Loading...
2008.11.10 PC Meeting PacketCRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION AGENC Monday November 10, 2008 7:00 p.m. Crystal City Hall — Council Chamk 4141 Douglas Dr N A. CALL TO ORDER B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 13, 2008 regular meeting* C. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Consider Application 2008-14 for a Variance to reduce the rear (west) setback at 790032 nd PI N.* 2. Consider Application 2008-15 to amend City Code Section 515.33 Subd. 8 a) 2) regarding tree houses.* D. OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS F. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. City Council actions on recent Planning Commission items.* 2. Staff preview of likely agenda items for December 8, 2008 meeting. G. OPEN FORUM H. ADJOURNMENT *Items for which supporting material are included in the meeting packet Page I of 5 CRYSTAL PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 13, 2008 A. CALL TO ORDER The regular meeting of the Crystal Planning Commission convened at 7:00 p.m. with the 1011 ow 11r, 1111+111v�1a r-�. X Commissioner (Ward 1) X Commissioner (Ward 2) Vacant (Ward 4) Sears Whitenack [Chair] Commissioner (Ward 1) X Commissioner (Ward 3) X Commissioner (Ward 4) Davis VonRueden [Vice Chair] Scheibe X Commissioner (Ward 2) X Commissioner (Ward 3) X Commissioner (At -Large) Nystrom Buck Strand T_ Also present were Council Liaison Ed Lenoch and city statt members j onn J uuc1, J moll Zimmermann and Corinne Elfelt. B. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Buck to approve the minutes of the September 8, 2008 regular meeting. Motion carried. C. PUBLIC HEARINGS Consider Application 2008-10 for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a storage building at 2756 Douglas Drive North (Fantasia Salon and Spa). Staff member Jason Zimmerman summarized the staff report and recommended approval of Application 2008-10 for a conditional use permit with the recommendations noted in the staff report. The Public Hearing was opening. Hearing no comments, it was closed. The Planning Commission discussion was opened with a question from Commissioner Buck regarding whether the plans included a driveway be installed leading to the standard garage door on the shed. Jason Zimmermann stated that nothing was included in the plans to install a driveway. Commissioner Whitenack asked if a man door was going to be installed and asked if Building Code addressed whether the door would be required. Jason Zimmermann stated that when the actual building permit is submitted that issue would be a part of the plan review. G:\PLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\ 10.13 \minutes. doe Page 2 of 5 Moved by Commissioner VonRueden and seconded by Commissioner Buck to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2008-10 for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a storage building at 2756 Douglas Drive North (Fantasia Salon and Spa). Motion carried. 2. Consider Application 2008-11 for Site Plan Review for building renovations and alterations to the parking lot at 5502 West Broadway (Crystal Gallery). Staff member Jason Zimmermann summarized the staff report recommending approval including the outlined conditions. The Public Hearing was opened. Janet Moore addressed the commission with her concerns regarding the use of low impact development, asking whether ponds had been considered for greater absorption of rain water. Jason Zimmermann responded that this had not been discussed at staff level. Commissioner Whitenack indicated that low impact development would be an owner/developer cost and it would be voluntary for them to participate. Mr. Sutter noted the O'Reilly site was an empty lot, not redevelopment like the Crystal Gallery site. This site is currently barely meeting the parking requirements and the parking requirements would need to be reduced in order to have space to add room for low impact development areas. Commissioner Sears commented on the ease of considering low impact development when developing a vacant site versus the redevelopment of a site such as the one that is being considered. He also commented on the need for the curb and gutters to protect the vegetation that has been included in the plans. Janet Moore commented on the cost the city has incurred to obtain the apartment buildings on 56th Avenue and the costs related to the plans to include a pond on the vacated space. Ms. Moore stated that is would be a cost saving measure to include more small low impact development areas where and when the opportunity arises. Commissioner Whitenack recommended she speak to the City Council and noted that the Planning Commission is an advisory committee or contact the civil or landscape engineer for this project. Commissioner Whitenack indicated the contacts were available as part of the public records of this meeting. Commissioner Sears made mention that, in this case, the minimum parking space requirements is barely being met. Commissioner Whitenack indicated that future discussions might include reducing the possibility of decreasing parking requirements in lieu of lower WAC/SAC fees. G:APLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\10.13\minutes.doc Page 3 of 5 Hearing no further discussion the Public Hearing was closed and no further comments or discussion was heard from the Planning Commission. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Scheibe to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2008-11 for Site Plan Review for building renovations and alterations to the parking lot at 5502 West Broadway (Crystal Gallery). Motion carried. 3. Consider Application 2008-12 to amend City Code Section 510 (Park Dedication). Staff member, Jason Zimmermann, presented the staff report. Discussion included comments by Jason Zimmermann that the current maximum park dedication fee is 51000, and that the new fee would be based on 5% of the Fair Market Value of the land and is tied to the number of lots not to the number of units. Commissioner Whitenack stated that this would be a substantial increase in the Park Dedication fees. John Sutter stated that the fee must be spent on capital expenditures in the city's parks. Commissioner Sears also commented that 5% was a fairly significant fee to impose. Mr. Sutter noted that 5% was reasonable when looking at other cities especially the fees imposed by newer cities. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Buck to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 2008-12 to amend City Code Section 510 (Park Dedication). Motion carried. 4. Consider Application 2008-13 for a Variance to allow an accessory building to be built closer to the street than the principal structure at 4552 Brunswick Avenue N. Staff member, Jason Zimmermann, summarized the staff report. Additional information was received late in the day and a copy had been supplied on the dais for each commissioner member. Staff recommended denial of the application for a variance based on the failure to meet the state law and city code criteria to grant a variance. Commissioner Whitenack asked if there is an alley to the south of the subject property. Mr. Zimmermann indicated that there is no alley along the southern boundary of the property. Commissioner Whitenack also inquired as to the requirements if the garage G:\PLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\ 10. 1 3\minutes. doe Page 4 of 5 A were attached to the house. Mr. Zimmermann indicated that it would still need to meet current code and would likely need a variance. If the entrance to the garage were on the north side of the garage, it would need to be twenty feet from the street. The Public Hearing was opened. Linda Meyer addressed the commission with her concerns as to where the entrance to the garage would be. Mr. Zimmermann indicated that it was proposed to face Brunswick but the driveway would come in off 46th Ave N. Ms. Meyer commented on her concerns about having a garage and large driveway in the front yard of a corner lot, the large elevation difference between the proposed location and house, the safety issues that would come from the possible loss of the sight line when approaching the intersection, and what prompted owner to request a variance when there is plenty of room where the city would allow the garage without a variance. Ms. Meyer also commented that she is not being unwelcoming the new neighbor, but they actually greatly appreciate the improvements that have been made to the property, the concern is for safety and aesthetics of the neighborhood. Moved by Commissioner Nystrom and seconded by Commissioner Buck to recommend to the City Council to deny Application 2008-13 for a Variance to allow an accessory building to be built closer to the street than the principal structure at 4552 Brunswick Avenue N. Motion carried. 5. Consider the 2008 Update of the Crystal Comprehensive Plan. John Sutter presented the staff report and provided additional tables on the dais for each commissioner. Commissioner Whitenack thanked John Sutter, Jason Zimmermann and Patrick Peters for the extensive work that has been done on the Comprehensive Plan over the past one and a half years. Moved by Commissioner Whitenack and seconded by Commissioner Nystrom to recommend to the City Council to approve the 2008 Update of the Crystal Comprehensive Plan. D. OLD BUSINESS — None to be discussed E. NEW BUSINESS — None to be discussed Motion carried. G:\PLANNING\PLANCOMM\200 8\ 10.13\minutes.doc Page 5 of 5 F. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Development Status Report for quarter ending September 30, 2008. 2. City Council actions on recent Planning Commission items. 3. Staff preview of likely agenda items for the November 10, 2008 meeting. The City Council has asked that staff and Planning Commission look at allowing an exception to the 30 foot setback for tree houses in front yards. G. OPEN FORUM — None heard. H. ADJOURNMENT Moved by Commissioner Whitenack and seconded by Commissioner Sears to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Motion carried. G:\PLANNING\PLANCOMM\2008\10-13\minutes.doc M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 31, 2008 TO: Planning Commission (November 10th meeting) FROM: Jason Zimmermann, Code Enforcement and Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Application 2008-14 for a Variance to reduce the west setback at 7900 32nd Place North. A. BACKGROUND The home on the subject property was constructed in 1963 with the following setbacks: ■ East (front) lot line: 30 feet (current requirement: 30 feet) ■ West (rear) lot line: 33.25 feet (current requirement: 30 feet) ■ South (side street) lot line: 30 feet (current requirement: 10 feet) ■ North (side) lot line: 5 feet (current requirement: 5 feet) The house currently encroaches into the required west setback by 19 feet and therefore is a nonconforming structure. The applicant is seeking a building permit for an addition on the north side of the house. The addition would be at least 16.5 feet from the north lot line and would be in compliance with the 5 foot minimum setback. However, the addition would expand the house which is not permitted because the house is a nonconforming structure. For this reason, the addition cannot be built unless a variance is granted to reduce the west setback so the house is conforming. The property owner has applied for such a variance. Notice of the November 10, 2008 public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 350 feet of the subject property on October 30, 2008. The following Exhibits are attached: A. 2006 aerial photo showing the location of the property. B. Narrative submitted by applicant. C. Site Plan of existing structure submitted by applicant. B. STAFF COMMENTS In order for a variance to be granted, state law and city code require that all three of the following criteria be met: ■ The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used as required by the code. VARIANCE - SETBACK — 7900 32ND PL N PAGE 1 OF 3 The property cannot be put to reasonable use if used as required by this Zoning Code. The house was originally built with two 30 foot setbacks (south and east) and two lesser setbacks. Having two 30 foot setbacks and two lesser setbacks is consistent with code requirements that are generally applicable to all houses in Crystal. Granting a variance that would create setback requirements consistent with not only the way the house was originally built but also the city's generally applied setbacks is necessary for the owner to have reasonable use of the property. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the property owner. The property is unique because (1) the house was built on a corner lot at an angle so that it does not face either of the abutting streets, and (2) the house does meet two 30 foot setbacks and two lesser setbacks but does so in a unique way by being set back 30 feet from the lot lines along both adjacent streets. ■ The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality; provided that the south setback is increased from 10 feet to 30 feet to what it was when the house was built. The existing 30 foot setback also matches the minimum front setbacks of the adjacent properties to the north and west. In addition, state law and city code specifically state that economic considerations alone do not constitute an undue hardship if a reasonable use for the property exists under the code. The findings of fact support a variance to reduce the minimum west setback from 30 feet to 5 feet. Because the findings of fact for this variance are justified by and dependent on the fact that the house is already set back 30 feet from two other lot lines (east and south), the variance should only be approved if the minimum south setback is increased to 30 feet from the currently required 10 feet. C. RECOMMENDATION Approve the requested variance from Section 515.33 Subd. 8 b) to reduce the west setback from 30 feet to 5 feet; with said approval being dependent on and subject to an increase in the minimum south setback from 10 feet to 30 feet so it is consistent with the actual setback when the house was built, and also to be consistent with the findings of fact that are the justification for approving a variance from the west setback. Suggested findings of fact are as articulated in Section B above. VARIANCE - SETBACK - 7900 32ND PL PAGE 2 OF 3 Planning Commission action is requested. Findings of fact addressing whether or not the three variance criteria are met should be included in the motion. The Planning Commission may choose to use staff's recommended findings of fact by reference in the motion. City Council would consider this variance request and the Planning Commission's recommendation on November 18, 2008. VARIANCE - SETBACK - 7900 32" PL N PAGE 3 OF 3 Hennepin County Property Map Print Page 1 of 1 Hennepin County property Map - Tax Year: 2008 The data contained on this page is derived from a compilation of records and maps and may contain discrepancies that can only be disclosed by an accurate survey performed by a licensed land surveyor. The perimeter and area (square footage and acres) are approximates and may contain discrepancies. The information on this page should be used for reference purposes only. Hennepin County does not guarantee the accuracy of material herein contained and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its derivatives. http://gis. co.hennepin.mn.us/HCPropertyMap/Locator.aspx?PID=191182114003 6 EXHIBIT A 10/29/2008 Bear Planning Commission Members: Our home was built in 1964 within the current the setback codes of that year. The hardship that we have is that we cannot add on to our home because of the current setback codes that are in effect today. We are requesting the rear setback be changed from 30 feet to 11 feet to allow us to add onto our home. This variance will not alter the essential character of locality. S incer�l` . -' e G. Stresemann EXHIBIT B EXISTING SITE PLAN 32nd Place N. CURB - FENCE W/ GATE .. .. .._..... .. �. .. ..... .�... r . . SCALE: V = 17.5' 141' Co x W i NORTH I, IDEWALK 1 -7/ 3 . s' t I SIDEWALK 19, > Q I yea II w '�� 1 10 x 20'6" c c N t NCO�Src. D� 1 ` J G � O 2b -' 12'x 22'9"91 PROPERTY LINE FENCE '' 72' SCALE: V = 17.5' 141' Co x W i NORTH I, M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 31, 2008 TO: Planning Commission (November 10th meeting) FROM: Jason Zimmermann, Code Enforcement and Zoning Administrator SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING: Application 2008-15 for text amendments to Section 515.33 Subd. 8 a) 2) of the City Code (Exceptions to the front yard setback) A. BACKGROUND Crystal has considered tree houses to be a type of outdoor recreational structure. As such, they have not required a building permit if less than 120 square feet but they have been required to comply with the minimum front and side setback requirements (typically 30 feet and 5 feet, respectively). Earlier this year, staff received a complaint about a tree house constructed within the required 30 foot front yard setback at 3908 Georgia. Because the structure was located within the 30 foot front setback, a notice for removal was sent to the property owner. Since that time, at the direction of the City Council, staff has reviewed the code pertaining to exceptions in the front yard and drafted proposed changes to Section 515.33 that would allow for an exception for tree houses to be located within the front setback in the R-1 District subject to certain limitations and restrictions. Notice of the November 10, 2008 public hearing was published in the Sun Post on October 30, 2008. The proposed ordinance is attached. B. STAFF COMMENTS Tree houses are not currently defined in the zoning code. As part of the proposed ordinance, tree houses will be defined as "structures attached exclusively to trees and used solely for recreational purposes". During staff's review of the ordinance, it was determined that options for the excepted setback and allowed area for a tree house would be provided in a menu -type format so the Planning Commission can get a sense of what the different options are. Options for the setback and area requirements are provided below following the proposed language, which is in bold: TEXT AMENDMENT — CITY CODE SECTION 515.33 Subd. 8 a) 2) Exceptions to front yard setback PAGE 1 OF 2 C. Tree houses, defined as structures attached exclusively to trees and used solely for recreational purposes, provided they do not exceed (choose from A below) in area and are located at least (choose from B below) from the front lot line. A: 60 square feet reasonable size for children to use 90 square feet size of actual structure at 3908 Georgia 120 square feet maximum size currently allowed without a permit B. 22 feet setback currently required for a deck or porch 15 feet setback of actual structure at 3908 Georgia 10 feet same as side street setback Per the Council's direction, staff also reviewed whether or not these types of structures should be screened from adjacent properties or the public right-of-way. Requiring screening seems impractical, other than requiring them to be made of plain wood or stained in a natural earth tone, as opposed to being painted with bright colors. If the Planning Commission feels some type of restriction regarding the materials or appearance of these structures is warranted, language to that effect should be included in the motion. The draft ordinance will be amended to reflect the change. The proposed exception would not apply to all tree houses. The exception only applies to the front setback. Tree houses are already allowed as recreational equipment provided they comply with the standard front setback and do not exceed 120 square feet. Therefore the limitations you select from the menu above would only apply to tree houses located in the 30 foot front setback. If the Planning Commission wants to apply restrictions to all tree houses, then staff will need to know which restrictions you would like to impose. RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission action on the proposed ordinance is requested. Please note the Planning Commission must choose (1) a maximum size for the structure and (2) the minimum setback from the front lot line. These numbers shall be included in your motion and will be presented in the draft ordinance presented to the Council. In addition, any language with regards to materials or colors to be used and whether similar restrictions should apply to all tree houses in all yards shall also be included in the motion and will be reflected in the draft ordinance presented to the Council. The City Council will consider the Planning Commission's recommendation at its meeting on November 18, 2008. TEXT AMENDMENT — CITY CODE SECTION 515.33 Subd. 8 a) 2) Exceptions to front yard setback PAGE 2 OF 2 ORDINANCE NO. 2008 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 515.33 OF THE CRYSTAL CITY CODE THE CITY OF CRYSTAL ORDAINS: Section 1. Crystal City Code Section 515 (Zoning) is amended as follows: 1.01 Amend 515.33 Subd. 3 e) as follows: e) Patios, decks, swimming pools, tennis courts and other recreational facilities, including tree houses defined as structures attached exclusively to trees and used solely for recreational purposes which are operated for the enjoyment and convenience of the residents of the principal use and their guests. 1.02 Amend 515.33 Subd. 8 a) 2) (Exceptions) as follows: xvi Tree houses, defined as structures attached exclusively to trees and used solely for recreational purposes,provided they do not exceed (60, 90 or 120) square feet and are not located less than (22 15, or 10) feet from the front lot line. Section 2. This ordinance is effective in accordance with Crystal City Code, Subsection 110.11. First Reading: Adopted: Summary Publication: Effective Date: ATTEST: Janet K. Lewis, City Clerk ReNae J. Bowman, Mayor EXHIBIT A Page 1 of 1 CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS ON PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS The Council considered a Conditional Use Permit to construct a storage building at 2756 Douglas Drive North (Fantasia Salon and Spa). October 21, 2008: Motion carried to approve. 2. The Council considered a Site Plan Review for building renovations and alterations to the parking lot at 5502 West Broadway (Crystal Gallery Mall). October 21, 2008: Motion carried to approve. 3. The Council considered a variance to allow a detached garage to be built closer to the street than the principal structure at 4552 Brunswick Avenue North. October 21, 2008: Motion carried to deny. 4. The Council considered First Reading of an ordinance and its summary ordinance amending City Code Section 510, Park Dedication. October 21, 2008: Motion carried to approve the first reading with changes. 5. The Council considered the Second Reading of an ordinance and its summary ordinance for publication; amending City Code Section 515.21 and Sections 515.33 through 515.53 to allow certain types of telecommunications towers as a conditional use in all zoning districts subject to limitations on height, location, adjacent uses, and other factors. The Council considered second reading on October 7, 2008 and again on October 21, 2008, but after much discussion no action was taken at either meeting. Council may vote down second reading on November 6, 2008 and send the matter back to staff and the Planning Commission to start over with a new public hearing in early 200'9.