Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-02-23 MINUTESCity of Cottage Grove Planning Commission February 23, 2009 A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at Cottage Grove City Hall, 7516 – 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, on February 23, 2009, in the Council Chambers and telecast on Local Government Cable Channel 16. Call to Order Chair Reese called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Obid Hofland, Tracy Poncin, Ryan Rambacher, Chris Reese, Jim Rostad, David Thiede, Chris Willhite Members Absent: Michael Linse, Steve Messick Staff Present: Howard Blin, Community Development Director John McCool, Senior Planner Justin Olsen, City Councilmember Approval of Agenda Reese asked if there are any changes to the agenda. Being no changes, the agenda was approved as submitted. Open Forum Reese 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 Reese explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory ca- pacity to the City Council, and that the City Council makes all final decisions. In addition, 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 Cub Foods Garden Center – Case No. ICUP09-007 Cub Foods has applied for an interim conditional use permit to allow a temporary outdoor garden center in the parking lot of their property at 8690 East Point Douglas Road. The public hearing on this application will be held by the City Council on March 18, 2009. Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 2009 Page 2 of 6 McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval of the application subject to the conditions of approval listed in the staff report. Reese asked for clarification on the time period of the interim conditional use permit. McCool responded that it would be from 2009 through 2013. There were no questions or discussion from the public on this application. The public hearing will be conducted by the City Council on March 18, 2009. Willhite made a motion to recommend approval of the application subject to the condi- tions of approval listed in the planning staff report. Rostad seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously (7-to-0 vote). 6.2 Newspaper Boxes – Case TA09-003 (continued from 1/26/09 meeting) The City of Cottage Grove has applied for a zoning text amendment to add regulations for newspaper boxes within city rights-of way. Blin summarized the staff report and recommend approval. Thiede asked if Blin discussed the proposed ordinance with the newspapers. Blin responded that the biggest issue would be a fee for the permit. He noted that during the Open Forum prior to a City Council meeting, a resident spoke against a fee for permits as newspapers are under financial stress and adding another cost to them is not appropriate. Thiede then asked about fee amounts. Blin responded the fee is proposed to be $20 per box. Willhite suggested putting a maximum amount on fees charged to any one distributor. She asked how the boxes would be secured if they can’t be chained to signs or light fixtures. Blin stated that the boxes could be secured to a stake in the ground. Willhite also believes that the reason the boxes are close to the road is so that it is quicker to buy a paper. Thiede stated that boxes located right on the corner could cause traffic problems. Willhite stated that not al- lowing newspaper boxes to be attached to signs or light posts and moving them away from the corner should leave enough room to allow vehicles to get to the stop sign. Poncin asked if it was six feet from any curb or just on the primary arterial roads. Blin re- sponded any curb. Poncin expressed concern that could result in the boxes looking like they are in someone’s front yard. Rostad stated that he is worried about the ordinance being too restrictive and does not believe that newspaper boxes cause much of a problem except for Public Works maintaining the areas around the boxes. Rambacher stated that he thought the original comments or questions when it was first brought up were the aesthetics of these boxes. He thinks proposal would just add more ad- ministrative work to the city and if eliminating them is the option. Willhite suggested that instead of a permit fee, there should be a fine for not maintaining the boxes. Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 2009 Page 3 of 6 Poncin stated that she agrees with the previous comments. She agrees with having aesthetic standards and prohibiting them from being chained to signs, but she does not see the need for a permit process. If the boxes do not meet the standards, then they should be removed. Thiede suggested a permit fee of $15 per box. He stated that his interpretation of the lan- guage requiring the boxes to be six feet from the curb was that the boxes needed to be at least six feet from the corner. Blin stated that the only language regarding corners is setbacks from crosswalks, which are five feet from a marked crosswalk and fifteen feet from an un- marked crosswalk. Thiede asked if the intention of was for the boxes to be setback six feet from the road. Blin responded that the proposed ordinance is based on the ordinance that was considered 10 years ago. He noted that a practical consideration is to keep the boxes from being buried during the snow plow season. Rambacher stated that if city staff are going to monitor these boxes, there should be a permit fee collected. Reese stated that the fee should be for a three-year period, which would make the owners of the boxes accountable.Blin stated that enforcement of this ordinance should not have much of an administrative cost as there is code enforcement staff who would monitor and respond to complaints. Rostad expressed concern that if some of the boxes have to be removed to comply with this ordinance, the city will probably hear more complaints from citizens who use these boxes than have been received due to aesthetics issues. Willhite asked if there have been many com- plaints about newspaper boxes. Blin responded none that he is aware of. Willhite stated that her only concerns are traffic safety and not allowing the boxes to be attached to signs and light posts. McCool noted that the locations of the boxes may not change much if instead of attaching them to city signs or lights they are attached to stakes in the ground. Willhite stated that the ordinance should require setbacks from crosswalks. Thiede stated that the goal is to limit the unaesthetic boxes and charging a fee could limit the proliferation of these boxes. Councilmember Olsen asked for background on this proposed ordinance. Thiede stated that he brought it up about four months ago because as treasurer of the Hidden Valley home- owners association, he asked that the Pioneer Press to remove the box they installed at the corner of Hinton Avenue and 74th Street. He stated that most of the residents in the neighbor- hood did not want the box there. He asked at a Planning Commission meeting if there are any regulations on newspaper boxes. Willhite asked if the Commission should make a recommendation. Blin asked if there needs to be an ordinance; should there be regulations; if so, how restrictive should they be; should permits be required; and if so, what types of fees should be charged for them. Reese stated that he supports not allowing the boxes to be attached to signs or light posts and to require maintaining the newspaper boxes, but he does not want the ordinance to be overly restrictive. Thiede suggested a permit fee of $15 fee per box for a three-year registra- tion. If the box is not registered, the City would be able to remove it. He also would remove the language about the boxes having to be six feet from the curb. Poncin stated that the definition of “newspaper box” should be broadened to include any type of publication and on page 7 where it states “display of certain matter prohibited,” it should be clear that is for publications Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 2009 Page 4 of 6 offered for sale or free publications. Willhite stated that she would be in favor of requiring that the boxes are maintained, no-fee permits, and imposing fines rather than upfront costs. Poncin agreed with Willhite. Rambacher stated he would prefer a permit fee. Hofland stated a $15 permit fee for a three-year period would be fair. Reese stated that he sees the merit in both a fee and a fine. A permit fee was supported by a majority of the Commissioners. Reese asked if other cities regulate newspaper boxes. Blin responded the Minneapolis charges fees, St. Paul is considering it, Woodbury has an ordinance similar to what has been proposed here with a permit process but they don’t enforce it, and Stillwater has an ordinance that only applies in their downtown. Reese opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Reese closed the public hearing. A motion was made and seconded to continue the public hearing to the March 23, 2009, Planning Commission meeting. Motion passed unanimously (7-to-0 vote). 6.3 Electronic Signs – Case No. TA09-004 The City of Cottage Grove has applied for an ordinance amendment to allow limited use of dynamic signs. Blin summarized the staff report and recommended approval of the ordinance amendment. He stated that a change to the proposed ordinance is to reduce the size of the reader board signs from 32 square feet to 24 square feet. Reese asked about the size of the Walgreen’s sign. Blin responded it is less than 32 square feet. Willhite asked where the signs would be prohibited. Blin responded on Highway 61, which is a principal arterial road. Thiede asked about the lottery signs in gas station windows. Blin responded those would be allowed as long as they are less than three square feet. Rostad asked if dynamic signs would be allowed along the frontage roads. Blin responded that should be defined a little tighter because there are a lot of properties that are technically not on a principal arterial but on the frontage road. Thiede asked about prohibiting pictures, graphics, and logos. Blin responded allowing those would be up to the Commission, but the idea was that it is a reader board with text. Reese asked where the maximum height of 21 feet came from. McCool responded that is the maximum height of monument signs. Rambacher asked if the proposed four hours is pretty standard. Blin responded yes, which makes it easier to prevent scrolling or changing messages. Poncin asked if the four-hour limit also applies to gas price signs. Blin responded there is no restriction on those. Reese asked if the ordinance could be more specific on prohibiting billboards. He then asked where in the city reader board signs could be located on local right-of-ways. Blin responded schools and churches, and he asked if 24 square feet would be too restrictive for schools. It Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 2009 Page 5 of 6 was the consensus of the Commission that the signs should be the same size as for businesses. Reese opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Reese closed the public hearing. A motion was made and seconded to continue the public hearing to March 23, 2009. Motion passed unanimously (7-to-0 vote). Discussion Items 7.1 Wind Turbine Regulations McCool summarized the memo sent to the Planning Commission regarding wind turbines and gave a slide show presentation. Reese asked why the WECS would not be allowed in the Ur- ban Reserve. McCool responded those are future development areas that are primarily resi- dential uses. He asked if the Commission wanted to include the new residential zoning districts as areas where wind turbines would be prohibited. Willhite asked if there are any wind turbines close enough to view. McCool responded in Northfield and at Arbor Lakes in Maple Grove. Rostad asked if there were any safety issues, such as ice. McCool responded that the larger units have sensors on the blades that will shut down the system if it is out of balance and vibrating too much. Rambacher stated that he would prefer to require a public hearing process so the neighbors would be informed about rooftop wind turbines. Reese asked where the probable locations for larger wind turbines would be. McCool responded out in the open field areas, such as the industrial park area or 3M property. Thiede stated that the summary information in the memo looked good to him. Hofland supports the ordinance. McCool asked if the Commission supported allowing wind turbines in the R-1 and R-2 districts. Reese stated that he does not see a problem with allowing them in the R-1 district but parcels in the R-2 district may be too small. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of January 26, 2009 Being that there were no corrections to the January 26, 2009, minutes, they were accepted as presented. Reports 9.1 Recap of February City Council Meetings Blin reviewed the items discussed by the City Council at their meetings on February 4 and February 18, 2009. He reported that the City Council is forming a Community Center Task Force. Olson stated that the Council approved the work plan and if anybody is interested in volunteering, there is a link on the city’s web page to download the application. Blin stated that staff received comments back from the Met Council regarding the Compre- hensive Plan update. One comment was that the Met Council is requiring that the staging plan must state the years that the city estimates development would occur rather than the number the areas sequentially. Another issue relates to parcels on the south side of Ravine Park that had been previously guided as Park because the park plan shows eventual expansion into Planning Commission Minutes February 23, 2009 Page 6 of 6 those areas. When the City Council reviewed the plan, they changed that guidance from Park to Commercial in response to requests from the property owners. The Met Council said that it has to be designated Park because it is in the park plan. Blin stated that the County has made an offer on one of those parcels and they are willing to discuss acquisition with the other property owner when they want to sell. The last issue is Grey Cloud Island, of which 80 per- cent is guided Transitional Planning Area, except for a strip of land along the north side of the island that was guided for rural residential. That reflects the existing land use and the wishes of the residents of Grey Cloud. The Met Council says the regional plan shows the entire island being a park so the entire island has to have the transitional planning designation. Reese asked if there would be an opportunity to change the staging of some areas such as moving development in the Langdon area up. 9.2 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries None. 9.3 Planning Commission Requests Reese asked about the Allina Clinic on West Point Douglas Road and why the Planning Commission did not review the site plan. Blin responded that they are building an addition, which was shown on their original plan. Thiede asked for an update on the Home Depot building. Blin responded there was nothing to report. Adjournment Hofland made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Thiede seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:19 p.m.