The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1989-10-03 Minutes Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on October 3, 1989, at City Hall. The purpose was to hear all persons present regarding the possibility of amending Ordinance #4, Section 32.03 -7 referencing real estate development signs. Chairman Tourville called the hearing to order at 7:15 p.m. Present: Welk, Drilling, Vermeulen, liaison Neumann. Chairman Tourville summarized the proposed amendment to the ordinance, questioning the wordage of the proposed amendment. He also questioned as to why the 1 1/2 years and /or 90% completion would be cause for removal of the sign, feeling that this would only deter the completion of a project. Commission member Welk and Vermeulen said that they had added this to the amendment so that a real estate construction sign would not be up for years and years waiting for completion of a project. Pat Camp, 7121 Centerville Road, was present in the audience and asked questions of the proposed amendment. Gunnar Pettersen, Building Inspector, was also present in the audience and expressed his concern that a year and a half was too short, and it also would depend on when the 90% completion occurs in relationship to the size of a project. Chairman Tourville expressed that since the size of the signs were reduced, and that they were on private property, that they should not be considered different from any other private business and it would be a benefit to the City to have a project completed. The primary concern seems to be that they do not want the signs to stay there forever. Motion by Welk, second by Drilling to adjourn public hearing, motion carried unanimously. Hearing adjourned at 7:23 p.m. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on October 3, 1989, at City Hall. The purpose was to hear all persons present regarding a request for variance from the Side Yard Setbacks of Ordinance #4, Table B, Schedule of District Regulations, lot and yard requirements to erect a home six (6) additional feet into the east and /or west property lines of the property described as follows: the west one third of lots 7, 8 & 9, Block 2 in Centerville. The property address is 1736 Main Street. Chairman Tourville called the hearing to order at 7 :30 p.m. Present: Welk, Drilling, Vermeulen, liaison Neumann. Dennis Schwallen, Mobilehome Minnesota, was present. Mr. Schwallen was representing the owners of the property, Mr. and Mrs. Givens. Mr. Schwallen explained that with the narrowness of the lot, and the fact that mobile homes do not come in twenty - four foot widths that a variance was needed to install a twenty- P & Z Meeting Minutes October 3, 1989 Page Two eight foot wide mobile home on that property. He also expressed that with the lot being so narrow that a house complying with the ordinance would have to high of a mortgage for the value of the lot. Earl Halley, 1740 Main Street, and Pat Camp, 7121 Centerville Road were present in the audience and asked questions of the request for variance. Gunnar Pettersen, Building Inspector, was present in the audience. He stated that this was a city ordinance, and not a state ordinance on the minimum width of a home. Motion by Drilling, second by Vermeulen to adjourn public hearing, motion carried unanimously. Hearing adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held their regular meeting on October 3, 1989, at City Hall. Chairman Tourville called the meeting to order at 7:45 p.m. Present: Welk, Drilling, Vermeulen, liaison Neumann. Motion by Drilling, second by Welk to approve the minutes of the September 5, 1989 meeting, motion carried unanimously. Chairman Tourville noted that the date of the City Council special meeting conflicted with the September 5, 1989 Planning and Zoning meeting. Since there was not two meetings on that date, he felt the date should be corrected to September 7, 1989. OLD BUSINESS: Discussion of variance request from the Side Yard Setback to erect an attached deck seven feet from the west property line at 1850 Fox Run. Tom Zurn, owner of the property at 1850 Fox Run, was present. Mr. Zurn explained that originally he wanted the house to be setback thirty feet from the streets, but was informed that the setbacks were thirty -five feet. After the house was complete he was then told that he was mis- informed and that the house could have been setback the thirty feet since he is on a corner lot. All new houses that have been built on corner lots in the R2A district now are setback thirty feet. His house could have been built six feet further to the east. There is nine feet there to build a deck, and two feet of this deck are taken up by a bay window that extends outward. There is no other feasible location for this deck, the sliding patio doors are there. The house is a single story and the deck would be approximately two feet off the P & Z Meeting Minutes October 3, 1989 Page Three ground. Gunnar Pettersen, Building Inspector, was present. Mr. Pettersen expressed that he was not aware of the thirty foot corner setback and approved the plans. Mr. Pettersen check on the ordinance when he received a plan with the thirty -foot setback. All other new homes in the R2A district are with the thirty -foot corner setbacks. It appeared the general consensus of the Commission members that the variance request was due to the fact that the owner was mis- informed as to the setbacks in location of building of his house. Motion by Drilling, second by Welk to recommend to the City Council to grant the request for variance from Side Yard Setback for 1850 Fox Run, sighting 65.03 -1, given information resulting from builders advise to buyer was misleading; not granting any special treatment that would not be conferred to another person building on the same lot, motion carried unanimously. A brief discussion on map overlay. It appeared to be the general consensus of the Commission members to accept the city staff recommendations. Motion by Welk, second by Vermeulen to recommend to the City Council that 1" to 400 feet be the standard for city maps, motion carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS: Discussion of variance request from Side Yard Setbacks for 1736 Main Street. This issue was discussed in July 11, 1986 with the City Council. The City Council granted the variance to Ordinance #4, Section 34.01 -2 requesting the setback of the west property line (off Progress Road) of the west one third of lots 7, 8 & 9, Block 2 in Centerville be no closer than 16 feet to that property line. This made the lot saleable for the City's minimum house requirements. The owners representative, Dennis Schwallen, stated that the lot was too small for a house that the Commission wanted to see built. He also expressed that someone who wanted to put that kind of a house on there, they would buy a better lot. Mr. Schwallen was also unaware of the ordinance requiring all new dwellings to have an attached garage. Walt Neumann, liaison, questioned the safety and vision obstructions already existing on this road. There are grandfathered buildings built write up to the street edge, and the City Council has considered making Progress Road a one way P & Z Meeting Minutes October 3, 1989 Page Four street. Any new building must comply with the setbacks. Chairman Tourville expressed that the street can only go to the east, and can not be widened because of the buildings. He also felt that the ordinance was stretched to the limit in 1986, and that they still could build on the lot but would need another design. Gunnar Pettersen, Building Inspector, stated that the buildings were all in line with the other ones, and suggests a 24x40x42 split entry would be feasible. Motion by Welk, second by Vermeulen to recommend to the City Council to deny request for variance at 1736 Main street due to the fact the house is to large for the lot; motion previously denied July 1986, motion carried unanimously. Discussion on the proposed amendment to Ordinance #4, Chairman Tourville expressed concern on the wordage of the amendment. Motion by Vermeulen, second by Drilling to recommend to the City Council the adoption of Ordinance #4, Section 32.03 -7 amendment as follows: Now Reads: The following signs upon the securing of a special use permit, as provided in Section 64 of this ordinance for each such sign: (1) Real Estate development signs may be erected to promote a residential project of ten (10) or more dwelling units. Such signs will not exceed one hundred (100) square feet per side and shall be removed when the project is ninety (90) percent completed, sold or leased. Is amended to read: Real Estate development signs shall be permitted if they meet the following requirements: (1) Signs shall not be placed upon private property unless written permission is obtained from the owner, (2) Signs shall be placed twenty five (25) feet from the curb edge, (3) Signs shall not exceed the dimensions of 6'x10', P & Z Meeting Minutes October 3, 1989 Page Five (4) Signs shall be removed when the project is ninety (90) percent completed, sold or leased. Real estate signs varying from the above criteria may be erected only upon securing a Special Use Permit. motion carried unanimously. Discussion on the request for variance from Joe Perkowski, 7231 Mill Road, who had asked to be removed from October adgenda and placed on the November adgenda, as he was unable to attend. Gunnar Pettersen was present and had talked with Mr. Perkowski. Mr. Perkowski's deck was grandfathered in, and is not in compliance with the present ordinance, but felt it was in compliance when it was built. Mr. Pettersen expressed that you could not replace a non compliance with a more non compliance. This is the only feasible place for Mr. Perkowski's deck /porch. Mr. Pettersen expressed that they could possibly replace or repair the deck with a non complying deck of the same size without being able to deny him. Mr. Petterson left the meeting at 8:45 p.m. Discussion on letters of interest for the open Planning and Zoning commission position. It was the general consensus of the commission to not make a decision based on letters. Motion by Vermeulen, second by Drilling to schedule the three applicants for short interviews between 7 -7:30 p.m. at the next Planning and Zoning Commission meeting; and ask that City Staff write letters asking them to appear before the commission, motion carried unanimously. Motion by Tourville, second by Vermeulen to re- schedule the November 7, 1989 meeting to Thursday, November 9, 1989, motion carried unanimously. Chairman Tourville addressed two items from the City Council meeting minutes; September 13, 1989 minutes page 6 adopt the DNR study; page 8 Planning and Zoning to review ordinance #8, storm water run off and evaluation. Chairman Tourville expressed that engineering should be the ones to address this issue. Liaison Nuemann questioned as to whether new developments had been addressed. Motion by Drilling, second by Vermeulen to adjourn meeting, motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. P & Z Meeting Minutes October 3, 1989 Page Six Respect fully submitted, / , / " Sanna Buckbee Assistant City Clerk