Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-09-01 P & Z Minutes - Approved Approved CITY OF CENTERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held its regular meeting on Monday, September 1, 2020 at 6:32 p.m. by Vice Chairperson Mark Haiden via Zoom videoconferencing. PRESENT*: Vice Chairman Mark Haiden Commissioner Ben Fehrenbacher Commissioner Jon Krueger Commissioner Darrell (DJ) Olson, Jr. Commissioner Nick Twohy Chairman Darrin Mosher (Arrived at 7:17 p.m.) ABSENT: Commissioner Linda Broussard Vickers STAFF: City Administrator/Engineer Mark Statz Council Liaison Russ Koski *Note that “present” is construed to mean that the noted individuals were visibly and audibly present on the videoconference call. I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:30 by Vice Chairman Mark Haiden. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Fehrenbacher requested that a discussion on the chicken ordinance be added as item number 6 under New Business. Motion by Chairman Haiden, seconded by Commissioner Fehrenbacher to approve the agenda with added changes. A roll call vote was taken. All in favor. Motion carried. IV. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPEARANCES 1. Variance Concept Review – 1597 Peltier Lake Drive City Administrator Statz explained that this address is an empty lot where a new home is being built. It was initially thought that the home met the 35-foot setback from the street as stated by city ordinance. Upon review of the permit application, it was discovered that setbacks were met at the corners of the lot, but the middle of the home was set back approximately 33.5 feet because the lot is on a concave curve. The homeowners would like to request a variance. The other homes on the street were built at a time when the 35-foot setback was not in place, and the homes on either side of this lot are set back approximately 32.5-33 feet. Page 1 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 1, 2020 Mr. Statz presented a copy of an email from City Attorney Kurt Glaser that included Minn.Stat.462.357, subd. 6(2), which defines variances and when they should be permitted. Discussion was had as to whether or not this instance met the conditions, with particular focus on the phrase “practical difficulties”. A statement of opinion was taken from each commissioner as to whether or not they would support a variance to the lake setback instead of the front setback. Mr. Statz recommended that if the resident wanted to move forward with the application, it should request a variance in either the front or the back, to allow for potential changes in ideas or opinions. rd 2. Variance Concept Review – 1837 - 73 Street City Administrator Statz explained that the homeowner would like a variance to side and rear setback requirements for the construction for a new shed. He shared a picture of an aerial view of the yard, showing an existing slab in the rear of the property that used to be used for a dog kennel. The location of the slab does not meet the setbacks for a shed, but rather than poor new concrete, the resident would like to use the existing slab. The Commission did not grant the variance because it did not meet the requirement of a “practical difficulty” 3. Variance Concept Review – 1779 Partridge Place The homeowner would like to build a shed in an area of his yard that does not meet the required setbacks, however placing the shed in an area that meets city ordinances could impede drainage patterns. He stated that when he installed his swimming pool, he had to regrade the whole backyard, and if he placed the shed further back he would block the water flow. City Administrator Statz shared a plat map of the lot, and discussion was had regarding where the homeowner might place the shed to avoid blocking water flow. It was also suggested that he could place the shed on green- treated wood. Members of the commission gave opinions on whether they felt the homeowner should go forward with the application. All commissioners agreed that the homeowner needs to abide by required setbacks and possibly put the shed on blocks or install draintile if he was concerned about impeding water flow. 4. Concept Plan Review – 7064 Centerville Road City Administrator Statz stated that an individual had contacted him regarding a piece of land for sale downtown in an M2 district on Centerville Road. The property currently has a 400 square foot building that cannot be rebuilt as a single family home under current city codes. Zoning codes for an M2 district require a minimum density of 12 units per acre. This lot is a 1/3 acre lot and could have up to 4 units according to code. It is also a middle lot that sits north of Heritage Street on the east side of Centerville Road, and only has access to Centerville Road. City codes state that all driveways must come off side streets. The possibility was discussed of building three row house-style units while allowing a temporary driveway off Centerville Road. In the future, a driveway could be built accessing Heritage Street, and then build a fourth unit where the current driveway sits. The commission discussed how this might fit into the neighborhood, because it would be developed as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and therefore would not have any setback requirements. Commissioner Fehrenbacher asked if building only three units would fit the code requirement. City Administrator Statz explained that in order to meet the code four units would be required, but a PUD allowed for flexibility under all aspects of the code, and the city could ask for certain amenities in exchange for a loosening of the standards such as improved architecture or streetscaping. City Administrator Statz explained that the inquiring individual had not purchased the property yet, and was only Page 2 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 1, 2020 there to explore whether or not the commission felt it was worth moving forward. 5. Concept Plan Review – 2005 Gateway Circle/Fairview Street City Administrator Statz explained that a landscape business would like to purchase two parcels, one at 2005 Gateway Circle and the lot to the north of it to use for outdoor storage. Their future plan would be to build a storage building on the additional site within five years. Mr. Statz explained that city code states that there needs to be a primary structure on the lot in order to allow for outdoor storage. Commissioner Twohy asked if the code would be met if the lots were combined. City Administrator Statz stated that it would, but they would need a preliminary plat and approval from the planning commission in order to do that. City Administrator Statz asked if the commission would be willing to allow that if there was an agreement in place stating that if the company did not have a building up by a certain date then they would be in violation. The commission seemed to be in agreement that they would allow it under those conditions. VI. OLD BUSINESS 1. Rehbein Black Dirt Interim Use Permit City Administrator Statz explained that Mr. Rehbein has an interim use permit with the city to operate a dirt thst business on the property between 20 Avenue and 21 Avenue on the north side of Fairview Street, which expires at the end of this year. The permit requires that all excess material be off-site by that date. The site is currently being marketed for development, but so far there are no buyers. The city is also actively marketing the property as a technology corridor in conjunction with the Economic Development Authority, Xcel Energy, Comcast, the Anoka County Regional Economic Development and Connexus Energy in an effort that was created by Anoka and Washington Counties. Commissioner Fehrenbacher asked if Mr. Rehbein would be out of business if the agreement were not extended. City Administrator Statz stated that if Mr. Rehbein were to go out of business, the dirt would probably remain. He also stated that it does not seem that any dirt has been added to the lot. The possibility of charging Mr. Rehbein a fee to extend the interim use permit was discussed. City Administrator Statz stated that the city already charges Mr. Rehbein a fee for each load he hauls out of the lot due to the damage it does to the road, however that fee is equitable to a problem that is caused, and he questioned if the city could charge a fee to obtain compliance. He stated that one avenue the city may be able to take would be to require that Mr. Rehbein set up a large escrow with a letter of credit. Commissioner Haiden requested that City Administrator Statz explore financial incentives as a way to get Mr. Rehbein to move the pile of dirt on the property. VII. NEW BUSINESS 1. Ordinance Review - Lawn Maintenance City Administrator Statz stated that the city’s lawn maintenance ordinance did not state how long the grass could be, and only included the boulevard. He would like to change it to include the entire yard. Discussion took place regarding making sure the ordinance allowed for things like rain gardens and gardens that were meant to attract bees. The commission asked Mr. Statz to explore the ordinances in surrounding cities. Page 3 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 1, 2020 2. Ordinance Review - Temporary Dwellings & Structures City Administrator Statz read the city’s ordinance regarding tents, RV’s and other temporary dwellings which states “The use and occupancy of a tent, recreational vehicle or other temporary dwelling for the purpose of living quarters is not permitted in the city, except as approved by the City Council under special circumstances.” He stated that he felt that the language was not intended for the City Administrator to authorize permits, instead it was intended that residents could not use items like RV’s as living quarters. Discussion was had regarding issuing permits to allow out of town visitors on vacation to use RV’s, versus an instance of a person actually living in a tent or RV, and whether or not a public hearing should be held. Commissioner Haiden asked if they could request that Council create an ordinance that would cover short term permits for visitors that wouldn’t open the City up to abuse by those that don’t meet the definition. 3. Ordinance Review - Trash and Recycling City Administrator Statz stated that he felt the ordinance read that residents did not have to have garbage service, but if they did, it had to be the service that is approved by the city. He asked if the Commission felt that it should be a requirement for each residence to have garbage service. He was concerned that if there were hoarding issues at a home it could create a problem. There was discussion as to whether or not the city should require residents to have garbage service. The general consensus seemed to be that they would not require this, as some residents may have other ways of getting rid of their refuse. 4. Ordinance Review - Industrial Districts - Outdoor Storage City Administrator Statz stated that the language in the City ordinance was not clear as to whether or not a primary structure was required or whether there was a limitation on outdoor storage. He said it was clearly a conditional use, so he felt that the City could put conditions on it, and he felt that there should be some relation of the size of the structure to the amount of outdoor storage. 5. Reschedule of October Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. This item was temporarily skipped over. 6. Ordinance Review – Backyard Chickens This items was handled out of order. Commissioner Fehrenbacher presented a proposal to change the ordinance on backyard chickens. His suggestions were as follows: a. Changing the number of hens (no roosters) allowed from four to six. b. A smaller fenced in area within the resident’s yard to contain the chickens. c. If a resident stops raising chickens in the winter, there would be a time limit in order to remove the coop. d. A fenced in area external to the coop and enclosed run is allowed, but the owner must be present when the chickens use this area. e. Fencing must be a minimum of 24 inches. The general consensus was that the commission was ready to discuss this. Page 4 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 1, 2020 Motion by Commissioner Fehrenbacher, seconded by Commissioner Haiden, to call for a public hearing regarding lawn maintenance, industrial district outdoor storage and backyard chicken ordinances. A roll call vote was taken. All in favor. Motion carried. 5. Reschedule of October Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting City Administrator Statz explained that Night to Unite is taking place on October 6, 2020 and asked if the commission would like to move the meeting to October 13, 2020.. Motion by Commissioner Haiden, seconded by Commissioner Mosher to reschedule the October Planning and Zoning meeting to October 13, 2020. A roll call vote was taken. All approved. Motion carried. Resident Corey Padrnos of 1874 Center Street provided feedback regarding a letter he received about parking on the lawn and outdoor storage. He stated that due to construction at his home, he had been parking on the lawn in order to make room for his family to get in and out of his garage. He stated that he would also be interested in discussing the outdoor storage topic and asked if there would be a time when the commission would further review the ordinance. City Administrator Statz stated that letters were sent to 45 different residents regarding parking on the front lawn and he had received good compliance and feedback from it. He said that the topic was not added to this evening’s agenda due to time constraints, but he did intend to put the topic on the agenda for the October 13, 2020 meeting. He also stated that the commission has explore changing the current ordinance to allow up to three recreation type vehicles in rear or side yards, and possibly disallowing the storage of commercial vehicles on residential properties. Commissioner Haiden said he thought that they should have a discussion on the matter at the next meeting. VIII. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. None IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES 1. Council Member Liaison Council Member Russ Koski reported that last month’s meeting focused mainly on budget and how to allocate CARES Act Funding. He also stated that the 2021 budget would be approximately the same as the 2020 budget. 2. Administrator’s Report City Administrator Statz reported that he is attempting to put the Administrator’s Reports on the City website. There had been a sweep of the front yards in the city to look for front yard parking. Letters were sent to violators, but no tickets were issued. Overall, he has received nice feedback and the letters were well received. A former hockey player is opening a training facility across the street from City Hall in the former Wholesome Health location. Page 5 of 6 City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission September 1, 2020 X. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Fehrenbacher, seconded by Commissioner Kueger, to adjourn the September 1, 2020 Planning and Zoning meeting at 9:17 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried. Page 6 of 6