Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-05-01 P & Z Packet 'Lsta[i{i.;(rd 1857 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA TUESDAY, May 1, 2007 6:30 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call ll. APPEARANCESIPRESENTATION(S) m. PUBLIC HEARING (S) IV. OLD BUSINESS 1. Comprehensive Plan Review **Please Bring Your Copy** 2. Proposed Ordinance ##, Second Series Amending City Code, Chapter 154.170 Parking Requirements V. NEW BUSINESS VL DISCUSSION ITEMS Vll. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1. April 3, 2007 Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes vm. ADJOURNMENT * * REMINDERS * * Parks & Recreation Committee Meeting - May 2,2007 - 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers City Council Meeting - May 9,2007 - 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers ili - 15 Annual Garage Sale/Clean-Up Days (Clean-Up - May 12, 2007, 8:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. Laurie LaMotte Memorial Park) - May 11 & May 12, 2007 City Council Meeting - May 23,2007 - 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers CITY OF CENTERVILLE ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE # ~ Second Series AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE, CHAPTER 154.170 PARKING REQUIREMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CENTERVILLE ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 154.170 of the Center City Code is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: 154.170 PARKING REQUIREMENTS. (A) Requirements in general. The following table illustrates the minimum number of parking spaces required for various uses permitted in the city. The city may modify minimum parking requirements in the M-l District, as part of the planned unit development approval process, if it is determined that the use is consistent with the purpose of the district and that parking is determined by the City to be sufficient to accommodate the use. Theaters Restaurants Offices Retail Convenience stores General services Trade businesses Manufacturing Other industrial or warehousing Car washes Drive-up restaurants Minimum Parking Required 2/dwelling unit 1/3 seats in largest assembly room 1/classroom plus 1/3 seats in largest assembly 113 seats 1/3 seats 5/1,000 sq. ft. gross floor space 6/1,000 sq. ft. gross floor area 7/1,000 sq. ft. gross floor area 4/1,000 sq. ft. gross floor area 3/1,000 sq. ft. gross floor area 3/1,000 sq. ft. gross floor area 2/1,000 sq. ft. gross floor area 5/stacking per bay 5 stacking plus 1/3 seats Uses Residential Churches Schools (B) Off-street parking. When a building is enlarged, additional off-street parking shall be required only with respect to the additional usable floor area. (C) Change in facilities. An off-street parking area shall not be changed to any other use until equal facilities are provided elsewhere. No parking area used or designated in connection with a building in existence on the effective date of this chapter shall be reduced to provide fewer than the minimum number of parking spaces required under this chapter. (0) Off-street parking and loading zones. No building shall be hereafter erected, substantially altered or its use changed unless off-street parking and loading spaces have been provided in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. The number of off-street parking spaces provided shall be at least the minimum number provided in the schedule contained in this section, except that manufacturing and industrial uses may be granted a conditional use permit to provide fewer parking spaces when it is clearly demonstrated by the applicant that the use will not require the number of spaces indicated. In the event a conditional use permit is granted, a condition may be imposed to require that the land normally dedicated to parking shall be held in a landscaped reserve that can be used for parking in the event the use or parking needs should change. (E) Parking spaces may be located on a lot other than that containing the principal use, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit. (F) Off-street loading. A loading space shall have minimum dimensions of not less than 12 feet in width, 50 feet in length, exclusive of driveways, aisles and other circulation areas. One off-street loading space shall be provided and maintained on the same lot for each commercial and industrial use requiring regular delivery of goods and having a modified gross floor area of more than 10,000 square feet. One loading space shall be provided for each additional 25,000 square feet or fraction thereof No off-street loading space shall be located in any required yard adjoining any residential use. Required off- street loading space shall not be included as off-street parking space in computing required off-street parking space. Vehicles utilizing this loading space shall not project into the public right-of-way. (G) Fractional space. When an application of the standards of this chapter with respect to number of off-street parking spaces results in the need to provide a fraction of one space, any fraction of one-half or less shall be disregarded and any other fraction shall be construed as one. (H) Uses not mentioned. For any use not specifically mentioned in the schedule of off- street parking and loading requirements, the number of spaces required should be that required for that use named in the schedule which is determined by the Planning and Zoning Commission to be most similar. (I) Spaces for five or more automobiles. Parking areas consisting of five or more off- street parking spaces shall have individual spaces so marked and shall be so designed, maintained and regulated that no parking or maneuvering incidental to parking shall be on any public street, walk or alley and so that any vehicle may be parked and unparked without moving another vehicle. (J) Improvement and maintenance. Required parking and loading spaces, together with driveways, aisles and other circulation areas, shall be improved in a way as to provide a durable and dust-free surface asphalt, concrete, pavers, cobblestone or similar material according to minimum city specifications, excluding R-l Districts. All parking and loading areas shall provide for proper drainage of surface water to prevent the drainage of the water onto adjacent properties or walkways. The owner of any parking or loading area shall maintain the area in good condition without holes and free of all dust, trash and other debris. Parking and access drives shall be located a minimum of five feet from any property line. Parking spaces shall be a minimum of nine feet wide and 18 feet deep. (K) Access. All off-street parking areas shall have access from driveways rather than from public streets, and except by conditional use permit, the driveway access shall be limited to 24 feet in width at the curb line. Section 2. Summary of Ordinance. The summary of this ordinance attached as Exhibit A, is hereby adopted and approved for publication. Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication ofa summary of this ordinance, according to law. ADOPTED this the City of Centerville. day of , 2007, by the City Council of Mary Capra, Mayor Attest: Teresa Bender, City Clerk Exhibit A CITY OF CENTERVlLLE Anoka County, Minnesota SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE ##_, SECOND SERIES NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, on , 2007, Ordinance # ~ Second series, entitled "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 154.170 PARKING REQUIREMENTS" was adopted by the City Council of the City ofCenterville, Minnesota. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that, because of the lengthy nature of Ordinance # ~ Second Series the City Council has directed that a title and summary be prepared for publication pursuant to Minn. Stat. 412.191, Subd 4. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that a complete, printed copy of Ordinance # ~ Second Series is available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk, 1880 Main Street, Centerville, MN, or will be mailed to anyone requesting it by telephone (651 )429~3232. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the general purpose of the ordinance is to establish parking requirements for the various zoning districts of the city ofCenterville. Section 1. TIlls section establishes minimum parking requirements for the various uses allowed within the zoning districts of the City. Section 2. This section authorizes this summary of the ordinance be published in lieu ofthc entire text of the ordinance. Section 3. TIlls section provides that the ordinance is effective on publication of this summary. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the City Council has by at least a 4/5 vote, approved this Public Notice. APPROVED this _ day of ,2007. CIlY OF CENfERVILLE Mary Capra, Mayor A TIEST: Teresa Bender, City Clerk Published in on ,2007. CITY OF CENTERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 3, 2007 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held their regularly scheduled meeting on April 3, 2007, at 6:30 p.m. ABSENT: Ben Fehrenbacher Jennefer Klennert Hunt Thomas Wood Xlfl@@ A IA\ rm~~@\J ~@1j [;Jlr PRESENT: Brian Hanson Robert Wright D. Love Mark Pangell COUNCIL: Council Member Linda Broussard STAFF: City Administrator, Dallas Larson L CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call Chair Hanson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. n. APPEARANCES None ID. PUBLIC HEARlNG(S) None IV. OLD BUSINESS 1. Selection of Planning Consultant-Recommendations of Sub-Committee Commissioner Love reported the subcommittee met and interviewed three planning firms on March 20,2007. He stated the first interview was with Mr. Dean Johnson of Resource Strategies Corporation, consultant on the comprehensive plan in 2006. Commissioner Love commented the committee expressed concerned because it is a two-person firm with a lot of work. He stated that, after interviewing Mr. Dan Jochum and Mr. Mike Darrow of Short Elliott Hendricson, the subcommittee felt they did not take the time to understand Centerville. Page 10f7 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 3, 2007 Commissioner Love reported Mr. Mark Statz and Ms. Tina Goodroad of DSUIBonestroo are the most expensive but have a real tie to Centerville. He commented the question he had involved what assistance the City would receive once the comprehensive plan was finished. Commissioner Love stated the subcommittee was unanimous in their selection ofDSUlBonestroo because Mr. Statz has ties to this firm and to the City ofCenterville. City Administrator Larson commented on the number of meetings required to obtain input from the public and to come to consensus on the plan He indicated not all the meetings would be needed, thus reducing time and cost. Commissioner Love responded it is important to have as many meetings as required to obtain public input and feedback. Council member Broussard commented this as an update to the comprehensive plan rather than a total revision. She questioned the cost quoted for a plan update. City Administrator Larson replied the consultants informed the subcommittee this is the City's last chance to identify any changes needed before final plan development and submission. Council member Broussard asked City Administrator Larson if he foresaw substantial changes needed to the comprehensive plan. City Administrator Larson reiterated this is the last opportunity to find any changes the City would like to make. Commissioner Love mentioned the number of new citizens attempting to move to Centerville and the improvements to the 20th Avenue conidor. Council member Broussard replied the commercial/industrial development plans are identified. She asked if the plan for high-density housing would change. Chair Hanson referred to the Conceptual Master Plan map and pointed out the location of potential housing areas. Councilmember Broussard stated she struggles with the cost difference among the consultant bids. Chair Hanson replied there might be room for restructure. A discussion on the proposal from DSUlBonestroo ensued. Commissioner Pangell asked about the time span of the comprehensive plan. Page 2 of7 Plarming & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 3, 2007 City Administrator Larson replied this update would reflect the City's vision for the next ten years. Council member Broussard commented the previous comprehensive plan was designed for a 20-year timeline. City Administrator Larson indicated joint meetings between City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission could alleviate about half the meetings. He again stressed there would not be another opportunity to make changes to the comprehensive plan. He pointed out the process would include looking at how to achieve the best tax base. A discussion on commercial/industrial plans and locations in Centerville ensued. A discussion on the annexation process ensued. Motion by Commissioner Pant!ell. seconded by Commissioner Writ!ht. to accept the recommendation of DSUlBonestroo as consultants on the Centerville Comprehensive Plan. All in Favor. Motion carried unanimously. The first Comprehensive Plan meeting will be held on April 18, 2007. 2. Comprehensive Plan Review No discussion. v. NEW BUSINESS 1. Proposal for Lot Split of Lot 17. Block 3. Lakeland Hills (1649 Lakeland Circle) Ms. Stephanie Lucas, Attorney representing Mr. Jim Williamson, reported Anoka County would acquire a portion of the property through eminent domain. She indicated Mr. Williamson would retain a portion of the property for a future home site. Ms. Lucas explained that subject to the easement, Mr. Williamson's site would be 17,639 square feet in size and the County would acquire 41,838 square feet. City Administrator Larson pointed out the property location on the site map and reported the property is zoned R-2. He also identified the Anoka County easement location. He explained the Centerville City ordinance identifies options in situations where property is taken from one lot, added to another and eminent domain. Mr. Williamson stated the County must have a holding pond area for the new highway and is purchasing his property for the pond. He pointed out the location of the holding pond where he would build the house on the site map. He explained he did not want the holding pond on his property because of the liability. Page 3 of7 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 3, 2007 Ms. Lucas stated Mr. Williamson would like the County to take the triangle property area also. She explained she and Mr. Williamson are before the Commission to determine if the lot split would be adequate. She stated the lot must be 100 feet wide to meet the building requirements and indicated the Williamson's lot would be 117 by 90 feet per the R-2 requirement. A discussion on lot dimension requirements ensued. Councilmember Broussard asked what County's plans are for the temporary easement through Mr. Williamson's property. She asked when it would be released back to him. Ms. Lucas replied it would be approximately 2009 before the temporary easement is released back to Mr. Williamson. She stated it is possible it could be released earlier. Mr. Williamson stated the temporary easement would be used to drive equipment used to dig out the lot across his property. Council member Broussard asked Mr. Williamson when he would begin building his house. Mr. Williamson replied he would probably begin building before the easement IS completed. Commissioner Pangell pointed out the house could not be built until the temporary easement was released. City Administrator Larson stated it would be difficult to build until the easement is released. Chair Hanson stated he did not think a variance would be required as the setback and size requirements are met. City Administrator Larson asked Mr. Williamson if the lot was planned as a buildable lot when initially developed. Mr. Williamson replied sewer and water are available and it is a buildable lot. A discussion ensued on the lot size. Mr. Williamson asked which side was considered the front of the lot. City Administrator Larson replied that generally both sides of a comer lot are considered the front. He stated that typically, the address is the street facing the front of the house, however, Mr. Williamson could face the house in any direction he desired. Mr. Williamson replied the driveway would come offLakeland Drive. Page 4 of7 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 3, 2007 City Administrator Larson commented the driveway would need to be as far from the intersection as possible. Ms. Lucas stated they would be back for the public hearing. City Administrator Larson replied they might not need a public hearing if the lot meets the exemption requirements, however this should be verified. He indicated the set back line would depend on where the house is built. He stated it is critical to acquire the 100 foot wide set back line. Ms. Lucas stated they would check with the County. City Administrator Larson noted this situation could exist whether or not a lot split occurred. Commissioner Love pointed out issues would become evident when Mr. Williamson submits the building plan. Council member Broussard commented the only issue is that until the County releases its easement, no buildable site is available on the lot. She suggested Mr. Williamson get an agreement from the County to release the easement as soon as possible. Commissioner Pangell asked where the new road would be and how it would affect the setback. City Administrator Larson pointed out the new road and commented the setback is measured from the property line to the foundation of the house. Commissioner Love stated that even if the lot split were allowed, setbacks would not need to be met until they plan to build. Discussion on the lot dimensions and the temporary easement ensued. Councilmember Broussard asked if there is a way to ensure this would be a buildable lot before the lot split is authorized. She stated she did not want to create a non-buildable lot by doing the lot split. Ms. Lucas presented a map of the lot and pointed out the wetlands on the lot. She asked where the setback should be measured from and what the setback should be. City Administrator Larson pointed out on the site map what the setbacks must be on the three sides. He indicated it is better to have the front of the property on Lakeland Drive relative to meeting the setback requirements. He stated it appears the setbacks could be met. City Administrator Larson said the issue is to decide if the lot meets the exemption requirements. He indicated a good case could be built that the lot meets the exemption Page 5 of7 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 3, 2007 requirements. He read the exemption definition from the ordinance. City Administrator Larson recommended Mr. Williamson not go through a platting requirement or hearing. Councilmember Broussard suggested that Mr. Williamson know what he wants to do with the lot and what the City requirements are before he approached the County. Ms. Lucas stated they would design the house with the setback information in mind. She mentioned she wanted to make sure they could do the lot split with the County and determine an appropriate price. Motion bv Commissioner Love. seconded bv Commissioner Pan2ell. to recommend aooroval of the proposed lot solit of Lot 17. Block 3. Lake'and BiDs (1649 Lakeland Circle). All in Favor. Motion carried unanimouslv. Chair Hanson stated this would be on the agenda for the next Council Meeting. City Administrator Larson recommended Mr. Williamson have the lot measured. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Parking Requirements for CommerciallIndustrial Districts City Administrator Larson reported he checked the parking recommendations of surrounding cities. He commented Centerville is close to what other cities require at approximately a 1: 1000 employee ratio. He stated most parking requirements are related to the number of employees on the largest shift. City Administrator Larson stated the City might want to make sure land is available for extra parking and keep it in reserve in case a change of use requires more parking. He commented he would draft a commercial/industrial recommendation and present it for approval. Chair Hanson recommended warehouses require a 1 :2000 square foot ratio and a 1 :200 square foot ratio for office space. Council member Broussard recommended staying close to what Lino Lakes requires to encourage development in Centerville versus Lino Lakes. A discussion on parking requirements for industrial, commercial, restaurants, and retail ensued. Consensus was reached to use the Lino Lakes and Hugo parking requirements as the benchmark for developing Centerville's parking requirements. City Administrator Larson recommended the Planning and Zoning Commission develop a recommended parking requirement plan for Centerville to send to City Council. He stated he would develop some standards. Page 6 of7 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes April 3, 2007 Chair Hanson referenced Appendix A, page 131, of the comprehensive plan and asked about the double asterisk. City Administrator Larson recommended removing the asterisk or change the description related to single family residential. Council member Broussard recommended reviewing the categories used by Hugo and consider using some variation of them. A discussion on employee parking requirements ensued. Commissioner Wright asked the Commission to consider amending the fence ordinance. A discussion on fence requirements ensued. Consensus was reached to not pursue the fence issue at this time. va CONSIDERA TION OF MINUTES 1. March 6. 2007 Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes 2. March 21. 2007 Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes Motion by Commissioner Pane:ell. seconded by Commissioner Love. to approve the Minutes of March 6. and March 21. 2007 as presented. All in Favor. Motion carried unanimously. VIn ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Love seconded by Commissioner Pane:ell. to Adiourn the Marth 6. 2007 Planni..~ Commission Meetinf! at 8:34 D.m. All in Favor. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Dianna Wise, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Page 70f7