Loading...
04-26-1988A regular meeting -of the. Hopkins. Zoning and, Planning Commission _ was S eld on Tuesday, April 26, 1988, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers f the City Hall. Present were members R. Anderson, Denny, Ebel, Maxwell and Richardson. Also present were Planning & Economic Development Director Kerrigan, and Community Development Analyst Anderson. Ms. Richardson chaired the meeting due to the absence of E. Anderson. Mrs. Ebel moved and Mr. Denny seconded a motion that the minutes of the March 29, 1988 meeting be approved and signed. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO: ZN88 -1 STOBBE DEVELOPMENT (6 -27) Hearing to consider an application by Stobbe Development Company to rezone the property located at the southeast corner of State Highway in and County Road 18 from R -2 Residential to R -4 Residential to allow construction of a 63 unit apartment building, continued from the March 29, 1988 meeting. Mr. Stobbe the applicant, and Mr. Norm Wells architect, appeared before the Commission. The hearing had been continued because the developer was waiting for completion of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. The EAW was completed and found satisfactory. No one appeared regarding the rezoning of the property. Mr. Maxwell moved and Mrs. Ebel seconded a motion recommending to the Council approval of the rezoning of the property from R -2 Residential to R -4 Residential with the Findings of Fact: 1. That an R -4 zoning designation is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; 2. That an R -4 district is a continuation of the R -4 district to the east. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO: CUP88 -1 STOBBE DEVELOPMENT (28 -43) Hearing to consider an application by Stobbe Development Company for a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a 63 unit apartment building to be located at the southeast corner of State Highway 17 and County Road 18, continued from the March 29, 1988 meeting. Mr. Stobbe applicant, and Mr. Norm Wells architect, appeared before the Commission to review the request. Mr. Stobbe had met with the townhome residents abutting the project, and their concerns have been met. One neighborhood resident previously expressed concern about increased pedestrian traffic in the area. No one was present in regard to the proposal. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the project was completed and found satisfactory to the City. Zoning & Planning Minutes 4/26/88 - Page 2 Mr. Denny moved and Mr. Maxwell seconded a motion recommending to the Council approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a 63 unit apartment building with the Findings of Fact: 1. That a 3 story multiple dwelling is a permitted use in an R -4 District; 2. That the proposed building meets the requirements for an R -4 District; and with the Conditions: 1. That the subject site is rezoned from R -2 to R -4; 2. That the applicant conduct an Environmental Assessment Worksheet and implement any recommendations contained therein. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO: CUP88 -5 STOBBE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (44 -71) Hearing to consider an application by Stobbe Development Company for a Conditional Use Permit to allow removal of more than 400 cubic yards of soil from the property located at the southeast corner of State Highway 17 and County Road #18, future site of a 63 unit apartment building, continued from the March 29, 1988 meeting. Mr. Stobbe and Mr. Wells appeared before the Commission. This item was also continued awaiting the results of the EAW for the apartment building. Mr. Stobbe is still requesting the removal of soil from the site before a building permit is obtained for the apartment building. It was noted that a grading permit will be required to remove the soil. Mrs. Ebel moved and Mr. Denny seconded a motion recommending to the Council approval of the Conditional Use Permit to remove more than 400 cubic yards of soil from the site with the Findings of- Fact: 1. That the removal of the soil will cause a hazardous area, 2. That granting of the Conditional Use Permit does not guarantee that the apartments will ever be constructed; and with the Conditions: 1. The applicant can start excavating when the Conditional Use Permit to construct the apartments is granted, 2. That a $10,000 Performance Bond for leveling and planting the site which will be forfeited if construction does not start by May 3, 1989. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO: SUBD88 -1 CITY OF HOPKINS (73-334) Hearing to consider an application by the City of Hopkins to divide the Norwest property and City owned property north of the Norwest Bank to facilitate the building of _a parking ramp. Jim Kerrigan and Mr. P.S.Vedi, architect, reviewed the proposal with the Commission. Mr. Kerrigan stated that Norwest Bank has agreed to transfer to public ownership their existing parking to accommodate construction of the municipal parking facility. The City in return will dedicate 120 spaces for Norwest Bank use. • • Zoning & Planning Minutes 4/26/88 - Page 3 • Mr. Maxwell moved and Mrs. Ebel seconded a motion recommending to the Council approval of the Waiver of Platting Requirements with the Findings of Fact: 1. That the new lots created meet the lot area for the B -2 District, 2. That the existing setbacks will not be affected by the new division line; and with the Conditions: 1. That the Conditional Use Permit to construct a parking ramp is approved, 2. The Waiver of Plat be approved by the Hennepin County Recorder. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO: CUP88 -6 CITY OF HOPKINS Hearing to consider an application by the City of Hopkins for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a municipal parking ramp between 10th & 11th Avenues South and north of the Norwest Bank. Mr. Vedi explained that the ramp would be constructed in two phases. The first phase should be started in early June and the second phase in September /October. The first phase will accommodate approximately 300 cars and the second phase approximately 100 cars. The ramp will have free short term parking and long term permit parking. The ramp will be designed with an off- white, pre -cast concrete on the upper sections and brick around the base. Phase I will be three floors and Phase II will be one floor. Phase I can be expanded to two more floors in the future is so desired. Mr. Maxwell moved and Mrs. Ebel seconded a motion recommending to the Council approval of the Conditional Use Permit to construct a municipal parking ramp with the Findings of Fact: 1. That the parking facility meets the requirements for a B -2 District, 2. That the parking facility meets the requirements for a Conditional Use Permit, 3. That the parking facility will provide needed parking for the downtown area; and with the Conditions: 1. That a waiver of plat is granted, 2. Council will review petition and determine if an Environmental Assessment Worksheet is required. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO: VN88 -4 DAN LAPHAM (335 -499) Hearing to consider an application by Dan Lapham for a Variance to allow a lesser front yard setback then required to construct a single family home on part of Lots 6 & 7, Block 5, Hobby Acres. (E. Wayside Road). Mr. Lapham appeared before.. the Commission. He stated that the variance was requested to facilitate a ramp in the garage for his handicapped daughter. The shape of the lot and a utility /drainage easement makes construction of the home difficult. The site is vacant following construction of County Road 18. Zoning & Planning Minutes 4/26/88 Page Staff recommended a 15 foot variance rather then the 19 foot as requested. There was no opposition to the request from the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Denny moved and Mrs. Ebel seconded a motion recommending to the Council approval of the 19 foot variance with the Findings of Fact: 1. A unique circumstance is present due to a 40 foot drainage and utility easement on the east side of the property, 2. That a hardship exists due to the easement and the shape of the lot, 3. The negative impact of the variance will be minimized due to the fact the lot in question is located on an undeveloped right -of -way, thereby reducing the visual impact of the front yard setback. Motion carried. Mr. Maxwell voting nay. CASE NO: VN88 -2 CHARLES ALBERTSON (502 -624) Hearing to consider an application by Charles Albertson for a Variance to construct an addition with a lesser sideyard then allowed and to exceed the maximum floor area ratio at 601 12th Avenue South. Mr. Albertson reviewed the request with the Commission. He stated that the addition is needed for storage. At the • present time he is leasing the building but if granted the variance he will buy the property. He is interested in staying in that area. Staff stated that a smaller addition would be possible without a variance. Mr. Albertson stated that would not be sufficient for their needs. Mrs. Ebel moved to recommend to the Council approval of the variance. Motion died for lack of a second and sufficient Findings of Fact. Mr. Denny moved and Mrs. Ebel seconded a motion that the hearing be continued to the May 31, 1988 meeting, giving the applicant time to research other possibilities. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO: VN88 -3 DALE RUHA (682 - 768) Hearing to consider an application by Dale Ruha for a Variance to construct an attached garage with a lesser sideyard then allowed by ordinance at 414 Monroe Place. Mr. & Mrs. Ruha reviewed their request with the Commission. They explained that the shape of their lot prohibited them from enlarging the garage. • • Zoning & Planning Minutes 4/26/88 Page, 5 Discussion about the proposed enlargement indicated that the garage could be constructed longer, building closer to the street, with no variance. The applicants seemed satisfied with this solution. Mr. Maxwell moved and Mr. Denny seconded a motion recommending to the Council denial of the variance with the Findings of Fact: 1. That there are no warrants presented by the applicant in regard to hardship or unique circumstance to justify the requested variance, 2. That the applicant has reasonable use of the property with the existing home. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO: VN88 -5 ROGER JEWETT (769 -878) Hearing to consider an application by Roger Jewett for a variance to allow a lesser side yard setback for an addition to the west side of his home at 3 Herman Terrace. Mr. Jewett reviewed the request with the Commission. He stated the following reasons for requesting the variance: 1. Ordinance has changed from 5' to 10' sideyards since the construction of his home, 2. Emphasis on senior citizens staying in their homes as long as possible, 3. New energy wall on the west side of the home, 4. New egress windows will be added to three rooms. Staff suggested the possibility of constructing only part of the addition which would not require a variance. Mr. Jewett stated that it was not possible because of the roof line. Mr. Denny moved and Mr. Maxwell seconded a motion recommending to the Council denial of the variance with the Findings of Fact: 1. That there are no warrants presented by the applicant in regard to hardship or unique circumstance to justify the requested variance, 2. The applicant has reasonable use of the property with the existing home. Motion carried. Ms. Richardson abstained. CASE NO: ZN88 -2 CITY OF HOPKINS (882 -889) Public hearing to consider amending the Zoning Ordinance in regard to side yards in Industrial Districts, continued from the March 29, 1988 meeting. The Commission reviewed the language of the proposed ordinance. No one was present in the regard to the proposed change. Mr. Denny moved and Mr. Maxwell seconded a motion that the Council approve Ordinance No: 88 -610 pertaining to 'I' Districts for a first reading. Motion carried unanimously. CASE NO: ZN 88 -3 CITY OF HOPKINS (890 -1051) Public hearing to consider amending the Zoning Ordinance in regard to fencing around swimming pools. Mr. Denny moved and Mrs. Ebel seconded a motion that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. ATTEST: Two residents of the Interlachen area spoke in regard to the need for the ordinance. They also stated that fences not permit an opening greater than 3 inches at the bottom rather than the 5 inches as proposed, that all ladders be retractable, and that a date be fixed for compliance to the ordinance. The hearing was continued to the May 31, 1988 meeting to give staff time to research the concerns of the residents with the City Attorney and Inspection Department. Toni Richardson, Chair pro -tem MEMBERS: