Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-10-07 PACKET 04.A.I.REC3i1EST CDF CITY CC9UP1CiL P,C710Pd COUPICIL AGENDA AAEE7ING ITE # DATE 10/7/98 � PREPARED BY: Community Development Kim �indquis4 CIRIGINATiNG DEPAF2TMENT S7AFF AUTHCJR m«��a�tr���..tr�.��a.Q��aabv.a..�A.a.4�.$..�.�.��. • , , � , � Fteceive and place on file the approved minutes fior the Pianning Gommission's meetings on July 27, 1998, and August 24, 1998. : r - • � . : r � . � . . . � ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTIOIV ►� ,� ,�! �I � � : , . •� PARKS AND RECREATIOtd HUMAN SERVICES/RIGHTS ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY .-t- i� � REV6EWED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ �' °t ' ■' • •. ■ +' � . ■ - - • r. ■ • ' # �' • ►:� � • . . . .� i. � APPROVED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DENIED ❑ ❑ ° o ❑ ❑ ..; _ , : ,, , ..; . .r ic? r� L7ate d:��a����..������a���.�«�m���«�«4.Q�a�a�«a�«��:� ct�u��i� �c�io� ���c��: � �PP�av�o C� ���i�� [� or��� e:�cROC!�s�r[,�tn�vrNC�lu�a�crro°cou�.n ec e��,,,c� a,v�.a� City of Cottage Grove Planning Commission July 27, 1998 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 27th day of July, 1998, in the Council Chamber. Call to Order Chairperson Auge called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Jon Auge, Ken Boyden, Glen Brown, Glen Kleven, Jeff Podoil, Pat Rice, Richard Sawyer Members Absent: Phil Foster, Herb Japs Staff Present: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director John Burbank, Associate Planner Ben Martig, Planning Intern Approval of Agenda Kieven requested that discussion of tree replacement issue due to utility instaliers be added to the agenda. It was added under 9.3 - Planning Commission Requests. Kleven moved to approve the agenda. Rice seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Open IF�arum Chairperson Auge asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non-agenda item. No one spoke. Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Chairperson Auge explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, and the City Council makes ail finai 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 fuli name and address for the public record. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Monday, July 27, 1998 Page 2 of 10 Public Hearings 6.1 CASE TA98-21 Terry T. Redmond, 9501 Islay Avenue South, has applied for a text amendment to Section 28-19 of the Zoning Ordinance relating to non-conforming structures. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended denial as outiined in the statf report. Terry Redmond, 9501 Isiay Avenue South, stated that he has had a problem trying to refinance his property. He has been working on this since last December. He finally got lt refinanced; however, he didn't get the amount he wanted because the financing company held back due to the ordinance. He had to buy ordinance insurance in order to get the refi- nancing, which, if the house is burned over 50 percent, covers the cost beyond that. He stated that he nas lived on that property since 1955. At that time, it was not zoned com- mercial. it was rezoned commercial later. He stated his opinion that if an area is rezoned, the residents who lived there prior to the rezoning shouid be able to rebuild their homes. Auge opened the public hearing. No one spoke. The public hearing was c%sed. Podoli asked Lindquist under a conditional usE provides for now. if the house was damaged more than 50 percent, it could be rebuilt permit. Lindquist answered that that is what the ordinance Boyden asked what the percentage is based on. Lindquist answered that it is the market value. It was then asked if it was structure value or property value. Lindquist stated that it was structurai value. Kleven stated that he would like to add to the ordinance language the caveat that as long as the residence has never been a commercial entity in the past. He stated that he feels the City should give protection to those whose residence has never been used commercially. Auge asked if the current zoning district and the land use portion of the comprehensive plan update coincide. Lindquist stated that they do, but Redmond's property is a non- conforming residential use. She stated that the intent of the amendment would be that residentiai units wouid be able to be rebuilt even if more than 50 percent of a home's fair market value, as estimated by the buiiding inspector, was damaged. Auge had concerns about how the amendment was crafted as it is not ciear. Lindquist stated that the language could be clarified. Podoll requested that the issue of rezoning residential areas to commercial and the effect upon current residents be part of the discussions on the comprehensive pian update. Kleven asked if it couid be done parcel by parcel on an as needed basis. Lindquist responded that the city needs to treat all like parcels similariy. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Monday, July 27, 1998 Page 3 of 10 �oyden asked about the status of the 17 properties that are non-conforming in their zoning districts and if they were original owners. Lindquist stated that she didn't believe the city could base the amendment on property ownership, only on use. Auge stated that he is sympathetic to Redmond's issue however he's concemed about the legal justification for this exemption. Kleven stated that when talking about non-conforming residential properties, the market will usuaily take care of the property rather than by natural disaster. He also stated that long- time ownership should be considered. When the land becomes more valuable as a commercial entity than as a residence, the market wili take care of it. Auge stated that the market argument applies to a lot of ordinances. He also stated that as the City goes down that path that they understand what they are getting into. Kleven asked if there were any other options that could be explored. Podoll stated that the conditiona� use permit couid be utilized if such a catastrophe happened and it couid be de- cided then if the resident could rebuild or not. Kleven stated that he was uncomfortable with a resident suffering a damaged home and having to go before the City Council for ap- proval to rebuild and the Council possibiy denying the appiication due to other commercial development in the area. Auge asked if there were other non-conforming uses of residential dwellings in a commercial zoning district. He wants to know what type of precedent would be set. Kieven stated that he believes that this issue is specific to residential uses only. Kieven requested that staff research other options for consideration. Lindquist will do so but explained that Planning stafF has explored numerous options with the City Attorney. It had been suggested that Redmond look for a mortgage company that is more flexible and everyone she spoke with had never heard of this problem, refinancing non-conforming residences, before. She furfher stated that the attorney's advice is to not change the ordinance. Sawyer asked if the o#her 17 residents understand the situation. Lindquist answered that they were not contacted. Kieven made a motion to table this item with input from legai counsel. Sawyer seconded. The motion passed unanimously. This item will be heard at the August 24 meeting with a report from the city attorney. 6.2 CUP98-22 Cub Foods, 8690 East Point Douglas Road, has applied to amend their conditionai use permit to ailow a temporary greenhouse, a trailer for aluminum can recycling, and an occasionaB outdoor food stand. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Monday, July 27, 1998 Page 4 of 10 Martig summarized the staff report noting that Cub Foods is dropping the aluminum can recycling request from their application. He recommended approval contingent on the con- ditions listed in the staff report. He further clarified that staff is recommending that the food stand be ailowed to operate twice a month on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays from April 1 through October 1, which is a clarification of condition #2 in the staff report. Podoli asked if Cub Foods had screened the mechanical structures on the top of their buiiding. Martig answered that they had. Kleven asked about the wording of condition #2 regarding the times that the food stand could operate. Martig clarified that it would read, "The temporary food stand shail be a!- lowed to operate no more than two weekends (Friday through Sunday) per month between April 1 and October 1." That means that there would be two total weekends per month. If a food stand operates only on Friday, that wouid count as one weekend. Kieven then inquired about condition #10, asking if it applied to a heaith department requirement and why the city was requiring Cub Foods to put up a temporary fence. Lindquist responded that the request for temporary fencing was to delineate the area so people did not biock the front fire lane. Boyden asked what type of fencing was required. Lindquist stated that cordoning off the area wouid suffice. Kleven asked if the food stand operation consisted of a for-profit enterprise for Cub or their subcontractor and would the proposed limitation on sales activity affect fundraising efforts by various sports teams and other entities. He further asked if this would affect the activi- ties of TCF Bank. Lindquist responded that, whether for-profit or non-profit, the property owner is responsibie and is therefore associated with the use. Rice asked what the difference is between the application for the food stand and the cur- rent sales of hot dogs every weekend outside the front entrance. Lindquist answered that they are same. Boyden asked if Cub was aware that if another organization ran a food stand that it wouid count against their days. Martig answered that they were. Brown asked if condition #3 shouid read Washington County Health Department rather than Department of Agriculture. Auge opened the pubfic hearing. Patty Garvey, Gub Foods Assistant Store Manager, stated that Cub Foods accepts all the recommendations; however, she asked the Planning Commission to reconsider the amount of time that they couid set up food stands. She stated that the events that they host are mostly done for charitable organizations, including Walk America, multipie scierosis, United Way, rehabilitation for ex-convicts, etc. There is very little room inside the building that could accommodate these events. She requested that they be ailowed to hold events every weekend during the recommended time frame. She reiterated that most events were for non-profit organizations and that most of the profits from the Cub-sponsored events covered labor and product costs. Planning Commission MeeUng Minutes Monday, July 27, 1998 Page 5 of 10 Auge asked Garvey if she was aware that other organizations hosting food stands at Cub are covered under Cub's conditionai use permit. Garvey stated that she understood. She asked if organizations could just set up a food stand, or if they needed Cub's permission. it was answered that Cub needed to give approval. Auge asked if anyone e/se wished fo address the Planning Commission. Being none, the pubiic hearing was c/osed. Podoll asked if the city regulates the �inn Companies hot dog stands around their stores and the Von Hanson's barbecue stand. Lindquist responded that this is an issue that needs to be resolved by the Council. After taiking with the City Cierk, staff's preference is to control on-going temporary sales througM pubiic process so conditions can be set. Podoil then asked if there was an ordinance against setting up food stands. He wondered what would stop Cub from setting up food stands every weekend rather than going through the City review process if other peopie are able to do so without going through the same process. He stated that is something that needs to be addressed. Auge asked if the licensing provisions allow different ways to operate than wouid be taken up under the conditional use permit. Lindquist explained that the licensing requirements are more stringent and the temporary sales period is sixty consecutive days in a calendar year. Staff was unaware of that standard when they laid out the Cub proposai for twice a month for five months. Staffs perspective is that it makes more sense to spread it out rather than encourage continuous use because there are potential concerns of the stand becoming a permanent use. Kleven made a motion to approve the conditional use permit subjecf to the condi- fions lisfed in the staff report with condition #2 changed to allow them to operate every weekend (Fridays, Safurdays, and Sundays) befween April 1 and Octoberl. Podoi! seconded. Boyden asked if 4he Commission would consider changing condifion #2 fo read 96 times rather than 12 times, instead of ailowing unlimited use. It was clarified that the motion stated only on weekends, not every day. Lindquist stated that a concern is that Cub may not remove their equipment between events and it wouid become a permanent fi�ure out- side the store. If the Commission decided that Cub could hold events every weekend, then it should be clear that the equipment must be removed on the off-days. Kieven stated that this condition shouid be added: 1) The amended lnterim Conditional Use Permit shai! expire on October 2, 2003. OutdoorFood Stand 2) The femporary food sfand shall be allowed to operafe between April 1 and October f on Fridays, Safurdays, or Sundays. All equipment such as grills, tab/es, fencing, and trash receptacles used for fhe operation of the food stand may not be established until Friday morning and must be removed by each Monday mornfng. If Phe food stand is not in operation on a weekend, it must be removed, Pianning Commission Meeting Minutes Monday, July 27, 1998 Page 6 of 10 3) The food stand shall comp(y with a!I rules imposed by Washington County's Health Department 4) ff a temporary tent is used for the food stand, Cub Foods shall obtain from fhe City a building pe�mit before erecting the tent The tent structure shall be of a�re ietardant material. 5) The temporary tent or mobife trailer for the food stand shall not extend beyond fhe concrete sidewa/k along the f�ont of the store nor obstruct motorisYs view of fhe "STOP" signs that are posfed near the sfore's doorways. 6) A �ve-pound ABC-rated fire e�ctinguisher sha// be stored in the mobile trailedfent sfrucfure. 7) A// e/ecfrica/ connections sha11 be in compliance with state e%ctrical requiremenfs. 8) Overhead elecfrical service or electrical extension cords are prohibifed from any power source within the parking lot to the greenhouse or food stand. 9) A minimum of fwo (2) trash receptac/es shal! be placed next to the food stand. 10) A temporary fence shall be installed between the designafed outdoor seating/food stand and the access drive for motor vehicles. This fencing shall not encroach on the access drive. Temporarv Greenhouse 11) A building permit for the temporary greenhouse shall be issued by the City before the temporary structure is erected. A building permit is required for each year fhe temporary greenhouse is used on the property. 12) The temporary greenhouse shall setback a minimum of 20 feet from fhe property line along East Poinf Dougias Road and 20 feef from the back of fhe curb for that portion of private drive providing access info Cub Foods parkfng lot. 93) The femporary greenhouse and outdoor display and sa/e of nursery products and merchandise sha!/ be a/lowed between April 1 and July 1 and located in the soutirwesf corner of Cub Foods southern most parking lof. Christmas tree sa/es are permitfed at the designated greenhouse site and for the period between Thanksgiving and Christmas. ?4) A!/ /andscaped maferials and fencing are prohibited on fhe grass area of fhe boulevard nor may they encroach into the drive ais/es of the parking !of outside of fhe designated area. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Monday, July 27, 1998 ?age 7 of 10 15) !f the city determines fhat there is a parking shortage due to fhe femporary greenhouse, the cify may make amendments to the Interim Conditional Use Permit to co�rect the situation. Brown asked about product liability. It was answered that that would be Cub's responsibility. Auge stated that the recommendation before the Commission was for approval of a condi- tional use permit for an outdoor food stand and a temporary greenhouse with condition #2 changed to read "shall be allowed to operate weekends (defined as Friday, Saturday, and Sunday) between Aprii 1 and October 1, and added ianguage about removal of equipment between uses. Motion passed unanimously. 6.3 TA98-.^.0 The City of Cottage Grove has filed an application for a Zoning Text Amendment to amend Chanter 28, Section 21(a)(b)(c) to revise the estabiished criteria relating to detached accessory structures in ail zoning districts. Burbank �ummarized the staff report and recommended that the amendment be forwarded to the Ci ;� Council for approval. Kleven su�^ested that Table 1 be clarified to indicate that it means total square footage for ail access�� y buildings on the property. He also asked for clarification on Section 21(3)(e). Burbank explained that if an application was submitted in excess of what is ailowed by ordinance, ±he only action the zoning administrator could take was to tum down the appli- cation. TI ordinance would allow residents the opportunity by the conditional use permit process to mai<e their case on why they need to vary from the ordinance. Auge ope�*ed the public 6searing. Stan Wuidc;ich, 7630 — 113th Street, asked if the 40 percent increase is over the 2,500 square f�^t. Lindquist answered yes. Ed Stitt, 7�75 — 113th Street, asked a question about Table 2, Zone R-3, regarding con- structing �s narac�e or pole bam behind the principal structure. He wondered if there was a variancc ; for those houses that have large front setbacks. Burbank responded that the Plar��'rg Commission previously discussed that issue, as the request to construct an accesscry �±ructure in front of the principal structure is one of the most frequent variance requests. Under the proposed ordinance, it can be done if the property consists of more than five �cres. Otherwise, it wili be treated on a case-by-case basis and will require a variance. Pat Owen, 7�'^5 — 110th Street South, stated that they applied to construct another garage on their rr� ��;� �nd were turned down because they already had one building. She also asked v:' �; ;' c�� cculdn't have a pole shed as a neighbor on the same side of the street has Planning Commi«inn r�eetin9 Minutes Monday, July 2� -_. �. Page 8 of 10 one or why they can't make one building bigger. Burbank responded that the property is in the R-3 z^^in� district and the maximum detached accessory structure square footage al- lowable urder the current ordinance is 1,520 square feet. In addition, there can oniy be in one accecscr;� structure. He further stated that pole structures are only permitted within the R-1 and R-2 zcning districts. He stated that one of the issues brought up after this te� amendm��°:; v.�� ;��ritten was to aliow pole-type construction on properties that are outside the MU`? ^, inn e' �-3 and R-4 districts. The Commission needs to discuss the issue of pole- type cer � r. � n Lindquist stated that aesthetics is the main issue staff is trying to address, n�± C� construction of pole bams. The Commission discussed the aesthetics portion c� ?"�e c�rdinance. Owen as!��d �� hy residents in the area around Hadley and Grange are ailowed to have two outside �� t - .,d aarages and she can't on her four acres out in the country. Owen then asked t' -� r.. "` c�onsider her permit for a biock garage that will be constructed in a similar fashion '-'' -- cf :he buildings on her property. Auge asked for clarification on why the applica' - °n� d down. Owen responded that they nave two outside buildings now and ne ' �,�ne. Their one-and-a-haif car garage was buiit in 1949 and their three-c- - � s huilt in 1970. They would like to replace one of their garages with a larger k' -'I�;,� for more storage. Burbank stated that under current ordinance cri- teria, tf rct be allowed. Auge stated that the Commission could not consider her reques� ;'. �! 'r � and that the current ordinance daes not allow her request. The issue being c^�si�'�~�i tonight is what rules should apply in the future to accessory structures. Owen � � _. . Comm_ � . then th� "'o. Owen � ' � ! that ni� ' i', t shortiy ' re< for ane'� � r a� -,: tP � new language would take effect. Auge answered that the Pianning �_' !o reach agreement, make a recommendation to the City Council, and �: �o adopt it. After being pubiished, it then becomes a city ordinance. . that process would take. Lindquist stated that if action were taken � c-!; �fore the Councii at their August 19 meeting and be published I h<: rew ordinance were adopted, Owen could proceed with her plans � rso+y structure. Kl�ven ��!<ec '��r cl�rification about the miscellan���� r�quirements, particularly (a), rvhich taiks a' t°< ,z!.� setback, screening, or topography changes that buffer the proposed structur `rcr: `�c�nt pubiic roadways or adjacent properties." lindquist answered that it is som~ t: �c!'r,�a and aliows the Council to approve or deny a request for an over- sized s :' _: I r ��ked if this means that a variance isn't needed to get a permit if those c n- "'_ L�ndquist responded that this provision is only related to oversized acces� ,. _ �" ; a variance would still be needed. Floyd C'� 1 1` � Pc!n; Douglas, stated that pole barns could look great from the outside and str_ '�ra' ,'.' �ey are as strong as a stick building. He stated that the city should be more o- ��rr ��.�i±l� how a buiiding looks from the exterior than how it is structured as long as it is � _ '_ ,iid'ng. Auge �-' �d "°�±�� �e else wished to address the Commission. No one did. The pu6lic. -.. _. .� ,d. Planning Comm�s�i^�� ""��+�^� �.4�nutes Monday, Ju!� "`, t' Page 9 of 1 � Kleven stated that he also thinks that pole barns can be very effective structures, as long as the Comm_����n can control the aesthetics of the building materials. K/even n�ad^ � rno±ien to approve the text amendment with the clarifications discuss�d. ("�� sec�r�ded. Mofion r�s�^�- - �ni�?,c�,sly, Applica''c �s . � �:�r;�:�sts TIF Distric± No. � _' `"^�i`{�cation Lindqu�-! ex� ,��! �h� modification to TIF District No. 1-7, which wiil aliow for the ex- pendit�. �� o� ` n±he development district on projects that are related to economic develc r+ recommended trying to acquire additionai land within the in- dustri� � r.;, „ ?�,ted the Pianning Commission on discussions by the Economic Devei^" -�� 'ty ''� �xplained that this allows the City flexibility based on what a poten±' '; c'.�: r';: ,�ss would need within the industrial park. K/even rjov ' ��prv ve the resolution. Boyden seconded. Motion passed ananir.- ,,�' Approv�' �f �'- - �`°�n !'^mmission Minutes of June 22, 1998 Auge m� �� �- '^- attendance roster that he was in attendance. B oyc+�.- ,� pass.�: � Report �t�e minutes with the correction. Rice seconded. Mofion 3.'i Ftec=? cf. ��_� 1�� C;ty Council Meetings Lindq� �-` :�� ' ���"� c��ing Commission on the July 15, 1998, City Council meeting. 9.2 Cer _ •,.. _ - _ _,�> None. 9.3 PI�.^,r�nn ^ •?,`s�icn Requests Kleven r^�or'��' Stree' � utility �^ -, !r the w� ; . � ._ within �- �. `� � dent c_ ` he h�d talked with a resident who lives in close proximity to 80th -= r�c ,�;epment of 80th Street. The resident stated that as a private �� I!"� �hrough the boulevard easement, which had a 30-year oid tree, ;,�,ient into the tree, damaging it significantiy, and trenched ��ing cutting through the roots. Kleven stated that the resi- ?� �- !ock at the tree, who stated that the tree should probably be Planning Comm!s��^�� ^ ��i�nn P^�^ ss Monday, J ,' : Page 10 of ' �� removed. Kl��,��n asked if this issue is addressed in the tree preservation ordinance and why the ��±!I��.y �r �- not r����,ired to replace this signiflcant tree. Staff will look into this topic and re;,���rt b?�': t��_� the Ple��ning Commission. 9.4 Re�^^n.�� �^ ^?ann' �ommission Inquiries None. Adjournm�^t goyd^-� r,�c� °�, a�'� Kleven seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The r� ,,,-„� _:�'5 p.m. The PI�--�-��r� �,�,��_ �-,� convened to the conference room to continue discussions on the la^ � , �` �rehensive plan update. City of Cottage Grove Pianning Commission August 24, 1998 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the duly held at City Hall, 7516 - SOth Street South, Cottage Grove, August, 1998, in the Council Chamber. Call to Order Chairperson Auge called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. :�t� Planr�ing Commission was Minnesota on the 24th day of Members Present: Jon Auge, Ken Boyden, Glen Brown, Herb Japs, Glen Kleven, Jeff Podoil, Pat Rice, Richard Sawyer Members Absent: Phil Foster Staff Present: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director John McCool, Senior Pfanner John Burbank, Associate Planner Ben Martig, Planning Intern �r• a s ••• •.� K/even moved fo approve tlre agenda. Rice seconded. Motion carried unanimousty, Open Forum Chairperson Auge asked if anyone wished to address the Pianning Commission on any non-agenda item. No one spoke. Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Chairperson Auge explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, and the City Councii makes aii 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 pubiic record. Public Hearings 6.1 CASE TA98-21 Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 1998 Page 2 of 9 Terry T. Redmond, 9501 Istay Avenue South, has appiied for a text amendment to Section 28-19 of the Zoning Ordinance relating to non-conforming structures. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended deniai of the application. She then gave an overview of the letter from the Assistant City Attomey dated August 18, 1998. Lindquist stated that the text amendment had been modified from that reviewed at the July meeting so that the wording is clearer. Auge opened fhe public hearing. No one spoke. The public hearing was c/osed. There was no discussion by the Pianning Commission. Podol! moved to deny the applicafion as proposed. Rice seconded. The mofion passed unanimously. 6.2 CASE V98-26 Richard and Marilyn Smith have appiied for a rear yard setback variance to build a porch at their residence at 7942 Isleton Avenue South. Burbank summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Boyden asked if the neighbors on either side had any objections. Burbank responded that he had not heard any comments. Mrs. Smith, 7942 Isleton Avenue, explained about the irregular rear boundary line. Boyden asked if Mrs. Smith agreed with the conditions in the staff report. She stated that they had no problems with the staff report. Aug� op�r�ed tlae publi� trearingr. No �►r� sp�Ke. Th� p�hfi6 h�arf�rg �ras �l�sg�, 8oyden moved fo approve the application subject to fhe conditions listed below. Brown seconded. !. The variance shal! only be app/icable to the addition defailed in the sfaff report for Case V98-26. 2. A building permif is required for fhe proposed building. 3. The variance applicafion shail expire within one (1J year if the structure is not erected. The motion passed unanimously. Pianning Commission Minutes August 24, 1998 Page 3 of 9 6.3 CASE CUP98-29 Phoenix Partners has applied for a conditional use permit to allow the installation of a drive-up window for Snyde�'s, 8200 Hadley Avenue South. Martig summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Sawyer asked who would remove the snow from the drive-thru lane. Martig stated that it be the responsibility of the management of Cottage Square. Dave Leonard, representative from Snyder Drug Stores, stated that he wouid answer any questions. Auge opened the public hearing. No one spoke. The public hearing was c%sed. Kleven moved fo approve the conditional use permit subject fo fhe condifions /isfed below. Sawyer seconded. 1. The existing parking sta!ls and islands fo the nortbwest of Snyder Drug shall be clearly marked with yellow sfriping. 2. Traffic flow shali be depicted on the drive-thru lanes with ye!low directiona/ arrows. 3. The raised concrete or bituminous island sha// be marked with ye/%w striping painf and shall adequately separate the drive-thru lane fram adjacent fraffic /anes. 4. Snow shall be cleared from fhe drive-fhru barrier island so as not fo inhibif traffic vision for vehicles entering and exiting. 5. �l01 exisfing Oight fixtr�res along fhe drive-thru Oane sha/l be operafional. 6. The canopy over the window shall be fhe same hue of red as fhe ofher signs on the Cottage Square Mall. Boyden asked if the Public Safety Commission had seen this request. Lindquist stated that they receive a copy of the Technical Review Committee packet and staff did not get any response from them. Japs expressed concern for traffic coming around the comer from DeMori's and asked that that be addressed. Staff indicated they would discuss the proposed traffic pattern with Public Safety. Mofion passed unanimously. Plan�ing Commission Minutes August 24, 1998 Page 4 of 9 6.4 CASE V98-31 Ted and Diane Fredrickson have applied for a variance from the floodplain ordinance relating to access elevation and a variance from the normai high-water structure setback requirements for their property at 8291 River Acres Road. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. He stated that today staff had received a revised site pian and building footprint frorn the applicant. Copies of the revised site plan have been distributed to the Pianning Commission members. McCool stated that under the revised site plan proposal, an additional oak tree would be removed. Boyden asked if the new site plan proposal moved the structure further from the river. McCool answered that the southwest corner of the home wouid be further from the river than the original proposal. Mrs. Fredrickson, 8291 River Acres Road, stated that they had to sandbag during 1993 and 1997 and decided to buifd a new house. They wili stay within their septic and weil systems. More fili would have to be brought in to allow for a higher home but to add fill to raise the driveway couid kill some of the trees on the property. They don't want to cut trees, though a few will be lost. She also stated that the road connected to the driveway was also below flood plain regulations. She reported that they shared the proposal with the neighbors on both sides and neither had any objections. She then stated that the new house wouid be valued twice what their existing home is now. McCool stated that he had received a response from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and they had no objections to the proposal. They did request that any trees that were lost wouid be replaced. Auge opened the pubiic hearing. No one spoke. The public hearing was c%sed. �oycfen moved ta approve the app/icat/on wifh the rev/sed slte p/an subject fo the conditions listed below. Japs seconded. 1. The appiicant must compiete a building permit application for the demolition of the earisting dwelling and a building peimit !o construct the new single family home. The City must issue fhe permit before any canstruction can begin. 2. The lowest floor elevation for the proposed new single family home shall not be below the 700-foot mean sea levei e%vafion as estabiished by Secfion 28-67(b) of the City's zoning ordinance. 3. All flood-prooffng requirements imposed by local ordinances and building codes shall be complied with. 4. An enclosed addition onto the rear of the principa/ sfructure is prohibifed. Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 1998 Page 5 of 9 The mofion passed unanimously. 6.5 CASES CUP98-32 and V98-33 Stu-Mac Properties, c/o 61 Marine & Sports, 11730 Point Dougias Road, applied for a cond'ational use permit to expand an existing non-conforming use for sales of recreational vehicles and a variance from the landscaping requirements of Chapter 28 of the zoning ordinance. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Podoll asked what part of the fencing would the wooden slats be instailed in. Lindquist answered that it wouid just be along the front and the portion immediately next to the building. AI Stewart, 6750 Jamaica Avenue South, asked how the lease would be drawn up and if everybody in the area would be asked to sign a lease. Lindquist stated that the lease would probabiy include maintenance, liability, and depicting the area where dispiay would be ailowed. Lindquist stated that the Council would have input into what the fee would be. Stewart stated that John Seeger told him when they bought the property that the Councii said that if they maintain the area, the prohibition against exterior dispiay would not be enforced. He further stated that as long as the lease isn't too expensive, he would be willing to sign it. Auge opened the pub/ic hearing. No one spoke. The public hearing was c%sed. Kleven asked that condition #2 be clarified as to the type of materiai should be utilized for the slats or that the material must be approved by staff. Lindquist responded that staff didn't want to limit their choices but also did not want the use of woven vinyl ar metal. Kleven moved to approve the application subject to the conditions listed below, with clarificafion to #2. Rice seconded. 1. The appticant pave the areas proposed for hard surfacing consistent wlth the submitta/ dated 7/18/98. 2. The applicant install wooden s/afs or a similar maPerial, but not vinyl, a/ong the south face of fhe existing chain link fence, which would screen the exterior storage area of the properfy prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the property. 3. The applicant enter info a/ease agreemenf with fhe City for utflization of fhe public righf-of-way for display purposes prior to issuance of a certificate of Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 1998 Page 6 of 9 occupancy for the new building. The applicanf wi!l reimburse the Cify fo� any costs incurred in drafiing or review of the /ease. 4. The applicant fence or cordon off the drain field area prior fo inifiation of construction of the building addition. 5. The applicant initiafe a subdivision and rezoning request by December 39, 2000, fo abfain the portion of the adjoining property currenfly being used for the commercial enterprise. The area, eifher on or otf-site, dedicated to the commercial use cannot be expanded without these actions, even with the approval of the adjoining property owner. Sawyer asked what the fencing would be screening. Stewart responded that it would be boats, snowmobiles, and other items that they seli. He stated that they are planning to use brown-painted wooden slats in the fence. He further stated that there are trees, some of which they planted, and a cornfield in the rear. Sawyer asked if automobiles wouid also be sold. Lindquist answered that the applicant initially applied to sell autos but deleted that portion the application. The motion passed unanimously. 6.6 CASE V98-34 Paul and Paula Runze have applied for a variance to Section 28-73(c}(1) of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Overlay District to reduce the 100-foot structure setback from a btuffline requirement of the city's zoning ordinance to construct a garage on their property at 11931 Lofton Avenue South. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended denial based on the ordinance criteria, a lack of sufficient findings, and the availability of other siting or construction nptic�ns wiYhouf ih� need oi a variance. lindquist explained what the City's Oiability wouid be due to the error in issuing the building permit. She referenced a letter issued by the City Attorney, who stated that, in general, cities are immune from tort liability from negligent acts in connection with issuance of building permits. She passed out a letter from the Department of Natural Resources and expiained that the DNR had not received a copy of the staff report, which was an oversight. Auge opened the public hearing. Paul Runze, 11931 Lofton Avenue South, read a letter, dated August 24, 1998, that he wrote to the Planning Commission and City Councii asking for approvai of his variance. Boyden asked if the size of the structure was in question. Runze answered that it was the height of the structure that had been previously questioned. To avoid a height variance, he Pianning Commission Minutes August 24, 1998 Page 7 of 9 incorporated a flat roof into the structure. He explained that he plans to store a boat in the proposed garage. Sawyer asked what type of structure is planned. Runze stated that it would be a frame structure and would match the house. Sawyer then asked if the bluffline paralleled the river and if the garage wouid obstruct the view. Runze answered that the bluffline is perpendicular to the river and that the strucfure would not obstruct river views for adjoining neighbors. Del Nelson, 11801 Lockridge Avenue South, stated that they were not informed of the construction of a garage on the bluffiine. He stated that he believes it would be a dangerous precedent to allow a structure to be built close to the biuff. He further stated that he observed Runze removing trees in the ravine. Nelson wondered if Runze was planning to convert the garage to a guesthouse due to its large size. Runze stated that he did cut down some trees but stopped when the Neisons took issue with it. He explained that he was unaware of the biuff setback ordinance when he applied for the building permit. He further expiained that the structure would be used as a garage and that there would be no further cutting of trees without the permission of the DNR. Sawyer asked if the slab that has already been poured would be for the entire size of the garage and what types of trees were removed. Runze answered that the trees were primarily softwood trees but some were hardwood. Japs asked if Runze had filed a request with the Department of Natural Resources. Runze answered that he was not aware that this was required until his project was stopped. Lindquist stated that the City usualiy �otifies the DNR. Boyden asked if the location of slab would cause erosion control concerns and if it is within the confines of Runze's property or if he is asking for a variance to go closer to the bluffiine. Lindquist answered that the slab is very close to the bluffline, and some fill was brought in to eievate the carner elosest to the biuffline. The slab is within Runze's property. Boyden then asked what the setback was. Lindquist answered that it is 10 feet from the bluff. Auge stated that he visited the site and that there is not much room between the end of the slab and the bluff. Lindquist showed a pervious survey of the parcel to the Commission explaining where things are situated on the site. Japs asked what type of soil is on the site and if the slab was sitting on a rock sheif. Runze stated that when the excavator prepared the area for the slab, they removed the soil that they determined was not appropriate and brought in clean fiil. He further stated that there was no bedrock under the slab. Podoll stated that he feit the setback from the bluffline is the issue that the Commission should be concerned about. Sawyer stated that they shouid also be concerned about what Planning Commission Mi�utes August 24, 1998 Page 8 of 9 the building is built on because it could fall down the biuff. He also stated that the DNR wouid probably recommend denial of the permit. Lindquist ciarified that the DNR's recommendation would be advisory and the City Council would take that under consideration along with other pertinent information. Auge reiterated that the DNR provides an advisory opinion to the City and it is the C+ty Council's decision to approve or deny. Sawyer stated that the City shouid not ignore the DNR's recommendation. Boyden asked if this structure coUld have been placed on this property in its existing size if ail the information were known prior to the permit application. lindquist stated that staff would have explored other options with the applicant but other locations may have required a setback variance. Runze stated that that the garage wiii be 1,400 square feet and would not look right in the front yard. He stated that the issue is erosion cont�ol and he doesn't understand how the slab in that location is changing the runoff in the area. He said that it was engineered to aliow rainwater to drain past the garage. Boyden asked if the design of the garage included gutters. Runze answered that he was wiiling to add gutters with downspouts that would keep the water away from the base of the buiiding and that the water will drain into the ravine eventually. Rice moved to deny the application. Japs seconded. Boyden asked what the staff recommendation was. Lindquist stated that it was for denial. Runze stated that he was told one of his options was to keep the slab. He asked what the problem was with putting a garage on top of the siab if the slab, and associated erosion issues, could remain. Rice changed his motion to include removal of fhe slab. Sawyer asked if the plans would be submitted to the DNR even if the application were denied. Lindquist stated that the plans would be submitted to the DNR prior to the City Council meeting. Lindquist then explained that the bluff setback ordinance relates to s4rue4ures and stafifs policy is that slabs are like driveways and are not viewed as structures. Japs stated that he wouid like to make a recommendation to the City Council that while additional information will be made available to them from the DNR that the Council recognize the Commission's position. Auge clarified that the motion on the tabie was to recommend denial and that the second motio� died due to lack of a second. Mofion to deny failed on a vote of 3 to 5. Kleven moved to approve the varianee because of siting ditficulties due to fhe presence of two ravines on the property. Podoll seconded. Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 1998 Page 9 of 9 Motion passed on a vote of 5 to 3(Japs, Rice, Sawyer). Applications and Requests None. Approval of Minutes of July 27, 1998 Boyden moved to approve fhe minufes. Japs seconded. Motion passed unanimously. •.. 9.1 Recap of August City Councit Meetings Lindquist updated the Planning Commission on the August 5 and August 19, 1998, City Council meetings. 9.2 Committee Meetings Lindquist stated that John Fredrickson, Recreation Director, has been invited to give a presentation at the September 14, 1998, Planning Commission Workshop to discuss the Parks portion of the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that the focus at that workshop will be on the parks and historic preservation elements of the plan. 9.3 Planning Commission Requests None. 9.4 Response to Ptanning Commission Inquiries Auge stated that included with the Rlanning C�mmissian packet was a response tc the inquiry last month regarding tree preservation. There were no comments from the Commission on the response. Adjournment. Podo(l moved for adjournment. Japs seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.