Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/19/20001. Call to Order MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, January 19, 2000, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes a. December 20, 1999 4. Approval of Agenda New Business a. Woodlynn Heights Townhomes No. 7 (West of 2175 Woodlynn Avenue) Preliminary Plat Front Setback Variance b. White Bear Avenue Corridor Study Presentation - Update on Land Use Planning (Bob Close) c. 1999 Annual Report 6. Visitor Presentations 7. Commission Presentations a. December 27 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler b. January 10 Council Meeting: Mr. Ledvina c. January 24 Council Meeting: Mr. Mueller d. February 14 Council Meeting: Mr. Thompson 8. Staff Presentations 9. Adjournment MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 19, 2000 CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:03 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Commissioner Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Jack Frost Commissioner Matt Ledvina Commissioner Paul Mueller Commissioner Gary Pearson Commissioner William Rossbach Commissioner Michael Seeber Commissioner Milo Thompson Commissioner Dale Trippler Present Absent Present Present Present Present Absent Absent Present III. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. December 20, 1999 Commissioner Ledvina moved approval of the minutes of December 20, 1999. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Ayes--Fischer, Ledvina, Pearson, Rossbach, Trippler Abstain--Mueller Commissioner Pearson moved approval of the agenda, amended to include Item d. Election of Officers under 5. New Business. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. The motion passed. Ayes--all NEW A. BUSINESS Woodlynn Heights Townhomes No. 7 (West of 2175 Woodlynn Avenue): Preliminary Plat and Front Setback Variance Ken Roberts, associate planner, presented the staff report. The board had no questions on the staff report. Pat Kinney, the applicant, had nothing to add to the report. Commissioner Trippler asked the applicant to explain the easement aspect of the proposal. Mr. Kinney said that the lot extends back but NSP has a power line easement over the majority of the back of the land. The land can be used by the homeowner but cannot be built upon. Planning Commission Minutes of 01-19-2000 -2- Commissioner Ledvina felt that moving the buildings back eight feet to meet the setback requirement would not be an extreme hardship for the applicant. He noted the different setback for the existing townhomes. He did not "see any glaring problem with the differences in the alignment of the building." It also made sense to Mr. Ledvina that, since Woodlynn is a busy street, these units should be set further back, at least within the setback requirement. Commissioner Rossbach asked about potential drainage problems. Mr. Kinney was not aware of any problems. Commissioner Ledvina confirmed that, based on discussion at the Maptewood Community Design Review Board meeting the previous evening, the city engineering department did not think there would be any difficulty in dealing with drainage from the site. Ken Haider, city engineer, said when the other units to the east were built, the drainage was "shunted off" to the west a little further each time and now needs to be brought out to the street. He said the plan does have a swale in between each of the units that comes out to the front. Mr. Haider felt this was adequate. Mr. Kinney said reducing the depth of the buildings and spreading them out was not an option--they did not have enough width to expand that way. He pointed out that the buildings closest to McKnight Road are a totally different style. They are two-story townhomes with garages underneath or close to the upper level and front structure of the house. The units directly to the east of the proposed buildings have the garages more to the front and the living area to the back of the home. Commissioner Trippler asked if the units directly to the east had requested a setback variance. Mr. Roberts clarified that the fronts of the buildings were not the setback problem, just the parking areas. He said the problem was that, when the bituminous parking areas were put in front, they put in more than what was allowed by code. He pointed out that the front of the building directly to the east lines up with the proposed fronts of the new units. These units did not receive a variance for the parking lots. Mr. Trippler questioned if allowing "the next three to conform to the two that are out of compliance" sent a "bad message to people in Maplewood to just go ahead and do whatever you want to do" and then keep doing it. He thought it was better to say that those two were done wrong and no more can be done that way. Mr. Roberts said that staff felt it was possible to cut the parking area down but it would make vehicle maneuvering too tight, and pushing the buildings back would put them up against the easement. Commissioner Mueller asked if the design of the proposed buildings was changed to that of the first four units would they then fit on these lots. Staff confirmed that they would. Commissioner Rossbach pointed out that they were basically talking about three feet of asphalt that is too close to the road since the buildings were aligned. Because the buildings could be placed as designed, he didn't think it made sense to handicap the people by not giving them adequate turn-around space. Commissioner Trippler questioned why Mr. Rossbach was talking about three feet; he thought it was eight feet. Mr. Rossbach said the argument was the same--the buildings meet the setback, just the parking areas don't. Mr. Trippler had a problem with "negating our rules and regulations" and then have the city grant a variance for the same thing. He said if the issue was only three feet, the applicant could move the building back three feet. Mr. Roberts said they were talking about seven feet. Commissioner Ledvina also mentioned that the buildings don't bump up right against the NSP easement so there is some room to move the buildings back and reconfigure the stairs to meet the setback requirement. Thus, he did not feel there was a hardship by meeting the setback requirement. Commissioner Trippler remarked that the first four existing buildings appear to be at the easement line. He asked if there had been any problems with these units complying with the easement. Mr. Roberts said a shed was built in the easement with permission from NSP. He Planning Commission Minutes of 01-19-2000 -3- was not aware of anything else. Mr. Roberts said that extensive landscaping was recommended in the boulevard area between the sidewalk and parking/driveway area. Commissioner Rossbach asked, if the city council denied the variance, would the applicant move the buildings back or lessen the parking areas? Mr. Kinney replied that it would probably be a combination of both. According to Commissioner Ledvina, the building elevations shown on the grading plans would not provide for a "look-out type" of setup. The grading plan shows that the finished floor elevation is a foot above the grade. Therefore, if the decks are built, there would only be one or two stairs to match the existing grade. Chairperson Fischer noted that the grading plan was marked preliminary. Mr. Kinney thought the units further to the west would have the look-out basements. Commissioner Ledvina moved the Planning Commission recommend: A. Denial of the seven-foot front setback variance for Woodlynn Heights Townhomes Number 7. Approval of the preliminary plat date-stamped December 3, 1999 for the proposed Woodlynn Heights Townhomes No. 7. Approval is subject to the applicant complying with the following conditions: 1.* Obtaining the city engineer's approval of the final construction and engineering plans. These plans shall include grading, utility, drainage and erosion control plans. The plans shall meet the following conditions: a. The erosion control plans shall be consistent with the city code. b. The grading plan shall: (1) Include proposed building pad elevation and contour information for each home site. The lot lines on this plan shall follow the approved preliminary plat. (2) Include contour information for all the land that the construction will disturb. (3) Show all proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 on the proposed construction plans. The city engineer shall approve the plans, specifications and management practices for any slopes steeper than 3:1. 2. Paying for costs related to the engineering department's review of the construction plans. 3. Signing a developer's agreement with the city that guarantees that the developer or contractor will: a. Complete all grading for overall site drainage, complete all public improvements and meet all city requirements. b.* Place temporary orange safety fencing and signs at the grading limits. c. Provide five-foot-wide drainage and utility easements along each side lot line between buildings and along the west and east lot lines of this addition. d. Extend the five-foot-wide concrete sidewalk from its current location to the west lot line of this townhouse addition. Planning Commission Minutes of 01-19-2000 -4- e. Provide for the repair of Woodlynn Avenue (street and boulevard) after the developer connects to the public utilities and builds the sidewalk. 4. If the developer decides to final plat the preliminary plat, the director of community development may waive any conditions that do not apply to the final plat. Submitting the homeowner's association bylaws and rules to the Director of Community Development. These are to assure that there will be one responsible party for the maintenance of the private utilities, driveways and structure. 6.* Providing a written statement from NSP and Amoco Oil Company which allows the grading in the easement that the developer proposes. *The developer must complete these conditions before the city issues a grading permit or approves the final plat. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Commissioner Rossbach asked if denying the variance but approving the preliminary plat, which shows it with the variance, made the two parts of the motion work against each other. It was Mr. Roberts' opinion that the preliminary plat was "laying out the box" while the variance is more of a site plan/structure within the lot. Commissioner Ledvina said he was recommending denial of the variance because the aesthetic impact was not significant. Mr. Rossbach did not think a hardship was being shown because the buildings are not built or fully planned yet. He did not want to end up with "crummy parking areas and the buildings in the same spot." Ayes--all The motion passed. Commissioner Pearson asked what the penalty was if developers don't develop according to the plans and use as approved. Mr. Roberts said that, if the change was caught before completion of the project, it could probably be corrected. Mr. Pearson then asked, if swales, setbacks, etc. were not maintained and no fine was imposed, what would keep them from doing it again. Mr. Roberts said that, if drainage problems occurred because a swale was not maintained and it was necessary for a city crew to correct the problem, these fees could be put on their taxes. White Bear Avenue Corridor Study Presentation--Update on Land Use Planning (Bob Close) Melinda Coleman, director of community development, introduced Bob Close. Mr. Close worked with city staff on planning for the White Bear Avenue corridor. Ms. Coleman mentioned the Steering Committee meeting on January 20 and a final open house on February 15, 2000. Mr. Close said they were looking at White Bear Avenue to determine what kinds of things they "could do to improve everything from signage to image along the corridor." Recommendations for Maplewood, that will be presented at the open house, primarily have to do with landscape because the spaces are large and the roads have been engineered for the traffic. Mr. Close said the group was specifically asked to consider the Builders' Square site, the area around Hillcrest Shopping Center, and the 80-acre site west of Maplewood Mall. Mr. Close said they saw the power line easement going through the area west of the Mall as a possible connection for the regional trail system. They also considered ways to make the Maplewood Mall more accessible for pedestrian and bicycle users. Planning Commission Minutes of 01-19-2000 -5- According to Mr. Close, the group looked at reconfiguring the blocks around the site to arrange for different types of housing, as well as accommodating the proposed new church and new commercial sites. He said they considered the realignment of North St. Paul Road to intersect with White Bear Avenue at 90 degrees. This would allow the neighborhood streets with single- family housing to be extended, would allow for some higher densities of housing, and would create a block that has a "more logical commercial structure." Mr. Close saw the area on the west side of White Bear Avenue as a good site for potential housing of higher density, i.e. senior housing, townhouses, etc. The group also identified a site very close to the existing Builders Square building that would accommodate the church and provide adequate parking. Commissioner Trippler asked who would pay for "all this reorganization." Mr. Close replied that the group was asked to look at this project in a "theoretical way--in terms of what could happen in a long-range plan." He said it was a projection for how the area might be developed if the Builders Square building was demolished. Commissioner Rossbach mentioned the redevelopment taking place in the old Phalen Shopping Center area. He said many times the retailers pay their own way if the redevelopment is in their best interest. Mr. Rossbach felt it was important to first "have a vision of what you want to do" so when the opportunity presents itself they could be prepared. Commissioner Mueller thought a pedestrian roadway into the back of Maplewood Mall might be very inviting to cars. He also asked about plans for parks in this area. Mr. Close felt there would be a great opportunity for recreational uses. Commissioner Rossbach was glad to see some thoughts about residential uses in the area. He said there needs to be another way to move traffic from the Mall area. Commissioner Pearson asked if the planning for the Builders Square site was a "moot point" since a church has been approved for the site. Melinda Coleman said that the church must still purchase the property. She thought the city missed an opportunity by letting the building sit for so long. Ms. Coleman said staff was seeking community and commission input and then would submit a land use proposal for consideration. She pointed out that Ramsey County would need to be involved in any planning because North St. Paul Road is a county road. She felt the city might become involved with funding to help demolish some of the buildings that are becoming dated. Ms. Coleman said the neighborhood residents have not seen the plan that was presented to the commission. Commissioner Rossbach alluded to a meeting he attended where it was projected that in thirty years the buildings in the Hillcrest mall area would be not be located as they are now. Ms. Coleman thought that land demands would pressure the city to look at different alternatives for sites. Chairperson Fischer asked if this study and the one that was done by Calthorp (a study of primarily the Lake Elmo and North St. Paul area) were working together. Mr. Close said there are a lot of competing uses and market studies have to be part of the whole process. C. 1999 Annual Report Chairperson Fischer introduced the staff report. Commissioner Pearson thought the WBBBA study should be included as a work item for 2000. Ken Roberts, associate planner, had a few changes to the report. There were actually seven land use plan changes (page 1). The Woodland Hills Church (BC to C) should be added to page 2. Ms. Fischer asked for a breakdown of the conditional use permits. Commissioner Rossbach inquired about the progress on a video tape of the public hearing process. Commissioner Ledvina said he didn't see a real value in generating a generic video--it Planning Commission Minutes of 01-19-2000 -6- should be specific to the City of Maplewood. He thought it might be possible to purchase the video. Ms. Fischer mentioned that the commission previously hoped to look at the comprehensive plan on a yearly basis to see if there were some areas where changing land uses, values, businesses, etc. should have less recommending. Ms. Coleman said she had serious problems with three or four of the proposed activities. She suggested tabling the annual report so that the commissioners could take additional time to decide on some realistic goals and activities. She mentioned staff goals that relate to White Bear Avenue, home replacement, and planning around the Maplewood Mall. She thought the sign ordinance might need to be reviewed. Ms. Coleman said she was going to work out the budget so that they could get a nice bus for the annual development tour of Maplewood. Commissioner Ledvina spoke about an "unsewered" area in south Maplewood. The council did not want to approve a change in zoning for these lots. They are now zoned for farm and can be subdivided to 10,000 square foot lots if sewer systems can be installed. Mr. Ledvina thought the zoning for this area should be reconsidered. Ms. Coleman said this was a reasonable suggestion and could be included as a 2000 activity. She also suggested having priorities within the activities. Mr. Roberts said the Metropolitan Council and the DNR are requesting changes to Maplewood's comp plan in regard to the Critical Area for the Mississippi River (south of Carver Avenue and west of 1-494) to make sure the city is in compliance with all the requirements these agencies have because of the river. One of these requirements is a three-acre minimum lot size. Commissioner Ledvina moved to table the Planning Commission's 1999 Annual Report until the next commission meeting. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. D. Election of Officers Commissioner Ledvina moved to nominate Lorraine Fischer as chair and Jack Frost as vice- chair of the Maplewood Planning Commission. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. Commissioner Ledvina moved in favor of Ms. Fischer continuing as chair and Mr. Frost as vice- chair. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes--all The motion passed. VI. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS There were no visitor presentations. Planning Commission Minutes of 01-19-2000 -7- VII. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS B. C. D. December 27 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler reported on this meeting. January 10 Council Meeting: Mr. Ledvina reported on this meeting. January 24 Council Meeting: Mr. Thompson will attend this meeting. (?) February 14 Council Meeting: Mr. Mueller will attend this meeting. VIII. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Melinda Coleman, director of community development, asked to have the February 21 planning commission meeting moved from February 21 to February 22 because of President's Day. Since a couple commissioners cannot attend on February 22, it will be decided at the next meeting whether the meeting should be held on February 23. IX. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.