Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991/09/11 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session MINUTES Study Session St. Louis Park City Council Wednesday, September 11, 1991 I. Proposed Zoning Ordinance items (from August 6, 1991 public hearing) A. Eliot View neighborhood/Edgewood industrial area issues 1. Industrial property owner and residential property owner issues The City Manager noted that the staff report responded to fourteen issues raised by industrial property owners and thirteen issues raised by nearby neighbors and noted that the staff recommendations addressed five of these concerns relating to screening open storage, regulation of curb cut width, restricting hours of operation near residential structures, restricting hours of operation for truck usage and counting rooftop equipment in the total building height. The Mayor noted that industrial property owners felt that the I-P designation would make many of them nonconforming . He noted that the staff report indicated otherwise . The Planning Coordinator referred to the staff memorandum and noted that most of the land uses permitted in the I-G District are also permitted in the I-P District . The primary difference is that ' automotive related uses generally would not be allowed in the I-P District. The Mayor noted that in the response to the neighborhood concerns there was no specific distance relating to the restrictions and hours of operation. The Planning Coordinator stated that the ordinance would specify a distance in those instances. Councilmember Jacobs said that , for ease of enforcement, he felt the current draft language regarding screening of open space should remain rather than making reference to visibility from a street. Councilmember Mitchell asked the City Attorney if her office had reviewed the staff report . Ms . Pace-Shapiro indicated that they believe the staff analysis was well done and covered the issue _ r Study Session Minutes September 11, 1991 Page 2 corrections and modification would come back to the Council and how revisions would be incorporated. Mr. Dixon responded that there were five recommendations and if Council agrees they could be incorporated in the draft. The Mayor asked if anyone had any comments on Councilmember Jacobs' comment regarding screening of open storage. Councilman Haun asked when the buffer yard requirement would have to be brought into compliance . The Planning Coordinator responded that they would have to comply by the end of the six year amortization period. Councilmember Jacobs said he saw no need for landscaping if there is no adjacent residential property. Councilmember Tschida said the property owners in the area had indicated that changes were necessary but that staff did not feel this was necessary. She wondered if the changes proposed by staff had eliminated the concerns of the industrial property owners. The Planning Coordinator replied that he had no knowledge of this. 2 . Chart comparing current and proposed Industrial District standards The Mayor noted that there were no final recommendations related to this item and that it was intended to provide a comparison between existing and proposed standards. The City Manager replied that the obvious conclusion was that the proposed ordinance has many more standards regarding industrial development than does the current ordinance. The Mayor commented that the information in the summary was helpful and that the issue will be further addressed at a later date: B. Parcel specific concerns 1. Zoning district regulations a. Pavek Museum: Jim Wychor, 3517 Raleigh The Mayor noted that the staff report Study Session Minutes III September 11, 1991 Page 3 concluded that museums should not be allowed in the I-P District. There was a discussion as to the length of the amortization period in regard to this property. The Mayor asked where museums would be permitted and was told that they would be permitted in the C-i, C-2 and "O" districts . The Mayor expressed concern about eliminating the existing museum because of its unique nature. Councilmember Jacobs asked for the definition of a museum. The Planning Coordinator read the definition contained in the Draft Ordinance. Councilmember Mitchell indicated some concern over the amortization process and indicated that he was ambivalent about its application. Councilmember Tschida responded that the purpose behind this was to upgrade the City by bringing properties into compliance with III the Zoning Ordinance and indicated her support of the idea . Councilmember Jacobs also indicated some ambivalence with regard to application of amortization. The Mayor asked the Attorney if a legal review of this had been conducted. The City Attorney replied that they had responded to questions from the Task Force and Planning Commission and were comfortable that the principle is valid and that the time periods for amortization in the Draft Ordinance appeared to be reasonable. In response to a question as to whether the Ready Mix Plant was subject to amortization Council was told that under the proposed ordinance the Ready Mix Plant would remain as a nonconforming use and would be subject to an amortization provision. b. Miracle Mile: Greg Amundson, 5009 Excelsior Blvd. 4 Staff recommendation in this case was to 111 leave the Ordinance as proposed . Councilmember Tschida stated that she thought Study Session Minutes September 11, 1991 Page 4 the Farmer' s Market idea was a good one if there was a way to accommodate it . The Planning Coordinator replied that such an activity could be conducted on a limited basis, however, the operation of a Farmer' s Market on a large scale over a long period of time would take up significant amounts of required off-street parking for - other land uses. Councilmember Jacobs said that while he did not object to the idea of fast food, he felt that parking and traffic issues were particular concerns along the south side of Excelsior Boulevard . The Planning Coordinator responded that generally the use would be permitted at that location but it would be extremely difficult to handle on the Miracle Mile site . The consensus of the Council was to leave the ordinance as it was currently drafted with regard to this issue. c. Glenhurst Union 76: James Thompson Following some discussion the Council indicated general agreement with the staff recommendation which proposed that the number of service bays remain at two but that up to 50% of their off-street parking could be stack parking with smaller stall dimensions. 2 . Zoning district designations a. Roller Garden area 1. William Sahly, 5622 W. Lake St. (Roller Garden) The proposed ordinance changes the zoning designation of the Roller Garden property from R-B to R-4 and the staff recommendation was to retain the R-4 designation . In response to a question it was indicated that the amortization period in this case would be ten years. There was some discussion about the number of dwelling units which could be placed on the property and what other land 111 uses would be allowed under the R-4 Study Session Minutes September 11, 1991 Page 5 designation. Councilmember Haun pointed out that regardless of which zoning category was used, the Roller Garden would still be a nonconforming use. Staff was directed to determine additional information regarding the size of the property and the number of dwelling units which could be constructed under R-4 zoning. 2 . J.R. Younger, 5624 W. Lake St. (resident) Following a brief discussion staff was directed to determine the size of this property and the number of dwelling units which could be constructed. b. Fine Management: Anthony Gleekel 6213-17 W. Lake St. The Mayor noted that the staff recommendation for this property was R-2 Single Family Residential but he expressed the opinion that the current zoning should remain in place on the property because of its location on a street with relatively high amounts of traffic. The Community Development Director indicated that there was a clear break between the commercial land uses further to the west and the subject property. Councilman Mitchell indicated that there were a number of small pockets of commercial land uses throughout the community and was concerned about leaving them in place. Councilmember Haun asked if the lot size is adequate for single family purposes . The Mayor indicated that he felt it was, and that while staff was correct in recommending the R-2 zoning based on the Comprehensive Plan, he still had a concern over zoning the property for that use. • The Community Development Director noted that there was substantial discussion regarding this property at the Comprehensive Plan Study Session Minutes September 11, 1991 Page 6 hearings and the decision at that time was to leave the Comprehensive Plan designation as residential. Councilmember Tschida said she would like to view the property as she felt this was a problem. She indicated agreement with staff. c. Brownlow/Lake St. area 1. Ed McDevitt, 3393 Brownlow Small Engine Co. 2. Ron Grimel, 3384-86 Brownlow Grand Produce The Mayor noted that the staff had already recommended concurrence with this item and that no further discussion of these two items was necessary. d. Al 's Liquor: David Payne 3912 Excelsior Blvd. The Mayor commented that the original designation of this property on the proposed zoning map was R-3 and staff is recommending C-1, Neighborhood Commercial. Councilmember Mitchell expressed some concern because of the gateway nature of the property and the potential appearance of commercial land use at that location. The Mayor indicated that the landscaping and bufferyard requirements in the draft ordinance would help to mitigate the visual impact. Councilmember Jacobs indicated that Neighborhood Commercial was appropriate if it was done well . The Mayor indicated he did not feel this was an appropriate site for housing. It was determined that the C-1 designation in the staff recommendation should remain for the Public Hearing. 3 . Golden Auto Harry Golden, 7003 W. Lake St. The Mayor noted that the owner had raised an issue regarding the environmental clean-up of Study Session Minutes September 11, 1991 Page 7 the site and that the staff recommendation was to retain the I-P designation, not the General Industrial designation. He asked if the legal issue concerning state statute had been reviewed. The Planning Coordinator stated that it was staff ' s opinion that zoning change would not have any effect on the ongoing remediation of - the site contamination problems. The Mayor asked for a description of the differences between General Industrial and Industrial Park designation. The Planning Coordinator replied that many of the land uses are the same , but most of the site development standards including setbacks and floor area ratios are higher in the I-P District. The performance standards apply in both districts and generally automotive related land uses were not permitted in the I-P. The Mayor asked if the Comprehensive Plan designation for the site was Light Industrial. The Planning Coordinator stated that it was. The Mayor indicated he had received a telephone call from a Mr. Faulkner at 4225-27 W. 36th St. indicating that his duplex was proposed to be located in a C-2 Commercial District and the C-2 zoning would render him nonconforming and subject to amortization. He asked staff to address this issue . The Planning Coordinator replied that the proposed zoning change to C-2 was in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and felt it was important to maintain a long-term view of land use objectives . He indicated that the same issue arose regarding the Space Center Warehouse on Vernon Avenue where the Comprehensive Plan says one thing but the property owner had asked for zoning inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He indicated that in this case the alternative would be to leave the R-3 zoning in place if it was felt the time was not right make a change in zoning. Some discussion ensued 111 about the concern with the possibility of compensating property owners of nonconforming Study Session Minutes September 11, 1991 Page 8 III uses and what alternatives were available to deal with this kind of situation . The Planning Coordinator noted that several years ago staff looked at the issue of noncompliance of the zoning with Comprehensive Plan designations. He stated that the proposed zoning map attempts to minimize these inconsistencies, but if deemed necessary zoning can be applied which is inconsistent. Councilmember Mitchell asked how many of the inconsistencies which had been identified would be remedied by the proposed ordinance. The Planning Coordinator replied that virtually all of the inconsistencies would be eliminated. Staff was directed to further review this issue and recommend an approach to the City Council. Councilman Mitchell asked the difference between the C-1 and C-2 districts . The Planning Coordinator stated that the C-1 district was a neighborhood service and retail district with low intensity and11, limited market area. He said the land uses themselves were not particularly different from the C-2 , but the C-2 added studios and showrooms as permitted uses. A brief discussion ensued regarding the procedures to be followed in carrying on the review of the Zoning Ordinance, particularly as it related to notice . The Planning Coordinator noted that statutory notice procedures were being followed and in addition individual notices are being sent to persons who testified at the Public Hearing or had responded in writing following the Public Hearing. C. Adult use licensing - Fridley experience The Mayor noted that the staff recommendation was to not pursue the licensing approach in consideration of the experience of the City of Fridley. Study Session Minutes 111 September 11, 1991 Page 9 D. Tree replacement/bufferyards - Randy Manthey The Mayor noted that while he supported the concept of tree replacement he felt that replacing trees on a one-for-one basis could result in overplanting and excessive amounts of trees in some locations . Councilmember Haun agreed and felt that there was a need to relate the tree mass to the area in which the planning was occurring. Councilmember Jacobs suggested that perhaps replacement could be based on the mature size rather than one-for-one at the time of planting. Councilmember Haun felt the replacement standard was fine if the primary objective was to buffer land uses but did not feel it was always appropriate in a residential setting. E. Miscellaneous concerns 1. Height limits on art objects The Mayor noted the staff recommendation to permit III art objects 50% higher than the height limit of the zoning district in which they were located. There was no opposition to this idea. 2 . Density limit in R-3 District It was noted that this was primarily a technical adjustment to specify the correct minimum lot size in the R-3 District. There was no objection to this item. 3 . Comments of Frederick Porter The Mayor noted no ordinance changes were recommended as a result of Mr. Porter's comments. Councilmember Jacobs noted Mr. Porter ' s concern regarding tree replacement in the context of the previous discussion. 4 . Motech site Councilmember Mitchell indicated that some discussion had been had regarding this site in the past and the fact that the current zoning designation for the property is C-2 . He felt this III is inconsistent and that this issue needed to be resolved once and for all . The Planning Study Session Minutes September 11, 1991 Page 10 Coordinator replied that the original recommendation was C-2 and that there had been some discussion but no conclusions had been reached. Councilmember Mitchell said he felt the area was similar to other areas along Minnetonka Boulevard which had C-1 zoning and he felt it was appropriate to consider C-1 zoning on this site. The Mayor directed staff to consider the possibility of C-1 zoning on the site and to make a recommendation in that regard. 5. 13th Lane - Texas I-394 area Councilmember Mitchell referred to a letter he had received from a property owner on 13th Lane expressing concern over the C-1 zoning proposed along the frontage road. The letter expressed concern about the lack of buffering and additional commercial encroachment in that area. Councilmember Mitchell asked the homeowner if he was concerned that the area is becoming more commercial. He was told that was the case. Staff was directed to reconsider and review this area and make a recommendation back to the Council. 6. Birchwood Area The Mayor indicated that a petition had been received regarding a parcel of City property located north of 25 1/2 Street and that the petition had requested that the area be zoned R-1 instead of the I-P designation occurring on the zoning map. Staff was directed to review this issue and bring a recommendation back to Council . 7 . Public Hearing minutes The Mayor indicated he had received a letter from Alice TenCate concerning the minutes and questioning their accuracy. The letter asked for a correction of the Public Hearing minutes with regard to Ms . TenCate ' s testimony . The Mayor indicated that a transcript of the Public Hearing testimony had been sent to Ms . TenCate and the Study Session Minutes September 11, 1991 Page 11 City Attorney had been asked how a change in the minutes could be handled. The manager indicated that further communication from Ms. TenCate was anticipated. Respectf uy mitted, n ri Donald R. -ye Planning Coordinator 2022 :GEN25 -