PCAgenda_04May25_Canceled - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Commissioner Lageson pointed out that the Source sign does not conform to the prohibition against roof signs. Ms. Jones confirmed that it is an old sign, that it is non-conforming and can only remain as long as there is no structural change. There was additional discussion of sign size relative to city age and community esthetics. Commissioners observed that newer, "classier," communities have stricter limits on signage than older cities. There was a general feeling that our present size allowance is too large. On Snelling Avenue it is probably too late to make a difference, but changes could have an impact on Larpenteur. The visual identity of Falcon Heights was also discussed, with reference to the green and yellow signs on the main streets. Councilmember Lindstrom said those are about 6 or 7 years old and were, according to what he has been told, very controversial at the time. Commissioner DeLeo mentioned cities, such as Seaside, Florida, that have very restrictive controls on all aspects of community visual design. Falcon Heights code does not require design review in most cases. Mr. DeLeo suggested this might be something the City should take a look at. Jones said that this code revision process is an opportunity to shape the code to reflect changes in how the citizens regard their community. It is appropriate for the Commission to consider those areas that our code does not presently address, including esthetics and the possibility of some kind of design review. However, our code has a simplicity many cities don't have and leaves many things to the discretion of the property owner. Part of the Commission's ongoing role is to find the balance point; the lot coverage change was an example of this. Housing Code (Chapter 10) This chapter of the code covers basic minimum standards of livability for dwelling units, both rented and owner occupied. It is one of the newest parts of the Falcon Heights City Code. It is • being reviewed by the Planning Commission for two reasons. First, there are references to Chapter 10 within Chapter 9, so it is important for Commissioners to be familiar with both chapters. Some elements that might seem to be overlooked by the zoning chapter may be covered in the housing code chapter. Second, the Commissioners may want to consider whether the minimum standards set by Chapter 10 are appropriate, in view of an ongoing staff concern about certain gaps in Falcon Heights' regulation of rental housing. Ms. Jones said that, although the City requires fire inspections and other checks on multiple family rentals, the City does not issue certificates of occupancy. Furthermore, there is almost no regulation of duplex and single family rentals. In fact, the City does not even have any way of knowing if a single family dwelling is rented. This issue was brought to the foreground by a tragic fire last year near the University of Minnesota, in which several young people were killed. Staff had received concerns from parents of a student sharing a rental home in Falcon Heights who were concerned about safety conditions and the state of disrepair of the property. The following points came up in the discussion, for future research and discussion: • The minimum space allowance of 150 square feet per dwelling unit (for a lone occupant) seems very small. What is the history behind this figure? • What kinds of units are inspected by the fire inspector and what other kinds of certification may be needed? • What do other cities do to regulate rentals, especially of single family homes? • If we don't have a certificate of occupancy in Falcon Heights, does this expose the City to liability? • Do we have all the enforcement and administrative tools we need to regulate housing • standards and, in particular, rentals? • What kinds of dwelling units are possible in our code? Do we allow boarding houses and rooming houses -explicitly or implicitly? Falcon Heights Planning Commission Workshop, February 24, 2004 Page 2 of 3