Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-18-82 Lakeville, Minnesota Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1982 Marvin Geisness, Secretary, in the absence of Chairman Harvey, called the meeting to order at x:35 p.m. in the Lakeville City Council Chambers. Roll call of members was taken. Present: Geisness, D. Miller, Heald, Grohoski. Absent: Harvey, Johnson, Rice Also present: Roger Knutson, City Attorney; Sid Miller, Building Inspector; David Licht, City Planner; Shirley Sorensen, Recording Secretary Commissioner Geisness asked if there were any additions or corrections to the November 4, 1982 planning commission meeting minutes., 82.180 Motion was. made by Grohoski, seconded by Miller, to approve the November 4, 1982 planning commission meeting minutes. Roll call-was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous Commissioner Geisness opened the public hearing on the application of A.D.T. Labs/Donald'Clarke for a conditional use permit under the Interstate Corridor District zoning to use an existing building at 20600 Kenrick Avenue for ligh t manufacturing of medical related. products. Mr. Roger Knutson attested to this being a duly publicized hearing. Mr. Donald Clarke showed the commission members some. pictures and answered questions. Mr. Licht, Planner, stated that he is comfortable that this is'a proper use of this land and there are: only a few details to be worked out. He recommends approval. Mr. Sid Miller stated that the plumbing inspector had deemed the .sewer system in good shape and there is plenty of room for expansion if necessary in the future. 82..181 Motion was made by Grohoski, seconded by Miller, to close the public hearing. Roll call was taken on the .motion. .Ayes: Unanimous 82.1$2 Motion was made by Grohoski, seconded by Heald,' to recommend to City Council approval of the application of A.D.T./Donald Clarke for a conditional use permit under the I.C.D. zoning. to use the building at 20600 Kenrick Ave. for light manufacturing of medical related products subject to the seven criteria in the recommendations included in the 15 November 1952 planning report from Northwest Associated Consultants. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous Commissioner Geisness opened the public hearing on the application ,of Joda, Inc. for a variance in lot size in the re-plat of the Acorn Heights Addition, located east of I-35 and north of Minnreg Road. Mr. Knutson attested to this being a duly publicized hearing.. rir. Licht. stated that Mr. Darrel Gonyea is not here tonight because he had told him it really wasn`t necessary, as far as this • variance is concerned. Lakeville, Minnesota • Planning Commission Meeting November I$, 1982 82.183 Motion was made by D. Miller, seconded by Heald, to close the public hearing.. Roll call was taken on the. motion. Ayes: Unanit~us Grohoski wanted to make sure the format of the public hearing was accurate, as far as the wording, and Mr. Knutson stated it is correct.. ;.82.184 Motion was made by Grohoski, seconded by Miller, to recommend to City Council approval of the variance in lot-size in the re-plat of Acorn .Heights Addition subject to the five recommendations as enumerated"in the planning. report from Northwest Associated Consultants dated 10 November 1982. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous Commissioner Geisness asked if there was a representative for the review of the. site/building plans for an office warehouse complex at the southwest corner of 215th Street and Cedar Avenue and Mr. Licht .stated that they are proceeding with a P.U.D so this matter should be tabled. 82.185 Motion was made by Grohoski, seconded by Heald, to table the Cedar 7Q project.. until the December 2, 1982 planning.. commission meeting. • Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous Commissioner Geisness called for the review of a proposed ordinance amending .the Lakeville zoning ordinance establishing dwelling unit restrictions fore residential housing, distinguishing types of housing, regulating its use, and authorizing its location in various zones, and review of amendments suggested. for it by Councilmember Sindt. Mr. Cal Brastad, representing Mobilhome Minn- esota, gave a slide. presentation on how manufactured homes are made and show- ing the end result, where many improvements have been made in recent years. He explained that they are trying to get away from '.parks' and the restrictions that 'parks' have, stating people would like to ba able to put manufactured homes on regular lots. Mr. Knutson stated that the Legislature will not look at this item again, so any clarification of the new law is up to us. Mr. Ken Karlson, Northland Mortgage, stated that Foxborough Addition already has two manufactured homes that look real good. ..Georgia Goulet, Suburban Homes, Inc., stated that a UBC house can be manufactured in a plant and meet all the. require- . merits. Becky Paulus, 17170 Hemlock Ct., said they, as well as other Woodbury residents, are. very .much opposed to a manufactured home being put on a lot in their development, saying it would lower. the value of their property. Commission members felt they needed more study and careful consideration before making such an important determination. :82.186 Motion was made by D. Mi~ndin~conded by :Heald,. to table .fits recommendation on this proposed ordinance ~t e akeville zoning ordinance establishing dwelling • unit restrictions for residential housing, etc. until the December 2, 19$2 planning commission meeting. Roll call was taken on the .motion. Ayes: Unanimous -2- Lakeville, Minnesota • Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1982 Jim Robinette arrived at 9:00 p.m. * Attachment, from Attorney General Warren Spannous regarding location of manufactured homes received. Commissioner Geisness opened the continued public hearing on the application of Margaret Barrett fora preliminary plat of a 55-acre parcel of property north of 175th .Street and west of Ipava Avenue adjacent to the Christina Huddleston Elementary School property. Mr. Dave Owen, Landscape .Architect with Landplan, Inc., stated that Mr. Don'Hess had met with the neighborhood people and resolved some of the issues. The following items were agreed to and decided upon: They are withdrawing the request for rezoning and it will be called the Barrett Addition. Deed restrictions will be put on all lots at the time of sale,. requiring that all units be constructed with a double attached garage and have a paved driveway. Develop plat on the basis of R-2 zoning, with a combination of lot sizes., from 11,000 sq. ft. to 14,000 sq. ft. not to exceed 140 lots. That a portion of the park. fees be used to fencing or screening of the proposed plat from the school property, to protect single family lots from the school. Mr. Owen recommended the public hearing be closed and that the planning commission recommend approval now. Commission members stated it was unlikely that park & rec fees could/would be used for screening in any development ,and wondered if the school might have to . put in some screening, as a church has had to do in the past. Public asked .about regulating homes to be built and. Mr. Licht explained .that the City can only regulate the size of a home, not the market value. 82.187 Motion was made by Grohoski, seconded by Heald, to continue the public hearing on the preliminary plat application for the Barrett Subdivision until the Dec- . ember 16, 1982 meeting, and request from Dave Licht, if it appears that they will not be able to meet that date, that Mr. McGarvey get that information and .see that it is published so that the public will be aware they will not be here. Roll call was taken on the motion. Ayes: Unanimous Grohoski stated that the sign ordinance committee has been formed, will consist of Nancy;Enright, Paul Krause, ,Bill Macklin, Forrest Hunter and himself, their first meeting being after the first of the year. Jim Robinette ~t~ted that he had met with the owner of the property, where Mr. Siegle is operating a body shop, and the owner is giving Mr. Siegle 30 days notice to vacate. Future agenda items: 1. Airlake - Cedar 70 2. Tom Thumb/James Ref rig. • -3- • Lakeville, Minnesota • Planning Commission Meeting November 18, 1482 82.188 Motion was made by Heald to adjourn the meeting. Voice vote was taken on the motion. Commissioner Geisness adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. Respectrully submitted, Shirley Sore a ,Recording Secretary ATTEST ~ ~ ~ Mdrv P. Geisness, Secretary (Acting Chairman) * Attachment • -4- • C ITIES. ZONING ORDINANCES. MANUFACTURED HOMESs Zoning ordinancE may not pr ohibt'location of manufactured homes within a district providing: other applicable uniform non-discriminatory ordinances are complied with. Minn. Laws 1.982, Ch, 490, § 2 (Minn. Stat. § 462.357, 5ubd. 1). November 10, 1982 Mr . Robert J . Schaefer Moorhead City Attorney 59a-32 Box ?79 Cr. Ref. 477b-34} Moorhead, MN 56560 Dear Mr. Schaefer: In your letter to Attorney:General Warren Spannaus you relate substantiaLly~the followings FACTS The City of Moorhead has passed a zoning ordinance • regulating the location of manufactured homes within its jurisdiction by specifically designating those residential ,classification districts where manufactured homes may be located and those where such types of housing may not be located:- You'then ask substantially the following question. 4UESTION Is an ordinance restricting the location of manufactured homes to certain residential classifi- caton districts and denying their placement in other districts permissible in light of Minn. Laws .1982,. Ch. 490, § 2 (Minn. Stat. § 462.357, Subd. 1)? OPINION We answer your question in the negative.. In our opinion Minn. Laws 1982, Ch. 490, § 2 (Minn. Stat. §'462.357, Subd. 1) clearly prohibits a city from restricting the location of manu- factured homes from any residential classification districts.. ' withinits 3urisdiction so long as those homes are in conformance with Minn.. Stat. 327..31 to 327.35 and comply with other • applicable zonir? g ordYnances. Minn.. Laws 1982, Ch. 490, § 2 (Minn. Stat. § 462,357, .Subd. 1) provides: No regulationmay prohibit earth sheltered constrv cton;as defined in Section'116H.02, Subdivision. 3, or manufactured-homes built in conformance with Sections 327.31. to 327.35 that comply with-all other zoning .ordinances promul- ga ed pur~uar~t to this section.. This provision expressly prohibits the exclusion of earth sheltered or manufactured homes .From res~identialdistricts and makes no mention of selective placement of those types of hou ing among the residential districts of a given community. Without providing-any exceptions, t is only reasonable to assume that . the legislature intended to prohibit disorimination against that' type of housing solely because of being manufactured housing."lf This is not to say that other reasonable non-discriminatory regulations or ordinanees passed in accordance with Minn. Stat. §462.357, Subd. l and which apply to all forms of housing within a particular zone may be .circumvented . Rather, these restric- tions remain applicable to manufactured housing as well as other conventional forms of housing, as is clearly stated in Minn. Laws 1982, Ch. 490, § 2 (Minn. Stat. 462.357, .Subd. 1). What is expressly prohibited, however, is any attempt to restrict the location of manufactured housing. solely because it is manufactured 1. Testimony of Representative Voss before the House Gen®ral Legislation and Veteran's Affairs Committee subcanmi.ttee on • Housing,. February 11 and l5, 1982.. in accordance with Minn. Shat. §§_327.31-327.3.5.. In our view, this includes the relegation of manufactured. homes to certain designated residential areas. Yours very truly, WARREN SPAI~NAUS Attorney General Y~AItl2Y°YS. STARNS Special Assistant Attorney General