought the Met Council is going to a net acreage calculation. Chairperson Fischer said there used to be a model ordinance for things on environment and things like that. She asked if they have model ordinances regarding if that's counted as net or gross acreage? Mr. Roberts said there may be an ordinance in the guidelines for updating the comprehensive plan that staff hasn't looked at but the consultant should know the answer to that. It will be interesting to see if that is one of the recommendations. Chairperson Fischer said she wasn't sure how that would be handled today under different terms. b. Mr. Walton will be the planning commission representative at the June 11, 2007, city council meeting. Items to be discussed include the (CUP) for Costco at the north side of Beam Avenue, west of the Bruce Vento Trail and the (CUP) for Corner Kick Soccer Center at 1357 Cope Avenue. Planning Commission Minutes of 06-05-07 -9- c. Mr. Desai will be the planning commission representative at the June 25, 2007, city council meeting. Items to discuss include the Pond Overlook, Rezoning (F(farm to R-2), (CUP) for Planned Unit Development, and the Preliminary Plat. There is a city council work shop session tentatively scheduled for a joint meeting to discuss the comprehensive plan prior to the regular city council meeting. (The Keller Lake Convenience Store, 2228 Maplewood Drive may be heard tonight). d. Mr. Hess will be the planning commission representative at the July 9,2007, city council meeting. The (CUP) for (The Keller Lake Convenience Store, 2228 Maplewood Drive may be heard tonight). It's possible that the (CIP) Capital Improvement Plan for 2008-2012 might be heard. It will be heard by the planning commission on June 19, 2007. e. Mr. Pearson will be the planning commission representative at the July 23, 2007, city council meeting. f. Annual Tour Mr. Roberts said the city's annual tour is scheduled for Monday, July 30, 2007, from 5:30 to 8:00 p.m. If the commission has anything to add, please contact staff. Otherwise, call the community development department regarding your attendance status. g. Mr. Desai asked staff a question regarding an update on the potential lawsuit that was going to be filled by the developer in south Maplewood. Mr. Roberts updated the commission regarding the lawsuit between the CoPar Development and the City of Maplewood regarding the 72 plus acre parcel of land in south Maplewood called Carver Crossing. The case was heard by District Court Judge, Kathleen Gearin, and Mr. Roberts updated the commission regarding the recent findings of the court and the status of the case. X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS None. XI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:53 p.m.