Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-05-20 PACKET 08.City of Cottage Grove Planning Commission April 22, 2013 A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at Cottage Grove City Hall, 7516 — 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, on Monday, April 22, 2013, in the Council Chambers and telecast on Local Government Cable Channel 16. Call to Order Chair Rostad called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Ken Brittain, Elijah Harter, Wayne Johnson, Brian Pearson, Lise' Rediske, Chris Reese, Jim Rostad, Randall Wehrle Members Absent: Maureen Ventura Staff Present: Jennifer Levitt, Community Development Director /City Engineer John McCool, Senior Planner John M. Burbank, Senior Planner Justin Olsen, City Councilmember Approval of Agenda Reese made a motion to approve the agenda. Brittain seconded. The motion was ap- proved unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). Open Forum Rostad 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 Rostad 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 go to the microphone and state their full name and address for the public record. Public Hearings and Applications 6.1 Zoning Text Amendment: Auto Dealerships in 1 -2 District — Case V13 -011 CMC Enterprises Incorporated has applied for a zoning text amendment to allow automo- tive sales as an accessory use with an automotive repair business (inside the principal structure) in the 1 -2, General Industry, zoning district. Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 2013 Page 2 of 6 McCool summarized the staff report and the proposed draft ordinance and recommended approval of the text amendment. Christopher Carey, 9461 Dunes Lane South, stated that his company purchases vehicles to create products, such as exhaust systems, intakes, etc., to mass produce those parts. When they are done with the vehicle, they would like to be able to sell it. They believe that they will exceed the five vehicle sales maximum. Rediske asked in the draft ordinance under E(1)c, is the minimum lot width 300 feet or 425 feet. McCool responded 425 feet and he would change that error in the ordinance. Rediske asked how many cars Carey thinks they will sell. Carey responded that all vehicles will be stored inside and there will be no signage and it is not their primary use. He foresees that they could sell around 12 vehicles a year. Rostad asked if the definitions of auto repair and auto body repair needs to be spelled out. McCool responded that auto repair and auto body are defined in the current zoning ordinance. Rostad opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Rostad closed the public hearing. Reese made a motion to approve the ordinance amendment. Brittain seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote.) 6.2 Hyde Avenue Setbacks Variances — Case V13 -012 J.G. Hause Construction has applied for a variance to reduce the required 35 -foot rear yard setback to 22 feet to allow construction of a house at 7675 Hyde Avenue South and a variance to reduce the required 30 -foot front yard setback to 20 feet to allow construc- tion of a house at 7679 Hyde Avenue South. McCool summarized the staff report. He reported that an unsigned letter in opposition to the variances was received today and was distributed to the Planning Commission. Staff rec- ommended approval of both variance applications based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Jeff Hause, Bayport, Minnesota, stated that the two lots could be viable for the community, which is the reason for the setback variances. Rediske asked if there are proposed buyers for either of the lots. Hause responded not at this time. Rediske asked about the setback for a deck on the house at 7675 Hyde Avenue. Hause responded that a deck would be approximately 16.4 feet from the rear property line. Rediske asked if the city would want a deck on this house with a variance to 22 feet. McCool stated that city ordinances allow deck structures to be as close as eight feet to the rear lot line, so this would exceed the minimum requirement. Brittain stated that he would have concerns about the requests if there were homes directly behind the lots, but there is open space. Rediske asked if there would be issues related to the drainage pond. McCool responded that staff would not allow any structure to be built within the easement. Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 2013 Page 3 of 6 Johnson asked how long the development has been there and why the lots have not been built on yet. McCool responded the development was platted 27 years ago. The minimum setback requirements are the same as they were at that time. These were probably the two least desirable parcels in the subdivision plat because of the stormwater basin in the back yards. He does not know the ownership history or why the property owner did not build on those lots in the past. Rediske asked if the houses would be dramatically different than the existing houses in the neighborhood. McCool responded that they would be two -story structures; the other homes are split entries. The exterior materials would be similar. Rostad opened the public hearing. Kevin McCormick, 7683 Hyde Avenue South, stated that when he moved in a year ago he was under the impression that those lots were not big enough to build on. The neighbors had told them that nothing could be built there because it backs onto a wetland and the lots were not big enough. He stated that in the past there was an attempt to build one house on both lots but that was not approved. He does not know why two houses could now be approved for those lots. McCool stated that the plat was approved in 1986 and at that time the drai- nage and utility easements existed on those parcels. There are easements that are six feet in width on along each side of the lot and extend along the backs of those parcels. He pointed out McCormick's lot noting that the rear easements are also on his lot. There is a 10- foot drainage and utility easement along the front of all the lots within the subdivision plat. He does not know why a house was not built on those parcels 27 years ago; the parcels were platted to comply with the minimum lot width and lot area requirements. McCormick asked why variances are needed to build these houses and why the lots are less desirable. McCool responded that the parcel depth from the front property line to rear prop- erty line compared to the other parcels in the subdivision is shorter. The parcel to the south (Lot 7) has a drainage and utility easement that occupies the easterly third of that parcel, where nothing such as a shed or deck could be built, so it limits the amount of buildable area. The other parcels in the subdivision do not have those characteristics. Rostad stated that if those two lots were unbuildable the plat likely would have been required to be changed. The lots are buildable, and even though nothing was built since the plat was approved, does not take away from that fact. McCool stated that other structures could be built on the lots without variances, including manufactured homes, which would be out of character for the neighborhood. Staff believes the setback requests are reasonable for single family structures that would be compatible with the rest of the homes in the neighborhood. He noted that 27 years ago the owner could have applied for variances to be able to build on those parcels. Both lots exceed the minimum lot area of 7,500 square feet and both parcels comply with the minimum lot widths. Reese asked how these two lots compare with 7663 and 7659 Hyde. McCool responded that he researched the building permits for houses in that neighborhood; the home at 7663 was built in 1994 and is a tri -level with a total floor area of 912 square feet. He did not look at the lot sizes. Reese asked why they are not requesting a front yard setback reduction for the house at 7675 Hyde instead of the rear yard. Hause responded that it did not seem detri- mental to the back yard to reduce that setback. Reese expressed concern about the lack of Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 2013 Page 4 of 6 space in the back yard for play structures or sheds. Hause stated that other types of homes could fit on these lots without variances but he is trying to have the homes fit into the neigh- borhood. Stacy McCormick, 7683 Hyde Avenue, stated that if the home was pulled forward it would be too close to the neighbor's driveway. Aesthetically two brand new houses among homes that built in 1986 would not match the neighborhood. Johnson asked how encroachments onto the park space could be avoided. McCool re- sponded that one of the conditions of approval for both parcels is that a park boundary marker must be purchased and installed on the northeast corners of the lots, which would provide a site line for the park boundaries. Any encroachments would be a city code enforcement issue. No one else spoke. Rostad closed the public hearing. Reese asked if this was a new development, would the City allow these variances. McCool stated that during the platting process, the City would make sure that all parcels were build- able. If someone chose to build a bigger house that would require variances, staff would not be able to control that. Harter asked if the city required Newland to redo their plat to make sure everything fit prop- erly. McCool responded that during the platting process all the properties complied or ex- ceeded the minimum requirements for setbacks and lot area. Staff is not aware of any variances that would be needed to build houses on any of the lots in those plats. He is sure that was case for this subdivision 27 years ago. Reese asked how much brush and vegetation will need to be removed in order to build the homes. McCool responded that enough material would be removed to provide for usable yard space. No vegetation would be removed from the City's parkland. Burbank stated that the square footage of the property at 7663 Hyde Avenue is 7,682 square feet. He explained that one of the previous owners was Richard Hubbs, who built several of the homes in that neighborhood. He was never motivated to build on those lots and stock- piled materials from other projects there, though he always intended to build. Levitt stated that when the Newland and DR Horton met with the Commission in the work- shop session they were looking for the front yard setback to be reduced to 20 feet and the City approved a compromise to 25 feet. Brittain stated that the house at 7679 is on the radius of the cul -de -sac and it looks like it would be in symmetrical alignment with the homes adjacent to it, so if it was pushed back another 10 feet it would stick out more. He stated that if these lots backed up to other homes, he would have a significant concern. People buying these houses will know that there will be limitations to what can be done in their backyards. He stated that building homes on these lots that would meet all requirements without variances could be a negative detraction to the neighborhood. Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 2013 Page 5 of 6 Reese noted that he asked why 7675 could not be moved closer to the front property line. Brittain stated that he would be concerned that a front yard variance would crowd the adja- cent homes. Reese asked if there was any thought to building split levels that would be con- sistent with the other homes in the neighborhood. Hause stated that they did consider that but they want the finished square footage to be consistent with other homes in the neighbor- hood. They could change these homes from two -story to multi - levels or split entries as long as they kept a similar footprint to end up with around 2,000 square feet finished. Johnson asked what times during the day construction can take place. McCool responded that City ordinances have a construction timeframe of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., which applies to all properties. Pearson asked if they went to a split level home trying to keep the same square footage, the footprint of the house would be bigger. Hause replied yes. He noted that the house on the north lot was originally placed farther north but was impeding on the driveway to the north. Pearson asked if the driveways in encroach onto the side yard easements. McCool stated that the driveway on parcel to the north does not meet the six -foot minimum setback re- quirement and he does not know the history of that. For the new home staff is requiring that the driveway not encroach into that easement, so this parcel will have a six -foot setback between the driveway edge and the side property line. Brittain made a motion to approve the rear yard setback variance at 7675 Hyde Ave- nue, based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions listed in the Planning Staff Report. Rediske seconded. Motion passed on a 7 -to -1 vote (Reese). Reese explained that he voted nay because there was no discussion after the motion. He stated that he hopes that builder will talk to staff about other house styles for those lots. Brittain made a motion to approve the front yard setback variance at 7679 Hyde Ave- nue, based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions listed in the Planning Staff Report. Harter seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). Discussion Items None. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of March 25, 2013 Wehrle made a motion to approve the minutes from the March 25, 2013, Planning Commission meeting. Brittain seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). Reports 9.1 Recap of April City Council Meetings Planning Commission Minutes April 22, 2013 Page 6 of 6 Levitt reported that on April 3 the City Council approved the rezoning, PDO, and preliminary plat for the Newland Development, and the rezoning, PDO, and preliminary plat for the DR Horton development. The final plats for both developments should be before the City Council at their June 5 meeting, with site grading and public utility construction starting in June. Reese asked when about the homeowners association. Levitt responded that they are cur- rently working with their attorneys on that and it should be part of the final plat discussion. The Council approved allowing a pot bellied pig as a therapy animal at 8230 Ivywood Ave- nue, as they met the requirements for the Americans with Disabilities Act. If there are any similar inquiries, they will be handled administratively by staff. The Council also approved the Kok Funeral Home site plan and variance. At the April 17 meeting, the City Council approved the variance allowing metal panels for 3M Building 143 and appointed Jim Rostad as Chair of the Planning Commission. 9.2 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries None 9.3 Planning Commission Requests Reese asked about the Famous Dave's project. Olsen responded that the challenge the franchisee faced was financial in nature, but there are some things occurring behind the scenes that seem to be positive at this point. There are also parking challenges, which could be solved with a cross - parking agreement with one of the surrounding properties, and the franchisee is working with city staff on a solution. Reese asked if Woodbury was going to take care of their portion of Radio Drive up to the turn into East Ridge and if County will do the rest of it. Levitt responded that the County's plans are under preliminary design for a roundabout at Military and CR13, which is slated for 2014. The pavement rehabilitation will probably end prior to reaching Military Road. Annual Meeting and Election of Officers 10.1 Adoption of Rules Harter made a motion to adopt the 2013 Planning Commission Rules. Wehrle seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). 10.2 Election of Officers Rediske nominated Brittain as Vice Chair. There were no other nominees for Vice Chair. Motion passed by unanimous consent. Brittain nominated Rediske as Secretary. There were no other nominees for Secretary. Motions passed by unanimous consent. Adjournment Brittain made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Reese seconded. The meeting adjourned at 8:06 p.m.