Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02_0423City of Falcon Heights Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 Chair Heideman called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. PRESENT: Tracy, Middleton, Lageson, Maher, Heideman, Ziebarth, DeLeo, Harris. Also present were Peter Lindstrom, Council Liaison, Heather Worthington, City Administrator, Deb Jones, Zoning and Planning Coordinator ABSENT: Ryan, Middleton MINUTES: The minutes for February 26, 2002 were approved as written. CONTINUING DISCUSSION OF SETBACK AND LOT COVERAGE ISSUES Chair Heideman reviewed the discussion to date. In February a Northome resident spoke to the Commission expressing her concern about the building up of garages in Northome and her feeling that the 75% lot coverage limit is too generous. Code restrictions exist to protect the esthetic quality of our neighborhood, among other reasons, and there is concern that Northome, especially, could come to resemble something more like a townhouse development rather than the single-family residential area it has always been. Staff liaison Jones, who has been researching the way other communities handle lot coverage and related issues, summarized her findings as follows: Most cities (both near Falcon Heights and across the country) have a limit of 30 to 40 percent lot coverage in single family residential zones, although there is wide variation in how lot coverage is computed and what is counted. Falcon Heights' 75% is noticeably out of the ordinary. In response to a question from Heideman, Jones said that, while Falcon Heights is fairly clear about all impervious covering being included in lot coverage, most surrounding communities are less specific. In response to a question from Commissioner Maher, Jones said that swimming pools are included in some communities but not in others. Falcon Heights does include in-ground swimming pools in lot coverage. Commissioner Ziebarth wondered what would be the implications of changing our definition of lot coverage or our limit. Would there be a different impact on different neighborhoods? And do we want to add to the complexity of the code by creating different rules for different neighborhoods? Administrator Worthington said that lot coverage is a citywide issue, not just in Northome, and that there are several ways the problem could be approached. Commissioner Harris asked how the cities in the study were chosen. Jones replied that the local cities were researched at the direction of the Commission, including cities surrounding Falcon Heights and other Twin Cities communities of similar age and size to Falcon Heights. The final internet search was a more random "fishing expedition" that included cities across the country. Most fell into the 30 - 40% range mentioned above. Commissioner Heideman raised the issue of stormwater runoff, asking if we are part of a larger picture. If everybody in Northome built up to the 75% limit, would this contribute to the runoff problem? Administrator Worthington said this is a very important point and there are some major downstream issues. Falcon Heights is in ongoing discussions with St. Paul about this. What is the next step? Worthington said that staff is discussing a lot coverage ratio or calculation based on lot size, in order to address the diversity of lot sizes throughout the city. We're trying to take a fair approach that doesn't penalize any area of the city. Staff will probably recommend continuing to include all impervious covering. What staff is discussing now is a modified neighborhood-based approach. A recommendation could be prepared for the May meeting, if the Commissioners so desire. The consensus was that this would be a good thing. In response to a question from Commissioner Tracy, Worthington affirmed that the city does grant permits for remodeling and other construction in the University Grove, although not many are requested. Worthington summed up the next steps. Only lot coverage is being addressed right now, not setback or other parts of zoning. Staff will do more research on typical lot size and lot coverage in the city now and enlist the help of the city attorney to draw up a recommended ordinance that would be brought to the Commission at the May meeting or later. Public hearings would be held, and the Council would make the final decision. If the Commission wants to include other issues besides lot coverage (for instance, corner lot side setback), they could be included. Commissioner asked, if the Commission recommended reduction of the lot coverage limit, other then groundwater runoff, what rationale could be given? Worthington replied that the other rationale is based on the esthetics of the built environment and the controls the city places on the look of the neighborhoods through zoning and building codes. This is the way the issue was raised by the resident who spoke in February, whose concern was that the ambience of certain neighborhoods is being eroded by increasing density. But this is an issue for the Planning Commission to frame in its presentation to the City Council. Chair Heideman asked if it is within the bounds of the Planning Commission and the Council to decide what the esthetic standards should be. This comes back to the question of why we have zoning and why we have a Planning Commission, Worthington replied. Yes, esthetics is part of the reason we have such institutions. Commissioner Harris said she was glad to hear that there would be public hearings, as only one resident had been heard from initially. Worthington emphasized that in Falcon Heights we try to err, if at all, on the side of "too much" public input. We want to be sure everybody has a chance to have his or her say, because this is a big change. REVIEW OF THE FIRST DRAFT OF A PROPOSED ZONING BROCHURE A "very rough" first draft of some text having been distributed to the Commissioners before the meeting, Ms. Jones asked the Commissioners for their input. The draft is in the form of questions and answers and will require a lot of editing, reordering, and other work. Diagrams and graphics will be included. The goal is to have something in print for the coming building season. The material will also be published on the city website and refined there in response to feedback from the public, so future editions of the brochure would be even more useful to residents. In the ensuing general discussion, the following points were raised. Make sure terms are defined for the layman, such as "R-1" or "setback" Put the questions in a logical order so terms are defined before they are used. Diagrams are a good idea; showing is clearer than telling. How do I find out what my lot size is? - Helpful sidebar. Questions on page 3 are more immediate; maybe start with these. ("How big can I make my garage?") Maybe we could insert a fee schedule each year. Give a realistic idea of how big the permit fee will be, maybe with a range, such as "80 to several hundred dollars" Where are rear lot lines in Northome, where there are alleys? (Worthington said right of way typically extends into what resident thinks is the yard; if in doubt, have a survey done and figure in the cost as part of the project. The city has a metal detector that can be borrowed free to help find the corner markers.) Watch vocabulary to minimize jargon, such as "obtain a permit" instead of "pull a permit." Jones will post comments, suggestions, updates and revisions on a private web page for the Commission. The URL will be sent to the Commissioners as soon as it is ready. Comments should be emailed back to her. Responding to the flyer that was sent out the whole community, Commissioner Lageson asked why permits are required for certain kinds of projects such as replacement windows. Administrator Worthington replied that this provides a way to make sure quality work is done, for the protection of the homeowner and the community. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: None ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 7:46 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Deborah Jones Zoning and Planning Coordinator