Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2 June 13 2022 PCM Minutes 1 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, JUNE 13, 2022 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance: Vice-Chair Tschetter called the MONDAY, JUNE 13, 2022 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Dan Ringstad, Jason Tschetter, and William Kallberg. Absent were Bryan Fleming and Dave Tieman. Also present were City Council Liaison Kim Churchill, Community Development Director Casey McCabe, City Planner Ian Cochran, and Administrative Assistant Jess Erickson. 2. Approval of MONDAY, JUNE 13, 2022 Agenda: MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, JUNE 13, 2022 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. 3. Approval of April 25, 2022 Meeting Minutes: MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO APPROVE THE APRIL 25, 2022 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. 4. Public Hearings: A. PDEV 22-000010 – Request for Conditional Use Permit at 6885 Boudin St NE– Gari Crouch is requesting for a CUP to allow for a pet grooming business at property located in the C-2 district 6885 Boudin St NE. PID-251910020. Planner Cochran: Introduced the public hearing to consider a Conditional Use Permit for a pet grooming business. The property is located at 6885 Boudin ST NE in the C-2 district. Cochran explained the site information, proposed operation information, access, 2040 Comprehensive Plan Designation, zoning, animal handling for this permit, and recommended a motion. Commission Comments/Questions: Ringstad: Commented that he understood boarding of animals was not being proposed as part of this request but asked how the application would be affected if boarding had been proposed. Cochran: Commented about separation distance requirements and outdoor areas if boarding was proposed and there would need to a plan to ensure there is no disturbance to any neighboring properties due to the outdoor activities. Kallberg: Asked about what portion of the building they will be occupying. Cochran: Stated the East portion of the building. Applicant: None. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4A AT 6:12 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. Public Comment: None. 2 MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4A AT 6:13 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. Commission Comments/Questions: Ringstad: Stated he will be voting to support as it will be a nice addition to the business community of Prior Lake. Kallberg: Stated he will be voting to support as the required conditions will be met. Tschetter: Stated he will be supporting this proposal and that it will be a great addition to the neighborhood. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN ANIMAL HANDLING BUSINESS AT 6885 BOUDIN ST NE. WITH STATED CONDITIONS. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. B. PDEV 22-000009 – Public Hearing – Request for Variances at 3857 Roosevelt St SW – Jake Peterson is requesting variances to allow a detached accessory structure in the front yard and from the total side yard setback on a property located in the R-1 District at 3857 Roosevelt St SW. PID: 250940211 Planner Cochran: Introduced the public hearing to consider variances to allow a detached accessory structure in the front yard and from the total side yard setback on a property located in the R -1 (Low Density Residential) zoning district. Cochran explained the history, current circumstances, issues, and recommended a motion. Commission Comments/Questions: Tschetter: Confirmed the garage was a detached accessory structure and not attached to the principal structure. Cochran: Replied yes, it is a detached structure. Tschetter: Asked about the side yard setback variance of seven inches and if there was any discussion about positioning the garage to avoid one of the variances. Cochran: Property owner wanted to maintain 5 ft of distance from the side property line. Applicant: None. MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4B AT 6:23 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. Public Comment: None. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4B AT 6:25 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg: Stated he will be supporting this application. Ringstad: Stated it is a challenging nonconforming lot and he will be supporting. Tschetter: Stated he will be supporting and appreciates the applicant reducing the impervious surface. 3 MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO APPROVE VARIANCES AT 3857 ROOSEVELT ST SW WITH STATED CONDITIONS. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. C. PDEV 22-000014 – Public Hearing – Request for Variances at 16280 Park Ave SE – Craig Kanis is requesting a variance from the lake setback to build a deck on a property located in the R-1 District at 16280 Park Ave SE. PID: 250960098. Planner Cochran: Introduced the public hearing to consider variance from the lake setback to allow construction of a deck at 16280 Park Ave SE. Cochran explained the history, issues, and recommended a motion. Variances requested is warranted due to the lot constraints unique to the property and practical difficulties as stated in the findings of the report. Approval of the requested variances with the following conditions: Variance resolution shall be recorded at Scott County and a Building Permit shall be obtained from the Building Department prior to the commencement of construction. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg: Asked if other considerations were given to minimize the variance. Cochran: Replied the applicant considered expanding a deck on the side of the home but did not want to block view of adjacent homeowners. Kallberg: Asked about access to the deck from the interior of the home. Cochran: Replied access to the deck would remove windows on the first floor and add a door to access the deck. Kallberg: Asked about extending the length of the deck and reducing the depth to minimize the variance request. Cochran: Replied that the main concern with extending the deck width was impact to adjacent trees. Ringstad: Asked for clarification about what makes this a non-conforming lot. Cochran: Replied the lot does not meet the minimum 15,000 square foot requirement. Applicant: Craig Kanis 16280 Park Ave SE: Responded to a question about expanding the deck on the side of the home by stating they are trying to maintain adequate separation from a neighbor’s deck and the deck off the side of the home is their primary entrance and the deck is only 8 ft wide. Tschetter: Asked about expanding the side deck to wrap around the rear of the home. Craig Kanis: Responded about an initial plan for a platform deck and stated they are trying to build a reasonable deck. Kallberg: Asked if the existing deck is a front door entry platform. Craig Kanis: Replied, yes. MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4C AT 6:44 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. Public Comment: None. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4C AT 6:45 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg: Stated it is unfortunate the house was not originally constructed within the buildable area and pushed close to the lake. 4 Craig Kanis: Replied that the home was destroyed by fire in 1996 and they reused part of the original foundation when it was rebuilt; the home was built in 1996 but has been in that location for 60 plus years. Kallberg: Stated that he will be supporting the request. Ringstad: Stated that the size of the deck is reasonable, the neighbors have no objections, and he will be supporting. Tschetter: Expressed concern that the deck will be closer to the water but understands the desire to improve the home with modest improvement. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR 16280 PARK AVE SE WITH THE LISTED CONDITIONS. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. D. PDEV 22-000016– Public Hearing – Request for Variances at 2733 Spring Lake Rd SW – David Fox is requesting a variance from the lake setback to build a deck on a property located IN THE R-1 District at 2733 Spring Lake Rd. PID: 251330750 McCabe: Introduced the public hearing to consider the approval of a resolution approving a variance from the maximum driveway width on a property located in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District. Property owners are requesting a variance from the maximum driveway width for construction of a new dwelling. McCabe explained the history, current circumstances, and recommended a motion. Commission Comments/Questions: Tschetter: Asked if construction has begun. McCabe: Replied they are ready to start construction, but it hasn’t begun. Kallberg: Asked about the proposed driveway width and the additional impervious surface because of the driveway. McCabe: Replied the driveway does add impervious surface within the right-of-way; however, the city code only counts the impervious surface that is on the private property. Kallberg: Asked how wide the driveway was at the curb cut. McCabe: Replied 24 ft. Kallberg: Asked if staff or the property owner has discussed a straight driveway instead of flaring to the east. McCabe: Replied that has not been discussed and that would be a question for the property owner. Ringstad: Asked if the side yard setbacks are increasing with the new design. McCabe: Replied when the initial variance was approved side yard variances weren’t part of the request because they comply with city code standards. With the redesign, both side yard setbacks will be increasing, and impervious surface has been reduced by 1%. Applicant: David Fox 2733 Spring Lake Rd SW: Responded to questions by commission members that they did a redesign on the new home following original variance approval and the previous home has been removed. With the redesign they discovered a revision to the variance was needed. Fox stated he wanted to increase side yard setbacks so the homes weren’t so close and allow for additional slope for better water drainage. They will be reusing the existing curb cut. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4D AT 6:57 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. Public Comment: None. 5 MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4D AT 6:57 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg: Commented about the big change from the original floor plan of home and it makes sense for them to use the original curb cut for the driveway and he will be supporting the request. Ringstad: Stated he agrees with staff’s recommendation and will be supporting the variance request. Tschetter: Stated he will be supporting variance request. MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO APPROVE A VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR 2733 SPRING LAKE RD SW WITH THE LISTED CONDITIONS. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. 5. Old Business: None. 6. New Business: A. Conditional Use Permit Cancellation-Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community Compost Site- The Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community is requesting to cancel a conditional permit for a compost site at a property located north of County Road 42 and West of County Road 83. PID:259210011 & 259210013 Planner Cochran: Introduced the consideration to cancel the conditional permit allowing outdoor storage of compost material on a property located north of County Road 42 and West of County Road 83. Cochran discussed the CUP cancellation process and recommended a motion. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg: Asked when the original CUP was approved. Cochran: Replied 2005. Kallberg: Asked if the main objective is to get it off the land title that it can be used more freely for other purposes. McCabe: Replied correct, the CUP cancellation is at the request of the SMSC. Tschetter: Confirmed that this is not the site of the organics recycling facility. McCabe: Replied correct. Kallberg: Stated he has no problem with the cancellation. Ringstad: Stated he agrees and will be supporting. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE RESOLUTION CANCELLING CONDIDTIONAL USE PERMIT 05-20PC ALLOWING OUTDOOR STORAGE OF COMPOST MATERIALS VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg The Motion carried 3-0. B. Code Update-Section 1123: Nonconformities- Provide direction to staff related to amendments to Section 1123, nonconformities, of the Prior Lake Zoning Code. Planner Cochran: Introduced to formally request a motion to have staff update Section 1123 of the Prior Lake Zoning Code. Cochran explained the proposed amendments will help accomplish the most appropriate and orderly development of the residential, business, industrial, public land, and public areas. Requires that development proceed according to the goals and policies established in the 6 City’s Comprehensive Plan. Conserves natural resources and environmental assets in the community. Staff is requesting the Planning Commission direct staff initiate a zoning ordinance amendment for Section 1123 of the Prior Lake Zoning Code. Commission Comments/Questions: Ringstad: Stated that it seems like a commonsense approach in identifying an issue and starting the process in correcting it. Kallberg: Asked about time to rebuild or repair; the City requires one year and state makes it half a year. McCabe: Replied staff’s intent is to review and compare city zoning language with state statute language and have our City Attorney review it. McCabe added another major discrepancy is Prior Lake City Code requires a variance for non-conforming structures, where state statue does not. Kallberg: Asked about difference between intentional removal of structure which requires a variance and with a natural disaster they do not require a variance. McCabe: Replied the state statute language does not require a variance if the property owner applies within 180 days. Tschetter: Asked if we anticipate any rebuilding on an existing footprint that was previously grandfathered in. McCabe: Replied that would be part of our staff review with the City Attorney to identify if there are certain situations with non-conforming cases. Tschetter: Stated he can see the practicality of not having a blanket approve without a variance request. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG DIRECTING STAFF TO PRESENT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 1123 OF THE PRIOR LAKE ZONING CODE AT 7:11 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The motion carried 3-0. C. Planning Commission Bylaws – Consider a recommendation to the City Council related to City of Prior Lake Planning Commission Bylaw amendments to allow for two alternate Planning Commissioners. McCabe: Introduced the agenda item to consider the Planning Commission Bylaw Amendment to allow for two alternate Planning Commissioners. The Planning Commission is composed of five members appointed by the City Council. The amendments would allow for the appointment of two alternate planning commission members, in addition to the five appointed members. Alternated members would attend meetings and participate in all discussions but would only participate in the voting process if regular members of the Commission are absent. McCabe explained the intent of the proposed amendment is to help ensure the Planning Commission has a full five-member board in attendance at most meetings. Commission Comments/Questions: Tschetter: Asked is there an order of sequence if both the alternates are present but one commissioner is absent. McCabe: Replied that will be decided with the Planning Commission but it is anticipated the alternate commissioners will take turns as a voting member as needed. Tschetter: Commented about the bylaws not including a meeting attendance requirement and asked if there is a specific attendance requirement. McCabe: Stated an attendance requirement is not in the bylaws but the expectation is commissioners attend as many meetings as possible. City policy is 75% meeting attendance. Tschetter: Asked if there are matters that require a recusal by active commission member, would we introduce alternates for a single matter. McCabe: Replied the Planning Commission can introduce alternates for a single matter. Ringstad: Stated it makes sense to have a full sitting commission at every meeting. 7 Tschetter: Stated we’ve been challenged with filling commission vacancies and this is a great idea for the bench strength we need. MOTION BY RINGSTAD SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ALLOW FOR TWO ALTERNATE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AT 7:16 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The motion carried 3-0. 7. Announcements & Adjournment: Announcements: McCabe: Reminded commissioners of the joint City Council and Planning Commission Work Session on June 20th at 5pm in the Parkview Conference Room. McCabe: Informed commissioners there will not be a Planning Commission Meeting on June 27th MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO ADJOURN THE MONDAY, JUNE 13, 2022, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 7:17 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad, Tschetter, and Kallberg. The Motion carried 3-0. Respectfully submitted, Jess Erickson, Administrative Assistant