Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-11-26 MINUTESCity of Cottage Grove Planning Commission November 26, 2007 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Planning Commission was duly held at City Hall, 7516 – 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota on the 26th day of November 2007, in the Council Chambers and telecast on local Government Cable Channel 16. Call to Order Chairperson Thiede called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Ken Brittain, Tina Folch-Freiermuth, Obid Hofland, Steve Messick, Tracy Poncin, Chris Reese, David Thiede, Chris Willhite Staff Present: Howard Blin, Community Development Director John McCool, Senior Planner Mark Grossklaus, City Council Approval of Agenda Reese made a motion to approve the agenda. Hofland seconded. Motion approved unani- mously (8-0 vote). Open Forum Chairperson Thiede asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non- agenda item. No one addressed the Commission. Chair’s Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Chairperson Thiede explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, and that the City Council makes all final decisions. In addi- tion, he explained the process of conducting a public hearing and requested that any person wishing to speak should come to the microphone and state their full name and address for the public record. Public Hearings and Application Reviews 6.1 Variance: Front Setback at 7793 – 69th Street Court – Case V07-060 Charles Goggin, Jr., 7793 – 69th Street Court South, has applied for a variance to City Code Title 11-9D-5, Development Standards for the R-3 Single Family Residential District, to allow a front porch to set back 20 feet from the front property line when the minimum front setback is 30 feet. Planning Commission Minutes November 26, 2007 Page 2 of 4 McCool summarized the planning staff report and recommended approval based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Thiede opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Thiede closed the public hearing. Poncin asked the applicant about the function of the addition. Charles Goggin, 7793 – 69th Street Court South, stated that it would be an open porch on the front of the house. The same vinyl siding as on the rest of the house will be installed on the top peak. Brittain made a motion to recommend approval of the front setback variance at 7793 – 69th Street Court subject to the conditions listed below. Poncin seconded the motion. 1. The exterior materials and color for the 10-foot by 23.5-foot porch addition must be similar to the principal structure. 2. The property owner must complete a building permit application and be issued a building permit before any construction begins. Motion passed unanimously (8-to-0 vote). 6.2 Variance: Front Setback at 8288 Jeffery Avenue – Case V07-062 Dan Luskey, 8288 Jeffery Avenue South, has applied for a variance to City Code Title 11-9E-5, Development Standards for the R-4 Low Density Residential District, to allow a front porch to set back 22 feet from the front property line when the minimum front setback is 30 feet. McCool summarized the planning staff report. He stated that by mail a letter was received from the neighboring property owner at 8302 Jeffery Avenue in support of the variance application. He recommended approval based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Thiede opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Thiede closed the public hearing. Messick made a motion to recommend approval of the front setback variance at 8288 Jeffery Avenue South subject to the conditions listed below. Brittain seconded. 1. The exterior materials and color for the 9-foot by 20.2-foot addition must be similar to the principal structure. 2. The property owner must complete a building permit application and be issued a building permit before any construction begins. Motion passed unanimously (8-to-0 vote). 6.3 Conditional Use Permit: TTM Antenna on Water Tower – Case CUP07-061 TTM – Telecom Transport Management, Inc. has applied for a conditional use permit to allow installation of an antenna on the water tower in Meadow Grass Park, 6950 Meadow Grass Avenue South. Planning Commission Minutes November 26, 2007 Page 3 of 4 McCool summarized the planning staff report and recommended approval subject to the condi- tions stipulated in the staff report. Reese asked what the antenna would be used for. Dan Pascal, representing Telecom Transport Management headquartered in Seattle, Washington, explained the technology of the proposed antenna. Thiede opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Thiede closed the public hearing. Hofland made a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit subject to the conditions listed below. Brittain seconded. Motion passed unanimously (7-to-0 vote). Discussion Items 7.1 Proposed City Ordinance Amendments Electromagnetic Communications Facilities McCool summarized his memorandum regarding Planning Commission approval for all proposed electromagnetic communications facilities. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Commis- sion that conditional use permits should be required for monopoles, structures, and initial proposals for sites such as water towers or adding a new type of technology but not when adding antennas to existing structures up to the limit set for that structure. Thiede asked about the future of wireless communication towers. Pascal provided information to the Commission on the history and future of the technology. He then stated that he believes that conditional use permit should not be required if a company is only adding antennas to an existing structure that has the capacity for the new equipment. Accessory Building Setbacks and Front Yard Setbacks McCool summarized the memo regarding accessory building setbacks and asked the Planning Commission about an ordinance amendment to delete the section of the ordinance with more leni- ent side and rear yard setbacks. The Commission agreed that should be done. Front Yard Setbacks McCool reviewed his memo to the Planning Commission and asked for direction on whether an ordinance amendment should be prepared to modify front setback requirements. Discussion from the Commission centered on setting precedents with variances, neighborhood notification, and setback requirements in new developments versus existing neighborhoods, types of addi- tions that could be allowed such as front porches, and if other cities changed their front setback requirements. It was the consensus of the Commission to have staff research other cities’ ordi- nances on front setbacks and report back with proposed language that could allow for porch ad- ditions onto the front of existing homes but ensuring that new homes meet the 30-foot front yard setback requirements. 7.2 Review of Plans for Hockey Arena Expansion and Park High School Additions Blin gave a preview of the plans for the hockey arena expansion, noting that the Commission will do a formal review in January. He showed renderings and described the exterior and interior of the building. He stated that the plans should be available for Planning Commission and City Planning Commission Minutes November 26, 2007 Page 4 of 4 Council review in January. The goal is to have the arena operating by October 2008. Comments from the Commission centered on traffic flow for the site and both vehicle and pedestrian access to the arena. McCool reported that plans have been submitted for four additions to Park High School, with construction planned to begin in January 2008. He explained the project and showed the plans to Commission. He stated that the project should be completed by fall of 2009. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of October 22, 2007 Being that there were no corrections to the October 22, 2007, minutes, they were accepted as distributed. Reports 9.1 Recap of October City Council Meetings Blin reviewed the items discussed by the City Council at their November 7 and 21, 2007, meetings. 9.2 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries Blin stated that regarding the lights at the auto marshalling yard, staff is still waiting for a re- sponse from Canadian Pacific Railroad. 9.3 Planning Commission Requests Folch asked about the Washington County Capital Improvement Plan. Blin responded that the city reviewed the plan and sent comments to the Council. He will provide a copy of the com- ments to Planning Commission. Reese asked if there were any agenda items for the December Planning Commission meeting. Blin responded there were none and proposed canceling the meeting. Messick made a motion to cancel the December Planning Commission meeting. Brittain seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Adjournment Reese made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Willhite seconded. Motion passed unanimously and the meeting adjourned at 8:38 p.m.