Loading...
2005-03-30 Planning Comm MinutesPlanning Commission Meeting March 30, 2005 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 30, 2005 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, March 30, 2005 in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:30 pm. The following Commissioners were present: Commissioners B. McManus, Miller, Dolan, Hesse, and M. McManus. Those excused: Chair Lorberbaum and Commissioner Betlej. City Staff present were City Engineer Sue McDermott and Administrative Assistant Patrick C. Hollister. Also present was Planner Steve Grittman. Minutes were recorded by Becki Shaffer. ELECTION OF ACTING CHAIR COMMISSIONER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS, TO APPOINT COMMISSION DOLAN AS ACTING CHAIR FOR THE MARCH 30, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. _5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED Approval of February 22, 2005 Minutes Staff has provided the Commissioners with a revised copy of the minutes that reflect changes recently submitted by Chair Lorberbaum. Other corrections are as follows: Page 3, 2 "d paragraph, 7th bullet should read: "Relating to the "Bill ", it seems that if the bill is not paid within a period of time, it automatically becomes a special tax against the Qty, which gives the property owner a long time to pay the bill. Mr. Hollister said there could be a penalty tax applied." Page 4, 9th paragraph, should read: "Commissioner M. McManus referred to the fire department's comments, and asked who provides the assurance that the turning radius will be adequate. Mr. Grittman said there are standards in place that have been created by the fire chief and city engineer." Page 7, 1St paragraph should read: "Mr. Grittman said this request is for a wetlands permit that would result in a substantial ate alteration of an existing wetland and that the applicant currently does not have significant information that was needed for the staff to properly review the application. This application has been tabled from the January 25th Planning Commission Meeting and the applicant is still working on the development of the plans and is currently not prepared to come before the Planning Commission." Page 10, motion should read: "COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER Al. AICAI A NI B. MCMANUS, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ALLOWING MASSAGE THERAPY OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AS AN ACCESSORY USE AS PRESENTED; SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Services are provided by only current students in the massage therapy program, Planning Commission Meeting March 30, 2005 2. Services are provided only during afternoon, evening, or weekend hours, 3. No more than ten massage tables may be used at any one time, 4. In the event parking issues are encountered with the public using the facility, the City may reconsider the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit" COMMISSIONER HESSE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 22, 2005 AS AMENDED. 4 AYES 0 NAYS 1 ABSTENTION (Commissioner Miller) MOTION CARRIED HEARINGS PLANNING CASE #03 -04 Property Maintenance Ordinance Mr. Grittman provided an updated draft for the Commission's review showing amendments based on the comments from the February meeting and a number of comments that were received from the public. Mr. Grittman said the majority of the comments relate to style or typographic, and the most substantial ones relate to firewood, outdoor storage, and rubbish/garbage issues. Commissioner B. McManus said he would like to have discussion tabled until the next meeting to allow the commissioners to review the document. Acting Chair Dolan said he would like to take this opportunity to allow the commissioners to offer any additional comments to Staff. Commissioner M. McManus said she would like to have clarification regarding the enforcement process and appeals process. Mr. Grittman said when the ordinance is approved, these processes will automatically be handled through the current city code processes. Acting Chair Dolan opened the public hearing. Seeing no one else come forward wishing to speak, Acting Chair Dolan asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HESSE, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED Acting Chair Dolan closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MILLER, TO TABLE THE PROPOSED PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ORDINANCE UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, PERMITTING THE COMMISSIONERS TO STUDY THE ORDINANCE THOROUGHLY. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED PLANNING CASE #05 -09 Richard Chapman Planning Commission Meeting March 30, 2005 614 Hidden Creek Trail Wetlands Permit Mr. Grittman shared a map of the proposed location, 614 Hidden Creek Trail, which is part of the Hidden Creek development which has been recently under construction during the past several years. Mr. Grittman said the applicant is seeking a wetlands permit to allow for the construction of a swimming pool and fence to enclose the pool area. The proposed fence would be placed along the southeastern edge and within the scenic easement area, which raises concerns regarding the potential visible barrier it would create. Staff feels that granting a wetland permit would go against the intent of the easement, and it is further noted that the applicant does not wish to be able to see the fence. Staff feels that appropriate landscaping could provide a screen for the fencing to address this concern. Staff recommends that the fence be relocated to avoid encroachment onto the easement and preserve the existing visual buffer. The pool location is within the wetland buffer and is allowable so long as there are no negative impacts to the wetland. Commissioner M. McManus asked for Staffs recommendation on the type of additional landscaping. Mr. Grittman said the applicant will be asked to provide additional landscaping plans depending on where the fence will be located. Commissioner Hesse asked for some history of the scenic easement. Mr. Grittman said the City worked with the developer to include this type of easement during the negotiations and only pertains to this development; there is no specific city ordinance that addresses this issue. Acting Chair Dolan said it is his understanding that the easement was granted to the City as part of the platting process, and the specific terms of the scenic easement is to now allow encroachment of any kind into the area. Mr. Grittman said he sees no negative impact with the pool being located within the wetland buffer. Commissioner Miller asked what the distance is between the water edge of the pool and the scenic easement. Mr. Grittman said it was approximately 5 -ft. Commissioner B. McManus asked how far the fence would have to be moved. Mr. Grittman said about 10 to 15 feet. Richard Chapman, 614 Hidden Creek Trail, said he obtained signatures from neighbors in support of his proposed fence design/layout. Mr. Chapman said the pool was not constructed in the wetland area. Mr. Grittman shared a plat map indicating that the pool is within the buffer. Mr. Chapman indicated on a picture of the property how the fence would be constructed. Commissioner M. McManus said the applicant has indicated that the proposed location of the fence is a personal preference, and asked the applicant how he would respond to denial of the application based on the fact that it would go against the intent of the easement agreement. Mr. Chapman said he is not asking the city to disregard the easement agreement conditions, but is asking for consideration of a fence inside the area. Commissioner M. McManus asked the applicant if he would be willing to move the location of the pool. Mr. Chapman said the pool has already been built. Commissioner Hesse asked what the height is for the proposed fence. Mr. Chapman said it will be 5 -ft. Mr. Grittman said it will be a wrought iron fence and would be in compliance with the 30% rule. Commissioner Hesse said the plat was laid out with the scenic easement in mind, and is concerned that the feelings of neighbors will not be adhered to. Acting Chair Dolan said he agrees with the other commissioners in that when the Commission is asked to grant a variance or an amendment to an agreement, there is usually a reason such as "it's impossible to do" rather than a preference. When the request is a preference, the Commission has a hard time granting an approval. Commissioner Miller asked how the scenic easement works in this case and asked for some history on this easement. Planning Commission Meeting March 30, 2005 Mr. Chapman said the pool was constructed late in the fall of 2004, and had spoken to the City Council regarding the ordinances regarding the fence. At that time, it was too late to construct the fence and there was question as to whether a fence was needed. Mr. Chapman asked the City Council to change the ordinance, but was denied. Commissioner Miller said that the applicant knowingly put the pool within the wetlands area without consideration for a fence. Mr. Chapman said there is room for the fence along the easement line. Acting Chair Dolan opened the public hearing. Commissioner M. McManus said she did not visit the property and was not aware that the pool was already in. According to the Planners Report, the applicant is seeking a wetlands permit to construct a pool. Commissioner M. McManus asked if the applicant had obtained a wetlands permit for the construction of the pool. Mr. Grittman said he was not aware of any wetlands permit being granted for this pool, and it may be that the Building Department included this permit as a condition to their inspection and requirement approval process. Acting Chair Dolan said this wetland permit request is to allow for the existing pool. Commissioner M. McManus said there have been residents in the past that have done things "after the fact" and were instructed to remove the project. Seeing no one else come forward wishing to speak, Acting Chair Dolan asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MILLER, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Further Discussion Commissioner B. McManus asked if the City has any power to recommend such an action that goes against the scenic easement. Mr. Grittman said it appears that the easement is in favor of the City and the City can amend this agreement if they wish to. Commissioner B. McManus said it would then appear that the City will need to amend or waive the pool issue in addition to the fence issue. Mr. Grittman said the pool is not encroaching into the scenic easement, but still needs to have a wetland permit granted. 4 AYES 1 NAYS (Commissioner Hesse) MOTION CARRIED Acting Chair Dolan closed the public hearing. ACTING CHAIR DOLAN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WETLANDS PERMIT FOR THE POOL UPON THE CONDITION THAT THE FENCE BE LOCATED TO AVOID THE ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SCENIC EASEMENT, WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION THAT THE CITY CONFIRMS THAT THE FENCE MEETS THE HEIGHT AND OPENNESS REQUIREMENTS. Further Discussion Acting Chair Dolan referred to the Staff Recommendation about additional landscaping and does not feel it's necessary to impose that restriction. Commissioner Miller said the giving up of the scenic easement would be a City Council issue. Commissioner B. McManus said the applicant is taking an optional stance, wanting to do the best he can for his site, and that the property is totally usable inside the requirements. 5 AYES 0 NAYS MOTION CARRIED 4 Planning Commission Meeting March 30, 2005 PLANNING CASE #05 -10 John Weikert / Kevin Courtney 1737 Delaware Avenue Variance and Conditional Use Permit Mr. Grittman said this request is for a single family property which consists of a single family home, a two car unattached garage and an additional storage shed. The applicant is seeking a variance and CUP to allow the finishing of an interior portion of the garage. The existing structure shows a small deck and stairway exiting from the second floor of the garage. The applicant wishes to remove that deck/stairway and reconstruct a stairway within the interior of the garage. The upper level of the garage currently provides cold storage and the applicant is seeking to finish this space to allow for the space to be heated. The applicant is also requesting to construct a new exterior porch to the upper level of the structure. The applicant has submitted a letter stating there are no intentions to make this a livable space as there will be no sewer or water hookups. The proposed garage remodel would add an additional 489 usable square feet (second floor) to the existing 1,009 usable square feet (first floor), giving a total of 1,498 square feet usable space. A variance is being requested to allow for the additional storage space, but a hardship has not been identified. The square footage maximum for detached garages is 750 square feet, and the garage is a legal non - confirming structure. A conditional use permit is required to expand or construct detached garages. The applicant has indicated that the purpose of the garage addition/remodel is for long term storage, as well as space to be utilized to work on hobbies /projects. Mr. Grittman said the City believes that the threshold for detached structures are inappropriate by today's standards, and would then be handled by code enforcement rather than a variance. Staff does not recommend approval of the variance, but does recommend that the City modify language in the ordinance, rather than deal with this condition by variance. Commissioner Miller expressed his concerns regarding fire exits from the second floor if the outside stairway is removed. Acting Chair Dolan asked if the outside structure would be changed. Mr. Grittman said it would not, except for the removal of the existing stairs and deck. Acting Chair Dolan said it is an interesting concept to change the ordinance language instead of using the variance. Mr. Grittman said that if the city believes that a larger detached structure is an appropriate use, the code could be written to reflect that rather than struggling to find a hardship for a variance. If the Planning Commission recommends to the City Council to change the language, a public hearing would have to be scheduled. Commissioner Hesse said he would like to know what the code says about "finished" and "unfinished" storage. Mr. Grittman said there are no definitions in the ordinances, but would be up to interpretation. Mr. Grittman said Staff also looked at previous cases with newer homes in which the owner wished to build a second story on an attached garage, however the City Council would not allow for. Commissioner M. McManus said she feels that taking the stairway away from the outside of the building and placing it inside seems to make the building look better. Mr. Hollister said the Planning Commission is not obligated to follow Staff's finding that this requires a conditional use permit and a variance, and there are three options for recommendation: 1) recommend denial; 2) recommend approval; or 3) adopt a finding that this project does not require a conditional use permit and variance. Mr. Hollister said there is a clause in the ordinance that talks about existing, non - conforming uses and in this case, the garage is an existing non - conforming use. At the time the structure was built, the ordinances were different where the garage did not require a conditional use permit for a detached garage as it is now a requirement, nor did it require a variance for the size that it's currently at. Planning Commission Meeting March 30, 2005 Mr. Hollister said there is also a clause in the ordinance that relates to all existing, non - conforming uses that any increase in the size or intensity of that use is prohibited. As an example, if a building is existing and non - conforming, and needs a conditional use permit or variance to expand or intensify, the conditional use permit or variance would need to be revisited. In this application, the request is for a modification of a conditional use and customarily, in Mendota Heights, when somebody modifies a conditional use, the project needs to be reviewed. Mr. Hollister said this home is in an R -1 district, and only one dwelling unit is permitted per lot in the single family zone. The city has been approached by people in the past seeking approval to build a "mother -in -law" apartment, or a guest house, and the City has not allowed for that. Mr. Hollister said that the applicant in this case has no intention of adding sewer and water, and it would be a stretch to consider it a dwelling unit; however the City needs to be proactive in dealing with the possibilities that residents would want to apply for permits for such purposes. Mr. Hollister said if the Planning Commission and City Council decide that a conditional use permit and variance are not needed for this particular project, he would apologize to the applicant and that the applicant could request that the Council authorize Staff to refund his application fees for the conditional use permit and variance. However, it is Staffs preference when necessary to "err on the side of caution" and refer these types of cases to the Planning Commission and the City Council. Kevin Courtney, Project Manager for Authentic Construction, lives at 816 Green Street, Hudson, Wisconsin and is speaking on behalf of the owner of the property. Mr. Courtney explained how the owner wishes to finish off the space above the garage to allow for better storage. Mr. Courtney said the structure already has a floor system and there are walls already framed in. The ceiling and walls need to be sheet rocked and possible a better floor installed. There will also be electrical wiring done to allow for lighting and heating of the upper space. Mr. Courtney shared some photos of the structure and explained how the outside would be upgraded to better fit the neighborhood. Mr. Courtney said there are two outside doors — one on the first floor and one on the second floor in addition to the garage doors. The door on the second floor would lead out onto a new deck, thus providing fire escape if needed. Commissioner B. McManus asked if there will be screens on the windows. Mr. Courtney said there will be. Commissioner B. McManus asked if the joints in the sheetrock will be taped. Mr. Courtney said it will be. Commissioner B. McManus asked if the room will be insulated. Mr. Courtney said it will be. Commissioner B. McManus asked how the floor will be fmished. Mr. Courtney said he does not know that yet. Commissioner B. McManus said it sounds as thought this will be a finished room Mr. Courtney said this room will be only used for storage, and the owner may want to have a table in that space to use for hobbies or crafts. Mr. Courtney said there will be no plumbing in this space. Commissioner B. McManus asked if the first floor is presently heated. Mr. Courtney said it was heated with a gas furnace. Acting Chair Dolan asked the homeowner, Mr. John Weikert, 1737 Delaware Avenue, if he had any objection to a condition that he remove the additional storage shed currently on the property. Mr. Weikert said he would not wish to remove the shed. Mr. Weikert talked about the need for the new storage in the second floor of the garage as he wishes to store antique furniture and needs to have a less humid environment as he is currently storing these pieces of furniture in the basement of his home, and that also, this type of storage would be different than that which is stored in the existing storage shed. Mr. Weikert said he may also use the storage area for work space or office space. Commissioner M. McManus asked the applicant why he wishes to put a new deck on the structure. Mr. Weikert said it was strictly an aesthetic enhancement. Commissioner M. McManus asked the applicant if he would be making any other improvements to the outside. Mr. Weikert said he would still plan on re- siding the garage and re- shingling the roof. Mr. Weikert said he would still like to build a stairwell inside the garage as the existing outside staircase is unusable in the winter. Commissioner B. McManus asked the applicant what his occupation is. Mr. Weikert said he is a service engineer for a manufacturer of laboratory equipment. Commissioner B. McManus said he asked this question because he also wants to know what type of hobbies Mr. Weikert intends to do in this space. Mr. Weikert said he did not have a lot of time for hobbies, but he has a four -year old son that needs space for his things. Commissioner B. McManus asked if the space would be painted. Mr. Weikert said it most likely will be painted. Planning Commission Meeting March 30, 2005 Commissioner B. McManus said it is very difficult to believe that the homeowner is going to use this space for storage only as the plans indicate that the space will be close to habitable, for instance there are fans that will be placed in this area as well. Commissioner B. McManus asked how the floor will be treated. Mr. Weikert said he has not given that much thought yet. There is currently a sub - floor, and would probably put a heavier sub -floor on top. Acting Chair Dolan opened the public hearing. Seeing no one else come forward wishing to speak, Acting Chair Dolan asked for a motion to close the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER B. MCMANUS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES NAYS MOTION CARRIED Acting Chair Dolan closed the public hearing. Acting Chair Dolan asked if anyone wished to make a motion. Commissioner Hesse said he would like to make a motion and wished to preface this motion by saying that he believes a conditional use permit is required, but a variance is not necessary. The reason for this is because the variance request is based solely on the increase of usable space or intensification of use and from the applicant's letter of intent, he does not see a significant intensification of use. Commissioner Hesse said this could be further addressed in the conditions put on the conditional use permit. COMMISSIONER HESSE MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER M. MCMANUS, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THE SPACE BE USED AS DESCRIBED IN THE LETTER OF INTENT AND MORE SPECIFICALLY FOR STORAGE PURPOSES ONLY, AND THAT WHATEVER SPACE IS ULTIMATELY BUILT MEETS ALL EXISTING BUILDING AND FIRE CODES. Acting Chair Dolan asked for a friendly amendment in which the applicant will need a building permit and as part of the building permit process, all code requirements need to be met. Commissioner Hesse and Commissioner M. McManus accepted the friendly amendment to the motion. Further discussion Acting Chair Dolan asked Commissioner Hesse to explain his interpretation of intensification of use. Commissioner B. McManus said this project will improve the appearance of the building, and the neighbor would benefit from that. Commissioner Miller expressed his concern about safety hazards and asked the applicant if he would consider adding a door. Mr. Weikert said there will already be door on each floor as well as windows that will allow for safe exit if needed. AYES NAYS MOTION CARRIED COMMISSIONER HESSE MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MILLER, TO RECOMMEND REMOVAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUIREMENT BASED ON THE FINDING THERE WILL BE NO ADDITION OF USABLE SPACE. AYES NAYS MOTION CARRIED Planning Commission Meeting March 30, 2005 VERBAL REVIEW— Sue McDermott PLANNING CASE #05 -04 Moen Leuer Construction - PUD • Approved as recommended by the Planning Commission. PLANNING CASE #05 -05 Greg Conway / Terry Russell — Critical Area Permit • Approved as recommended by the Planning Commission. PLANNING CASE #05 -06 Sampson Properties LLC /Henry Votel — Wetlands Permit for Office Building • Approved as recommended by the Planning Commission. PLANNING CASE #05 -03 Stanley and Nicole Genadek — Wetlands Permit • Denied as recommended by the Planning Commission due to incomplete application. PLANNING CASE #05 -07 Brown College — Zoning Ordinance Amendment and CUP • Approved as recommended by the Planning Commission. PLANNING CASE #05 -08 Opus Corporation — PUD Concept Plan for Residential PUD • Reviewed revised concept plan based on suggestions from the Planning Commission, which showed the splitting of the condominium building and decreasing the units to 120. City Council also preferred public streets as opposed to private streets. COMMISSIONER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HESSE, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:10 PM. AYES NAYS MOTION CARRIED Respectfully submitted, Becki Shaffer, Recording Secretary