Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-15-00 CITY OF LAKEVILLE Planning Commission Meeting Minutes .JUNE 15, 2000 The June 15, 2000 Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Drotning in the City Hali Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m. Roll call of members was taken: Present: Kot, Skipton, Drotning, Rieb, Comer, Wulff, Ex-Officio Commission Member Knutson. Absent: Bellows. Staff Present: Daryl Morey, Acting Community and Economic Development Director; Frank Dempsey, Associate Planner; Ron Mullenbach, Associate Planner; Matt Brokl, Assistant City Attorney; and Donna Quintus, Recording Secretary. The June 1,.2000 Planning Commission meeting minutes were approved as submitted. ITEM 4: Announcements Acting Community and Economic Development Director Daryl Morey indicated that a revised survey and typographical corrections to the Planning Report had been distributed to the Commission regarding Agenda Item No. 5. c~.,,,~ ITEM 5, Public Hearin: Daniel and Barbara Laun Conditional .Use Permit `~,S .Chair Drotning opened the public hearing for consideration of the application of Daniel and Barbara Laun for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a detached accessory building greater than 788 square feet in area and 15 feet in .height in th8 R- 3, High Density Single Family Residential District. Assistant City Attorney Brokl attested that the legal notice had been mailed and published in accordance with state statutes. Mr. Dan Laun, property owner, presented his request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow the construction of a new 952 square foot detached two-car garage, 19.5 feet in height, on his property located at 8675 - 206t" Street West.. Mr. Laun indicated he will be removing an existing 252 square foot detached one-car garage currently located on his property. However, he is proposing to retain an existing 198 square foot detached accessory building located behind the existing garage. Mr. Laun indicated that the proposed 28' x 34' garage will be used for storage of three vehicles and other personal property. Mr. Laun stated that the new structure is proposed to be constructed with vinyl lap siding and asphalt shingles to match the existing house. Associate Planner Frank Dempsey presented an overview of the details of the Planning Report. Mr. Dempsey indicated that the total accessory building area being proposed for the. Laun property is 1,150 square feet or 362 square feet more than the 788 square feet permitted in the R-3, High Density Single Family Residential District. The proposed height will be 4.5 feet higherthan allowed without a CUP. Mr. Dempseyalso • .noted that the existing 198 square foot detached accessory building currently has a non-conforming rear yard setback of 4.6 feet. Planning Commission Meeting June 15, 2000 Page 2 • Mr. Dempsey tated that the survey indicates the proposed new garage will be setback 25 feet from the street right-of--way setback and set back 7.5 feet from the side and rear lot line. The survey also identifies a 9 foot building separation between the new building and the existing 198 square foot detached shed. The proposed Zoning Ordinance revisions allow a 25 foot front yard and 5 foot side yard setback, but requires a minimum building separation of ten (10) feet for structures larger than 120 square feet in area. The Laun's proposal fora 9 foot building separation would require a variance unless the .plans are revised to provide a 10 foot building separation. In summary, Mr. Dempsey stated that, under the existing Zoning Ordinance requirements, the Laun's proposal would require a CUP for the number of detached accessory buildings, accessory building area, and proposed accessory building height, as well as variances for the setback between buildings, the rear yard setback, and the setback from the street right-of-way. Under the proposed Zoning Ordinance Update, the Laun's proposal requires a CUP for accessory building area and height and a variance for setback between buildings. Associate. Planner Dempsey stated that if .the Planning Commission recommends to City Council approval of the CUP request of Daniel and Barbara Laun, Community and Economic Development Department staff recommends compliance with the seven (7) stipulations as listed in the Planning Report with consideration of an eighth stipulation requiring a $500.00 security to guarantee paving of the driveway on completion of the • building project. There were no comments from the audience. 00.67 MOTION by Wulff, Second. by Comer to close the public hearing at 6:14 p.m. Ayes: Kot, Skipton, Drotning, Rieb, Comer, Wulff. .Nays: 0. Commissioner Wulff asked Mr. Laun if he was willing to reduce the size of his proposed garage to meet the required 10 foot building separation. and eliminate .the need for a variance. Ms. Wulff indicated her desire that the 10 foot building separation requirement be enforced and stated that it is good policy to be consistent. in-enforcing the requirements of the proposed Zoning Ordinance considering the amount of time and effort that has been invested by the .City Council, Planning Commission, advisory. committees, City staff, the development community and the public in establishing the standards for the Zoning Ordinance Update... The Commissioners concurred that, especially in the case of new construction, the applicant has the ability to make modifications to their proposals that will meet the minimum ordinance requirements for building separation. Mr. Laun indicated that he had his property re-surveyed to determine whether the 9 foot building separation was accurately identified on the original survey. The new survey shows the building separation to be 9.8 feet, or 2.5 inches short of the 10 foot • ordinance requirement.. He indicated his original intent was to have a 10 foot Planning Commission Meeting June 15, 2000 Page 3 • separation when establishing the location of the new garage. Mr. Laun stated that he would prefer not to reduce the size of his proposed garage; however, he agreed to modify his plan if the Planning Commission dial not choose to support the 2.5 inch variance. Commissioner Wulff expressed her opinion that the existing detached non-conforming shed ("chicken coop") had historical value due to its age and architecture. The Planning Commission concurred with Commissioner Wulff's suggestion that if the "chicken coop" is removed or destroyed beyond 50 percent of its fair market value, the applicant should. not be permitted to replace it with another detached building. Instead, a request for a new second detached accessory building would require an amendment to the CUP. The Planning Commission agreed to an amendment to staff recommended Stipulation. No. 7 to read as follows: Stipulation No. 7: "If the existing non-conforming shed is removed or destroyed beyond 50 percent of its fair market value, as determined by the. City, the total accessory building area shall not exceed 952 square feet. " After further discussion, the Planning Commission agreed to add the following stipulations for approval of the Laun CUP request: Stipulation No. 8: "A $500.00 security shall be submitted prior to the issuance. of a • building permit to guarantee installation of the driveway following completion of the building. The driveway shall be completed within one year of the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit." Stipulation No. 9: "A revised survey shall be submitted prior to City Council consideration of the Conditional Use Permit to show setbacks for the proposed accessory building consistent with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance Update." Stipulation No. 10: "Approval of the proposed Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to City Council approval of the Zoning Ordinance amendment as recommended by the Planning Commission. This stipulation would be met upon City Council approval of the Zoning Ordinance Update.. as it pertains to the proposed RS-CBD, Single Family Residential District: Central Business District Area and zoning performance standards. 00.68 MoTiorv by Wulff, Second by Kot to recommend to the City Council approval of the application of Daniel and Barbara Laun for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a detached accessory building greater than 788 square feet in area and 15 feet in height in the R-3, High Density Single Family Residential District at 8675.- 206th Street West, legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 5, Berres Addition to Lakeville, subject to the seven stipulations listed in the June 9, 2000 PlanningReport with an amendment to Stipulation No. 7 and the addition of Stipulation Nos. 8, 9 and 10 as noted above and approval of the Findings of Fact dated June 15, 2000. i ,Ayes: Skipton, Drotning, Rieb, Comer Wulff, Kot. Nays: 0. Planning Commission Meeting .June 15, 2000. Page 4 • ITEM 6. Irene Peterson: Conditional Use Permit Associate Planner Ron Mullenbach indicated that on August 19, 1999 the Planning Commission held a public .hearing to review a request from Irene Peterson for a .Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow an expansion to a legal non-conforming detached garage at her single family residence located at 20854 Holiday Avenue. At that time, the. Planning Commission tabled this request pending further discussion of-the Zoning Ordinance Update.. The Planning Commission completed their review of the draft Zoning Ordinance Update at their May 24, 2000 work session and. Ms. Peterson and staff have agreed to move forward with her request prior to adoption of the Zoning Ordinance Update. Associate Planner Mullenbach presented an overview of the history of Ms. Peterson's request for an addition to her existing detached garage. When her request was presented for informal discussion at the April 1, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission informed Ms. Peterson that her request could not be supported by them and it was suggested that she consider moving the detached garage to conform with the required 10 foot side yard setback. The garage was and is currently set back 0.60 feet from the south side lot line. Ms. Peterson proceeded to construct the addition onto the east side of the garage without the required CUP or a building permit. After being contacted by City staff, Ms. Peterson submitted a completed application for a CUP. At the public hearing held on August 19, 1999, the Planning • Commission: determined that this issue and issues. unique to the historic downtown should be reviewed and addressed. as part of the Zoning Ordinance Update. The Planning Commission closed the public hearing and tabled action on Ms. Peterson's application until the Zoning Ordinance Update was completed and ready for final recommendation. Associate Planner Mullenbach indicated that the proposed Zoning Ordinance Update establishes a new RS-CBD, Single Family Residential -Central Business District Area District which will be applied to residential properties in the historic downtown. Specifically, the Zoning Ordinance Update allows for reduced accessory building setbacks, the permitting of a second accessory building in addition to a detached or attached garage, and administrative approvals that will make it easier for property owners in the downtown residential areas to improve their properties. Associate Planner Ron Mullenbach summarized the following options the Planning Commission has for formal recommendation of Ms. Peterson's request: 1. The Planning Commission could recommend approval subject to the stipulations contained in the Planning Report. 2. The Planning Commission could recommend denial of the request to the City Council resulting in the City completing its enforcement action regarding the garage addition. 3. Ms. Peterson could .move the garage to meet the five (5) foot side yard setback as proposed.. in the draft Zoning Ordinance Update. Planning Commission Meeting June 15, 2000 Page 5 Chair Drotning offered a fourth option available to Ms. Peterson where she could. remove the unauthorized 10' x 14' addition and relocate it an her property as a detached accessory building within the proposed setbacks required in the Zoning Qrdinance Update. This option would require Ms. Peterson to obtain a building permit.. for the 140 square foot detached accessory building and eliminate the need for a CUP. Acting Community and Economic Development Director Daryl Morey indicated that if Ms. Peterson should elect to exercise Option 3 or Option 4, she could formally withdraw her CUP application and the City would refund her application fee. Ms. Peterson indicated that she had originally requested a second detached accessory building and was told by staff that it was not allowed by the Zoning Ordinance that was in force at that time. Ms. Peterson stated that she has completed the construction as an addition onto her existing detached garage and was not interested in relocating the existing. structure to meet the 5 foot side yard setback or detaching the addition and relocating it as a second detached accessory building. Ms. Peterson stated she wanted the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to City Council on her CUP application as submitted. 00.69 MOTION by Rieb Second by Skipton to recommend to City Council approval of the application of Irene Peterson for a Conditional Use Permit to allow an expansion to a legal non-conforming detached garage in the R-2, Single Family Residential District at • 20854 Holiday Avenue, legally described as Lot 4, Block 1, Yung Addition. Ayes: 0. Nays: Rieb, Comer, Wulff, Kot, Skipton, Drotning. The Commission members each stated their reasons for their negative votes as follows: Kot: Ms. Peterson's proposal does not meet the requirements of both the current Zoning Ordinance and proposed Zoning Ordinance Update. Options are available to the applicant that meet the requirements of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Update. Ski ton: Concurred with Commissioner Kot. Drotnin ; Stated his interest in maintaining the integrity of the Zoning Ordinance Update. Many of the original issues regarding Ms. Peterson's conditional use permit request have been addressed in the'proposed Zoning Ordinance Update and options. are available to Ms. Peterson to be in compliance with the proposed update. Rieb: Agreed with other Commissioners that the Zoning Ordinance Update provides Ms. Peterson with an opportunity to have the additional accessory building space without requiring a conditional use permit. Comer: Concurred with Commission members. Wulff: Stated that both the current and proposed Zoning Ordinance allows the ..expansion of anon-conforming dwelling unit by Conditional Use Permit. M However, both ..ordinances prohibit the expansion ofnon-conforming accessory Planning Commission Meeting June 15, 2000 Page 6 structures. Ms. Peterson's request is for an expansion to anon-conforming garage. Commissioner Wulff stated her interpretation is that a garage is not considered a dwelling unit. The Planning Commission directed staff to prepare Findings of Fact for their action on Ms. Peterson's CUP request and forward them for their review at the June 29, 2000 Planning Commission meeting. Chair Drotning indicated that Ms. Peterson's CUP application will be reviewed by City Council at their July 5, 2000 meeting. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned 7:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted onna Quintus, Record ng Secretary ATTEST: Karl Drotning, Chair