HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-04-03 Minutes Pursuant to clue call and notice thereof the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the City of Centerville held their regular meeting
• Tuesday, April 3, 1990 at City Hall. Chairman Tourville called
the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. Present: Welk, Vermeulen,
• Wilharber, Liaison Neumann. Absent: Drilling.
Motion by Vermeulen, second by Welk to approve the March 8, 1990
meeting minutes, aye - Welk, Vermeulen, Tourville; Abstain:
Wilharber, motion carried.
OLD B SIN SS:
POSSTBTLTTY OF AMENDING ORDINANCE #4 ARTICTE 4 NON CC
USES AND STRUCTURES.
Chairman Tourville questioned the legalities of Section 45.04
AMORTIZATION PERIOD FOR BUILDINGS as to whether or not it could
be enforced.
Commission member Welk noted that it seems to imply tearing down
of a non- conforming structure.
Chairman Tourville expressed that, in his opinion, unless the
non - conforming structure was a health hazard, and that the
structure would be on private property, the burden of proof would
be on the City as to why the non - conforming structure should be
to be removed.
Commission member Welk also noted that the age of a building has
nothing to do with whether or not it could be a health hazard.
Chairman Tourville noted that the moving of a Contractor's Yard
from commercial to industrial created non- conforming uses.
Commission member Welk noted that a special use permit would be
needed to add on to a non- conforming structure.
Chairman Tourville questioned on how to deal with a use that the
community deems permissible from a common sense point, but the
Ordinance does not permit that use.
Commission member Welk felt that the Ordinance gives the City
more control. She also questioned as to what kind of
justification would be given to the people permitted under a
special use permit versus the people who are denied a special use
permit for a non- conforming use.
Chairman Tourville and Commission member Welk felt it may be
unfair to people who were conforming before an amendment to the
Ordinance, if they should want to expand they would not be
permitted.
Chairman Tourville felt that exceptions need to be allowed,
citing Eagle Trucking as an example.
1
P &Z Meeting Minutes
April 3, 1990
Page Two
Commission member Wilharber felt that unless something is wrong
with the present Ordinance why try to fix it.
It appeared to be the general consensus of the Planning and
Zoning Commission that they would like to see how other cities
handle non- conforming uses.
Motion by Welk, second by Vermeulen to request city staff to
obtain non- conforming use standards, to include Lino Lakes and
Hugo for the Planning and Zoning Commission to compare at their
next meeting, motion carried unanimously.
POSSIBILITY OF AMENDING ORDINANCE #8. SECTION 43, 44. AND 45_
The Planning and Zoning Commission was asked to table this item
until John Stewart "s, City Engineer, comments were available.
NEW BUSINESS:
ORDINANCE #8, SECTION 38.04 STDEWAUS
Orville Hughes, Public Works Director, asked city staff to bring
to the attention of the Planning and Zoning Commission that
Ordinance #8, Section 38.04 states that paved sidewalks are to be
four (4) feet wide. The City Council appeared to want the
sidewalks to be five (5) feet wide.
Chairman Tourville asked if the Ordinance should be amended to
add the word "minimum of four (4) feet wide ".
Commission member Wilharber asked who would bear the replacement
cost, the City or the home owner? He also pointed out that this
would be a 20% increase.
Liaison Neumann stated that a developer could hold you to the
Ordinance, which only requires a four foot sidewalk.
Commission member Welk questioned why the City Council felt the
need for a five foot sidewalk. If the extra foot was to create a
biking /walking path, she does not agree with this.
The Planning and Zoning Commission would like to bring to
attention of the City Council their questions as to need for a
five foot sidewalk.
ORDINANCE #5, SECTION 38.09
Orville Hughes, Public Works Director, asked city staff to bring
to the attention of the Planning and Zoning Commission that the
Ordinance #8, Section 38.09 states that the tree should be P &Z
r
P &Z Meeting Minutes
April 3, 1990
Page Three
planted in the front yard. The City Council appeared to be
discussing the planting of trees on the boulevard.
It appeared to be the general consensus of the Planning and
Zoning Commission that the wording in the ordinance stating that
the location and types of trees must meet the approval of the
City Council. The City Council approval would allow for the
planting of trees in the boulevard.
CITY NEWSLETTER
The Planning and Zoning Commission had no comments at this time.
KENNELS
Orville Hughes, Public Works Director, asked that the Planning
and Zoning Commission discuss the City's handling of the issuing
of kennel licenses. Mr. Hughes felt that a kennel license could
only be issued to some one living in an F -1 Rural Residential
through a special use permit.
It appeared to be the general consensus of the Planning and
Zoning Commission that the intent of Ordinance 44, Table B, Item
Six is the definition of a business, not for a person who applies
for a kennel license for his own dogs.
It also appeared to be the general consensus of the Planning and
Zoning Commission that if there is a problem with the issuing of
a kennel license, which would fall under the jurisdiction of
Ordinance 424, it should be addressed at the City Council level.
GOVERNMENT TRAIRNC_WORKSHOP
Chairman Tourville brought to the attention of the Planning and
Zoning Commission that the Planning Institute would be having a
workshop on April 28, 1990 in Brooklyn Park. The cost would be
$50.00 per person and in his opinion would be informative for the
Commission members to attend. Chairman Tourville noted that he
will try to attend.
ADJOURN
Motion by Wilharber, second by Vermeulen to adjourn the meeting,
motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned 8:50 p.m.
Respectful y sibmitted,
Sanna E. Buckbee
Assistant City Clerk