Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda & Draft 6/23/08 Minutes 4646 Dakota Street S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, JULY 14, 2008 City Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. 1. Call Meeting to Order: 2. Roll Call: 3. Approval of Minutes: 4. Consent Agenda: 5. Public Hearings: A. EP08-l25 Spring Lake LLC/Bill Broback is requesting variances from the Zoning Ordinance for construction of a single family home located at 2485 Spring Lake Road. B. EP08-l28 Preston Reynolds (EM Products) is requesting variances from the Zoning Ordinance for construction of a building addition located at 5380 Cottonwood Lane SE. C. EP08-l29 FMHC Corporation for T-Mobile is a conditional use permit to allow a communications tower with a reduced front setback in the R-l Use District. The property is legally described as "Park Willows 3rd Addition." D. EP08-l26 212 Development is requesting an amendment to the Planned Unit Development Crystal Bay Townhouse development located on the south side of CSAH 82, east of Fremont Avenue and ~ mile west ofCSAH 21. E. EP08-l30 Consider an amendment to Section 1004 of the Zoning Ordinance. 6. Old Business: 7. New Business: 8. Announcements and Correspondence: 9. Adjournment: LI08 FILESI08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC AGENDASIAOOUil.~H~!rfYofpriorlake. com Phone 952.447.9800 / Fax 952.447.4245 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, JUNE 23, 2008 1. Call to Order: Chairman Lemke called the June 23, 2008 Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Billington, Fleming, Lemke, Perez and Ringstad, Community Development/Natural Resource Director Danette Walthers-Moore, Planner Jeff Matzke and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2. Roll Call: Billington Fleming Lemke Perez Ringstad Present Present Present Present Present 3. Approval of Minutes: The Minutes from the May 27, 2008, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. 4. Consent: None 5. Public Hearings: Commissioner Lemke read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting. A. EP08-123 (Continued) Jeff Wilson is requesting a variance from the minimum bluff setback for the property located at 14970 Pixie Point Circle NE. City Planner Jeff Matzke presented the Planning Report dated June 23, 2008 on file in the office of the City Community Development and Natural Resource Department. Jeff Wilson and Ryland Homes are requesting variances to construct a new house on property located at 14972 Pixie Point Circle on the east side of Prior Lake. For this proposed construction, the following variances are required: . A 15.3 variance from the minimum 25 foot front yard setback required in the R- 1 District (Section 1102.405 (3)). . A 5.0 foot variance from the minimum 10 foot side yard setback required in the R-1 District (Section 1102.405 (3)). . A 25.0 foot variance from the minimum 25 foot bluff setback (Section 1104.304). The property is zoned R-l (Low Density Residential) and SD (Shoreland Overlay District). A single family dwelling with a detached two-car garage currently occupies the lot. The existing dwelling was constructed in 1956. The applicant is proposing to remove the L:\08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN062308.doc 1 Planning Commission Meeting June 23, 2008 existing house and garage and construct a new home on the site. The proposed house and garage have a footprint of 2,606 square feet. The new home is proposed to utilize a similar area as the existing structures. The lot area is 19,000 square feet. The buildable area of the lot without the need for variances is less than 1,250 square feet. The proposed structures on the lot have a footprint of2,752 square feet with a proposed driveway of272 square feet for a total of3,024 square feet of impervious surface coverage (15.9% impervious surface coverage). The existing house and deck lie within the bluff area. The proposed house and deck do not impact the bluff area; however, they do not meet the required 25 foot setback from the top of the bluff. Therefore, the applicants are asking for a variance from the bluff setback. A soil analysis was also conducted for the lot that determined very stable soils in the area. The applicant will be required to follow any guidance outlined within the soils engineering report. The front yard setback of the existing structure is 9.2 feet. To reduce any impact ofthe bluff area to the rear of the property the applicants propose to maintain a similar front yard setback of 9.7 feet. The east side yard setback of the existing garage is 12 feet. The applicants have proposed to decrease this setback to 5 feet to allow for the construction ofthe home and two-car garage. The separation distance between the proposed structure and the structures on the adj acent lot is 15 feet. The strict applications of the front, side, and bluff setback requirements create a hardship for the property owner. The applicant proposes to construct a two-story, walkout home in a similar footprint as the existing structure. The proposed structure will lessen the impact on the bluff area by the home and deck area will maintaining similar setbacks for the front and side yards. Based upon the findings in this report, staff recommended approval of the requested variances with the following conditions: 1) This resolution must be recorded at Scott County within 60 days of adoption. Proof of recording, along with the acknowledged City Assent Form, shall be submitted to the Community Development & Natural Resources Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2) The building permit is subject to all other applicable city, county, and state agency regulations. 3) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the proposed structure the property owner will provide an as-built survey to verify compliance with the approved grading plan. L:\08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN062308.doc 2 Planning Commission Meeting June 23, 2008 Questions from the Commissioners: Fleming: . Stated he requested the neighboring property information from staff prior to this hearing. The City granted side yard setback variances for those properties. . Even with this request would the 15 foot building separation maintained? Matzke explained the 15 foot separation. . Questioned staff on the 5 foot side yard setback posing a problem in the future. Matzke commented on the nonconforming lots and explained the building separation regulations. It comes down to which neighbor is granted a variance first. . Asked for clarification on the deck and bluff line. Matzke explained the existing and proposed deck. The proposed deck was intentionally cut off at an angle and is out of the bluff area. . Questioned the developer, Dan Ryland, 13786 Frontier Court, Burnsville, what the total livable square footage ofthe new home would be. Ryland responded around 2,400 square feet on two floors. Ryland clarified the length and footage of the proposed house. Ringstad: . Questioned the additional 150 extra square feet with the proposed home. . Do the variances requested come from the additional proposed footage or are they from the existing home? Matzke responded the footprint was chosen to stay out of the bluff area resulting in the requested variances. Staff wanted the new structure to stay out of the bluff area and did not feel the variances were out of line. Staff did not feel the requested variances were unique. . Ringstad confirmed the neighbors were notified. Matzke said he received four or five calls just asking general questions on the proposal. There were no concerns on the overall design. Most concerns were not to impact the bluff and the deeded access. Comments from the Public: Jeff Wilson, 14972 Pixie Point Circle, said he bought the house from the original owner and was told at the time the house was a combination of two small cabins. He has lived in the house about 9 years. When he moved in many neighbors asked why he didn't tear it down at the time. Wilson said "All the neighbors are in favor of getting rid of the eyesore, it does however have a lot of character." There were no other comments from the public and the hearing closed at 7: 17 p.m. Comments from the Commissioners: Ringstad: . The applicant did a good job of talking to the neighbors because no one is present to dispute the requests. . The structure is not going into the bluffby encroaching any further than the existing structure. L:\08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN062308.doc 3 Planning Commission Meeting June 23, 2008 . Agree with staff s 9 hardships being met. . My only concern was additional variances with the 150 square feet. Without the neighbor coming in to argue on the setback, it tells me it is all right with him. . Support all three variance requests. Billington: . Given the configuration of the lot and the way it sits relative to adjoining properties, these are reasonable accommodations. . Support. Fleming: . My only concern was the 5 yard setback variance but after talking to the developer and reading through the staff report, I am satisfied the conditions will be met. . Support all three variances. Perez: . Agreed with the staff report - the hardships are met. . Support. Lemke: . Agree with Commissioners and staff the hardships are met. The applicant has gone through a lot already with the engineers. . The existing deck extending into the bluffwill be removed. . Support the three variances with the conditions. MOTION BY BILLINGTON, SECOND BY FLEMING, ADOPTING RESOLUTION 08-07PC APPROVING THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES SUBJECT TO THE LISTED CONDITIONS: a) A 15.3 variance from the minimum 25 foot front yard setback required in the R- 1 District (Section 1102.405 (3)). b) A 5.0 foot variance from the minimum 10 foot side yard setback required in the R-1 District (Section 1102.405 (3)). c) A 25.0 foot variance from the minimum 25 foot bluff setback (Section 1104.304). Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. B. Consider amendments to Section 1107 of the Zoning Ordinance. City Planner Jeff Matzke presented the Planning Report dated June 23, 2008 on file in the office ofthe City Community Development and Natural Resource Department. The Zoning Code Amendments proposed as a part of this report include the following components: L:\08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN062308.doc 4 Planning Commission Meeting June 23, 2008 . Section 1107: General Performance Standards On October 25,2006 the Metropolitan Council approved the City of Prior Lake 2030 Comprehensive Plan. At that time, as is mandated by State Statute, the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map were required to be amended to make them consistent with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. In addition to the proposed amendments for the purpose of meeting State Statute requirements, additional amendments are being proposed with the intention of making the Zoning Ordinance more user-friendly for citizens, business owners and developers. Staff felt some of the key areas the Planning Commission may want to more closely consider relate to the following: 1107.205 (4) . Hard surface driveways are required for accessory structures that have potential access to a public or private street. Commissioner Comments: . Six foot door requirement for accessory structures. Lemke asked if this would apply to existing structures. Matzke replied this would start from here forward - future structures. Any remodels would have to comply with existing conditions. Walthers-Moore explained the process for removal of 50% or more of the foundation. Everything is done by a case-by-case basis. This change came from our code enforcement information however, most ofthe time it is for recreational equipment storage. 1107.303 . Parking requirements for Elementary Schools were revised to include the option of determining the number of spaces by the size of an assembly area. Commissioner Comments: Fleming - Does the AP A describe a "primary" or "assembly" area. Matzke responded it was spelled out as the main function for assembly, a theater room, cafeteria, or an auditorium. Fleming wanted to point out the great range of inconsistencies between sites. One elementary school could be more modem versus an older school with a small assembly area. His first reaction was the parking spaces were not enough. "Don't know if we could reach a greater consistency on the term "primary assembly" area." Perez felt we do not want to overburden the schools with the extra parking incurring additional construction costs. His concern was "We're doing this for how many times a year?" L:\08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN062308.doc 5 Planning Commission Meeting June 23, 2008 Matzke explained staff looked at the differences between the elementary, middle schools and high school events with the different demands - presentations, sports, concerts, etc. Walthers-Moore said staffwill be looking at updating the ordinance and making it more "green". Staff will look at this issue more closely. Perez asked ifthere has been any dialogue with the schools. Walthers-Moore responded staffwill bring back the entire ordinance for review before it goes to the City Council. Staffwill take another look at the Commissioners' concerns. Lemke would like some feedback from the School District. Staff will look into the matter. Billington said there are current criteria set forth by AP A so we're not out of bounds but subject to further review. . Transportation Terminal language. Fleming questioned who the "zoning administrator" would be. Walthers-Moore replied it would be the staff planners. Lemke questioned where the 90% stipulation for paving and striping came in. Matzke explained the parking conditions and how this would typically be used in a larger area i.e. for a facility having over 500 parking stalls. Walthers-Moore added staff can look into distinguishing a smaller to a larger user ratio. Staff still has the flexibility if the applicant needs it to say "put it in." There was a brief discussion on grass/open space areas that could be used for occasional parking for events. Lemke suggested it might be more appropriate to have 50% requirement instead of 90%. 1107.700 . All temporary, portable, and banner signs were given the same display timeframe (30 days, 3 times per year) Commissioner Comments: Fleming and staff clarified the temporary sign 30 day time limit. Fleming asked ifthere were concerns with the temporary sign 14 day restriction. Walthers- Moore explained the process and said she contacted the Prior Lake Chamber of Commerce to get information from the businesses. The ordinance is really a compromise. Perez confirmed all the temporary signs were 30 consecutive days three times a year. The Commissioners felt it made sense. 1107.710 . Wetland buffer signs were added to the list of sign regulations. L:\08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN062308.doc 6 Planning Commission Meeting June 23, 2008 No comments. 1107.2005 . Bufferyard A was removed, (no longer applicable). No comments. 1107.2303 . Further clarification regarding what constitutes a remodel project for a non- conforming structure remaining in a non-conforming state vs. a new construction project which must comply with current ordinance standards. Commissioner Comments: Lemke questioned if the clarification applies to the entire section. Matzke replied it could apply to the entire section - signs, parking. The Commissioners agreed. Lemke questioned if staff specifically took the "landmark" signs (regional significance) out of the section. Matzke replied they wanted it identified under a different ordinance. Perez felt it should be noted. 6. Old Business: 7. New Business: 8. Announcements and Correspondence: Walthers-Moore - Reminder - compost site will be open this Saturday (June 28th). 9. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Connie Carlson Recording Secretary L:\08 FILES\08 PLANNING COMMISSION\08 PC MINUTES\MN062308.doc 7