Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-02 P & ZCity of Centerville Planning & Zoning Minutes April 2, 2002 CITY OF CENTERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 2, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held their regularly scheduled meeting on April 2, 2002, at 6:30 p. m. PRESENT: John McLean Ray DeVine Tom Wilharber David Kilian Mary Jo Helmbrecht Brian Hanson ABSENT: None. COUNCIL: Council Member Travis/Council Member Nelson/Council Member Capra (arrived at 6:45 p.m.) STAFF: City Administrator Ms. Moore-Sykes, Public Works Director Palzer I. CALL TO ORDER 1.Roll Call The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. II. PUBLIC HEARING(S) None. III. APPEARANCES 1. Corbar Companies (Site Plans, Grading – Royal Industrial Park) Commissioner DeVine asked if the plan had been reviewed by Mr. Palzer. Mr. Palzer commented that the plan states light industrial and the City does not have a light industrial zone. He also noted that the building would need a sprinkler system contrary to the plans. Chair Hanson clarified that the sprinkler is a requirement of the state fire code. Page 1 of 10 Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that Staff was not aware that Corbar Companies was coming in for site plan review at this meeting and that is why the plans were not sent through the site plan review process. Commissioner DeVine commented that a landscaping company fits in perfectly in the industrial area. The Applicant indicated his architect had said he did not need a sprinkler due to the size of the building. Commissioner DeVine explained that the City had adopted the more strict provisions of the Minnesota Fire Code. Mr. Palzer asked if the Plans had been sent to Rice Creek Watershed District for review and approval. Commissioner DeVine asked if the City had sent the plans to the Fire Chief. Mr. Palzer explained that a certain number of copies of the plan are required when the applicant comes in for the building permit and Staff forwards one of those copies to the Fire Chief. He then explained it is the responsibility of the applicant to send the plans to Rice Creek Watershed District for review. Chair Hanson explained that the City does not have light industrial zoning, there is only commercial and industrial. The Applicant indicated his architect had designed the building next door. Chair Hansen asked how many employees were expected at the business. The Applicant indicated there would be three or four employees. Chair Hanson asked what kind of vehicles the company uses. Mr. Corbar indicated that the company is in the sod business so there would be a truck with a flat bed and a tractor trailer but noted there would not be anything outside. The applicant presented a colored drawing of the proposed building to the Commission. Chair Hanson advised the applicant to make sure the signs for the business meet the sign code requirements. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Wilharber to recommend to Council approval of the site plans for Corbar Companies pending final approval from Staff, Rice Creek Watershed District and the Fire Chief. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Palzer noted the applicant would need to send plans to the Health Department. Page 2 of 10 V. OLD BUSINESS 1.Ordinance #4 Amendments The Commission reviewed the Mayors proposed corrections and comments on Ordinance #4 page by page and the following are the recommendations for change. In the Table of Contents, there is no Section 36, please remove it. Mr. Palzer suggested moving Division 90 into Division 165 to make the Ordinance simpler to interpret. Commissioner Wilharber recommended that Staff review Division 165, Division 90 and Division 80 and consolidate them. Commissioner DeVine pointed out that Division 50 dealt with driveway and parking lot improvements and should also be part of the consolidation. The Commission requested that Staff review the ordinance concerning parking and consolidate Divisions 50, 80, 90, and 165. The Commission determined that the word ordains is commonly used throughout the City’s ordinances and by other cities as well but decided to define it in the terms section for clarity. Ordained is defined as follows: to order by virtue of established authority. The Commission determined that the board of appeals and adjustment is either the City Council or a group appointed by the City Council but determined that no change was needed to the language in the Ordinance. On Page three eliminate the definition of Building Height because it is listed on Page 7 as Height of Building. On Page 3 change Building Principals to Principal Structure. On Page 4 eliminate Intensive Vegetation Clearing and then make sure the wording is not used in the rest of the Ordinance. If it is, replace it with clear cutting. The Commission determined it was appropriate to leave the definition of Commission and the definition of Planning and Zoning Commission in the Ordinance to be sure both usages were defined. On Page 5 delete District Zoning and make sure the words are not used in the rest of the Ordinance. If they are, use zoning district to replace. Page 3 of 10 On Page 7 noise generated by a kennel would be governed by the noise ordinance. Mr. Palzer also noted that kennels are only allowed in the industrial district and require a special use permit. On Page 7 delete Intensive Vegetation and use clear cutting. On Page 9 add the word “average” to the definition. It should read: “The average horizontal distance…” On Page 10 eliminate the definition of portable sign and add “See Ordinance #39.” Commissioner Wilharber asked if portable signs were addressed in Ordinance #39 and Council Member Nelson indicated that they are. Commissioner DeVine asked Staff to search the Ordinance to make sure the term portable sign is not used. On Page 11 delete the definition of Sign and insert “See Ordinance #39.” The Commission determined that the definition of Variance needed no change. Mr. Palzer agreed to look up the official definition of Certificate of Occupancy and have that added to the Ordinance. On Page 16 after 080-030 insert “and Table A;” and. On Page 17 change D to read “See Ordinance #39.” On Page 18 add the words “newly constructed” before single-family in C. On Page 18, Division 45 put a period after the word period and delete “but are subject to the Minnesota State Building Code. On Page 18, Public Utilities Required add See Ordinance 30 and Ordinance 45. On Page 19, Division 60 end the sentence with approval in accordance with Ordinance #8. The following sentence should read: “The Planning and Zoning Commission shall not forward a site plan review without certifying the following:” There are no changes needed to Page 20. On Page 21 change “Committee” to “City Review”. Authority to waive is Council. There is no need for a definition of building official. Page 4 of 10 Ordinance #8 is in effect. Commissioner Helmbrecht asked whether Staff had reviewed the Mayor’s comments with him in an attempt to answer some of the questions raised. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated she had received the document and was asked to forward copies to Council and Planning and Zoning for review. Mr. Palzer explained the City had eliminated special use permits but brought them in for kennels and mini-storage. On Page 27 change Site Plan to “Special Use Plan Review”. On Page 27 the definition of Special Use Plan Review should be: site plans for all uses requiring a special use permit must be submitted for review prior to the issuance of the building permit. On Page 27 add an E. See Division 200. Ordinance #44-A is effective. On Page 28 change “Section 135-140” to “Division 135-140.” On Page 28 change “Lighting” to “Nuisance”. No change to refuse on Page 29. The Commission determined that the way around having a towing company would be to address the outside storage issue. On Page 30 delete “Off Street Parking” and “Section 36”. On Page 31 F. Change “Section” to “Division 165.” On Page 41 change “Dwellings” to “Structures.” On Page 32 change “Section” to “Division #160.” Also make same changes as for commercial section. Change “Site Plan” to “Special Use Plan Review” and define as: site plans for all uses requiring a special use permit must be submitted for review prior to the issuance of the building permit. On Page 32 add an E. See Division 200. On Page 32 change 080-100 to 80-100. On Page 32 change “Section” to “Division #135-140”. Page 5 of 10 On Page 33 change “Lighting” to “Nuisance”. Also change “Section” to “Division #135- 140. On Page 34 change the word constructed to construed (3 occurrences). On Page 35 no new bars permitted in M-1 district, old ones grandfathered in. No changes needed to document. On Page 37 change “are” to “area” in Other Industrial line. On Page 46 add: F. Lakeshore properties can store the following items of personal property within 50’ of the shoreline during the months from September to May: docks, boat lifts, swim rafts, slides, and other swimming equipment. Commissioner Wilharber cautioned the Commission about discriminating against any resident that may live across the road from a lake but has lake access. No changes needed on Page 47. No changes needed on Page 48. No changes needed on Page 53. On Page 55 change “12” copies to “16” copies. On Page 56 change “Section 51” to “Division 80”. On Page 59 under Non-Compliance change “Planning and Zoning Commission” to “Zoning Administrator”. On Page 60 delete Section 180-220 Annual Review. On Page 65 under Section 190-020 change “Section 7.03” to “Division 195.” Commissioner Wilharber indicated he had signed the Ordinance as Mayor in 2000. On Table A add minimum size garages. On Table A change the title of table to “Table A Schedule of District Regulations Lot and Yard Requirements. Mr. Palzer indicated he would provide the correct minimum garage sizes for Table A. Page 6 of 10 Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that Staff is having an issue with winter construction and indicated that all requirements for occupancy are met with the exception of the driveways. She then asked whether the Commission would consider putting a requirement in the Ordinance that Class 5 must be installed prior to passing the footing inspection in order to eliminate this type of issue. Mr. Palzer commented he felt that type of language should be put in the developer’s agreement. Council Member Travis indicated that a previous Council had determined that every development would escrow an amount to include a silt fence and gravel drive on every lot but that was misinterpreted and is not being done. It was the consent of the Commission to ask that the developer’s agreements contain the language governing the gravel drives. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that Ken had said that attached garages were defined as an accessory structure and asked that it be fixed. The Commission asked Ms. Moore-Sykes to have Ken locate the error in the Ordinance so it could be fixed if need be. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated Ken had asked the Commission to consider allowing fences on the property line without requiring signatures. The Commission indicated it had no interest in allowing fences on property lines without signatures. The Commission indicated it would like to hold the public hearing on Ordinance #4 at the June meeting. VI. NEW BUSINESS 1. Ordinance #3-B – Curfew City of Centerville a.City of Circle Pines (Anoka County) b.City of Lexington c.City of Hermantown d.City of Aitkin Chair Hansen indicated there may be an issue with curfew at Waterworks because of the teen nights. It was the consent of the Commission to ask Staff to discuss the curfew Ordinance with Waterworks to make them aware of the potential issue with teen nights. Page 7 of 10 Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated the Chief of Police had asked for an Ordinance book. 2.Ordinance #63 – Lawn and Gardening Water Use City of Centerville a.City of Circle Pines b.City of Lexington c.City of Bloomington d.City of Hoyt Lakes Commissioner Wilharber suggested attaching the letter concerning water restriction to the Ordinance because the Ordinance itself is not specific. He then commented that other cities state the Mayor is the person who enforces this but actually the public works staff is the most aware of water usage in the City. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that public works staff has informed her that the odd/even watering ban with no time frame defeats the purpose. Mr. Palzer agreed it does not aid the City with water usage. Commissioner Kilian asked if use of private wells affects the City wells. Mr. Palzer indicated that use of City wells may affect private wells. Motion by Commissioner Helmbrecht, seconded by Commissioner DeVine to table this matter for further wording from Mr. Palzer. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner DeVine asked Staff to put the letter together with the Ordinance before the Ordinance is reviewed by the Commission. Mr. Palzer indicated the City has to put out an annual water report and asked if the Commission would like that report included with the letter. The Commission consented. 3. Liquor/Tobacco Work Session Update (Scheduled Meeting April 8, 2002 Ms. Moore-Sykes invited Commissioners to the liquor/tobacco work session scheduled for April 8, 2002 at 6:30 p.m. Commissioner Wilharber asked if the people from the state would be at the meeting. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that no state representatives would be attending the meeting. Commissioner Helmbrecht asked if more strict fines would be included in the Ordinance. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated the City is working on the fine structure. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS Ms. Moore-Sykes asked if the Commission discussed adult establishments at its last meeting. Page 8 of 10 Commissioner DeVine indicated he had thought he had asked for an outline for the City of Forest Lakes massage parlors and an outline for Chapter 114 on body piercing. The Commission indicated that it feels the adult ordinance needs no changes. Commissioner Helmbrecht asked Ms. Moore-Sykes to ask the County for a plan for the widening of Main Street to a four-lane highway. Discussion ensued concerning the widening of Main Street. Ms. Moore-Sykes commented that the City might want to think about redeveloping downtown with the four-lane highway pending. Commissioner Wilharber reminded the Commission that it had tabled consideration of the right of way ordinance and asked when it would be back on the agenda. Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that a right of way ordinance would help the City control how and when its rights of way are used and restored by the public utilities. It would require a permit to help the City hold them accountable for disruptions and surface restoration. Commissioner Wilharber asked what the courts had decided with the cases where cities were sued because of right of way ordinances. Ms. Moore-Sykes explained that the courts had upheld the cities’ rights to manage their rights of way. She then indicated that the City was told if it did not have a right of way ordinance to get one. Chair Hanson asked Staff to place the right of way ordinance on the agenda for May. VIII. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1.March 12, 2002 Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes Commissioner DeVine questioned whether he had a copy of the Mayor’s comments on Ordinance #4 at the last meeting as stated in the minutes. The Commission indicated that the Commissioners did have a copy of Ordinance #4 at the last meeting. No change needed to minutes. Commissioner McLean indicated that he, not Chair Hansen, had seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner McLean to approve the March 12, 2002 Meeting Minutes as amended. Ayes – 4, Nays – 0, Abstain – 2 (Wilharber/Kilian). Motion carried. Page 9 of 10 IX. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Helmbrecht, seconded by Commissioner DeVine to adjourn the April 2, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting at 9:31 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Page 10 of 10