Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCAgenda_91Oct28i P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N OCTOBER 28, 1991 AGENDA A. CALL TO ORDER: 7:30 P.M. B. ROLL CALL: Lee Barry Len Boche Donna Daykin John Duncan Ed Finegan Carolyn Nestingen Jan Gibson Talbot C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 23, 1991 D. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: October 9, 1991 E. REPORTS, REQUESTS, RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Request for "No Parking" along Garden Avenue between Pascal and Holton 2. Planning Commission/Council Workshop to Discuss the Draft Comprehensive Land Use Plan 3. Request for a "No Parking Here to Corner" sign or Designation for the East 30 feet of Hoyt Avenue between Cleveland and Folwell 4. Proposed Code Revisions to Eliminate Planning Commission and City Council Review of the Detached Accessory Structures in 9-4.01 (3)(i). F. INFORMATION 1. City Development/Improvement Update 2. The Tract House as Landmark, New York Times, 10/17/91 G. ADJOURN MINUTES • REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING September 23, 1991 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: Lee Barry Len Boche Paul Ciernia, Council member John Duncan Donna Daykin Susan Hoyt, Administrator Ed Finegan acting as Planner Carolyn Nestingen Jan Gibson Talbot Meeting was called to order by Lee Barry in the absence of Chairman Len Boche at 7:30 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the August 26, 1991 meeting were unanimously approved as written. A REQUEST FOR "NO PARKING" ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF GARDEN AVENUE, 25 FT. WEST OF THE UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST ENTRANCE. Request was postponed to appear on a future agenda. REQUEST FOR A PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR 1707 N. HAMLINE After some discussion, ,the commission recommended granting a permitted accessory use permit for a storage shed at 1707 N. Hamline if it is built 5 ft. from the front property line on the southside lot, not 3 ft. as shown in the owner's drawing. A REVIEW OF PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE PERMITS 9-2.04[1](I) The commission discussed the request for the possible elimination of the review of permitted accessory use permits for utility sheds by the planning commission and city council for the following reasons: 1) efficiency for the property owner by avoiding unnecessary bureaucratic delay, 2) adequacy of zoning code controls, 3) efficiency of staff time by not having to prepare agenda items for both of these bodies as well as informing the property owners after the meetings, and 4) efficiency of the commission's time by not having to add these routine items to the agenda in view of the larger tasks the commission has been assigned by the city council. The commission also discussed eliminating the permitted accessory use permit fee and requiring a building permit for all utility structures regardless of size. At the present time, all structures larger than 90 sq. ft. require a building permit. The planner and building official would review the applications. Administrator Hoyt mentioned this was the most streamlined way to • go. The cost of the permitted accessory use permit vs. obtaining a building permit was discussed. This will be discussed in more • detail at the next meeting. Finegan moved that action be initiated to remove the planning commission and city council from review of accessory use permits. Unanimously approved. The commission also asked staff to get the city council's ideas on this change. A REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED 1992 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Administrator Hoyt explained the proposed 1992 capital improvements, clarifying some figures and answering questions. The commission moved to accept the program because it conforms to the city's comprehensive land use plan. DISCUSSION OF A HOUSING CODE The city of Falcon Height's draft comprehensive plan includes the adoption of a housing policy because most the city's housing is 40 years old. After a brief discussion, Administrator Hoyt summarized that the housing code is to assure that there are safe and sanitary dwellings in the city, and that it may be implemented in a variety of ways. It was moved to refer this for future staff research. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Susan Hoyt, Administrator/Planner Dee Swenson, Recording Secretary • • ITEM E -1 DATE 10/28/91 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Request for "no parking" along Garden Avenue between Pascal and Holton SUBMITTED BY: Mr. Warren West, Falcon Heights United Church of Christ REVIEWED BY: Susan Hoyt, City Administrator acting as planner EXPLANATION/DESCRIPTION: At the September 23, 1991 planning commission meeting, the commission postponed a request for "no parking" from Mr. West, representing the Falcon Heights United Church of Christ, until Mr. West could review the planner's report with the Church Board. On October 11, 1991 Mr. West notified city staff that he reviewed the planner's report with the Church Board, and that the Board concurred with the planner's recommendation that the "no parking" be extended the entire length of the block and that the signs be • placed perpendicular to the street rather than parallel. ATTACHMENT A - Planner's report ATTACHMENT B - Illustration of the proposed "no parking" along Garden Avenue between Pascal and Holton ACTION REQUESTED: Approve "no parking" along Garden Avenue between Pascal and Holton. • 1 E-1 . ~ Attachment A CITY OF • ~~~ FALC®~ ~ 2077 W. LARPENTEUR AVENUE FALCON HEIGHTS, MN 55113-5594 PHONE (612) 644-5050 FAX (612) 644-8675 y 18 September 1991 MEMO TO: Planning Commission FROM: Susan Hoyt, City Adminstrator acting as planner RE: Request for additional "no parking" on Garden Avenue in front of the Falcon Heights United Church of Christ Representatives of the United Church of Christ are requesting. an additional 25 feet of "no parking" on the west end of the block on Garden Avenue. The additional "no parking" zone is needed to allow cars to drop off passengers directly in front of the main church entrance. Interestingly the three "no parking" signs are currently parallel to the street front and atypically close together. This makes reading the signs difficult. EiCISTING PARKING • The existing "no parking" covers the east one half of the block along Garden Avenue and stops directly at the sidewalk to the main church entrance. The remaining one-half of the block accomodates parking. There is also a church parking lot across the street to the north of the church. Single family homes with off-street parking make up the land uses on adjacent blocks. PROPOSED PARKING The addition of an additional 25 feet of "no par,cing' to the west of the current "no parking" zone along Garden will eliminate two off-street parking spaces, probably used by parishoners to the Church. The parking lot across the street and the residential streets probably can accomodate these two cars on Sundays during services or during large events. Adjacent residents don't appear to use this parking area. The designation of "no parking" along this stretch of street will make driving up and dropping passengers off much easier since no cars will impede driving up to the front sidewalk. Easier access to the front door will allow people with mobility problems to reach their destination more easily and with less interference. ALTERNATIVES The designation of the additional "no parking" area will not eliminate all off-street parking along Garden Avenue in front of the Church. Designating the entire block "no parking" would make the parking restrictions easier to understand and enforce as well as provide a larger area for cars to line up 1 FiCME OF THE MINNESOTA STATE FAIR ANO THE U OF M INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE w• ~ ?,gINTED CV AE:'lC~ED PAPER ~ an cu iii~~~,~,JJJJ '1 along as they drop off passengers, thereby avoiding cutting in front of a parked car to drop someone off. It would also avoid another request to incrementally change the parking along the street. Due to the need to expeditiously review this request, Mr. West was not asked about this alternative. However, he will be prior to or at the meeting. RECOMMENDATION An additional "no parking" area in front of the more easily and safely accomodate drop off tra substantially reducing the parking needs of the However, it may be more reasonable to designate parking" for easier, safer drop-off and pick-up marking. United Church of Christ will ffic for the Church without neighborhing land uses. the entire one-half block "no as well as consistency in If an additional "no parking" area is designated along the southside of Garden Avenue in front of the Church, the direction of the signs and the distance between them should be standardized unless there is a sound reason for leaving s them in their current configuration. r • • 2 ~~ ~~~ IMb- i ~Q~1~~T" SC+~ co ~. •' ~ + ' o~ ~!® o;o ~:o -HaL~rt~~ ai~io~oio~oioioia • ~ ~ I o.a a'o 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~=N (, L `r ~~SC~„ O o 0 0 d O O~ 0 0 0 0 o a o o Q o 0 O i O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O p ~1~4 STiN 6-- I-~0 I~i4~ZK 1/~- .. . - - ~r~p~scd., ~~ ?-4n.K~~vl~- ITEM E -2 DATE 10/28/91 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Planning Commission/Council Workshop to discuss the draft Comprehensive Land Use Plan SUBMITTED BY: Fred Hoisington, Hoisington Group REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission EXPLANATION/DESCRIPTION: The Planning Commission reviewed and revised the city's draft ti comprehensive land use plan. This is an opportunity for council members and commissioners to discuss the proposed plan with Fred Hoisington prior to the public hearing. The draft comprehensive land use plan is a critical document for future decisions for the city. It includes the city's overall policies toward development and neighborhood quality. This document has statu tory authority. Any revisions in the comprehensive plan must be reviewed by the Metro Council. • ATTACHMENT A - The Draft Com rehensive Land Use Plan P ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Review and discuss the draft comprehensive land use plan. 2. Schedule public hearing date. • 2 • ITEM: E - 3 DATE:10/25/91 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Request for a "no parking here to corner" sign or designation for the east 30 feet of Hoyt Avenue between Cleveland and Folwell SUBMITTED BY: Susan Hoyt, City Administrator acting as planner EXPLANATION/DESCRIPTION: Residents of the University Grove neighborhood have called the city about a traffic hazard created by cars parking to close to Cleveland Avenue along the northside of Hoyt. Legally, cars cannot park within thirty feet of an intersection. However, this location gets a substantial amount of parking along it from staff at the University. The parking tends to overflow into the thirty foot area. This affects traffic turning off Cleveland, and frequently hampers school buses from easily turning into the neighborhood. City staff initially responded to the residents' concerns by • ticketing and, if necessary, towing the vehicles. However, this is a chronic problem. Using law enforcement officials to remedy it becomes time consuming and doesn't prevent the safety problems created by the situation until a car is towed. It also creates frustrations for those parking in this area, who are not aware of of the thirty foot regulation. Therefore, the staff recommends that a more permanent alternative be considered to solve the problem. These are: 1. Put up a "no parking here to corner" sign 30 ft. along the northside of Hoyt to the west of the intersection. 2. Paint the 30 ft. described above - yellow. Both proposals would solve the problem. The sign is consistent with other city postings. Yellow requires re-painting, but doesn't intrude on the landscape with a raised sign. However, given the necessity of posting parking signs in the Grove neighborhood due to its proximity to the University, there are already a lot of signs throughout the area. ACTION REQUESTED: Approve a "no parking here to corner" designation. • .l°~o ~L~~ o °/o/°~ ~~/ o ~ ° °/ o ° o o -r ~~s 0 o c~,-~. i• EXI STI ~ (~- ' Ub i'r4Z-K~u'Is- S!(~1V ~11o t~f~K~NIr~F~ 30 ~i^o~vt.tir.L. S i~ . ~U W J i~ • ITEM: E-4 DATE:10/28/91 ITEM DESCRIPTION: Proposed code revisions to eliminate planning commission and city council review of the detached accessory structures in 9-4.01 [3](i) SUBMITTED BY: Susan Hoyt, City Administrator acting as planner REVIEWED BY: Planning Commission EXPLANATION/DESCRIPTION: At the September 23, 1991 meeting, the planning commission recommended removing the zoning code requirement that requires the planning commission and council to review and approve permitted accessory uses for detached accessory buildings as described in 9-4.01 [3](i). The logic behind this recommendation is that the zoning code section 9-2.04 defines the placement and color of detached accessory structures. Council concurred with this recommendation. The commission should also decide whether or not to continue to require permitted accessory use permits for these structures or to require only a building permit. Currently structures under 90 • square feet require only a $25 permitted accessory use permit. Those over 90 square feet require both a permitted accessory use permit of $25 and a building permit of about $35. If the permitted accessory use permit is eliminated all structures will require a building permit. Building permits are granted based upon the cost of a building. After some investigation, staff estimates that the cost would range from $23 to $40 for the structures, which tend to be utility sheds. After consulting with the building official and reviewing the commission's concern that neighborhood quality be preserved, staff recommends that all structures be inspected by the building official to assure that these structures are soundly constructed and not poorly built structures that rapidly deteriorate. This does not increase city expenses because the building official is hired at a monthly fee not on an hourly basis. ATTACHMENT A - Proposed code revisions ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Decide on permit procedure. 2. Set public hearing for the next regular planning commission meeting. • 4 s ATTACHMENT A 9 -4.01 [3] (i) EXISTING CODE Accessory buildings other than detached private garages as regulated herein. The design and placement of the accessory buildings must be approved by the city council as being in harmony with the surrounding residential neighborhood after review and recommendation by the planning commission. REPLACE WITH - . .must be approved by the planner as being in harmony with the surrounding residential neighborhood. 9 - 2.04 [1](i) EXISTING CODE . (1) Structures larger than 90 square feet shall require a building permit. REPLACE WITH (1) All structures require a building permit. • 5 • ITEM: F - 1 DATE: 10/28/91 ITEM DESCRIPTION: City Development/Improvement Update SUBMITTED BY: Susan Hoyt, City Administrator acting as planner EXPLANATION/DESCRIPTION: AMOCO City staff met with an engineer and an attorney representing AMOCO about possible plans to upgrade the AMOCO station along Larpenteur and Snelling. The proposed improvements are designed to make access to the station easier and more aesthetic. The implementation of the scheme may require the city granting an easement on Snelling Service Drive after the state turns the road over to city control. These discussions are very preliminary and, obviously, any changes in AMOCO require meeting with the Warners, who own adjacent Falcon Center. STRATFORD Staff is beginning a more aggressive marketing approach for the • development of the Stratford vacant parcels. As it currently exists, the vacant land is not easily visible to potential purchasers so it is important to make it known. Given some of the constraints on the property and the current development market, this activity may not have immediate results. • 6 ITEM: F-2 • DATE:10/28/91 ITEM DESCRIPTION: The Tract House As Landmark, New York Times, 10/17/91 SUBMITTED BY: Susan Hoyt, City Administrator acting as planner EXPLANATION/DESCRIPTION: Over fifteen years ago on a trip to New York I asked to see the infamous "Levittown" because of its significance as the first tract community. This article captures the essence of "Levittown". ATTACHMENT A - "The Tract Home As Landmark" ., • 7 o fDrD < ~ •<oo.o°.c, <.....-, c~ pma'.. m .e.~g . ."'dn o•'~oa°~°msojxco.e °A~~~m~~°'~~•`~°N.£rn~m ^~o.OoX•n''~1suw33_<~tv~m°"iy~•c~o.°:~~~~%mrv~~a ;~~'<~ 3w m a•~ v. A,o a'o' ~ ....^y~ ~ w ~ ~ c•d w ~ y ~`e =; ~•° x~ ~ a~ ~~ Noc.~ do,°i., FiBx~~'wco~c~~~`.<~~z3on^v`;aN~7mQ co c ~ 3 `+ .. ~ w Q o ^ m o o m ° _ o o -s ~ o .~+ ° .s No, N~ to O° G~ W r a N r O ~ rn V:- R N° N~ N°i. y W ~-•. (D N X~ fxD n.~w F 9 ° °r `~•iu y ~ ° cn .°, c ~`< °.~~ o=` m a~.~ aw•o o:.=,~ 3 y o `< . ~, a a o,- -+ ~ c f to 5 ~_:" I moo ' m •H N E c ~ ~. fD ~ ~ < H o axy a~~ •' _ m ° 4 :° °-;o rx.':b a_a ~ ~ ~ ~ `3 ~ N .y Q ~ N ~ ~ ° N A .C+ N ~ f) O ~ °• N << ~ fD O 7 x-j 7 ~ ~ oo =° ~- ~3....' ° °^. ~ -,nab '- m ..E 0v a',., y. f H p• _~ n O ~ rn "d 1~~1 ~ o y° cOO V o.p' ~"--nOi Z ooo' m~`<~ x°:~o rt ~'•~' ~ ~ p,° why- ~=' oao o ° a -c m m fA f ~ - x• co c @ a~ aam° Bmf~ :C ~ r'3 ~,,,, ~p ~y~",.~ .awn o a w y a•°, b~ ~fD O ~+ ~ a m' ~ Sao - m a .w x _ H y m a ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ m, cn~ ~ .- ac .-brow d f ~ va £•d _w w ~ v ~ Q ~ m ``'~ ~ •'~ a.-„ try c°o ,~ CD vc a• < ... v o0 3 0 o w~ E raO. O y ,~3 r7 p:~ ~5 o-y ~ x ~ rD ~•~• ~ m o ro ccoo rv oov, a•a+co ~m ~o~ oa mo-+ • n a T ~l^' `~ O ! , 00 r•'a!' ~ .~ { Z D Sn m °vt-'w~n~, .ro?vv^n.•<-~y?w T .< SS=. ?•-~n '~~~ ~` ^3'+.~ yN-.^> n to OC y toil wQ0 wNQ'C`G <O- .. ^={~~tn ,n? Gn p~ ~ .. \~ .%~. - -t S - - rr •J W C1 n a d C r r m a r C7 ~-r O CD s~•a Gm v ~~m n w °• C1 m °°. °c. ~ ~~ w n s G ~ C °1 O rv ~ o ao o C .au- ~ <• N• ~ A ~ oa c ~ ~ c ?. c~ ° o ° ~ m w H z w :C '@. ti n oa °3~ m .w• K .~ a N i. ~ A - 0• ~ ~ ~ 70 O G O G ~ n. ° .- O ti r G C' ~. 6 % v. -^s ~ 7 ` n n ~ n .7.. - ° O ~ .~ _ ~ _ = J. O C O ~ V n _ %~ °. o •. N ~ ~ :~ E ....°. ~ N "o ~ ~ ^ :n c ^ ~• tn" n ~ ~ ~; ~ _ "• ~ y o ~ y ~ ~ ~ Ci ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ l `^ _ _ ` o `-1 N~mm~w$.mH ~o n~s_.°-<°n ° ^c-^NV ^~o r~- yarn boo _°n~ ~~ ?wn...~ ~~ 3 on°_ r°~ o. z s,N -_~~<oy~'~r;N°'•`r3~=~ ° .- -O <~wo°wN v waw°0~..'~wro 9 °r Cc~~ n~~ n: n - n ^~ ~~?Ja S H m m ;~ o ? r: =c > > rno - =+. o •• ^ o ° w ~ 3 ~, ^ °. ~ ° n ~ j ^~'? o n ~ _ ~ ~c ~.< _ o •o o. c °• n °000 <w ~ I ..gin Od7 ~ ^O-Gk°~-+. 'f7 G?n~ i~ _ ~i~n--•-, c tj !J N ~ ~ n'T~r-•uni3i~OG?F rn-jNN~ y HOC`wG [~v, w~.y-po„n~yn~ H C.wn _F O•nFCn O^G'+.O<. n _~- ! _7 ` l~ 1 o S ~ _. H G 0'' O •G . u C ? '' ~ .~j ~ !^ I""' y ? - ~ n ' .O_ .'+. ^. Cvi ~0 = G G T w w 07 S y n 0 6 N C `G w e Q ~' y 00 w- n r' ` ' n 7= .-. (10 :~ ~ -^ , OO•<~~GGt°J I Ort~+O~vi~OG.n.i~ p0 'ti Oln~a o~.n0-J~rl fl~~Cn~ON~.~~OT.~ C°VSw~y O'O ~O OYN-+f0 ~'_' nnA~7N EP:A G-^. G_•-L•Y00n_--.~0v~-w -~'~ O G l1 __^• O X00 n 3 ~. N ?j -~ N w O?~ 'G w -.... ~ ~~ F i'. C O =. _ w ~~ n C n O _- p0 H' N O y w a 0 6 n n (7~ N _6a ° !n ?~ ... C m 00 n n 7 O S° d .-. G 7`? n J J ...1 .~ y~~ 0 _? N •- °n~'~,wQ•6~~ x=m~`''ooo JUni-°. <^°n~°~o%~o- ~~n-, c~~; N.' ~~---Nnc ° Etnt^_• omn l n o .. n--Tm7o•n^.....a. vn ~ c nnn:a° ~ ntio N tow w-' O- ~'? O N..{~ EGG ~ w~ N<_ .N-.~?S('1 •L' ._• rp ~ 6- O~? O w `< ~ C N 3 w -~ C w~ O' ~ V V w- N= O~ w O C- C G y ~ ~~ snow?o_.wAN C n off'-,^^° u ~ ~_^_~ om~~v n„=~ ° \\~~~~ w.., nao ro?~Z~O`~' na3?°cs:sw °~:w?n -n-^ < 'y ~' o:~=~=N~wn--C•_3E~'~'a wc'w2.o° a cn?G°n~» ~ N ..~. ~~.. o`~; \ _a~~' o~`<d~o~-~-:o W~co~SOp~-, n o°o-;n~~wG_oo o FSS~_ \..\ 1' i••-` /~ V~ vj ,-~ ,_~* O~ E n A w° .. T 6 Z O w^ 7 -. X= A .. O ?Q•j i U y~ C j n j rGj O 3~^y <a06b NP0^ nV1 000•w On nSw .^- _nG`<O H l ,~ ~. (7 3m ~ ° o c F+o o?-_.''o x'Nnn~~ .•NCO 3 O ~' ''`?°CC ca~n~ •vo 9w Dvm °~'t'nu~~' ~O O~om no°~-. ~ ./ tOi~t°jpt~ vii 0o0Uwo Sy O~S7 wCV N?n ^nU?'<_~ ~=_O:'n n .1 _ mn:7 w? C~ Sn`F~~NO f°HO~c~ w~n~~o ?•. c-'o _N `nom ~~"'^- nvov'-o ~ °nc- ^^- ~^?_ c ti~. _ is :mm ? ~ aCo~ wn° ~ ro "v;"w ~a nro ~ , - r-.~ , , c~ - - - C n ~ -_ - ~ .. o I v- ~- - ~_ ° Q mcn- _^F ~ ry < -, npo o C _...J n °•~ ?'--~~ Gry f<'J ~ w O -C f, ° _C^ ~ ~ -<`~ ~ m o,~.. E °sri~oa~w<~= vo^-c nom".-=~'" i- C( O O A -• Nom ^O3 fit-. r ix-.•i~n=ow<o- - n ~d m~ °-•°O°'o_ -_.~..i~~N~n<Ya °o~=own=~N OC^~~ r'>. I ~..C ,~ .•t~ _ 1 3v~ tcnaa~aw X.vn~3~°1~~00 3U-v-,"-`.3o~°noN o's < ...~~ ~/ m ~ °•^° '^ ~y-o~3vn o '`•7n' ox`o~3 m'. m + ~Y_ _ ~-~ y •-1 G S O a x ^.t N• ~° . O O~ I 3 n O v ^ C _ - :~~ 1 S G 3 `< S rr C w O to ~. ~ n) N -. C O 00 +j S -~•~ ,• ~v ~~- P S `^