Minutes

New Brighton Planning Commission

Regular Meeting - July 21, 1998

7:30 p.m.

Call to Order

Larry Baker, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

Roll Call

Present:	Larry Baker, Mike Livingston, Jim O'Brien, David Schmitz, Jeff Schopf, Paul Zisla

Absent:	Norm Schiferl

Also Present:	Kevin Locke, Director of Community Development

Erny Mattila, Project Manager

Cary Teague, City Planner

Steve Larson, City Council Liaison

Approval of Minutes

Motion by Livingston, seconded by O'Brien, to approve the minutes of the June 16, 1998, Planning Commission meeting as written. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

Report on Council Action

Steve Larson briefly reported on the Volunteers Recognition Picnic and National Night Out.

Agenda Review

Teague asked to have the Jones Lake Concept Plan added to the agenda as a discussion item.

Public Hearings

Site Plan Review and Special Use Permit for the Brightwood Hills Golf Course	Mary Burg

Teague reviewed the Planning Report concerning the review of a plan for redevelopment of the Brightwood Hills Golf Course Club House. Teague showed slides of the site.

Baker asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak on the issue. No one responded.

Motion by Baker, seconded by Livingston, to close the Public Hearing. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

Baker commented the new clubhouse would be an asset to the community. The extra parking stalls are a plus.

Livingston asked the project architect, Jim O'Brien, if he changed the square footage of the facility in the new drawings. O'Brien said the new drawings changed the character of the building. Livingston asked why no provision was made for changing clothes. O'Brien said the issue was discussed during the design phase. However, space is limited, and there is room in the handicap stalls for changing clothes.

Motion by Livingston, seconded by Baker, to recommend approval of SP-205, subject to conditions. 5 Ayes - 0 Nays - 1 Abstention. Motion Carried.

Special Use Permit, Site Plan Review and Minor Subdivision for McDonald's	Craig Barnes

Teague reviewed the Planning Report concerning a request to review plans to redevelop the McDonald's on Silver Lake Road. Teague showed slides of the site.

Zisla asked Teague to explain how the plan will improve the circulation of traffic in the area. Teague stated there is a traffic problem on 27th Avenue and Linden Drive. The City receives many complaints about parking from area residents and tenants of the office buildings. Vehicles have difficulty making their way down 27th. Turning onto the service road is a problem because vehicles are parked on both sides of those streets. The new plan would improve that situation.

In answer to a question from Zisla, Teague stated most of the vehicles parking along the street belong to Minar's employees. Teague stated he had not seen the plan for Minar Ford, but the employees' vehicles are supposed to be accommodated on the site. Zisla asked why they are not parking within Minar's property now. Teague responded he believed there is not enough room on the Minar site. Zisla said that Minar must be getting more land somehow. Teague answered the land swap is more of an even trade. Zisla asked, if it is even trade, how will there be more parking space?

Phillips stated that, ultimately, Ford Motor Land would seek vacation of the service drive. The vehicles parked on the service drive would then be parked on Ford property and there would be no traffic through there. Once that drive is vacated, there would be a considerable reduction of traffic on 27th also. The vehicles would be using the new entrance created by the subdivision as the main entrance to Minar Ford. The new access would be created directly from Palmer Drive and would reduce the traffic significantly on 27th. Phillips pointed out that, if McDonald's request is approved, Minar would expect to construct their driveway, with the proper permits, almost immediately.

Baker said the statement was made that most of the traffic on Palmer Drive, 27th, and the service drive was created by northbound traffic on Silver Lake Road because the traffic has to go around the block. Why is there a "No U Turn" sign posted on that corner? Teague said he would have to check with Engineering or the Police Department. O'Brien said many vehicles used McDonald's parking lot as a pass-through instead of making that U-turn.

Baker asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak on the issue. There was no response.

Motion by Baker, seconded by Livingston, to close the Public Hearing. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

Baker stated this proposal does not include vacating the service drive. This proposal strictly involves McDonald's. Baker said he did not have any concerns about tonight's proposal.

O'Brien referred to concerns expressed by Mr. Ordway in respect to the fence. Will this become Ford Motor Company property? Phillips responded Ford will own the property out to Palmer Drive. O'Brien asked Phillips for some reasonable assurance that Ford will maintain that fence in good condition. Phillips responded he did not have a survey showing the location of that fence. Phillips asked if the fence is on McDonald's property. O'Brien responded the fence is on the adjacent property. Phillips said the neighbor should maintain the fence and that Ford was not in the business of maintaining fences. O'Brien said that, according to Mr. Ordway's letter, the problem is that when McDonald's plows its snow, and when trucks and buses come into McDonald's, they hit the fence. Therefore, McDonald's created the problem.

Phillips responded the direction of traffic will change and will probably be farther from the fence. Phillips said he had not seen letters from any of the neighbors.

Teague said he would address that issue. Apparently, the existing parking does not meet the setback requirement of 5 feet. The proposal would meet the requirements for a paved surface. Mr. Phillips is correct in that there will be an additional three feet from the paved surface to the fence than exists today.

Motion by Baker, seconded by O'Brien, to recommend approval of LP-343 and PL-247, subject to conditions. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

General Business

Final Plat (PL246) - Stony Lake Estates	Larry Beach

Teague reviewed the Planning Report concerning a request for consideration of a final plat for a single family residential subdivision of property located east of Silver Lake Road, west of 23rd Avenue NW and north of Stony Lake. Teague also reviewed the Tree Identification Plan. The City Forester has reviewed the plan, and recommended several changes.

Teague stated that, as part of the review by the City Council, the Council received a citizen petition for an EAW. Mr. Beach did a preliminary EAW. Based Beach's study, the DNR said they did not need a full-blown EAW. The particular issue was the possibility of an endangered specie, the Blanding Turtle, was present on the site. The DNR ran a preliminary search. There was a Blanding Turtle sighted in the general vicinity in 1980, within a one-mile radius of this site, but not specific to this site. The DNR recommended the developer do a specific study to determine if this would be a habitat suitable for the Blanding Turtle. Mr. Beach hired the expert recommended by the DNR. The expert concluded that, under no circumstances, would the Blanding Turtle be present on the site. Based on all the information, an EAW was unnecessary.

Zisla asked if Teague had talked to the neighbors about the tree plan. Teague responded affirmatively. There is a large oak tree on the existing right-of-way off of 23rd that they would like to see saved. The 28-foot street width could help save the tree. The developer and the Forester will try to preserve the tree. Teague said he spoke to the property owners about the change from evergreens to crab trees. They were confident about the City Forester's recommendations.

Baker said this was not a public hearing, but asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak on the issue. No one responded.

Motion by Livingston, seconded by O'Brien, to recommend approval of PL-246, subject to conditions. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

Concept Plan Review of US West facility located on Cleveland Avenue	Pat Conlin

Teague reviewed his memo on the item. Us West does not wish to install their required landscaping around their monopole. Therefore, they would like consideration of a revised site plan.

Baker stated several tower proposals have come before the Planning Commission. The City requires landscaping on all these proposals. Baker said he was not in favor in making any change to the approval. Teague introduced Pat Conlin of US West.

Conlin said that, when US West reviewed the landscape plan they submitted, they realized it was a generic plan and was submitted in error. Conlin said US West wanted to comply with the City's intent. However, US West would like to come up with a plan satisfactory to the City that would minimize the impact on the parking. The site plan takes up a 30-foot space. The monopole takes up a nine by eleven foot space. The 30-foot by 30-foot site plan would take up all the parking spaces in that lot. The pole takes up five spaces out of the twenty-nine spaces in the parking lot. There are about twenty to twenty- five people who park in that lot. The loss of the parking spaces would have a negative impact on that site.

Conlin said US West wanted some help on how to handle this problem. Conlin stated that US West would consider a landscaping screen or a cedar fence. Pine trees surround the property. Conlin said they would be willing to augment those trees. Conlin said US West would like the Planning Commission's help to minimize the impact on the parking and still landscape the site.

O'Brien stated that, to be frank, offering any advice without seeing the site would be difficult. Conlin said she had photographs taken of the site showing the pine trees, but they were not available tonight. The trees are about six feet tall with spaces between them, but they will grow.

O'Brien said he thought US West should submit a new site plan that is more definitive than the one provided for this evening. The plan US West provided does not tell us anything. O'Brien stated it is unfortunate that they submitted the original site plan because that plan was the basis for the approval. Conlin said she agreed and apologized for the mistake. Conlin said she was interested in hearing the Planning Commission's concerns. Would the Planning Commission be amenable to landscaping the parking lot itself to screen the installation as opposed to taking up parking spaces with screening? If so, Conlin said she could come forward with a plan next month. Conlin asked if the Commission was more interested in directly screening the monopole itself by putting a fence around the monopole and then screening the lot.

Livingston said that without a site plan he could not visualize the site. It would be helpful if US West could provide a site plan. Conlin said she thought that was reasonable, but she would like to know about the Commission's major concerns.

Baker said he remembered that, when we approved this site plan, a question came up about losing parking spaces. The US West representative said they could live with the loss of parking. It was obvious to Staff and the Planning Commission that parking spaces were going to be lost. We made that statement, but the applicant proposed it and we accepted it.

Conlin said US West took responsibility for the mistake. It should have never been presented to the Commission. Baker said, on top of that, the item was postponed once and once the US West representative simply did not show up for the meeting. Baker said he remembered the details well. Baker stated, if US West is going to propose something, it would have to be something more than just a fence around the pole.

Zisla said he would like to see photographs of the site. Teague showed slides of the site.

O'Brien said moving the landscaping away from the pole makes some sense. The farther the landscaping is from the pole, the less obvious the pole becomes. Zisla said moving the landscaping out toward the street would landscape the whole parking lot. O'Brien said he did not understand why Conlin thought they would need a fence. Conlin responded we would need a fence for security if the City required it. Zisla said the City Forester should probably look at the site.

Conlin thanked the Planning Commission for their consideration.

Concept Plan Review of PDQ	John Keenan

Teague reviewed his memo on the concept review and consideration of setback variance for the purpose of redevelopment of the PDQ store located on County Road D.

Baker stated that considering this site with the proposed setback would be difficult. The Planning Commission held SuperAmerica on Silver Lake Road and Rice Creek Road to the requirements. Baker said he could see no way the Planning Commission could ever approve an application with a zero setback when 25 feet is required.

Teague said he emphasized to PDQ that they need to try to meet the setbacks. This request would be like the existing building. Livingston asked whether PDQ or an adjacent property owner owned the green area on the plan. Teague responded the adjacent property owners own the green area, the apartment complex to the north.

O'Brien asked Teague to show the north property line on the plan. O'Brien said the west property line seemed to be on the west side of the dumpster. The PDQ driveway would be in the apartment building's property.

Jim Shelton of PDQ in Madison stated PDQ has a permanent easement across the property to the west shown in green on the plan. The property owner did not even realize he owned the property. Shelton said he contacted both owners. PDQ has also always maintained the back green area. PDQ would be willing to landscape the area and put new curbing around it. If we could move the building back, we could pick up five or possibly ten feet of additional green area in the front. PDQ lost frontage when the road was widened. The office building owners owned the back part of that lot. PDQ acquired that piece recently. Shelton showed a PDQ in Madison similar to the one they are proposing. Shelton said he was hoping the Planning Commission would look at this request keeping in mind PDQ maintains all the green area as if it belonged to PDQ.

Baker said asked about the easements. Shelton said he met with the owners of the easement properties, but could not acquire the property. Baker said he was concerned about uniformity in applying the Zoning Code. We required that E-Z Stop and SuperAmerica meet the Code.

Zisla said the green space was behind the building and would have no impact on the front setback variance. Shelton said the area on which PDQ has the easement would take care of the setback to the west. Baker stated, assuming the easement would take care of the west variance, the front and back of the building would still require 20-foot variances.

Teague stated the easements under discussion are simply access easements, similar to McDonald's, using the drive entrance with Minar Ford. It would not affect the setback. We would require a variance whether there was an easement there or not. There would be a 25-foot variance required on the west side. Shelton said the easement covered all of it, not just the driveways. Teague responded the easement is still only an access easement owned by the property owners to the west.

Zisla asked how much frontage PDQ lost when the road was widened. Shelton said the road was widened in the early 80's.

Livingston asked if the new building would be bigger or smaller than the current building. Shelton said it would be smaller. Baker said the building would probably meet the Zoning Code without the car wash. Shelton said he wanted to get the Planning Commission's consensus because PDQ either has to build a new unit there or will sell it.

Teague said the complete teardown of the building creates a vacant lot. Therefore, the Planning Commission would be considering a new development. If it were a remodel, it would be a nonconforming use similar to Howie's Mobil on Old Highway 8. The teardown of the building makes it a new development that would have to meet the required setbacks.

Baker asked if the front of the proposed building would be located behind the proposed building. Teague responded affirmatively. Shelton said PDQ wanted to build the new building before they demolish the old one. Baker said, if PDQ took the car wash out, they would meet the requirements. Shelton said PDQ had considered that, but felt that the investment would require the car wash in view of the competition.

Livingston asked if vehicles would be traveling next to the car wash on the east side. Shelton said there would be a drive lane for emergency vehicles when vehicles waiting for the carwash block the way. Livingston said the proposed building would go about 20 feet to the east of the old building. Livingston asked if the location of the proposed building would cause a parking problem. Teague responded that the proposal would be short one or two spaces from the minimum number of parking stalls required.

Baker said he had a problem with the number of variances required. O'Brien asked if the pump area can be considered part of the parking requirement. Teague said the Code did not address the question, but most cities count that area as parking stalls. Teague said that, even if we do consider the pump stalls as parking, the issue is the setbacks.

O'Brien asked if there was any way PDQ could reconfigure the proposal to meet Code requirements. Teague responded they could, but they may have to eliminate the car wash. Shelton said he was looking for direction from the Planning Commission. PDQ would like to rebuild the facility.

Baker said that the consensus of the Commission is that the Commission would consider the pump area as parking. Staff would have to ask the Council if they would be willing to consider that as a change from past practice.

Shelton asked, if PDQ come back with a proposal with just one variance, would the Planning Commission consider one variance? Baker answered that he could not consider a zero setback when we require 25 feet. Zisla commented the drawing did not show the lot lines and was hard to understand. Shelton reviewed the drawing for the Commission.

The Commission briefly discussed past variance requests dealing with fuel/grocery facilities. In answer to a question from Baker, Teague stated a canopy can be up to 10 feet into the required setback. Teague said the green area, however, still must maintain a 30 foot setback. The reason for the exception for the canopy is for the nonconforming uses that currently exist. This proposal is essentially a new facility, and not a nonconforming use.

Following Livingston's request, Teague showed slides of the site. Shelton emphasized the green area PDQ maintains on their easements. Zisla suggested PDQ purchase the easement area. Shelton said the owners did not want to be bothered with the paperwork involved. Zisla said the purchase might be difficult, but it can be done. The proposal would better meet the requirements.

Baker stated the Commission would like to help PDQ, but they must be consistent in administering the Land Use Ordinance. Baker said there is a real problem in the back area. Shelton said he appreciated the Planning Commission's consideration and would come back with another proposal, if possible.

Announcements and Updates

Jones Lake Concept Plan

Teague distributed a draft of the concept plan. The concept plan entails the teardown of the apartment complex, the single family home to the south would be purchased and combined with the apartment complex. They propose a four-story apartment complex for the cleared site. They would target the complex for the fifty-five and older group, but not exclusively. Teague said, because there are no commercial facilities within walking distance, he had some concern about this being a complex for the elderly. The Commission discussed the parking requirements for an 80-unit building.

Baker said he would have a problem with the parking if this is not a complex restricted to the elderly. Teague said he had not reviewed the density or setbacks. In answer to a question by Zisla, Teague answered the site was zoned for multi-family. The Commission briefly discussed the concept plan and asked for more detail on parking and density.

Special Planning Commission Meeting - August 4

Baker announced there will be a special meeting on August 4 to consider the proposed mixed-use district for the Highway 8 Corridor. Larson said that was the date for the National Night Out and he cannot attend the meeting.

Mattila's Resignation

Baker said Erny Mattila would be leaving the City at the end of December. Teague said Mattila was leaving to start his own consulting business.

Adjourn

Motion by Zisla seconded by O'Brien, to adjourn the meeting. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

_______________________________________

Cary Teague, City Planner