2010-11-17_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, November 17, 2010 Page 2 Further discussion included review of the existing Appeals and Enforcement 46 sections with the existing code for comparison purposes; $50 fee for processing 47 fees to cover additional mailings and administrative time to process the appeal to 48 the City Council level for public hearing; confirmation that the notice provisions 49 for appeals will run parallel with those for other established notice provisions of 50 the City Council, without specific footages to facilitate any potential changes in 51 those notice provisions by the City Council in the future. 52 Additional discussion included fence height deviations being new to this section, 53 based on past variance applications related to fence height for properties 54 adjacent to highways, whether for aesthetics and/or noise, and usually approved 55 as a variances; however, staff noted with recent Minnesota Supreme Court 56 rulings during 2010 related to variances, rather than have the potential height 57 hindered when past practice had been to approve the additional height, staff 58 recommended adding another minimal footage for fences, with standard 59 materials and their pre-manufactured height aligning with the eight foot (8’) 60 maximum as proscribed in the new code. 61 Vice Chair Boerigter expressed concern with the restrictions on location and 62 distance in the drive-thru section limiting a drive-thru lane at the side or read, not 63 front of a property, as previously discussed, and how a future drive-thru request 64 could deviate if their circumstances or property was unique. 65 Mr. Lloyd advised that staff recommending that the proposed language remain in 66 Item A relating to the drive-thru lane’s distance and relative location to the 67 property line; noting that it was still the preference that those properties still 68 attempt to redesign the site to meet code requirements; or apply for a Zoning 69 Code Text Amendment if it became evident that this proposed code provision 70 was not working and needed amendment. 71 Vice Chair Boerigter addressed the Animal Boarding/Kennel/Pet Daycare Section 72 and noted that, with staff support, the City Council recently approved The Woof 73 Room’s application for a forty-foot (40’) distance between their business and 74 adjacent residential properties; however, now the proposed zoning code provided 75 for a one hundred foot (100’) distance requirement, and questioned staff’s logic in 76 those differences. 77 Mr. Lloyd advised that consideration of The Woof Room proposal was based on 78 existing zoning code provisions, and Comprehensive Plan land use guidance for 79 that area being High Density Residential, with the use identified as non- 80 conforming and using an Interim Use permitting process not intended for long- 81 term use, as recognized by the applicant and staff. Mr. Lloyd opined that this 82 was a reasonable approach for this site, and while staff didn’t anticipate that the 83 use would be problematic at that location, given its close proximity to residential 84 properties and the discomfort of those residents for potential problems, the 85 conditions applied to the use seemed appropriate for a short-term duration. 86 Further discussion addressed accessory dwelling units to accommodate 87 separate dwellings on site, such as a “granny flat” but different than single-family 88 homes being rented out, and proposed new requirements requiring a walkway 89 connection from an accessory dwelling to the street, and practical applications. 90 In Section 21, discussion ensued related to outdoor storage in manufacturing 91 districts as a somewhat new section, with Mr. Lloyd noting that outdoor storage is 92 a use presently allowed in Industrial II and General Industrial Districts, but 93 identified as a Conditional Use with conditions written into approvals to require 94 screening; but now in the Industrial chapter of code, the requirement for outdoor 95 storage required screening, and was basically a reorganization of current code, 96 with outdoor storage seen as an accessory use; definition of outdoor activities 97