HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-08-17 PC Minutes
MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
1830 COUNTY ROAD BEAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA
TUESDAY, AUGUST 17, 2010
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Commissioner AI Bierbaum
Commissioner Joseph Boeser
Vice-Chairperson Tushar Desai
Chairperson Lorraine Fischer
Commissioner Robert Martin
Commissioner Tanya Nuss
Commissioner Gary Pearson
Commissioner Dale Trippler
Commissioner Jeremy Yarwood
Present
Present
Present
Present
Absent
Present
Present
Present
Absent
Staff Present:
Tom Ekstrand, Senior Planner; Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the agenda as presented.
Commissioner Trippler seconded.
Ayes all; the motion passed.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Trippler moved to approve the minutes of the July 20, 2010, minutes as
presented.
Commissioner Pearson seconded.
Ayes: 7, abstaining Commissioner Bierbaum; the motion passed.
It was noted that the commission has not yet received the minutes for the July 6, 2010,
meeting minutes. Commission Pearson also requested a disc of that meeting and for the last
council meeting.
August 17, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
1
6. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Kingston Avenue Right of Way Vacation: Request for 1721 DeSoto Street
Richard Dufresne, who lives at 1721 DeSoto Street was present as applicant for the street
vacation of a small portion of the Kingston Avenue right of way to attach to his property. A
Maplewood city engineer believes that the city does not currently have the right of way for this
part of DeSoto and, if the right of way is vacated and attached to his property, Richard
Dufrense has agreed to grant an easement to the city. Because the city has no use for the
small piece of right of way, staff is recommending approval.
With no one else wishing to speak on this item, the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Trippler moves to approve the attached resolution regarding the vacation of
the right of way of Kingston Avenue west of DeSoto Street. Reasons for vacation are show in
the attached, 1 - 3; approval is subject to parts 1 and 2.
Commissioner Pearson seconded the motion. Ayes all; motion passed.
It was noted that the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City council. City
council makes the final decision on this item an either the August 23 or Sept. 13 city council
meeting.
b. Metro Transit Front Setback Variance and Parking Stall Width Variance Requests
for a Proposed Parking Ramp at the Mall Area Park and Ride. (No Report-Item has
Been Withdrawn)
This item has been tabled indefinitely.
7. NEW BUSINESS
a. Ordinance Review to Consider Allowing the Keeping of Chickens in Residential
Areas
Shann Finwall, Environmental Planner, and Melissa Weigant, Community Development
Intern, presented the proposed ordinance that has been under development by the
environmental and natural resources commission (ENR) since October 2009. The purpose of
the ordinance is to promote urban agriculture and sustainability. Current zoning code
prohibits the raising of poultry in all zoning districts.
In the development of the ordinance, the ENR researched the ordinances of six other cities
that allow chickens to be kept in residential areas; these cities are: Minneapolis, Saint Paul,
Shoreview, Rosemount, Oakdale and Burnsville. The ENR also spoke with health experts as
well as citizens who either own or have owned chickens at their residence.
The ENR recommended approval of this ordinance on July 19, 2010. The proposed
ordinance carries the following restrictions:
August 17, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
2
1. Up to 10 chickens would be allowed on any size lot with a permit.
2. Applicant must have approval of 75% of home owners within 150 feet of the
applicant's property.
3. No roosters can be kept.
4. Chickens must be kept in a separate coop; no chickens may be kept in human-use
buildings, including garages, etc.
5. Leg banding is required as a means of identifying ownership of each chicken
6. Slaughtering of chickens is prohibited.
Additional application requirements are also included in the ordinance.
The following questions/issues were raised and discussed:
1. Allergies among neighbors
2. Make the ordinance specific in requiring chickens to be kept in the back yard
3. All adjacent neighbors must approve
4. Cost to the city/tax payers versus permit fees:
. Commissioner Trippler noted that, as the ENR was developing the ordinance, it
was always stressed that it should not cost the tax payers to allow people to have
chickens, yet, while the costs to process would be approximately $115, the ENR
commission is recommending a fee of $50. The ordinance does not actually state
what the fees would be.
5. Assess fees per chicken like it is for dogs.
6. How will the ordinance be policed?
7. What are the requirements for dealing with feces and deceased chickens? How will
that be regulated?
8. What are the set backs for the location of the coops?
9. Some questioned the "sustainability" of keeping only hens.
1 O. Concern that allowing chickens will lead to residents wanting to keep other types of
livestock.
Ms. Finwall made the following clarifications:
1. The ordinance would be policed the same as any other animal ordinance. Leg bands
are intended to reduce the cost of boarding stray chickens. Slaughtering can be done
by an outside company with the chicken is no longer producing eggs. Similar to the
policing of other ordinances, policing would be done based on complaints received.
2. Portable chicken coops are quite innovative and a practical way to keep them, so the
ordinance allows for the use of these portable coops; therefore, there are no specific
setbacks included.
3. ENR heard from people have concerns about the eggs they are buying in the store.
They are people who prefer to grown their own food on their own property. Ms.
Finwall believes this ordinance will be used only by people who know what they are
getting into. Sustainable agriculture is also preferred by a large part of the immigrant
cultures.
Commission members agreed to review and consider the ordinance again if the following
changes are made:
August 17, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
3
1. Include language to address the handling of feces and deceased chickens.
2. Include specific language on how the ordinance will be policed.
3. Define "officer" to distinguish between animal control and police.
4. Add the word "Iive" to references of keeping chickens.
5. Require the approval of 100% of adjacent neighbors.
6. Require the approval of neighbors as part of the annual permit renewal.
7. Increase the distance for neighbor approval to 300 feet.
8. Limit the number of chickens based on the lot size using a ratio of chickens to
area.
9. Establish set-backs.
10. Address disposal of a deceased chicken and the waste.
11. Make the fees strong enough to make people serious about doing it.
12. Require rodent-proof coops.
A guest raised concerns about the city being at risk for law suits filed due to incidents that
occur with chickens. Commissioner Boeser recommended that the liability issue be
investigated.
The ENR will modify the ordinance as discussed and present this updated ordinance to the
Planning Commission at a future meeting.
b. Gladstone Neighborhood Master Plan and Zoning Update
Ms. Finwall gave an update on the rezoning of the Gladstone Neighborhood.
On January 25,2010, the city adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. State law requires that
the city revise its zoning map and zoning ordinance controls to reflect the Comprehensive
Plan designations and meet the goals and objectives of the Gladstone Redevelopment plan.
The deadline for completing this rezoning is October 25, 2010.
One of the last areas to be rezoned is the Gladstone neighborhood. The comprehensive plan
was approved with mixed-use and medium density residential zoning. However, Gladstone
currently has a variety of zoning codes compared to the plan, including:
1. Light manufacturing
2. Business commercial
3. Business commercial modified
4. Multiple-dwelling residential
5. Double-dwelling residential
Ms. Finwall explained and answered questions about form-based zoning. This type of zoning
doesn't look at the specific use, but instead looks at the form and function of the building
based on the street frontage. These codes are designed to provide more flexibility and fewer
barriers to development that traditional zoning. The differences between P.U.D.s and form-
based zoning were discussed at length.
Rezoning options will be presented to the City Council at a workshop on Monday, August 23,
2010, at 5:15 pm. Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission offer direction on if the
city should study and consider changes to the master plan for the Gladstone, and, following
the short-term rezoning of the neighborhood to meet the requirements of the comprehensive
August 17, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
4
plan, if the city should continue to explore other zoning options of the neighborhood to meet
the unique characteristics of the neighborhood.
Commissioner Trippler offered that, because there is no redevelopment taking place or
planned for the Gladstone neighborhood, staff recommend the rezoning of Gladstone with
mixed-use to bring it in compliance with the 2030 plan by October 25, 2010. The
Comprehensive Plan can always be modified when the city is ready to do redevelopment in
that area.
c. Comparison of Zoning and Land Use Maps
At the last meeting Chairperson Fischer requested that each commissioner and staff review
the maps and see what discrepancies they find. Mr. Ekstrand presented his findings, which
comprised three types of discrepancies:
1. Those resulting from the 2030 Comprehensive Plan update
2. Old inconsistencies carried over from previous plan conversions
3. Corrections/Errors in color coding
Specifically:
1. The MCI/Cell Com cell tower is incorrectly zoned as Mixed Use. The commission
determined that this is a color-coding error.
2. Three homes along Sloan Place are shown as Limited Commercial in the
Comprehensive Plan. Should be shown as Residential.
3. A property on the corner Parkway Drive is designated as High-Density Residential
(HDR), the other corresponding zoning map shows it as Farm-Residential. If changed
to H DR it will create a non-conforming zoning for that property.
4. Property south of Coleman Lake shows split zoning with some lots zoned as Low-
Density residential (LDR) and some as Farm Residential. This prompted discussion
regarding whether or not to take steps to eliminate all split zoning. No changes will be
made at this time.
5. 2694 Stillwater Road: Two lots west of Knowlan's Market. One is zoned as Limited
Business Commercial (LBC), but should probably be zoned Residential (R1). Staff
recommends rezoning the LBC lot back to R1.
6. Parcel owned by school district is zoned (shaded) G for government. The parcel next
to it is planned for LDR. The zoning is split into Farm and Residential. Staff
recommends that this be rezoned to R1.
7. A lot that includes Waldorf School should not be shaded as Government. Staff
recommends re-shading this to represent Institutional zoning.
8. Wetland area along county road C is shaded as Commercial Office; this should be
changed back to Farm zoning shading.
9. An Xcel substation is shaded as Institutional and should be shaded as Commercial.
10. Gethsemane Senior Housing was approved for split land use as HDR and Park. It is
intended to be zoned as PUD and Park. Staff recommends leaving as is for now.
11. Watershed district parcel: Shaded as Medium-Density Residential (MDR) on west half
and LDR on the east half; however it is zoned single-family residential. It is owned by
the watershed district and is a government property. Should be zoned and shaded as
Government.
August 17, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
5
12. Along Century Avenue almost to Highwood is a large townhouse and single-family
development. Several rezoning/shading changes should be made to reflect the
correct usage.
13. Gladstone Neighborhood: in this single-family neighborhood the Comprehensive Plan
shows a small lot that is shaded for HDR is actually a single-family home and is zoned
Single-family. Staff recommends correcting the shading.
The commission will submit any additional corrections/changes to staff for future review.
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
9. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS
None
10. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS
a. City Council Meeting of August 9, 2010: Commissioner Pearson reported on items discussed at
this meeting.
b. Commissioner Trippler is scheduled to attend. A possible item for review will be the Kingston
Avenue right-of-way vacation.
c. First September Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for the day after Labor Day; a
quorum is expected. Agenda items for review will include Metro Transit and Walser Automotive.
11. STAFF PRESENTATIONS
12. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 9:32 p.m.
August 17, 2010
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
6