Loading...
1991-08-27 Planning Comm MinutesCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 27, 1991 DRAFT The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 27, 1991, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve. Vice-Chair Sandra Krebsbach called the meeting to order at 7:34 o'clock p.m. The following Commission members were present: Friel, Koll, Duggan, Dreelan, Krebsbach. Chair Mike Dwyer arrived late at 8:00 p.m. Excused members were: Tilsen. Also present were Public Works Director James Danielson, Planning Consultant Tim Malloy, and Administrative Assistant Kevin Batchelder. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Duggan moved approval of the June 25, 1991 minutes with corrections. Commissioner Dreelan seconded the motion. AYES: 4 NAYS: 0 ABSTAIN: 1 (Friel - Did not participate in Centex hearing.) Administrative Assistant Batchelder announced that tonight's cases would be reviewed under the terms of the old Zoning Ordinance, that was in effect at the time that all of this evening's planning applications were filed. Batchelder stated that the new Zoning Ordinance went into effect on August 21, 1991 upon publication of the ordinance summary in the official city newspaper, the Sun-Current. Batchelder stated that any future applications would be judged under the new ordinance, but for tonight's agenda the old zoning ordinance is being applied. CASE NO 91-31: DESMOND VARIANCE Mark Desmond, of 656 Second Avenue, appeared before the Planning Commission and presented his request for two conformance variances to allow construction of an addition to his home. Mr. Desmond stated the addition is to provide additional garage and living space. Mr. Desmond described the design of the addition and stated he could place shrubbery along the west side of his home. Commissioner Koll moved that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a 3.38 foot side yard setback variance and a 1.4 foot front yard conformance setback variance with the condition that shrubbery be placed along the west wall. Commissioner Friel seconded the motion. AYES: 4 NAYS: 1 (Krebsbach) CASE NO. 91-32: RUTZICK VARIANCE Mr. Mark Rutzick presented his request for a side yard abutting a street setback variance of ten feet. Mr. Rutzick stated he had four children and the need for a large house with a good sized backyard. Commissioner Koll inquired if Mr. Rutzick was aware of the private neighborhood covenants. Mr. Rutzick responded, not at the time of purchase. Mr. Rutzick stated he originally wanted to face the cul-de-sac, but that the only way to fit the house on the lot and have a backyard was to face Wachtler Avenue. Planning Consultant Malloy stated that the proposed garage extends into the thirty foot side yard setback required along right of ways and that it will be visible from both streets. Malloy stated that a key question was if there was too much house for the lot. Malloy stated this house was consistent with the existing homes in the neighborhood and would be an attractive addition to the neighborhood. Malloy stated the lot was pie shaped with two streets, therefore there were not a lot of options that would leave a usable backyard. Malloy stated the pool and fence plans could be better aligned or located, however, it was reasonable to expect a usable back yard. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated the proposed pool and fence are not being considered for planning approvals at tonight's meeting, however, staff had asked Mr. Rutzick to show them on his plans for discussion. Batchelder stated that, as shown, the pool and fence would need variances under the new ordinance and that without signatures of consent from all neighbors within 100 feet the pool and fence variances would require a public hearing. Commissioner Friel stated that he was concerned about granting variances for the house that would require more variances to complete the plan. Commissioner Friel stated he was worried about granting variances that will lead down the path to the necessity for more variances. Malloy stated that the variance for the pool setback is in the Pool Ordinance and is a different variance than the zoning ordinance. Malloy felt that the pool could fit on the lot without a variance and that the fence could be moved back. Malloy felt that this type of adjustment would leave more rear yard, more usable yard although it would probably require more grading. Malloy stated that under this scenario only the fence would need approval. Mr. Rutzick stated his plans are to build the pool at later date, after his home is constructed and the rear yard can be analyzed. Commissioner Koll stated that she preferred the spaciousness of required yards, however in this case she felt there was a need for the setback but that the applicant would have to be flexible with the pool design in the future. Vice Chair Krebsbach stated that there was a letter in the packet from the Deer Trail Hills Homeowners Association. Commissioner Dreelan stated that the home appears to be well designed and is a nice fit in the neighborhood. Commissioner Duggan inquired about the removal of trees on the property. Commissioner Duggan stated he was concerned that the site plan did not conform to what is actually out there. Commissioner Duggan stated that the curb and private drive are not accurately shown and that he is concerned about the approving a plan that is not quite accurate. Duggan inquired if this lot had been surveyed. Mr. Rutzick replied that the metal stakes mark the lot lines. Planning Consultant Malloy explained the trapezoidal R.O.W. for the cul-de-sac and the property lines of the lot in question by presenting a drawing. Commissioner Friel stated the house design is nice and it fits the neighborhood, however, there is no hardship shown to justify the variance except that the design of the house requires it. Commissioner Friel stated it was clearly possible to design a house that would fit the lot. Mr. Rutzick inquired, what defines a hardship? He stated his children would be denied a backyard. Mr. Rutzick stated he bought the lot, designed a house that was appropriate for the neighborhood and that this is the house his family wants. Commissioner Duggan inquired if there would be a deck. Mr. Rutzick responded, yes. Vice-Chair Krebsbach stated signatures of consent from the three neighbors had been submitted this evening for the public record. Chair Mike Dwyer arrived at 8:00 o'clock p.m. Mr. John Hartmann, representing the Deer Trail Hills Homeowners Association explained that the cul-de-sac had been designed as a hammerhead and had been changed when built, and perhaps that was why there was confusion about the plan. Mr. Hartmann stated that the homeowners association was in agreement that the requested variance 1 for the garage setback was acceptable. Mr. Hartmann stated that the homeowners association was opposed to the proposed pool and fence variances. Commissioner Koll moved that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council grant approval of the requested ten foot (10') side yard abutting a street setback variance. Commissioner Dreelan seconded the motion. AYES: 3 NAYS: 2 (Friel, Duggan) ABSTAIN: 1 (Dwyer: arrived late and missed majority of discussion) CASE NO 91-33: PEASE SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCE Mike Pease presented his plans to combine three lots in order to meet the R-1 minimum requirements to allow construction of his proposed home at 940 Chippewa Avenue. Commissioner Friel moved to waive the public hearing requirement under Section 11.3(1) of the Subdivision Ordinance. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 Commissioner Duggan inquired if Mr. Pease would be adding to the house in the future, he felt it was the right fit for the lot as presently shown, and if he was replacing the vegetation that would be removed. Mr. Pease responded that the house is located to save as much vegetation as possible. Commissioner Friel stated that he had a concern about a new house requiring a variance, that this was another design issue. Mr. Pease responded that he had talked to the architect about changing the plan, but it altered the design of the house they wanted too much. Friel stated that it doesn't meet the hardship requirement. Commissioner Duggan moved that the Planning Commission recommend that City Council grant the requested replat and a four foot (4') rear yard setback variance. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 CASE NO. 91-30: OLIN PRELIMINARY PLAT/SUBDIVISION Chair Mike Dwyer opened the public hearing. Dr. Olin briefly described his request to plat a lot on Orchard Place and proposed Carly Lane for his son to build a home. Dr. Olin explained that his 13.2 acre parcel also has plans for future subdivision. Dr. Olin stated that he had been trying to convince his neighbors to participate in the area concept plan for years, however, at this time he only wishes to create a lot for his son. Commissioner Krebsbach inquired if the trees would remain along Orchard Place. Dr. Olin responded that he and his son had planted those trees and that they will remain. He stated the trees will be on the newly created lot and not in the Right-of-Way. Commissioner Friel inquired about Lot 3 that was shown on the plan. Dr. Olin stated that he does not wish to create that lot now and that it would be part of Lot 2. Commissioner Friel stated that the legal description for Lot 2 should then include Lot 3 and that Dr. Olin should consider not platting Lot 2 at this time as it will only need to be replatted if it is subdivided. Commissioner Friel inquired if Dr. Olin was sure he wanted to plat Carly Lane at this time. Dr. Olin stated that the house would face proposed Carly Lane with drive access from proposed Carly Lane. Public Works Director James Danielson stated that the existing drive could be used for utility extension. Mr. Malloy stated the City would want an easement over this should ownership change. Danielson stated that it should be dedicated as R.O.W., that the lot does have access to Orchard. Mr. Tim Hartusch, of Hunter Lane, stated he was curious about the area concept plan. Two other Hunter Lane residents expressed a desire to see the plans also. A brief, informal presentation of the plans was conducted. Mr. Keith Kelly, of 1901 Lexington Avenue, stated he lives just east of the area and inquired about the future intent of development. He stated the future cul-de-sac will require a sewer extension through his front yard and that this would impact the wetlands. Commissioner Dreelan moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Koll seconded the motion. AYES: 5 NAYS: 1 (Krebsbach - Not sure neighbors understand the full extent of the proposal and the area concept plan through the notice that was mailed.) Commissioner Friel moved that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council grant Preliminary Plat approval for Lot 1 with the condition that a private driveway easement be executed. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 ABSTAIN: 1 (Krebsbach - Feels the public hearing should remain open.) VERBAL REVIEW ADJOURN Public Works Director provided a verbal review of City Council action on last month's Planning Commission recommendations and cases. There being no further business, the Planning Commission adjourned at 9 o'clock p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kevin Batchelder Administrative Assistant