Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/20/2003MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, October 20, 2003, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. October 6, 2003 5. Public Hearings None 6. New Business a. Home Occupation License- 1828 Radatz Avenue (Horvath) b. Heritage Square Townhouses (Legacy Village) 1. PUD Amendment 2. Preliminary Plat 7. Unfinished Business a. Proposed Mixed-Use Zoning Ordinance 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations a. October 13 Council Meeting: Ms Dierich b. October 27 Council Meeting: Mr. Trippler c. November 10 Council Meeting: Ms. Fisher 10. Staff Presentations a. Reschedule December 1,2003 Meeting 11. Adjoumment MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2003 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. I1. ROLL CALL Chairperson Lorraine Fischer Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Present Tushar Desai Present Mary Dierich Present Jackie Monahan-Junek Present Paul Mueller Present Gary Pearson Present William Rossbach Present Dale Trippler Absent Staff Present: Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director Chris Cavett, Assistant City Engineer Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Desai seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Monahan-Junek, Mueller, Pearson, Rossbach The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for October 6, 2003. Chairperson Fischer suggested Will Rossbach should be the acting chairperson instead of sitting in as chairperson) on the front page of the October 6, 2003, minutes under role call. Commissioner Monahan-Junek moved to approve the planning commission minutes for October 6, 2003, as amended. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Monahan-Junek, Pearson, Rossbach Abstention - Mueller, Fischer Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -2- V. PUBLIC HEARING None. VI. NEW BUSINESS a. Home Occupation License - 1828 Radatz Avenue (Horvath) Mr. Roberts said Ms. Christine Horvath is requesting a home occupation license to start and operate a naturopathic healing clinic in the house at 1828 Radatz Avenue. The applicant's business would be using naturopathic medicine (therapeutic natural health care) to help heal various ailments of individuals. Ms. Horvath would be using much of the lower level of the home for the business, including having an office and two bedrooms for treatment rooms. The city's home occupation ordinance limits a home occupation to occupy a maximum of 20 percent of the floor area of the house. Her proposed business would use about 620 feet of the lower level of the home, which is 20 percent of the floor area of the house. This space limit also is important to David Fisher, the Maplewood Building Official. Commissioner Rossbach asked if the current recommendation was for the applicant to have a limit of 30 customers per day? It states in the staff report that the applicant would have about 32 customers per day. Mr. Roberts said he did state 30 customers per day in the staff report but that was only to limit the potential impact on the neighborhood, however, 30 to 32 is not a large impact on the neighborhood as far as traffic either way. Commissioner Desai asked staff if 30 customers per day is a city ordinance or was that just an arbitrary number from staff? Mr. Roberts said 30 was only an arbitrary decision from staff. Commissioner Dierich asked staff how many other medical home occupation businesses there are in the city of Maplewood? Mr. Roberts said there are no other medical home occupation businesses that have gone through the home occupation process. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Ms. Christine Horvath, Park Rapids, addressed the commission. She said this is a transitional move. She has six clients that she sees twice a month at this current time so the expectation of 32 clients a week will take awhile to accomplish. She said if it got to that many clients she would gladly move her business to an office instead of a home occupation location. Commissioner Dierich asked Ms. Horvath who oversees her license as a naturopathic person? Ms. Horvath said there is no licensing for a naturopathic person. She has the client sign a Client Bill of Rights before they except service. Planning Commission -3- Minutes of 10-20-03 Commissioner Dierich asked if there is oversight by the state or anybody else? Ms. Horvath replied no there is not. She said this was enacted in July 2001, and the only requirement is to have the client sign the Client Bill of Rights before treatment. Commissioner Dierich asked about the privacy issues and records? Ms. Horvath yes that is included in the Client Bill of Rights. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant if she had any questions of the staff report? Ms. Horvath said no she did not. Chairperson Fischer asked if anybody in the audience would like to speak regarding this issue? Nobody came forward. Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the home occupation license for Ms. Christine Horvath to have a naturopathic healing clinic in the house at 1828 Radatz Avenue. This approval shall be subject to the following conditions: 1. Meeting all conditions of the city's home occupation ordinance. This includes that the area of the home occupation is limited to a maximum of 20 percent of the floor area of the house. 2. Customer hours for this home occupation are limited from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 3. There shall be no more than 30 customers visiting the home per week. 4. All customers or visitors to the business shall park on the driveway. 5. Provide a five-pound ABC dry chemical fire extinguisher in the lower level of the home. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes - Desai, Fischer, Monahan-Junek, Mueller, Pearson, Rossbach Nay- Dierich Commissioner Rossbach said he would like to comment regarding the residents that wrote into staff regarding the traffic concerns in the area. These comments show another instance where residents are commenting on the traffic from the commercial areas using residential streets. Commissioner Dierich said for the record the reason she voted Nay was because she thinks the city should reconsider the ordinances for home businesses. In her opinion this is a very inappropriate place to be running a medical business especially for reasons of record storage and privacy issues. The motion passed. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -4- This item goes to the city council on November 10, 2003. b. Heritage Square Townhouses (Legacy Village) Mr. Ekstrand said Mr. Phil Carlson, AICP, with Dahlgren, Shardlow, and Uban, Inc., will be presenting the staff report. Mr. Carlson said the Legacy Village PUD, being developed by the Hartford Group and approved earlier this year, consists of a number of separate parcels with a variety of land uses. Outlot H of the PUD consists of approximately 20 acres in the southwest corner of the PUD, bound by the new Kennard Street on the east, the power line easement on the north, and abutting the south and west lot lines of the Hajicek Property. This parcel was approved in concept by the city council for up to 250 owner-occupied townhomes. Town and Country Homes, a national residential builder, is proposing a project of 221 townhomes, to be called Heritage Square. Mr. Carlson said Heritage Square involves two building types: the Hometown units, which are back-to-front units with an entry at the front and garage/driveway in the rear, in 4-, 5-, and 6-unit buildings, labeled Building Type A on the site plan; and the Chateau units, which are back-to-back units in 8-unit buildings, four on a side, labeled Building Type B on the site plan in the report. Commissioner Rossbach asked who is developing the open space to the north? Mr. Carlson said that open space is owned by the Hartford Group and there was some discussion about the city buying the open space for park land. Staff would be able to update the commission on the latest information. Mr. Ekstrand said the city was asked to pay a certain dollar amount for the open space, which the city rejected. Therefore, the property remains an open space and will remain an open space as long as the dollar amount remains to be asked. The city would like to see that land incorporated into the other properties or retained as a recreational area. Commissioner Rossbach asked if that open space is set aside in the PUD to be an open space park land? Mr. Carlson said it's set aside to be an outlot within the approved Legacy Village PUD. Commissioner Rossbach asked if it has a specific designation? Mr. Carlson said it is designated as open space. Mr. Ekstrand said that is correct. Commissioner Rossbach asked if in the original PUD an area in the northeast corner was still being set aside as affordable? It was going to be apartment buildings and then there were going to be 50 townhomes. He asked if this affordable housing was going to take the place of that or is this an additional 50 affordable housing units? Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -5- Mr. Carlson said there are going to be 50 homes for affordable housing within Heritage Square and they are guaranteeing 50 homes, however, he was not privy to the discussion of it being "in place" of or "in addition" to the 50 affordable housing units. Mr. Ekstrand said it was his understanding that it would be "in addition" to the 50 affordable homes. Mr. Carlson said the overall Legacy Village PUD is owned by the Hartford Group and this piece of Outlot H is being sold as an option to Town & Country Homes and they are only dealing with this Outlot H and not the other parcels within the PUD. Commissioner Rossbach said at the last planning commission meeting the commission discussed the additional parking on Kennard Street and he was led to believe there would be carriage walks put in by the developer. In Mr. Carlson's report it sounds like a question that the carriage walks would be put in and he would like that clarified. Mr. Carlson said he would have to ask Mr. Cavett if that has been incorporated into the design or not. Mr. Cavett said as part of the change order to add parking to the Kennard Street project, the city felt the carriage walks should be put in by the developer. The city would put in the sidewalks and the developer should find out how many carriage walks would come out to those parking stalls. Commissioner Rossbach said he has a concern about the setback, regardless of the fact that he understands some of the residential homes have been sold to a developer. He said the ordinance states that the setbacks are taken from the property line so he doesn't agree with that portion of Mr. Carlson's report. He is hesitant to put the townhomes so close to the current residential property lines without knowing the fate of what is going to happen in that location. Mr. Carlson said three out of the five residential homes have been optioned to another developer so it is possible that those homes will stay there for the foreseeable future. He said if Outlot H were platted as single family homes it could be developed with the lots budding up to the back end of the property with homes that would be about the same size, shape, and profile as the townhouse buildings that are proposed and within the 30 foot setback. He said this development is not dramatically different from what a single-family development could accomplish on this same site. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if the engineering comments on pages 22 through 26 were incorporated into the staff report, and if not, why not? Mr. Carlson said the engineer provided a full review, as well as a list of conditions for approval that the engineer thought would be appropriate. He said those conditions of approval were incorporated into the memo and the resolution. However, not every one of those comments were put into the staff report. Chairperson Fischer asked what the procedure would be if the carriage walks did not get put in prior to occupancy and the potential of having unhappy neighbors if they tried to go in afterwards and finish the job later? She asked if the carriage walks would have to be put in before occupancy permits could be issued? Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -6- Mr. Ekstrand said the carriage walks would be covered in the CDRB requirements. Typically the city would require escrow to guarantee all work would be completed before occupancy. Mr. Carlson said to clarify there are two pieces of sidewalk being discussed. The townhomes facing Kennard Street will have a walk from the front door to the city sidewalk parallel to Kennard Street. The second piece is for the carriage walk, which is from the sidewalk across the boulevard to the curb at the parking space itself. Both of those pieces are covered in the requirements of Town & Country. He said the first is shown on the site plan. The second piece would need to be part of Town & Country paying to build the sidewalks in the city right-of-way and those would be part of the private development. He said the sidewalks would be constructed in a manner agreed to at an appropriate staff level. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Ms. Krista Flemming, Project Manager of Land Development, Town & Country Homes, 7615 Smetana Lane, Suite 180, Edina Prairie, MN, addressed the commission. Ms. Fleming wanted to thank everyone who had been involved in this project for the past few months. She said this project creates a pedestrian friendly, streetscape feeling that is desired with a village feel. Commissioner Monahan-Junek asked what the difference in grade would be on Kennard Street? Ms. Flemming said depending on where you are on Kennard Street the grade ranges from four feet to eight feet in height. The walks going up to the townhomes have stairs and railings so there is an elevated feeling for the homes. Commissioner Monahan-Junek said the color rendering on page 3 of the booklet provided doesn't show the increase in the grade from the street level. Ms. Flemming said as you get farther down along the street there is more of a significance along that area that has the green space area. She said part of the color rendering was done before they had the final plan for Kennard Street because of what was happening with the final plat plan and when this rendering had to be completed. Commissioner Mueller said he has a concern about the stairs going up to the property. He said that causes a problem for anybody who is in a wheelchair or handicapped. He asked if it's a standard practice to use steps or is there usually an attempt to try to make it a winding slope? Ms. Flemming said they try to have a graded area that can accommodate all conditions. Depending on the grade of the site they may not be able to provide that. They try to use long risers and stretch them out to eliminate the need for stairs. Town & Country has developed this design in a number of different locations under similar conditions and haven't had any issues or concerns. She said stairs make it more difficult to access the front of the home but you can access the home by the garage where there is a level plain. Commissioner Mueller said his concern is not so much for the access to the townhome because the homeowner can pick and choose the unit that is best for them but the concern is relating to the public pathways. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -7- Ms. Flemming said public paths are different from private paths. Public paths have to be winding or at a grade. The private paths are the ones that would have steps and then they could use retaining walls to wind the path along in place of using steps. Chairperson Fischer asked if anybody in the audience wanted to address the commission. Mr. Gerald Peterson, 3016 Hazelwood Street, Maplewood, addressed the commission. He said as far as the setback variances he doesn't think the setback is large enough. He said those lots are deep and just because the lots are deep doesn't mean there should be any exceptions made to allow the development to be any closer to the existing homes. He is concerned about the glare from headlights for the homes on the ends. He thinks the landscaping should be heavy and with a decent size tree between the existing homes and the new townhomes. Mr. Peterson said he noticed on the plans that there were some additional lines on Legacy Parkway and wondered what the lines represented? Mr. Carlson said those lines represent a possible future continuance of the road going through the area. He said Legacy Parkway could be a through street to Hazelwood Street to provide a thru connection. If the existing single-family homes that have not sold yet remain there than Legacy Parkway would not go through as it currently shows on the map. If the homes get sold, and the area is redeveloped, than Legacy Parkway could go through to Hazelwood. However, there is no street design; it is simply a suggestion that Legacy Parkway could be extended in the future. Chairperson Fischer asked if anybody else wanted to speak on this item? Nobody came forward. Commissioner Dierich asked what the purpose was for having two entrances to the driveway? Ms. Flemming said the area was designed that way for public safety purposes for fire and emergency vehicles to gain access. She said they would plant coniferous trees between the residential area and the new development to help block the vehicle headlights shining through for the four seasons of the year. Commissioner Mueller said he would recommend using Blue Spruce evergreen trees as the barrier between the homes and the townhome development. He asked if it was possible to use berms? He also asked how Town & Country Homes felt about fences? Ms. Flemming said they tried to tie into the neighborhood without having to create an offsite drainage issue and without having to look at grading. She said typically you can put a berm within a 20-foot area. She said they would prefer to use landscaping as a barrier instead of a fence. Commissioner Mueller said he doesn't care for fencing either but maybe the best thing would be to check with the homes that have not been sold to see what they would like to see in their backyard. Ms. Flemming said they could discuss that with staff as well. Commissioner Rossbach asked what type of landscaping and variety and size of trees Town & Country plans on planting on the boundary line? Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -8- Ms. Flemming said they propose to use eight-foot high trees. They will try to cluster five to six different species of trees along with some deciduous trees to provide a balance as well as some ornamental trees. Commissioner Dierich asked if there are other public streets in this development besides Legacy Parkway? Mr. Ekstrand said just Kennard Street and Legacy Parkway. Chairperson Fischer asked what the distances would be of the setbacks of the buildings? She noticed on the plan that it cuts farther in then the private road shown on page 6? Mr. Ekstrand said the plan is not to scale but he would venture to say that the center of Legacy Parkway looks like 20 feet as compared to the setback for the homes on Kennard Street. He said other areas range from 12 to 15 feet and up to 30 feet for the setback. Chairperson Fischer said a comment was made in the report regarding additional trails may compromise the design of the rainwater gardens. She asked if that was going to be a problem or can they be accommodated? Mr. Cavett said there should be no problem and it should be a very workable plan. Commissioner Monahan-Junek said she likes this plan except for the setback issue on the west side that meets up with some of residential homes. She said even though some of the properties have been sold to a developer there are two other homes that have not been sold. Since the city does not know what is going to be put in the area where the homes have been sold, and we can't assume the area will be developed, she does not think we should ask for a variance to allow a smaller setback. Chairperson Fischer said she shares the same feeling. Some people have deeper properties that they have maintained and it should not be used as an excuse for a development to not meet the requirements that would normally be in place. She said then the commission is faced with the unusual conditions of the property it is highly possible that the property will be redeveloped and the city does not know the time frame and that adds to the dilemma. She said if the city knew what the time frame was she would not have as much of a problem with this. Commissioner Dierich said what about the people that would live in the end townhome units, they would not have a reasonable setback from the existing residential homes. She agrees with the commissioners about the setback, maybe not as strong as some, but the new homeowners need to have a reasonable distance from the existing homes. Commissioner Pearson asked Mr. Cavett at one of the previous planning commission hearings a few homeowners to the west had some serious concerns that this development would be draining onto their properties and were concerned about potential flooding problems. He asked Mr. Cavett if he is satisfied the drainage will be maintained without draining excessively onto the neighboring properties? Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -9- Mr. Cavett said the city is very satisfied that there will not be any drainage problems. There was an extensive drainage study done as part of the Hartford Development for this property. Part of the water will drain towards Kennard Street, into the drainage system, to the north and into the two drainage ponds. He said much of the drainage would be contained in the streets and conveyed by storm sewers. The drainage may be reduced from what currently goes to the neighbor's properties. Commissioner Rossbach said he believes the residents were concerned that the drainage would flood their basements. He said maybe the city could make a reassurance that the drainage would go to the drainage system and not into their basements? Mr. Cavett said staff will certainly look into that. The city will make sure that flooding would not be the case. This concern is the first time he had heard people were concerned there would be a potential flood problem so he will check into it. Chairperson Fischer asked if the commission wanted to call a five minute recess to come to a resolution regarding the motion? The Planning Commission members agreed to a five-minute break. When the commission reconvened, Commissioner Pearson moved to recommend adoption of the resolution on pages 33-34 of the staff report, approving the Planned Unit Development for Heritage Square, Outlot H of the Legacy Village PUD, as illustrated on the drawings prepared by Landform, date-stamped October 15, 2003, except as revised in accordance with the following conditions: (changes or additions to the motion are in bold and underlined.) 1) Outlot H is approved for 220 units of townhouses as revised according to the conditions in this report. 2) The southern unit of the Hometown (Type A) building, as the southwest corner of Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street, shall be eliminated, reducing it from 5 units to 4 units, thus continuing the internal linear green space out to Kennard Street at a width of at least 70 feet. The landscape treatment of this green space shall be continued into this new area in similar fashion to the rest of the linear green space. 3) Within the linear green space two north-south segments of sidewalk shall be added, one connecting Driveways K and U, the other connecting Driveways G and W. The rain gardens and landscaping shall be revised to accommodate these sidewalks. 4) The dead ends of all driveways behind the Chateau (Type B) buildings - Street B and Drives G, I, K, M, O, Q, U, V, and W - shall be designed, striped and signed to accommodate two common parking spaces each. 5) The monument signs and associated landscaping at the corner of Legacy Parkway and Kennard Street shall be revised to place trees or other landscape features that are at least 25 feet in height and close to the right-of-way, while still maintaining safe sight distances, that will create a significant tall edge mimicking the scale of the proposed senior building and future office building on the opposite corners of the intersection. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -10- 6) The setbacks are approved as shown on the site plan except the west side setbacks for the buildinqs shall be 50 feet. 7) All construction shall follow the plans date-stamped October 15, 2003. The city council may approve major changes. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 8) The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall end. The council may extend this permit for one year. 9) The city council shall review this permit in one year. 10)The homeowners association documents shall state that the visitor parking areas shall be kept open for visitor parking and shall not be used as a storage area for RVs, trailers, campers and the like. Commissioner Pearson moved to recommend the Preliminary Plat as illustrated on the drawings submitted by Landform, dated September 12, 2003, in the staff report except as revised in accordance with the following conditions: 1) The plat shall be revised in terms of the dimensions and numbering of lots if necessary to reflect the recommended revisions to the number and location of buildings in the above conditions for the PUD. 2) Legacy Parkway west of Kennard Street is shown as a public roadway. The following conditions must be met if Legacy Parkway is constructed as a public roadway: The city should be responsible for the design and construction of the roadway. The developer will need to petition the city for the improvements. The roadway needs to be redesigned to a more typical city street design or the developer needs to be responsible for the ongoing maintenance of all of the amenities and rainwater gardens included in the design. The city will grant an easement to the developer for the maintenance of the amenities and rainwater gardens. The developer will be required to prepare a maintenance agreement detailing the specifics of the maintenance operations for city review and approval. 3) The plan shows on-street parking along the west side of Kennard Street. The following conditions must be met if the on-street parking is to remain on Kennard Street. a. An additional 8 feet of right-of-way shall be dedicated by the developer along the west side of Kennard Street to accommodate the parking bays and allow for the necessary sidewalk and boulevard areas. b. The developer shall be responsible for the costs (construction and 31.5% admin & engineering) to add the parking bays along Kennard Street. These costs are estimated to be approximately $70,000. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -11- 4) The plans show grading outside of the property boundary along the north, west and south sides of the site. All grading shall be restricted to within the property boundaries or temporary construction easements need to be obtained from the adjacent property owners. The developer must provide evidence of any temporary construction easements. 5) The developer must prepare an operation and maintenance plan for the proposed storm drainage system for the review and approval of the city. An active operation and maintenance program is critical to the proper function and operation of the system. 6) In the future, the city may design to extend sanitary sewer and water main services into Outlot I from the sanitary sewer and water main utilities in the driveways north of Legacy Parkway. The services may be for future park and/or open space uses on Outlot I. The developer and the Home Owners Association must agree in writing that they will not object to the future installation of these utility services. 7) The plat includes Outlot A for the storm water pond. The pond must be included in a public drainage and utility easement rather than an outlot. The developer must also dedicate a public drainage and utility easement for the pond outlet. 8) The plat shall include 20' wide utility easements along all water main outside of public right-of- way per SPRWS requirements. 9) The developer shall be required to grant the city a right of entry/temporary construction easement, as necessary, for public roadway construction outside of the limits of the public right-of-way. Commissioner Dierich seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Monahan-Junek, Pearson, Rossbach Nay- Mueller Commissioner Mueller said he voted nay based on the information he received tonight that there is really only one property that is affected by the setback being less than 50 feet. The other lot that has not been sold is 52 feet from the setback. The rest of the homes have been sold and are to be redeveloped by a developer. Staff told him that once a developer comes to the city they have to work with what is "existing". Staff said the developers have to work with the land that is there and with the rules and regulations that exist. So with that information we know the remaining homes that have sold will be redeveloped in some way. Eventually maybe the two remaining unsold homes will decide to sell and the whole area will be redeveloped. The motion passed. This item goes to the city council November 10, 2003. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -12- VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Proposed Mixed-Use Zoning Ordinance Mr. Roberts said the planning commission reviewed the draft mixed-use zoning ordinance at the October 6, 2003, planning commission meeting. During that review, the planning commission requested clarification or changes on the following items: 1. Nonconforming uses. 2. Limited production and processing. 3. Motor vehicle fuel stations. 4. Dry cleaning. 5. Setbacks to non-mixed-use residential zoning districts. 6. Alley right-of-way and pavements widths. Mr. Roberts said at the previous planning commission meeting them was a question raised about having less than 1 year for a nonconforming use. There was not time to get the updated information in the staff report, however, the city attorney said the state law for a nonconforming use is 1 year and the city is not recommending anything less than that. Mr. Roberts continued to explain some of the clarifications and/or changes to the proposed mixed-use zoning district ordinance. Mr. Roberts handed out some comments from Richard McLaughlin, an architect that worked with the Hillcrest Village Urban Design Standards booklet during his employment with HGA. Mr. McLaughlin had comments on the live-work units and the alley width and garage setbacks to alleys. Chairperson Fischer asked a two-part question. She said with this urban village proposal for the Hillcrest Redevelopment area will the intent of drivers be that there are too many hassles driving on White Bear Avenue because of the traffic calming devices so the drivers will use the side streets or is the plan to have a steady flow of traffic with different things happening on the side? Mr. Cavett said White Bear Avenue is under Ramsey County's jurisdiction and he does not see major things happening to hinder traffic. He said there will be more pedestrian friendly things redeveloped on the side streets. There may be sidewalks close to the roads and parallel parking, but as far as traffic moving off White Bear Avenue and onto other streets, he does not see that happening. Commissioner Pearson said regarding alley widths with combined commercial shops and living quarters above; he asked how the city contemplates those shops receiving deliveries? Will they park in the street and unload or in an alleyway and unload? Mr. Roberts said it is his understanding that many of these units will have both street frontage and an alley possibly on the back for a garage for residential. If it is commercial the main focus will be on the street and an alley for service, whether that is for trucks and deliveries he cannot make any guarantees. Commissioner Pearson said his guess is that the shops would use the garage space for storage so the shop would probably need additional parking. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -13- Mr. Roberts said if it is strictly a commercial building they probably wouldn't be building a garage but if it is a mixed use building then you will have a mix of commercial and residential and there would probably be a garage. Commissioner Rossbach asked if Commissioner Pearson was making a pitch for Mr. McLaughlin's comments about the alley width and garage setbacks to alleys? Commissioner Pearson said he likes Mr. McLaughlin's recommendations for the alleyways. Commissioner Rossbach said in the areas that are commercial oriented there should be alleyways that are wide enough to accommodate larger vehicles for deliveries so vehicles are not sitting out on White Bear Avenue. Mr. Roberts said he is not sure having a 30-foot alleyway is appropriate for all uses. However, there is some safety in having a standard number used. Commissioner Mueller said he is not sure if the 30-foot alleyway is appropriate for all areas. You may have a problem setting a number because things change and down the road and it may not be appropriate. Commissioner Rossbach said just remember the 30-foot alleyway people are referring to is a 30- foot alleyway right-of-way. So when you hear 30-foot alleyway it doesn't mean that is how wide the alleyway is going to be. Commissioner Dierich said regarding the snow removal piece and the unloading 30 feet is larger than many of the streets in the new developments. She can't imagine needing more than 20 feet unless you are having a huge issue with garbage containers and unloading trucks. She is comfortable leaving it up to the discretion of the staff because the planning commission would review every one of these requests. Mr. Roberts said at minimum the CDRB will be reviewing the development requests as they come in. Commissioner Rossbach said setbacks at the perimeter of the mixed-use zone language do not reflect what he thought the commission was talking about. The language on page 7 of the staff report up against existing mixed-use zone they have to have matching setbacks. The perimeter in the mixed-use zone meets existing zoning that should match. The way this is worded only applies to residential units within the mixed-use zone and is not addressing the commercial units that could be up against residential. His intent was where ever you are budding existing R-1 you need to provide a larger setback then what is currently being provided. Mr. Roberts asked if he meant that any commercial use within the mixed-use district would have to meet the city's current setback standards from residential? Commissioner Rossbach said it needs to meet the existing setback standards and not be modified for the mixed-use zone in those perimeter locations and it would not just be the commercial it would be the residential within the mixed-use zone. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -14- Commissioner Pearson said the whole idea of having pedestrian friendly side streets and a mixed-use zone it would be defeating the purpose to have large trucks sitting on the streets to make deliveries. It should be a requirement that where the commercial applications in the mixed- use zone exist, deliveries be made in the alleyway. Commissioner Mueller said the city should plan for the worst that could happen in the future. The saying goes plan for the worst rather than waiting for the worst to happen and then try to figure out how to handle it. Plan for what "could" happen in the future. Commissioner Pearson said he would like to see Mr. McLaughlin's comments incorporated into the mixed-use zoning ordinance. Mr. Roberts asked if Commissioner Pearson meant to have all Mr. McLaughlin's recommendations incorporated or just the alleyway recommendation? Commissioner Pearson said he meant the alleyway recommendation. However, if the city incorporates the alley width recommendation that would help with the recommendations above recommendation number 2. Commissioner Rossbach asked Commissioner Pearson if he would be okay with keeping the 30- foot alley right-of-way but eliminating the 6-foot setback for all garages to an alley so that they can build right up to the right-of-way? Commissioner Pearson said yes. Commissioner Rossbach said he likes number 1 in Mr. McLaughlin's recommendation as well. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if we would still require that they meet the minimum frontage that is imposed on developments in the R-1 district or would we allow a smaller front? Mr. Roberts said the city has not specified lot widths we have lot areas that are smaller on the top of page 7 but that doesn't get into specific lot widths. Chairperson Fischer said she is not as concerned about the lot width as she is the structure width because these are smaller structures. She asked what the minimum structure width currently is? Mr. Roberts said the minimum structure width is 21 feet. Chairperson Fischer asked Commissioner Pearson how wide a typical single-wide manufactured home is? Commissioner Pearson said a single-wide manufactured home is 16 feet wide. Commissioner Rossbach said in reading the building fa(;;ade width paragraph on page 9 of the staff report he does not see if that refers to single or double dwelling. Mr. Roberts said he would have to check with Ms. Finwall to see if the building fa(;:ade width refers to single family or multiple dwellings. He would assume it refers to multiple dwellings but he would check further for the commission. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -15- Commissioner Mueller said the more specific the commission and staff get with this mixed-use zoning ordinance the harder it will be to overlay in any other part of the city. He said maybe the city should be more general instead of providing the specifics. He thinks if you get "too" specific with this mixed-use zoning district ordinance you may have to come back to the commission to rewrite this ordinance. Commissioner Pearson said at the last planning commission meeting he asked that a playground be listed as a permitted use and he did not see that in the updated staff report. Chairperson Fischer asked if staff left out the playground information intentionally or was it an inadvertent omission. Mr. Roberts said his understanding was that playgrounds were intentionally left out of the ordinance because any public use or public park has no designation in the zoning code. He said if it is part of the comprehensive plan those dedications are looked at by a case-by-case basis. There is no zoning designation for a park and the city would look at open space and playground space as development plans are submitted to the city. Commissioner Pearson said it bothers him that a playground cannot be a permitted use so that the city could require the developer to provide a play area as part of the housing development. Mr. Roberts was wondering if Commissioner Pearson would be okay with a paragraph added on page 8, under the design standards that public open space and/or playgrounds may be required by the city as part of the development within this district? Commissioner Pearson said he would be okay with that. Chairperson Fischer invited members to attend an informational session on the Hillcrest Redevelopment area to help revitalize the area. There are two sessions on Thursday October 23, 2003, from 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m., and from 5:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. in the city council chambers at City Hall. Please R.S.V.P. to the department secretary Andrea in Community Development. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if the Hillcrest presentation was open to the public? Mr. Roberts said yes. The reason he asked Chairperson Fischer to announce the invitation is there may be comments out of the discussion that may help the commissioners or staff for that matter regarding this mixed-use zoning district ordinance. Commissioner Desai said he would be more comfortable with staff bringing this back to the planning commission with the clarifications and/or changes. Chairperson Fischer asked staff if they would be okay with bringing this back to the planning commission? Mr. Roberts said yes. Commissioner Rossbach moved to table the mixed-use zoning district ordinance to allow staff more time to incorporate changes and/or clarifications in the proposed mixed-use zoning ordinance that were discussed by the planning commission. Planning Commission Minutes of 10-20-03 -16- Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Monahan-Junek, Mueller, Pearson, Rossbach VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Ms. Dierich was the planning commission representative at the October 13, 2003, city council meeting. Planning commission items that were discussed included Gruber's Power Equipment that was tabled so the city council could get a feeling of the fence size, ground covers, and for conditions to be approved and to allow Gruber's to put together their plan. The swimming pool fence code amendment was discussed and will come back for a second reading after staff gets clarification of having the ordinance for a fence around all pools or just the below ground pools. There was also miscellaneous discussion regarding road improvements in the city. b. Mr. Trippler will be the planning commission representative at the October 27, 2003, city council meeting. Items to be discussed include the Street Right-of-Way of Karth Road north of County Road D, the South Maplewood Rezoning to R-I(R), Gruber's Power Equipment at 1762 White Bear Avenue, and the second reading of the Swimming Pool Fence Code Amendment. c. Ms. Fischer will be the planning commission representative at the November 10, 2003, city council meeting. Home Occupation License for Christine Horvath on Radatz Avenue, Heritage Square Townhouses (Legacy Village). X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS a. Rescheduling of the Monday, December 1, 2003, planning commission meeting. Mr. Roberts said due to the city council budget hearing that evening the planning commission meeting is rescheduled for Tuesday, December 2, 2003. Xl. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.