Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-09-01 PACKET 04.A.iii.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION I as: e. &I a COUNCIL MEETING DATE 8/11 /10 Community Development ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM # A-111 Howard Blin STAFF AUTHOR COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST: Receive and place on file the approved minutes for the Planning Commission's meeting on July 26, 2010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive and place on file the approved Planning Commission minutes for the meeting on July 26, 2010. BUDGET IMPLICATION: $N/A $N/A N/A BUDGETED AMOUNT ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION: DATE PLANNING 8/23/10 F PUBLIC SAFETY F PUBLIC WORKS ❑ PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ HUMAN SERVICES/RIGHTS ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: ❑ ❑ ❑ L-1 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ MEMO/LETTER: ❑ RESOLUTION: F ORDINANCE: F ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: F LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: Z OTHER: Planning Commission minutes from meeting on July 26, 2010 ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS 8(a7110 City Administrator Date COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: APPROVED ❑ DENIED F OTHER • r • July 26, 2010 A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at Cottage Grove City Hall, 7516 — 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, on July 26, 2010, in the Council Chambers and telecast on Local Government Cable Channel 16. Call to Order Chair Messick called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Ken Brittain, Michael Linse, Steve Messick, Brian Pearson, Tracy Poncin, Jim Rostad, Chris Willhite Members Absent: Ryan Rambacher, Brian Treber Staff Present: Councilmember Justin Olsen Howard Blin, Community Development Director John McCool, Senior Planner Approval of Agenda Rostad made a motion to approve the agenda. Pearson seconded. The motion was ap- proved unanimously (7 -to -0 vote). Numilm Messick 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 Messick explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory capac- ity to the City Council, and that the City Council makes all final decisions. In addition, he ex- plained 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. • a. » . .•. y . . »., • » c..,• ry a » Planning Commission Minutes July 26, 2010 Page 2 of 4 McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions stipulated in this staff report. Robert Solberg, 7001 70th Street South, stated that the only portion of the house that needs a variance is the southwest corner. He explained that they tried to move the house around on the lot and removed parts in order to make it fit. Messick opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Messick closed the public hearing. Willhite made a motion to recommend approval of the variance based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions listed below. Poncin seconded. Findings of Fact: A. The principal structure is centrally located on the irregularly - shaped lot. B. The parcel is the smallest lot within the Hidden Valley 11th Addition and must comply with two front yard setbacks. C. There is a stormwater basin west of the property. No other residential structures will be constructed west of this site. D. The screen porch will not adversely impact the view of adjoining neighbors of any parks, open space, or wetlands. E. The screen porch will make the home more efficient and livable and increase the property's market value. F. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adja- cent properties, will not increase the congestion of the public streets, will not en- danger the public's safety, or diminish property values within the neighborhood. Conditions of Approval: 1. The applicant completes a building permit application and the City issues a build- ing permit before construction can begin. 2. The exterior materials and color for the screen porch is similar to the principal structure. Motion passed unanimously (7 -to -0 vote). Discussion Items 7.1 Discussion on Proposed Outdoor Vending Equipment Ordinance Blin stated that this matter came up when the city was approached about the installation of Red Box vending units for DVDs. Currently there are no regulations on outdoor vending equipment. In the recent past when the Commission reviewed site plans for gas stations, as part of the conditional use permit, outside storage such as machines, salt, and mulch was restricted. He stated some cities don't have regulations, some are very restrictive and do not Planning Commission Minutes July 26, 2010 Page 3 of 4 allow them, and others allow them as conditional uses. He explained that the options before the city are to continue to not address these types of machines, allow it as an accessory use and include standards or not, allow them as a conditional use, or prohibit them. He asked the Commission for direction on how to proceed. Willhite asked if the local business requested them or was it Red Box that wants to put them in. Blin replied that Red Box leases space from the businesses and in many cases, it is the businesses themselves that make the request. For example, gas stations have ice machines outside. Willhite stated that there are advantages to having outdoor vending equipment, such as after hours access. She asked how much a conditional use permit costs. Blin responded currently it is $400. Willhite stated that if a business is paying for something, it is more apt to take better care of the equipment. Rostad stated that some businesses have located pallets of merchandise close to intersec- tions and expressed concern about hindering site lines for vehicles. He does not object to having vending machines and other items outside as long as it is done within reason. Linse asked if existing city ordinances would cover if a machine were to fall into disrepair or if an area sees increased traffic or increase safety issues. He also expressed concern about who has access to the machine and asked if adult movies or other obscene materials would be able to be sold. Blin responded that the city does not currently have any control over re- pair and maintenance. On the issue of content and adult movies, he will confer with the city attorney on that. Brittain stated that the conditional use permit process gives the city some control, especially in the beginning. He agrees with some of the statements in the memo, such as requiring the equipment to be placed up against the building. Rostad asked if the ordinance could be specific to point of sale vending machines, so it does not affect softener salt, ice machines, etc. He also asked to see language from other cities' ordinances. He agrees with going the conditional use permit route, especially in its infancy. Blin stated that staff will provide examples of code language from other cities at the next meeting. 7.2 Organizational Business Blin stated that the Commission is asked to appoint a Vice Chair and a Secretary, but action on the work rules will be extended to the next meeting as they were not included in the packet. He explained that the work rules have been amended to include language that the Council appoints the Chair; in the past the Commission elected the Chair. Messick asked if there were any nominations for Vice Chair. Brittain was nominated for Vice Chair. Messick closed the nominations. Brittain was elected Vice Chair on a unanimous vote (7- to -0). Messick opened nominations for Secretary. Rostad was nominated for Secretary. Messick closed the nominations. Rostad was elected Secretary on a unanimous vote (7- to -0). Planning Commission Minutes July 26, 2010 Page 4 of 4 a, • • =411320 • • • • 1 1 Poncin made a motion to approve the minutes of the June 28, 2010, meeting. Motion seconded by Willhite. The motion passed unanimously on a 7 -to -0 vote. Reports 9.1 Recap of July City Council Meetings Blin updated the Commission on the City Council meetings held on May 5 and 19, 2010. 9.2 Public Safety /City Hall Building Blin reported that the group working on the Public Safety /City Hall project interviewed four architectural firms. By the August 11 City Council meeting there should be a recommenda- tion to hire one of those firms. A schematic design of the facility is planned to be finished by the end of the year. 9.3 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries j 3 9.4 Planning Commission Requests None Adjournment Willhite made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Linse seconded. Motion passed un- animously (7 -to -0 vote). The meeting adjourned at 7 :26 p.m.