Loading...
2012-08-28 Planning Comm Agenda PacketMH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Agenda August 28, 2012 - 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of the Agenda 4. Approval of the July 24, 2012 Planning Commission Minutes 5. Hearings a. Case No. 2012-13: City of Mendota Heights, zoning amendment pertaining to new property maintenance code for commercial/industrial properties. Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. 6. Verbal Review a. September 25, 2012 meeting will start at 6:00 p.m. in observance of Yom Kippur 7. Adjourn Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 120 hours in advance. If a notice of less than 120 hours is received, the City of Mendota Heights will make every attempt to provide the aids, however, this may not be possible on short notice. Please contact City Administration at 651-452-1850 with requests. Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2012 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 2 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 24, 2012 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 24, 2012, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Norton, Commissioners Field, Hennes, Magnuson, Noonan, and Viksnins. Those absent: Commissioner Roston. Those present were Assistant to the City Administrator Jake Sedlacek, Public Works Director/City Engineer John Mazzitello and NAC Planner Stephen Grittman. Minutes were recorded by Heidi Guenther. Approval ofAzenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of June 26, 2012, Minutes COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2012, AS PRESENTED. AYES: 4 NAYS: 0 ABSTAIN: 2 (FIELD AND MAGNUSON) Hearings PLANNING CASE #2012-22 Greg Quehl . 953 Wagon Wheel Trail Wetlands Permit Planner Stephen Grittman presented the request of Greg Quehl for approval of a wetlands permit Mr. Grittman noted that the applicant received approval to re -subdivide two existing parcels along Wagon Wheel Trail to create two buildable parcels as part of an application heard at the June planning commission meeting. The two lots both have their frontage on Wagon Wheel Trail. The applicant has spoken with the city's engineering staff as to where clearing would occur on the lot near the wetland. Staff recommended the 25 feet closest to the wetland remain undisturbed. However, the applicant has requested steps be allowed to approach the pond. It was noted this would be a DNR consideration. Mr. Grittman presented staff's analysis of the request and while the applicant is still working on final plans, Engineering staff is comfortable with a recommendation for approval at this time. Staff recommends the final design and construction drawings be reviewed by city staff for approval prior to construction, grading and excavation. Commissioner Field questioned if the plans presented this evening differed from last month. Mr. Grittman indicated the plans were new from last month and were placed on the dais for the commission to review this evening. Commissioner Viksnins questioned the conditions for approval. Mr. Grittman suggested a condition for approval be added stating the 25 feet closest to the wetland remain in an undisturbed state. MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 3 Planning Commission Minutes Aly 24, 2012 Commissioner Hennes requested clarification on where the borings were proposed. Mr. Grittman recommended the applicant address this concern. Commissioner Hennes commented there was a high water table in this area and understood a great deal of fill was needed on the lot. He asked if staff had cleared this issue with the applicant. Mr. Grittman stated this was being resolved with the applicant prior to purchase of the lot. Commissioner Noonan inquired if the pond access would require DNR approval. Mr. Grittman explained this was the case. Commissioner Field questioned if the city's map of the site had the correct elevations. Mr. Grittman commented the topography lines were correct on the city' map and were based on a preliminary grading plan. Chair Norton opened the public hearing. Greg Quehl, 1361 Riverside Lane, stated he was the purchaser of the lot and would close on September 4, 2012 based on the recommendation of city council and based on soil borings. He noted the elevations have been increased slightly to reduce sediment from the site going into the pond area. The pond access was requested to allow him to access the waterway and he understood this approval was needed from the DNR. He stated the area that would be cleared to access the pond would be minimal to allow him to use a canoe or paddleboat on the waterway. Mr. Grittman recommended natural materials be used for the stairway and landing. Commissioner Field asked if the stairs were necessary to access the pond. Mr. Quehl stated a ramp could be used instead of stairs. He commented he was not looking to change the wetland in any way. Commissioner Viksnins requested further comment on the 25 -foot area near the wetland. Mr. Quehl indicated he was raising the elevation to assure there was no runoff. He did not object to the recommended condition for approval stating the 25 feet closest to the wetland remain undisturbed. Commissioner Hennes inquired where the borings were proposed. Mr. Quehl explained the borings would be taken from the proposed location of the home. Chair Norton asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES 6 NAYS 0 COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WETLAND PERMIT AT 953 WAGON WHEEL TRAIL AS REQUESTED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THE APPLICANT WILL SUBMIT FINAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR CITY STAFF REVIEW AND APPROVAL. 2. THE 25 FEET CLOSEST TO THE WETLAND WILL REMAIN IN AN UNDISTURBED STATE. Commissioner Noonan requested the commission not take action on the stairs at this time, as the plans were not finalized. He recommended the applicant work further with the DNR and staff. Assistant to the City Administrator Sedlacek indicated the egress down the graded area could be reviewed at a staff level and approved. If there were significant changes to the grade, a wetlands permit would be necessary. 2 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 4 Planning Commission Minutes Judy 24, 2012 Commissioner Field suggested an additional condition be added stating the stair plans would need to be reviewed and approved by city staff. Commissioner Viksnins questioned if the 25 -foot setback was necessary. Mr. Grittman recommended the condition remain in place to assure that no other improvements were made within the 25 -foot setback. Commissioner Magnuson clarified that the 25 -foot setback would remain undisturbed except for the proposed stair area, which would be subject to city staff approval. Mr. Quehl inquired if a ramp could be used instead of stairs. Commissioner Field suggested the condition be revised to state the egress area within the 25 -foot setback to the pond. COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO REVISE CONDITION 2 AS STATED BELOW: 2. THE 25 FEET CLOSEST TO THE WETLAND WILL REMAIN IN AN UNDISTURBED STATE EXCEPT FOR THE PROPOSED EGRESS AREA, WHICH WOULD BE SUBJECT TO CITY STAFF REVIEW AND APPROVAL. AMENDED CONDITION VOTE: AYES 6 NAYS 0 ORIGINAL MOTION VOTE: AYES 6 NAYS 0 Chair Norton advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 7, 2012, meeting. PLANNING CASE #2012-23 Thomas Wieser 1256 Wachtler Avenue Critical Area Permit Planner Stephen Grittman presented the request of Thomas Wieser for approval of a Critical Area Permit. Mr. Grittman noted that the applicant is seeking a critical area permit to construct a new single-family home on a parcel along Wachtler Avenue. The proposed construction site is on a relatively level portion of the property, generally in the area of a previous structure. Due to the fact the property is located within the Mississippi River Critical Area; a permit was required for all of the proposed improvements. The structure would utilize the existing driveway and would extend to the new garage. Mr. Grittman presented staff's analysis of the request and recommended approval of the critical area permit as proposed with conditions as the property makes use of the property consistent with the R-1 zoning regulations and utilizes the property with the least impact on the vulnerable parts of the property. Tom Wieser, 1524 Alameda Street in St. Paul, thanked staff and the Commission for reviewing his request this evening. Commissioner Hennes asked if the property was vacant. Mr. Wieser explained there was a home on the property, which was removed last fall but utilities were on site. MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 5 Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2012 Chair Norton opened the public hearing. Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Norton asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES 6 NAYS 0 COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CRITICAL AREA PERMIT FOR 1256 WACHTLER AVENUE AS REQUESTED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT. 2. ANY FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY ENGINEER REGARDING GRADING, EROSION AND STORMWATER CONTROL. AYES 6 NAYS 0 Chair Norton advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 7, 2012, meeting. PLANNING CASE #2012-24 David Williams 755 Wentworth Avenue Wetlands Permit Planner Stephen Grittman presented the request of David Williams for approval of a Wetlands Permit. Mr. Grittman noted that the applicants are seeking a wetlands permit to construct a new single family home and swimming pool and related improvements at 755 Wentworth Avenue. The project would be located in proximity to the former house on the site. The subject property is just under eight acres in size, has been occupied by a house, and detached garage. The area of construction would be on the north side of a creek that runs through the property from east to west. Nearly all of the building area is within 100 feet of this creek. Per city code, a wetlands permit was required. Mr. Grittman presented staff's analysis of the request and recommended approval of the wetlands permit with conditions as the proposed project should not have a negative impact on the wetland, especially the native vegetation plantings which serve to filter the runoff into the wetland. Commissioner Noonan requested further clarification on the required landscaping for all cleared areas. Mr. Grittman explained any land cover that would avoid erosion would qualify. He stated this was common language used in the past. Commissioner Magnuson asked where the existing house and garage was located. Assistant to the City Administrator Sedlacek clarified the buildings had been removed. Alan Maas, 14551 Judicial Road, Suite 100, stated he was the general contractor that had been hired by the Williams to build the proposed home. He thanked the commission for considering his request this evening. Chair Norton opened the public hearing. 0 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 6 Planning Commission Minutes Judy 24, 2012 Alan Weinblatt, 754 Upper Colonial Drive, noted his property abuts the subject property and expressed concern with the clearing of the site. He also had concern with the disruption of the wildlife in the area through the construction of the home. He requested the wildlife not be markedly changed through the project. Chair Norton thanked Mr. Weinblatt for expressing his concerns and assured him that city staff would be following the wetlands permit and building permit in accordance with city code. Kevin Burns, 741 Wentworth Avenue, requested the culvert under Wentworth Avenue not be altered in any way through the proposed project. City Engineer John Mazzitello assured Mr. Burns that storm water considerations would be a part of the building permit review. Chair Norton asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES 6 NAYS 0 COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WETLANDS PERMIT AS REQUESTED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY ARE REMOVED. 2. AREA WITHIN THE 25 FOOT SETBACK IS LEFT UNDISTURBED AND IN ITS NATURAL STATE. 3. DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION UTILIZES THE EXISTING CULVERT LOCATION AND OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS. 4. ALL CLEARED AREAS ARE LANDSCAPED TO MINIMIZE RUNOFF INTO THE CREEK. 5. POOL FENCING MEETS THE CITY'S FENCING REQUIREMENTS FOR MATERIALS, OPENNESS, HEIGHTS, AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR SWIMMING POOL ENCLOSURES. 6. ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FOLLOW THE LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT. Commissioner Field was pleased with the proposed project on this parcel and was glad that the parcel was not being subdivided. Chair Norton agreed stating this was a beautiful property. Commissioner Magnuson asked if the Land Disturbance Guidance Document addressed the concerns with the culvert. Public Works Director Mazzitello indicated this was the case as the document provided guidance for the contractor on how to develop the site. The current drainage would continue to function after the site was developed. AYES 6 NAYS 0 Chair Norton advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 7, 2012, meeting. PLANNING CASE #2012-25 Steve Stulz 1897 Delaware Avenue Conditional Use Permit for Wireless Facility MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 7 Planning Commission Minutes Judy 24, 2012 Planner Stephen Grittman presented the request of Steve Stulz for approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a wireless facility at 1897 Delaware Avenue. Nh-. Grittman noted that Sprint was requesting approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow modification to their existing wireless telecommunications equipment located upon the roof of Sibley High School located at 1897 Delaware Avenue. The property currently has cellular antenna mounts for four other cellular carries including AT&T, Nextel, Verizon and Qwest. The applicants are proposing to add three antennas and place two additional cabinets of the existing platform. Once surrounding sites are operational, Sprint's existing equipment would be removed. Mr. Grittman presented staff's analysis of the request and recommended approval of the conditional use permit with conditions as the proposed antenna and related equipment upgrades are expected to have no physical impact upon neighboring properties. Steve Stulz, agent for Sprint, thanked staff for their presentation this evening. He was pleased with the application and conditions recommended by staff. Chair Norton opened the public hearing. Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Norton asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES 6 NAYS 0 COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A WIRELESS FACILITY AS REQUESTED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THE EXISTING EQUIPMENT (TO BE REPLACED) BE REMOVED WITHIN SEVEN MONTHS OF CUP APPROVAL. ANTENNA AND EQUIPMENT REMOVAL SHALL INCLUDE THE REMOVAL OF UNUSED MOUNTING EQUIPMENT AND THE REPAIR OF ANY DAMAGED WALL OR ROOF ELEMENTS (FROM EQUIPMENT ANCHORS). 2. THE NEW ANTENNAS AND ACCESSORY EQUIPMENT CABINETS BE PAINTED TO MATCH THE COLOR OF THE BUILDING. 3. THE NEW ANTENNAS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL FCC REGULATIONS. 4. THE NEW ANTENNAS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE ELECTRICAL CODES. 5. A LEASE AGREEMENT EXISTS BETWEEN THE APPLICANTS AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. AYES 6 NAYS 0 Chair Norton advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 7, 2012, meeting. PLANNING CASE #2012-13 City of Mendota Heights Zoning Amendment pertaining to New Property Maintenance Code for Commercial/Industrial Properties 0 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 8 Planning Commission Minutes Judy 24, 2012 Assistant to the City Administrator Sedlacek presented the request of the City for approval of a zoning amendment pertaining to a new property maintenance code for commercial/industrial properties. Mr. Sedlacek noted that a planning application was presented to the planning commission on June 26, 2012 to amend Title 12 of city code to include a chapter on commercial property maintenance. At that meeting, the zoning amendment was tabled and staff was directed to discuss the item further with the Chamber of Commerce and local business/commercial property owners. Staff met with Ruthe Batulis and Bob Engelhart on the matter and feedback was provided to staff. Mr. Sedlacek recommended the planning commission discuss the matter further and make a recommendation to the city council, who is anxious to discuss the topic. Commissioner Hennes asked for staff's recommendation on this issue. Mr. Sedlacek apologized for not including staff's recommendation from the June 26, 2012 meeting. He commented that staff's position had not changed and recommended approval of the zoning code amendment. Commissioner Field noted he was not at the previous meeting and was not privy to the discussion held. He questioned why the council had set a timeline for the matter. Mr. Sedlacek explained the council was anxious to discuss the matter themselves and were looking for a recommendation from the planning commission. Commissioner Magnuson indicated she was not in attendance at the June meeting either. She presented staff with a list of proposed changes to the drafting of the ordinance. Mr. Grittman indicated this could be reviewed with the City Attorney prior to the council meeting. Commissioner Viksnins reviewed the July 24th staff memo concerning the comments made by the Chamber of Commerce and Mr. Engelhart. He questioned if the suggested changes were made or if staff had retained the language of the code. Mr. Sedlacek discussed the language changes that were made to the document by staff. He commented the policy issues were left to the planning commission's discretion. Commissioner Viksnins encouraged the city to remain cooperative with the business community and noted that he supported the ordinance amendment. He understood the council wanted to move along with the ordinance, but wanted to be assured that all voices were heard prior to approval. Commissioner Hennes commented this document could be discussed for the next six months; however he was in favor of moving it along to the city council. He agreed with having the policy in place. Commissioner Noonan was pleased with the changes made to the document based on the comments made by the business community. He indicated all property within the community would now be treated equally, whether residential or commercial/industrial. He stated the zoning ordinance would establish a level playing field of reasonable expectations for property owners in Mendota Heights. Commissioner Viksnins suggested the council consider the comments provided by the Chamber of Commerce before approving the amendment. Commissioner Field stated he would like to be assured this ordinance was done correctly and was in favor of holding this off until comments could be received from Commissioner Roston. Chair Norton agreed. He was in favor of tabling the matter until a full and complete discussion could be held by the entire planning commission. This would also allow for the changes suggested by Commissioner Magnuson to be completed prior to approval. He was concerned the ordinance amendment was a solution searching for a problem. Commissioner Hennes asked if the 60 -day time limit was a concern with this item. Mr. Grittman noted was a city generated request and a waiver could be granted for the zoning amendment. 7 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 9 Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2012 Commissioner Hennes questioned if the commission would be any more comfortable with the proposed zoning amendment in 30 days. Commissioner Magnuson stated the language would be cleaned up, which would eliminate some of the concerns on the vagueness of the terminology. She was uncertain that all objectives would be overcome, but the document would be more complete. Chair Norton stated the duty of the planning commission was to fully review the information and make a determination accordingly. He was not in favor of rubberstamping the item based on the deadline set by the council. Commissioner Noonan discussed the action taken by the commission at the June meeting as the item was delayed already to allow for conversations between staff and the Chamber of Commerce. However, if the delay was prolonging a denial the action should be taken this evening. Chair Norton stated the final ruling would be taken by the council even if the commission recommended denial. COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO TABLE ACTION ON THIS ITEM TO THE AUGUST 28, 2012 MEETING AFTER REVISIONS ARE MADE TO THE DOCUMENT LANGUAGE. Commissioner Magnuson recommended any other language changes from the commission be sent to staff prior to the August 28, 2012 meeting. Mr. Grittman recommended the commission provide comments to staff prior to August 10, 2012. Commissioner Viksnins stated he would be in favor of hearing staff's opinion on the comments made by the Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Grittman explained this could be completed prior to the August meeting. Commissioner Hennes expressed concern with the assertions made by the Chamber of Commerce's letter dated July 20, 2012. He did not feel that the City of Mendota Heights was hostile to local businesses. AYES 4 NAYS 2 (HENNES AND NOONAN OPPOSED) Chair Norton advised the Planning Commission would reconsider this application at its August 28, 2012, meeting. Verbal Review Mr. Sedlacek gave the following verbal review: PLANNING CASE #2012-18 Greg Quehl Lot Line Adjustment and Wetlands Permit • Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. PLANNING CASE #2012-19 Scott Cottington Wetlands Permit and Critical Area Permit • Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. PLANNING CASE #2012-20 Orlando Ponce Critical Area Permit • Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission. COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:12 P.M. AYES NAYS Respectfully submitted, Heidi Guenther, Recording Secretary MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 10 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC. 4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, Ik N 55422 Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile 763.231.2561 planners@naeplanning.com MEMORANDUM TO: Mendota Heights Planning Commission FROM: Stephen W. Grittman DATE: August 23, 2012 MEETING DATE: August 28, 2012 SUBJECT: Commercial/Industrial Property Maintenance Code CASE NO: NAC Case 254.08 APPLICANT(S): City of Mendota Heights LOCATION: NA ZONING: NA GUIDE PLAN: NA Background and Description of Request: At a previous meeting, the Planning Commission discussed the Commercial/Industrial Property Maintenance Code, and it was noted that a number of Commissioners had comments that would be useful to build into the draft for Commission discussion. The attached version incorporates comments from Commissioners Noonan and Magnuson. The proposed changes are primarily clarifications and intended to add specificity to the code, based on the common concern that the language was overly broad or vague. Unfortunately, much of nuisance -based code is necessarily broad, since the range of specific conditions is often difficult to define beforehand. In many of these cases, the City will likely rely on cooperative property owners when non-compliant properties are identified. In the (likely) unusual case resulting in enforcement, the ultimate decision will be based on a fact question for a court, and what a reasonable interpretation would be under normal circumstances. MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 11 The proposed changes are underlined or 6+r, and highlighted for easy reference. In the notes below, we have provided a brief explanation of the purpose of the proposed change. Section Purpose of amendment 12-8-2 Definitions Clarified that lawn grasses are not considered weeds Notes that address numbers are not "approved" but rather just 12-8-3 B. made to comply with standards Deletes "occupants" and refers to public, noting that "vacant" 12-8-4 A.2. buildings should not have occupants Specifies that "vacant buildings" refers only to those buildings subject to the conditions in A. above, not others that may be 12-8-4 B. vacant due to lease terminations, etc. Clarifies that agents "jointly and severally" liable for maintenance includes only those that are so by law, not merely ANY agency 12-8-5 A. relationship 12-8-5 B. Adds "removed" to the standard that weeds are "prohibited" Sets the weed mowing height at 8 inches to be consistent with the lawn grass mowing height, and adds a note that natural or native landscapes may be exempt from the mowing/irrigation 12-8-5 C. requirements 12-8-5 D. Broadens the list of examples of hard -surfaced areas to be maintained to include patios and similar surfaces 12-8-5 G. Deletes this section as repetitive of other sections of City Code 12-8-6 C.1. Clarifies theagent responsibilities see 12-8-5 A., above Clarifies that only required improvements are required to be replaced by this code, with the implication that other improvements have been placed voluntarily and their replacement is not 12-8-6 C.3. mandated 12-8-6 C.4. Provides a weather exemption for the 45 day replacement Reworks this section to include "storage" and be more consistent 12-8-7 A. With other code requirements 12-8-7 B. Provides an internal City Code reference for related provisions Deletes the "nuisance" standard and clarifies that any rubbish 12-8-8 A. accumulation is a potential violation 12-8-8 B. Provides an internal reference to related City Code provisions 12-8-9 A. Provides an internal reference to related City Code provisions Replaces "tax" with "assessment" consistent with previous 12-8-10 F. comments 12-8-10 G. Adds a clause specifying that the remedies in this section are an alternative enforcement option for the City, in ADDITION to other common enforcement processes, not INSTEAD of those. MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 12 Action Requested: Following the closing of the public hearing, the Planning Commission may consider one of the following alternative recommendations: (1) Recommendation of approval of the Commercial/Industrial Property Maintenance Code, as submitted by staff and as may be amended by the Commission. This action should include a finding that the Code will better identify maintenance issues and facilitate improved maintenance of commercial and industrial property. (2) Recommendation of denial of the Commercial/Industrial Property Maintenance Code, based on a finding that current regulations have served the City adequately and there is no need for further amendment. (3) Tabling of action on the Commercial/Industrial Property Maintenance Code subject to the submission of additional comment and/or research related to the impacts of the proposed ordinance. Staff Recommendation: The current draft reflects the discussion on the proposed ordinance to date, including changes intended to address concerns raised by the Chamber of Commerce and others providing review comments. Staff has no further recommendations on the code at this time. Supplementary Materials: 1. Updated Draft, Commercial/Industrial Property Maintenance Code MH Planning Commission 8/2812012, Page 13 Draft 08/28/12 Chapter 8 COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY MAINTENANCE 12-8-1: FINDINGS AND PURPOSE STATEMENT: 12-8-2: DEFINITIONS: 12-8-3: BUILDING AND STRUCTURE APPEARANCE AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS: 12-8-4: MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR VACANT BUILDINGS: 12-8-5: LANDSCAPING AND GROUNDS MAINTENANCE: 12-8-6: ACCESSORY USES, BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES: 12-8-7: ACCUMULATIONS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL: 12-8-8: RUBBISH, GARBAGE AND TRASH: 12-8-9: STORM DRAINAGE: 12-8-10: ABATEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES: 12-8-1: FINDINGS AND PURPOSE STATEMENT: The City Council finds that it is in the best interest of the City to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens. To this end, the City believes that by adoption of these commercial/industrial property maintenance regulations, it will further the following objectives: A. To preserve the value of commercial and industrial property within the City; B. To protect the character and stability of commercial and industrial areas of the City; C. To provide for minimum standards of maintenance for commercial/industrial properties within the City and ensure compliance; D. Provide a mechanism to conditions upon commercial/industrial property which do not comply with the standards of maintenance established herein. E. Assist in identification and correction of dangerous or life threatening conditions that may be identified within the City. F. Provide a mechanism to mitigate potential public health issues identified within the City. MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 14 12-8-2: DEFINITIONS: All terms not defined herein shall have the meaning assigned to them in Section 12-1 B-2 of this Title. If a conflict arises as to the definition of any term between this Chapter and Section 12-1 B-2 of this Title, the definition in Section 12-1 B-2 of this Title shall control. As used herein, the following words shall have the following meanings: ACCESSORY STRUCTURE: Shall have the meaning stated in this Title. Accessory buildings or structures shall include, but are not limited to: decks, porches, detached garages, and sheds. BUILDING: Shall have the meaning stated in this Title. Buildings shall include, but are not limited to: dwellings, offices, warehouses, and stores and shall include all buildings containing commercial or industrial uses, regardless of zoning district, with the exception of legal home occupations on residentially zoned property. FENCE: Any structure, wall, or gate erected as a permanent dividing marker, partition, visual or physical barrier, or enclosure, excluding any permitted temporary fence as regulated in the zoning regulations of this Code, within a parcel of land regardless if the parcel is platted or unplatted. PROPERTY: Developed or undeveloped land, parcel or platted lot, including any building structures, and accessory structures thereon and shall include all land, parcels, or lots containing commercial or industrial uses, regardless of zoning district, with the exception of legal home occupations on residentially zoned property. STRUCTURE: Shall have the meaning stated in this Title. WEEDS: All grasses, annual or perennial plants and vegetation, other than trees or shrubs. This term shall not include cultivated lawns, flowers and gardens. 12-8-3: BUILDING AND STRUCTURE APPEARANCE AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS: A. Building Material Condition: Any building or structure is a public nuisance if its exterior does not comply with the following requirements: 1. All exterior property shall be maintained in a clean, safe, and sanitary condition. 2. No part of any exterior building surface shall have significant deterioration including, but not limited to, holes, breaks, gaps, or loose or rotting materials. All exterior surfaces of the structure including, but not limited to, doors, door and window frames, cornices, porches and trim, shall be maintained in a good and safe condition. Exterior wood surfaces on the structures, other than decay resistant woods, stucco or other materials that do not normally require protection from the elements shall be protected from the elements and decay by staining, painting or other protective covering or treatment or 2 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 15 other appropriate method acceptable to the City. With regard to broken windows, repair shall require replacement of all broken glass, or in the alternative, remodeling of the exterior by removing the window and its frame and replacing such window with exterior siding to match and blend in with the surrounding siding. B. Premise Identification: All buildings shall have awed address numbers placed in a position to be plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be Arabic numerals. Numbers shall be a minimum of four (4) inches in height or larger as necessary to ensure visibility. C. Architectural Elements: All architectural elements including, but not limited to, cornices, belt courses, corbels, terra cotta trim, wall facings and similar decorative features shall be maintained in good repair with proper anchorage and in a safe condition. 12-8-4: MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR VACANT BUILDINGS: A. Maintenance: 1. Any vacant building or structure in the City that is found by an authorized employee or agent of the City to be dangerous to public safety or health by reason of the following is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and a hazardous structure or condition: a. Damaged by fire, storm, or vandalism; b. Defective chimneys or stovepipes; C. Dilapidated condition or decay; or d. Any other defect endangering the public safety or health. 2. Any vacant structure which is damaged, decayed, dilapidated, unsanitary, unsafe, vermin or rodent infested, presents environmental health risks or which lacks provisions for safe illumination, ventilation, or sanitary facilities to the extent that the defects create a hazard to the health, safety, or welfare of the af the public, may be declared unfit for human habitation or unsafe to the public by the City. 3. Whenever any vacant building has been declared unfit for human habitation or unsafe to the public, the City may proceed to declare the building a hazardous building or hazardous property and may seek to correct or remove the hazardous condition as authorized by Minnesota law. B. Security Measures. Vacant buildings violating the terms of Paragraph 12-8-4 A shall be secured in accordance with Minnesota State Statutes 463.251 and applicable Building Code requirements. 3 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 16 1. Windows and doors shall be covered to prevent entry within a frame, and with covering materials, that are designed to complement or match those of the existing building. 2. Any part of the building, such as walls or roof, which is damaged in such a way as to allow possible entry, shall be repaired with materials that match the materials used for that part elsewhere on the building, and in a manner which masks the visible impression of vacancy. 12-8-5: LANDSCAPING AND GROUNDS MAINTENANCE: A. Vegetation, Trimming and Replacement (Trees and Shrubs): The owner and any respective agents responsible by contract or law for property maintenanceshall be jointly and severally responsible for the planting,trimming and maintenance Fepla^o.,,o„ of all site trees and shrubs in a condition presenting a healthy, neat and orderly appearance which is free from refuse and debris. Plants and ground cover which are required by an approved site or landscape plan and which have died shall be replaced as soon as seasonal or weather conditions allow. B. Weeds: All premises and exterior property shall be maintained free from weeds or plant growth in excess of eight (8) inches. All noxious weeds shall be prohibited and 'removed. C. Grass Mowing and Irrigation: All grass shall be maintained at a height not exceeding 04 ei ht 8' inches. All exterior property areas devoted to grass shall be maintained and irrigated (watered) as necessary to ensure vegetative health. The City acknowledges;.'th D. Sidewalks and Driveways: All sidewalks, walkways, stairs, driveways, parking spaces, other hardscaped surfaces such as patios, and similar areas shall be kept in a proper state of repair, and maintained free from hazardous conditions. E. Parking Lots: Unless otherwise approved by the City, every lot or area used for public or private parking shall be maintained in accordance with the following requirements: 1. Pavement. Off-street parking areas shall be paved and maintained so as to eliminate dust or mud and shall be graded and drained to dispose of surface water. 2. Striping. Designated parking spaces shall be indicated and maintained on the surface of off-street parking areas with paint or other striping material approved by the City. 3. Curbing. Curb barriers (around the perimeter or within off-street parking areas) shall be maintained to so as not to exhibit any significant deterioration. F. Fencing: Any fence is a public nuisance if it does not comply with the following requirements: 2 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 17 1. The fence shall be firmly fastened and anchored in order that it is not leaning or otherwise in any stage of collapse. 2. The fence shall be maintained in sound and good repair and free from deterioration, loose or rotting pieces, or holes, breaks, or gaps not otherwise intended in the original design of the fence. The fence shall be free from any defects or condition which makes the fence hazardous. 3. All exterior wood surfaces of any fence, other than decay resistant woods, shall be protected from the elements by paint or other protective surface covering or treatment, which shall be maintained in good repair to provide the intended protection from the elements. 4. No fence section shall have peeling, cracked, chipped or otherwise deteriorated surface finish, including but not limited to: paint or other protective covering or treatment, on more than twenty (20) percent of any one linear ten -foot section of the fence. 12-8-6: ACCESSORY USES, BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES: A. Building Materials Condition: The exterior of all accessory structures, including but not limited to, fences and walls shall be maintained in structurally sound condition and in good repair. B. Architectural Elements: All architectural elements accessory to the principal building shall be maintained in a structurally sound condition and in good repair (as similarly required of the principal building). Architectural elements include, but are not limited to, cornices, belt courses, corbels, terra cotta trim, wall facings and similar decorative features. C. Storage and Screening: Except as specifically allowed within the applicable zoning district or as a listed exception, all materials and equipment shall be stored indoors. When allowed, materials and equipment stored outdoors shall be screened from eye level view of abutting residential zoning districts in accordance with the City's zoning regulations and maintained as follows: 1. Maintenance of required screening (plantings, berm and/or fence) shall be the joint and several responsibility of the individual property owner, its respective agents 5 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 18 responsible by contract or law for such maintenance; and/or, where applicable, the homeewneW property owners' association. 2. All fence repairs shall be consistent with the original fence design in regard to location and appearance. 3. Wherever landscapinq and/or fer approval as a part of zoning, subdivision, or site plan review process', replacement of landscape materials or plantings shall be consistent with the original screen (buffer yard) design. 4. All repair or plant replacement shall be done within forty-five (45) days of written notification from the Zoning Administrator, weather permitting. D. Signage: All signs shall be maintained in a safe, presentable and good structural condition at all times. Maintenance shall include painting, repainting, cleaning, replacement or repair of defective parts, replacement of missing letters and other necessary acts. Any sign which the City finds is in a dangerous or defective condition shall be removed or repaired by the owner of the sign or the owner of the premises on which the sign is located. E. Exterior Lighting: All light fixtures shall be maintained in good repair. Lights for illuminating parking areas, loading areas or yards for safety and security purposes shall be maintained in such a manner that the maximum illumination levels established within the City's zoning regulations are not exceeded. 12-8-7: ACCUMULATIONS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL: A. Accumulations: R I I i I jltbage, OF Ot #Hazardous substances, eAd dangerous materials, pollutants, or contaminants, as those terms are defined by Federal, State, and local laws, shall not be stored or allowed to accumulate in stairways, passageways, doors, windows, fire escapes or other means of egress. B. Hazardous Material: Hazardous substances, refuse, pollutants and contaminants, as those terms are defined by Federal, State, and local laws, shall not be accumulated or stored unless storage complies with the applicable requirements of all laws, rules and ordinances pertaining to the activity, including, but not limited to, the City's Building Code and Fire Prevention Code, includinq,'but not limited to, Title 4 and Title 7 of the'City CodE 12-8-8: RUBBISH, GARBAGE AND TRASH: A. Accumulation and/or Storage of Rubbish and Garbage: All exterior property areas shall be free from any unreasonable accumulation of rubbish and garbage C• MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 19 B. Disposal of Rubbish: Every occupant of a structure shall reasonably store and dispose of all rubbish and garbage in a clean and sanitary manner in accordance with all laws, including, but not limited to, Title 4, Chapter 2 of the City Code. C. Screening: Garbage and recycling containers shall be either: a) stored inside a building such that they are not visible from adjacent public streets or adjoining properties; or b) stored outside but fully screened from view of adjacent public streets or adjoining properties by landscaping or fencing materials. D. Collection: Discarded materials and equipment shall not be left outside for collection and disposal for more than seventy two (72) hours. Materials and equipment not awaiting collection and disposal shall not be placed outside. 12-8-9: STORM DRAINAGE: A. Public Nuisance: Stormwater runoff and drainage of roofs and other hard surfaced areas on property shall not be allowed to occur in a manner that creates a public nuisance, and shall comply With the requirements of the City Code, Title 11. B. Site Grading: Except in the case of approved retention areas and reservoirs, all premises shall be graded and maintained to prevent the erosion of soil and to prevent the accumulation of stagnant water thereon, or within any structure located thereon. 12-8-10: ABATEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES: A. Enforcement Officials: The City Council shall enforce the provisions of this Chapter and may by resolution delegate to various officers or agencies power to enforce particular provisions of this Chapter, including the power to inspect private property. B. Notice to Abate: Whenever, in the judgment of City Council or the officer charged with enforcement of this Chapter, it is determined that a violation hereof is being maintained or exists within the City, such officer shall notify in writing the person committing or maintaining such violation and the owner of the property and require them to remedy such violation and to remove such conditions or remedy such defects. Such written notice shall be delivered to the person committing or maintaining violation and the owner of the property or may be delivered by mail. If the property is not occupied and the address of the owner is unknown, service on the owner may be accomplished in the manner specified for service in Rule 4 in the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, except in the case of an emergency and then in such case, service shall be accomplished after posting such notice for twenty four (24) hours. Such notice shall require the owner or occupant of the property, or both, to take corrective steps within a time as defined by the officer charged with enforcement to remedy such violations, such steps and time to be designated in the notice, but the maximum time to remedy a violation after service of such 7 MH Planning Commission 8/28/2012, Page 20 notice shall not exceed one hundred twenty (120) days. In the case of severe financial or physical hardship, the Council may grant an extension to the time limit. Said violation shall be corrected "immediately" in the case of imminent danger to the public health, safety, or welfare. Service of notice may be proven by filing an affidavit of service in the office of the City Clerk setting forth the manner and time thereof. C. Report of Failure to Abate: When notice so given is not complied with, such noncompliance shall be reported forthwith to the city for such action as may be necessary and deemed advisable to abate and enjoin further continuation of such nuisance, including referring the matter to the City's prosecuting attorney to pursue a judicial remedy on behalf of the City. A violation of this Chapter shall be subject to a penalty as provided in section 1-4-1 of this Code. D. Abatement by City: In the event the City chooses to abate said violation, the City shall adopt a resolution setting forth the specific details of the corrective matters to be taken. A copy of the resolution shall be sent to the property owner by certified mail and if the violation is not abated within ten (10) days of the mailing of said resolution, the City shall take all actions necessary to abate said violation, keeping accurate records of the cost of the same. E. Costs to Owner: The Finance Director shall prepare a bill and mail it to the owner of the property for the costs incurred by the City, including, but not limited to, administrative costs, attorney fees and costs and the costs of any outside contractor engaged by the city to correct such violation, and thereupon the amount shall be immediately due and payable to the City (the "bill"). F. Special Tax Assessment: If the bill is not paid to the City within twenty (20) days after the mailing of the bill, the City Clerk shall extend the costs of abating the violation as a special tax assessment against the property upon which the violation was located, and such special tax assessment shall, at the time of certifying taxes to the County Auditor, be certified for collection as other special taxes and assessments are certified and collected. The City Council may specify an additional penalty for such special fax assessment collections. E:3