Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/13/1988 P&Z MinutesD 1 i PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD JANUARY 13, 1988 Chairman Dave Cody called to order the regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board at 7:00 p.m. Wednesday, January 13, 1988. Board members present: Chairman Cody, McLean, Joyer, Irwin, Averbeck and Nelson. Board members absent: Prokop. Also present were: John Miller -City Planner, Pete Kluegel - Building Official, Ron Stallberg -City Engineer, and Secretary- Connie Husby. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: MOTION: Averbeck moved to accept minutes as presented. McLean seconded the motion and the motion was carried unanimously. OPEN MIKE: Gary Shipman - 907 Lois Lane, Lino Lakes brought a petition to the Planning and Zoning meeting regarding changing an ordinance. Their participation is to request the City of Lino Lakes to change section 4, subdivision 7 , items 11E and 11F of the Building Codes, to have a minimum lot size of 3 /4ths acre and not one (1) acre, as it currently is. This will allow larger tool sheds and detatched garages on slightly smaller lots. Chairman Cody suggested making this an agenda item at a future Planning and Zoning meeting, perhaps 30 -60 days from now to discuss revising the ordinance. The City Council would have to approve this change also if made. We will notify Gary Shipman as to when this will take place. Let the records show that Mr. Prokop joined the meeting already in progress at 7:09 p.m. PRESENTATION OF CONTOUR MAPS -RON STALLBERG: Ron Stallberg showed areas of concern on the contour maps he brought to the meeting. These maps could become helpful to the Planning and Zoning members as they discuss new building in the area with the contractors. These contour maps will be available on file in care of the City Clerk at City Hall. LOT SPLIT /LEE & IONE ROBINSON 8179 4th Avenue, Lino Lakes - Application 87 -31. Lee and Ione Robinson own a large amount of land in the northwest part of the city. At present they wish to divide the land among their grandchildren and retain a ten acre parcel for themselves. Lee Robinson brought a copy of a contract for deed that would give one of the grandchildren a contractural interest in 63 acres of land. The exhibit attatched to the deed describes the two parcels. A certificate of survey is not provided with this request as with large simply defined parcels Anoka County does not require a survey for recording purposes. Lee also provided a rough sketch showing the location and size of both the ten and the sixty three acre parcel. In the staff report by John Miller, the recommended action is to recommend to the City Council approval of the request of Lee and Ione Robinson for a minor subdivision creating two parcels measuring ten and sixty three acres as described in Application 87 -31. MOTION: Mr. McLean moved to approve application 87 -31 Lot Split for Lee and Ione Robinson to City Council. Ms.Averbeck seconded the motion and the motion was carried unanimously. KENT ROESSLER'S PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR LAKE VIEW PLACE ADDITION APPLICATION 87 -32. Kent Roessler wishes to plat approximately 7.7 acres adjacent to LaMotte Drive and south of Centerville Lake. The east side of the property is adjacent to the City of Centerville. Roessler wishes to divide the land into 17 residential lots. The land has sewer available to it. Glen Simondson - 1566 LaMotte Drive, voiced his concern regarding the traffic pattern and drainage. He also is concerned with the lot size. Roger Hoffmeister - 1588 LaMotte Drive, is concerned regarding the water problem in their area. The sewer is backing up every year in the area. Their houses are on the same level and they worry about getting water in their basements. Jim Hines - 6519 LaMotte Drive, is concerned regarding his own lot. Jim said he wouldn't have bought the house if he knew a road was coming in next to his home. He doesn't like the idea of Mr. Roessler taking a residential lot and turning it into a road!! MOTION: McLean moved to table Application 87 -32 because of inadequate information necessary to consider. Ms. Nelson seconded the motion and the motion was carried unanimously. t • • CONSIDERATION OF LOT SPLIT FOR KEN LUNDGREN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON HOLLY CIRCLE, APPLICATION 87 -31. Beginning in 1984 and continuing through 1985, and into 1986, the Donnel Companies worked at subdividing 76.8 acres of land into five parcels. The parcels were all larger than ten acres and were described by metes and bounds methods. During the review of the Donnel proposal there was a considerable amount of discussion about the street that was to serve these parcels. In particular it was asked if the street would be owned by the developer or by the city. There was also considerable debate over park fees and the original $11,000 fee - it was reduced to $800.00. At present the street has been constructed and accepted by the city. This application is to further subdivide the largest of the five parcels. The applicant, Ken Lundgren, wishes to subdivide it into two parcels measuring 10 acres and 10.61 acres. In addition a variance is requested for one of the new parcels as it does not have the required 330 feet of frontage on a public street. This is the large parcel and is designated as "Parcel B" of "Parcel D" of the original metes and bounds subdivision. The other piece of land, "Parcel A" has the required 330 feet when the length of the chord of the cul -de -sac is included in the total. The recommended action in the staff report was to table the request from Ken Lundgren for a minor subdivision of land and for a variance. Application 87 -33, 34 pending dedication of Holly Court to the City of Lino Lakes. After considerable discussion, the Planning and Zoning Board decided to table this issue for the following reasons: * No final plat * Not filed in the county * The City Council is more familiar with this and they dealt with this issue first with the partner that is now deceased. MOTION: Prokop moved to table this with these considerations: * Research Metes and Bounds Split • * Need additional information on variance * City Attorney should review to make sure everything is legal * Check on Ghost Plat Mr. Irwin seconded the motion and the motion was carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF LOT SPLIT, VARIANCE, AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR JOE SPETZMAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8171 LAKE DRIVE, APPLICATIONS 88 -01, 88 -02, and 88 -03. John Miller explained the applicant owns 5.37 acres of land on Lake Drive also known as C.S.A.H. 23. Located on the land are Mr. Spetzman's residence, a 32 X 36 garage and a 20 X 50 barn. Those structures are located on the north part of the land. In the southwest corner is a 48 X 75 pole barn. Presently one driveway serves the property. South of the applicant's land is a transmission repair shop • owned by Jim Spetzman, Joe Spetzman's son. • In 1985 Spetzman requested rezoning of his land from the 5 acre minimum lot size Expansion Residential district to the Light Industrial zone. Spetzman explained that he wished to construct a pole barn for cold storage in conjuction with his son's transmission repair business. The action taken by the City Council was to rezone the south two acres to the Light Industrial District keeping the remaining 2.27 acres in the Expansion Residential zone. The council was aware that the remaining residential parcel was undersized and granted a variance to address the question of size and frontage. The following month Mr. Spetzman asked for a site plan review that would allow him to construct the pole barn. The site plan was approved with these requirements: 1. Construction of a six foot high fence along the 165' west boundary, which could be removed when the trees provide 50% screening. 2. No exterior storage 3. No exterior lighting 4. No parking of either material or vehicles outside of the building. 5. No signage • 6. No access to Lake Drive from the existing residential property owned by Mr. Spetzman. At this time the applicant wishes to change the use of the building from cold storage to cabinet manufacturing, a use permitted in the Light Industrial District. He is also asking for a lot split to separate the two industrial acres from the residential land. And to achieve this lot split, Spetzman is further asking for a variance as the pole barn is located closer to the residential land owned by Spetzman that the 75 feet required in the zoning ordinance. MOTION: Mr. Prokop moved to recommend approval of a lot split as requested by Joe Spetzman for property located at 8171 Lake Drive, Application 88 -01. Mr. McLean seconded the motion and the motion was carried unanimously. MOTION: Mr. Prokop moved to recommend approval of a variance to reduce the side yard set back, for industrial buildings adjacent to residential land from 75 to 60 feet for property owned by Joe Spetzman at 8171 Lake Drive, Application 88 -02. Mr. Joyer seconded the motion and the motion was carried unanimously. There was considerable discussion regarding 88 -03 Contractural Zoning. MOTION: Mr. McLean moved to recommend to City Council denial of a site plan changing the use of a building at 8171 Lake Drive, from cold storage to the manufacture of "custom wood products," Application 88 -03 denial to be based on the finding that the conditions placed on the rezoning by the City Council are proper. Ms. Averbeck seconded the motion. The motion carried with Joyer, Cody and Irwin voting no. CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ROLAND FORD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6074 HODGSON ROAD, APPLICATION PENDING. Roland Ford owns ten acres of land at 6074 Hodgson Road. For a number of years he has operated a tree trimming /wood selling business from that land, a use that is non - conforming in both the General Business District and Single Family Residential District. The west half of Ford's land is in the commercial district and the east half in the residential zone. In addition to the wood business Ford and /or his son have started a trucking business on the site that involves the use of "drop -off boxes ". With the boxes a truck hauls the large containers to different sites and returns to get them after they're billed, usually with construction debris. The Ford's keep the truck and store the boxes on the ten acres of land. This use is not permitted in either the General • • • Business or Single Family Residential Districts and is not grand- fathered. Ford's case went to court in September and it was agreed to give him time to rectify the problems he created. Later this month he will be going to court again to show what progress he has made. In visiting with Ford and with Barry Robinson, the attorney responsible for prosecution, I learned that an agreement with the city and the DNR establishing a time -table for clean -up the site, and operate within local ordinances then he would face paying his fine and time in jail. Lino Lakes' task then is to follow the procedure called for in Section 4, Subd. 33 and to process a conditional use permit for Ford's property. It is important to remember that Lino Lakes has the obligation by ordinance to require maintained in a clean and a duly manner. There was considerable discussion regarding the proposed conditions. MOTION: Mr. McLean moved to approve Roland Fords request for a conditional use permit that the Planning and Zoning recommend adoption of a conditional use permit that would be issued to Roland Ford. The content of the conditional use permit would include the conditions in the City Planners staff report as amended here. Amendment #1 To be completed by 06/05/88 #1 & 2 Change footage from 400 feet to 600 feet. Prokop seconded the motion with an editorial change. #4 ALL be inserted as the first word A number 10 be added - properly advised health official be contacted to check for Rodent Control. A number 11 be added - Removal meaning off the property and properly disposed of. The motion was carried unanimously. Here are the following conditions formerly written by our City Planner: CONDITION #1 Cutting, Storage, and sale of wood shall be permitted on the westerly 600 feet of the land. CONDITION #2 Storage of vehicles and equipment used in • • • the wood business shall be permitted on the westerly 600 feet of the land. CONDITION #4 All "drop -off boxes" shall be removed from the site and the drop -off box business located at a different, properly zoned location. Removal is to be completed by June 25, 1988. CONDITION #10 Appropriate local and state health department personnel will be permitted to check for adequate rodent control. CONDITION #11 "Removal" shall be defined as removal from this property to proper locations dependent on the type of material, e.g. metal scrap to scrap yards, solid waste to sanitary land fills, construction debris to demolition land fills. REVIEW OF PROPSED AMENDMENT TO THE SIGN ORDINANCE REGARDING PORTABLE SIGNS (READING BOARDS) Pete Kluegel - Building Official is having a problem with Reader Boards. There are more of them and they seem to be permanent. Pete is asking for reconsideration of the draft ordinance. MOTION: Mr. Joyer moved to table this until the next Planning and Zoning meeting because of time and a significant issue remaining on the agenda. Mr. McLean seconded the motion and the motion was defeated with Nelson, Averbeck, McLean and Irwin voting no. MOTION: Mr. Prokop moved to approve the sign ordinance as presented. Mr. McLean seconded the motion. Mr. McLean made an editorial change: Article 5 - DELETE Shall expire six (6) months from the effective date hereof. The question was called by Chairman Cody and the motion was carried with Irwin and Joyer voting no and Chairman Cody abstaining. REVIEW OF DRAFT ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO IMPLEMENT THE 1) ZONING ORDINANCE REVISIONS NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, 2) INCREASED MINIMUM STANDARD FOR ONE AND TWO- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND 3) CREATE EXECUTIVE HOUSING DISTRICT. Cheryl Nelson made three points. 1) 90 foot on the Rl is a little wider than we need it. 75 is a little narrower than we need it. I would like • to see 85. Concerned regarding cost effectiveness regarding street frontage. 2) Executive Zone - No problem with this. Normal residential area - concerned that we will get a lot of variance requests because of resubdividing. 3) To increase the home value in executive zone - we should increase the garage size. Go with 24 X 24 garage - extra storage. SECTION 6 SUBD. 2 "R" RURAL DISTRICT Page 1 (3) DELETE the word " attatched" in the following: All dwellings shall have an attatched double garage. CHANGE TO: All dwellings shall have a double garage. • * CHANGE Split Foyer /Entry square footage from 980 sq. ft. to 960 sq. ft. SECTION 6 SUBD. 2A "R -X" RURAL EXECUTIVE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Page 3 LOT AND YARD REQUIREMENTS Page 3 Bottom Page 7 (C) Setbacks: DELETE - IV Side Yard (carport or garage) to interior lot line: 5 feet CHANGE (6) Conditional Uses (R District) to RX District) RE- SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS - CHANGE (3) Split Foyer /Entry from 980 sq. ft. to 960 sq. ft. RE- SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS - CHANGE - Planned for resubdivision SHOULD BE CHANGED TO maximum density single family re- subdivision. Page 9 LOT AND YARD REQUIREMENTS (2) S -RX Minimum lot depth should be added and read 330 feet. Page 11 SECTION 6 SUBD. 5 R -1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT - LOT AND YARD REQUIREMENTS - (2) (B) CHANGE Minimum lot width from 90 feet to 80 feet. (4) FLOOR AREA REQUIREMENTS: CHANGE: Split Foyer (Foyer Stairs) from 912 sq. ft. to 960 sq. ft. SECTION 6 SUBD. 5A "R -1X" SINGLE FAMILY EXECUTIVE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Page 11 (2) (B) LOT AND YARD REQUIREMENTS CHANGE Minimum lot width should be changed from 95 sq. ft. to 90 sq. ft. Page 12 DELETE: ITEM 3 Maximum Density ADD: All dwellings shall have an attached double garage minimum 600 sq. ft. (7) CONDITIONAL USES: "R -1" should be "R -1X ". Page 14 FLOOR AREA REQUIREMENTS: CHANGE: Split foyer /Entry should be changed from 980 sq. ft. to 960 sq. ft. MOTION: Mr. Prokop moved to recommend to council adoption of the draft zoning ordinance amendments as corrected. Mr. McLean seconded the motion with an editorial change: On page 10 (7) CONDITIONAL USES - DELETE 7B, 7C, and 7D. The motion was carried with Irwin and Joyer voting no and Chairman Cody abstaining. RESOLUTIONS: MOTION: Mr. Irwin is concerned that we needed more time to study the wide ranging change in the zoning ordinance in the city as presented. Mr. Prokop seconded the motion and the motion was carried with Ms. Nelson voting no. MOTION: Mr. Prokop moved to suspend and table any items left on the agenda until the next Planning and Zoning meeting and moved to adjourn. Mr. McLean seconded the motion and the motion was carried unanimously. The Planning an Zoning Board meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. •