HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1992-02-25 AMENDED & APPROVED 4-28-92
Planning and Development Board
MINUTES
February 25, 1992
PRESENT: S. Adams, S. Blumenthal (chair), C. Feuer, G. Hagood, D. Kay,
J. Schroeder, Staff: Director H. M. Van Cort, L. Tsang. Also,
applicants and members of the public.
1. Meeting was called to order at 7:40 PM.
2. Privilege of the Floor: No one appeared.
3. Public Hearings for Final Subdivision Approval
A. 812 E. State St./Ching Po. The public hearing was adjourned at
the request of the applicant due to illness.
B. 214 N. Plain St./Cannon. This subdivision was requested for a
rear yard adjustment, and no major issues were identified. A public
hearing was opened by chair. No one appeared to speak, and the hearing
was closed. Schroeder, seconded by Feuer, moved for final subdivision
approval. Carried unanimously.
4. West Inlet Housing Proposal/Weisburd - Report
For the benefit of the Glenside neighborhood association and residents,
Chair Blumenthal reported on the meetings that were held by city
departments and planning board committees with the applicant regarding'
the proposed subdivision and housing project. Van Cort briefly
explained the zoning regulations and how an applicant could apply for
approval of a cluster subdivision. As lead agency for environmental
review of this project, the Board identified the following issues:
drainage, road width, sidewalk installation and maintenance, pedestrian
circulation, open space management, preservation of locally scarce
species (hackberry trees and butterflies), and public controversy.
Chair invited the public to comment on the proposed project. Concerns
expressed included aesthetics, density, slope, garbage, drainage, effect
of salt runoff on hackberry trees, traffic, incompatibility with
neighborhood, question of housing affordability.
Feuer expressed concern regarding the long-term affordability of homes
which were not purchased with public subsidies. He also questioned the
city's authority in regulating building size if CD funds were not
obtained for the project.
Mr. Weisburd responded to comments as follows. Soil tests have been
done on the proposed site which show porous sandy loam with no traces of
water.. After further calculations have been done, a storm drainage plan
will be designed to meet City standards. He mentioned that hackberries
are surviving all along Floral Avenue despite the volume of traffic
which suggests that traffic and the accompanying salt from cars alone is
not damaging them. He also stated the slopes on this property are
nowhere near the 30% slope at the new Towerview development nearby, nor
will the roads and houses be built on slopes which exceed those already
existing on West Hill.
The Board members agreed to table further discussion until the project
is considered for preliminary subdivision approval.
5. Site Development Plan Reviews
A. Fairfield Crossing. Tsang reported that some of the support
documents that were required for preliminary site plan approval have
been received and are being reviewed by staff. Applicant Rick Cowles
asked for conditional final approval and said that he would deliver
additional materials to staff by the end of the week.
Planning and Development Board -2-
Minutes of February 25, 1992
The following resolution was moved by Schroeder, and seconded by Feuer.
WHEREAS the Planning and Development Board at its January 28, 1992
meeting has approved the Preliminary Site Development Plan for Fairfield
Crossing, 324 Spencer Road, and
WHEREAS in its January 29, 1992 Letter of Communication of Decision, the
Board has listed the items to be submitted for Final Site Development
Plan Approval, and
WHEREAS, Chartwell Associates has partially complied with this submittal
requirement,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Final Site Development Plan
Approval is granted with the condition that the revised final site plan
will include all items as listed in the Board's January 29, 1992 Letter
of Communication of Decision, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the completeness and adequacy of the
revised final site plan and supporting documents are to be determined by
the appropriate City staff or officials and the Codes and Administration
Committee.
Passed 5-0-1 (Kay abstained) .
B. City Court/Police Facility. Tsang circulated a draft letter to
the client committee with the Codes and Administration committee's
recommendations for modifications. Board members felt that at this late
stage of design the suggestions would have little effect, but voted to
relay the information to the client committee, 4-0-2 (Kay, Hagood
abstained) .
6. Old Business
A. Site Development Plan Review - revisions. Tsang and Van Cort
explained what types of revisions needed to be made as requested by the
city attorney. During the discussion it was determined that there was
not agreement between the Board and staff as to the desired intent of
the ordinance. The Board requested that staff draft a chart including a
number of options for each proposed change in the ordinance.
B. City Master Plan - discussion. Van Cort reported that this
project was given high priority by Common Council this year and staff
have begun preliminary research. He said that they expect to identify
the components necessary for preparing a master plan by the Fall.
C. Subdivision amendments. A proposal to simplify subdivisions which
do not create a buildable lot (minor lot line adjustments) was
discussed. Van Cort recommended that the definition of subdivision be
changed so that only divisions which create new buildable lots be
defined as a subdivision. The Board directed that van Cort draft
amendments which provide that transactions in the R-1 and R-2 zoning
districts involving a division of land for sale that does not create a
buildable lot be processed by the Director of Planning and Development
without review by the Planning Board.
7. Zoning Appeals
Draft memo of codes committee recommendations was reviewed, moved by
Schroeder, seconded by Kay, and unanimously passed.
This Board has reviewed subject appeals and finds none that involve
issues of citywide or long-range planning concern. They are remanded
for action, with the following comments:
Planning and Development Board -3-
Minutes of February 25, 1992
Appeal 2097, for Special Permit to conduct a home occupation (computer
software marketing) at 329 W. Buffalo St., in an R-2b zone, appears to
meet the criteria specified by the ordinance.
Appeal 2099, for Area Variance to height restrictions to allow
construction of a boat storage facility at Johnson's Boat Yard, 101 Pier
Rd., in an M-1 zone, is of great concern because of the probable visual
impact on surrounding community facilities with high public use (golf
course, Farmers' Market, etc.) due to the sheer size and lack of
features of the proposed structure. If permitted, it is suggested that
ways be sought to offset the appearance of bulk and lack of scale by
some method of relatively simple and inexpensive design treatment,
including tree planting.
Appeal 2101, for Use Variance to permit music instruction as a home
occupation at 417 Hudson St., in an R-1b zone, appears to involve
something close to rezoning by variance, and may represent an
undesirable precedent.
Appeal 2103, for Special Permit to install a satellite dish for data
transmission and receipt at 304 Elmira Rd., in a B-5 zone, appears to be
acceptable under the intent of the ordinance. It is suggested that the
dish be painted a neutral color with a dull finish in order to minimize
its potential visual impact.
Appeal 2104, for Special Permit to install a satellite dish for TV
reception at 302 W. Green St., in a B-2a zone, raises a question as to
the need for such a feature, which will be visible from several
surrounding residential properties, when commercial cable offering
extensive commercial programming is available (ref. Sec. 30.26 C4(ii)a) .
Appeal 2105, for special Permit and Area Variances to allow operation of
a day-care facility at 201-5 E. Tompkins St., in an R-2b zone, is
essentially a matter in which neighborhood input will be of critical
importance. Particular attention should be paid to assessing potential
impacts on the neighborhood, with respect to the criteria stated in sec.
30.26 C3.
Sign Appeal 3-1-92, for signs in excess of the number, area and location
allowed, at 311 S. Corn St., in an R-2b zone, appears to involve signage
that is redundant to denote the obvious and specific commercial nature
of the property, and an excessive amount that is contrary to the intent
of the ordinance. The premises is obviously a filling station, and its
long-standing presence in the neighborhood, off the main area highways,
assures that it will continue to serve primarily local and neighborhood
trade. The proposed new lighted canopy will further emphasize its
nature; excess signage seems at best unnecessary, while at worst it may
be objectionable to neighborhood residents, and detract further from the
character of the surrounding neighborhood. The proliferation of signage
in the nearby B-2a zone, while necessary due to the nature and multiple
occupancy of that premises, is not a valid argument for further visual
clutter within the residential area. The intent of the Sign Ordinance
is to reduce signage to an acceptable level when changes are made to
existing nonconforming installations.
While it may be reasonable and equitable to allow the existing free-
standing sign pole to remain in use, to provide some distance
recognition of the station's presence, it is suggested that the sign be
reconfigured to eliminate the encroachment over the street right-of-way.
Planning and Development Board -4-
Minutes of February 25, 1992
8. Reports
A. Committees of the Board. None
B. Director. None
C. Chair. Blumenthal asked for a representative on codes and
Administration; Kay volunteered to participate on a temporary basis.
D. Board of Public Works. None
E. Planning and Development Committee. Schroeder reported that the
W. state Street Rezoning proposal and West Hill Master Plan will be
going to Common Council in March. The committee also discussed site
Plan Review. The final report of the Inlet Island land use committee is
available for review.
9. Approval of Minutes
Approval of November Minutes moved by Adams, seconded by Schroeder and
unanimously carried. Approval of January Minutes was deferred.
Meeting was adjourned at 11:15 PM.
epj-25FEB92.min/4-29-92
Ek)
zoo
------------
_-
s
_ .- - _. . - ---_ -�a�►-ti:.... __ _ _ __ _ . - -- --_ __L 1.8 _C�..�e�-�-tic _ -- 12-c� . __i�nQ _ �_ _.__.
. --. ---•-- -- --- �����. �----�'` - . _ _�`��� .. -- _ . __fig__ _ _ �' - _-- ���-_. �-- �,_�� _ --- ,-_