Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes04_0824City of Falcon Heights Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 2004 PRESENT: Commissioners Harris, Heideman, Lageson, Maher, Ryan, Tracy, Council Member Lindstrom. Also present was Staff Liaison Deb Jones. ABSENT: Lukermann, DeLeo, Ziebarth The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Harris at 7:03 p.m. The minutes of the June 22, 2004, meeting were approved. LOT COVERAGE VARIANCE AT 1885 ASBURY Preliminary to the public hearing, Staff Liaison Jones presented the staff report on the variance application. Applicant sought a variance to build an addition on his house that would bring his property over the legal limit for lot coverage given in Section 9-2.05, subd. 2d of the City Code. The property is 11,622 square feet, for which the code allows a maximum of 30% or 3,487 square feet. The existing coverage is 3,900 square feet, or 413 more than allowed. The applicant would remove some existing pavement and a shed and build a 624 square foot bedroom addition that would be a net increase of 234 square feet, or a total of 647 more than allowed by the ordinance. Jones pointed out that this residence is one of the properties on the west side of Asbury and east side of Snelling that are unusually wide and shallow. This configuration imposes unusual constraints on the buildable area of each lot, and in fact, most of the homes are non-conforming with respect to setback. Similar additions have been allowed on other homes on these lots, although those took place before the current lot coverage limits came into effect. The owner has two other options (1) removing an existing patio, which would be the loss of an important outdoor amenity, or (2) adding a second story – which would be significantly more costly. Staff did not find that the variance would have any negative or harmful effect on surrounding properties or public spaces or that the expanded home would be out of line with the other properties on the west side of Asbury. Staff did find that the proposed addition is a reasonable amenity and would probably enhance the value of the property . No neighbor contacted the City prior to the hearing to express any opinion. To summarize the findings, Staff did not find sufficient reason to deny the variance and recommended approval. The public hearing was opened by the Chair. The only persons in attendance were the property owner, Steven Genz, and his architect Jeff Hogsted of JDH Designs. Mr. Genz spoke to the Commission about his proposed plan and answered Commissioner questions. Commissioner Lageson offered the suggestion that plumbing not be located in the outside north wall, which was taken to heart by the designer. Mr. Hogsted also spoke briefly about the design and answered questions. There being no one else who wished to speak, the Chair closed the hearing. Tracy moved, Lageson seconded, that the Commission recommend approval of the variance. The ensuing discussion centered on the lot coverage issue and whether the variance should be granted when there is an option (removing the patio) that would make a variance unnecessary. Commissioner Ryan said he is struggling over this point, although he appreciated the applicant making an effort to eliminate other pavements and the shed. The same discomfort was shared by other Commissioners, in view of the fact that the Commission spent so much working on lot coverage in 2002. In the end, the motion to recommend approval passed, 4 in favor, 2 opposed. Commissioner Harris felt that the formal findings of fact drawn up by the City Attorney for the Planning Commission should be amended to match the wording of the Staff findings, which mention the non-variance options. She made a motion to that effect; Maher seconded. Discussion followed. Mr. Genz was asked about the timing of his project, as the actual permit application has not yet been turned in; he said they are taking things one step at a time. After further discussion, the motion was withdrawn and Harris made a new motion to approve the City Attorney’s draft of the findings. Tracy seconded. Motion passed unanimously. The variance will move on the Council for its decision on September 8. INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Lageson said that he had spoken to resident Brian Olson before the meeting and wanted to pass on a couple of his concerns. Mr. Olson wants to know why the traffic signal at the intersection at Snelling and Roselawn has no emergency light. Jones said she would investigate and report back. Mr. Olson is also concerned about speeding on Roselawn and says that it seems to be getting worse. Jones said she would communicate that to the Police. Ms. Harris said she has seen the police stopping people along Roselawn. Mr. Lageson also asked about the police reports. He pointed out that they are “filtered” in the Roseville review and asked if they are also “filtered” on the website. Ms. Jones said that the website lists all incidents in the weekly police report, when available, but staff selects the incidents most likely to be of interest to residents to report in detail. Most of the incidents are traffic stops of minimal interest to the public. The full report is available at City Hall on request. Citizens can also contact the St. Anthony Police Department. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:53 p.m. WORKSHOP The meeting adjourned to a brief workshop on code revision issues, particularly relating to the portions of the zoning code dealing with variances and amendments. There was further discussion on the variance considered earlier. Commissioners requested a training opportunity on the standards for granting a variance. When is a hardship a “material hardship” or “substantial hardship” as opposed to an inconvenience? Jones said she would pass that request to the City Administrator. Respectfully submitted, Deborah Jones, Staff Liaison