Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/11/1987 P&Z Minutes• PLANNING & ZONING BOARD March 11, 1987 The regular meeting of the Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board was called to order by Acting Chairman Dave Cody at 7:02 P.M., Wednesday, March 11, 1987. Boardmembers present: Cody, Prokop, Nelson, Averbeck, Irwin, Joyer. Boardmembers absent: McLean. Also present were: Mr. Kluegel, Building Official; Mr. Johnson, City Planner; Mr. Marier, Council Liaison; Mr. Schumacher, City Administrator; Mrs. Foster, Secretary. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIR Mrs. Averbeck nominated Mr. Cody to serve as chairman of the P & Z Board for 1987. Mr. Prokop seconded the nomination for Mr. Cody as Chairman. Mr. Prokop moved to close nominations for chairman. Mr. Joyer seconded the motion. Vote carried unanimously. Mr. Prokop nominated Mrs. Averbeck to serve as vice chair of the P & Z Board for 1987. Ms. Nelson seconded the nomination for Mrs. Averbeck as Vice Chair. Mr. Prokop moved to close nominations for vice chair. Ms. Nelson • seconded the motion. Vote carried unanimously. • CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - 2/11/87 Mrs. Averbeck noted that on page four of the 2/11/87 P & Z minutes, under the heading "Building Standards - Proposed Ordinance #05 -86 ", the motion did not carry unanimously as stated; the vote was carried with Mr. Joyer and Ms. Nelson voting no. She asked that this correction be made to the 2/11/87 minutes. MOTION: Mr. Prokop moved to accept the 2/11/87 minutes including the correction requested above. Mrs. Averbeck seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Mr. Prokop asked in regard to the 2/23/87 Council minutes, under Ordinance 17 -86 "Creating Central Business District ", page six, paragraph beginning with "Purpose ", whether the Council meant to have left in the words "expansion and" or whether this was merely an oversight. Mr. Schumacher and Mr. Marier felt it was an, oversight, and the words "expansion and" would be removed for the permanent record. OPEN MIKE - MIKE GROW REPRESENTING HANSON BLOCK COMPANY Mr. Grow appeared before the Board asking their thoughts or concerns on a possible concrete block company of 15,000 - 20,000 square feet on a ten -acre parcel in Lino Lakes. Hanson Block is considering locating either near Moline Concrete or near County Rd. 14 and 35E. Boardmembers offered suggestions that Hanson Block consider the noise and traffic complaints which may occur if located near Moline Concrete and also be informed that a Conditional Use Permit would be required in the General Industrial zone. A Conditional Use • PLANNING & ZONING BOARD March 11, 1987 Page Two Permit would require a public hearing and limits on exterior storage, etc. Applicant was told to get this information from the Building Official. The consensus of the Board was that they were not adverse to considering the proposal since it appears to be moving in the direction the City intends to go ", BUILDING OFFICIAL'S REPORT Mr. Kluegel reported the following recent Council actions: - The minor subdivision request of Vernon Wahlberg was withdrawn before Council consideration. - The site and building plan of Custom Manufacturing for an in- jection molding plant was approved by Council. - The minor subdivision request of Donald McShannock was approved with the stipulation that the planner's and engineer's recom- mendations be followed completely. - The Comprehensive Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council with the recommendation that the 21 acre lots on the west side of 35E remain "rural ". - The second reading of the ordinance calling for a "Central Business District" was approved. - Council referred the "building standards" ordinance to the Chamber of Commerce and Economic Development Committee for their review and input. Those meetings have been set. - Zack Johnson has been reappointed to serve as the City Planner. KEN CHAPEAU - VARIANCE TO ACCESSORY BUILDING ORDINANCE Mr. and Mrs. Chapeau appeared for the third consecutive month regard- ing the storage area which they added to their garage. (See January 1987 and February 1987 minutes.) Per P & Z's request, Mr. Kluegel has determined that it would cost approximately $250 to bring the storage area to state code and have the siding match the garage. These changes would still leave the area attached to the garage. Mrs. Chapeau stated that at the time the garage was built the former building official was aware of the storage area that the Chapeau's had planned; at that time there was no accessory building ordinance which would prohibit the storage area; years later (when the storage area was actual built) they did not know they would be violating an ordinance by attaching the storage area. Mr. & Mrs. Chapeau claimed that there would be no other place on their lot on which to build the storage area since their lot has such high water table. They felt that the only possibility would •be next to their home which they felt would be unsightly. It was the City Planner's opinion that 50% of the property has water table problems. Linda Carlson, a neighbor to the Chapeau's, appeared and said that the Chapeau's have done a very good job of improving and maintaining their property, the neighbors were petitioned and were not opposed • • • PLANNING & ZONING BOARD March 11, 1987 Page Three to the storage area as it exists and in fact the neighbors preferred the existing structure which is not visible to a storage building next to the Chapeau's house. MOTION; Mr. Prokop moved to recommend to Council approval of a variance for Kenneth Chapeau, application #87 -1, 1243 W. 81st St., Lino Lakes, MN. This variance would be to the accessory building ordinance and is recommended due to the hardship of the land (50% of the land having water table problems per the City Planner) with the following findings of fact: (1) That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the accessory building ordinance. (2) That the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property (watertable problems and asthetics problem if the storage building is located alongside the house). These circumstances are not created by the landowner, (3) The hardship is not due to economic considerations alone. (4) Granting the variance will not confer on the applicant any special privilege. (5)This action will not unreasonably dimin- ish or impair established property values within the neighborhood. (6)The proposed actions will be in keeping with the spirit and in- tent of the ordinance. (Appendix B, Section 5, Subd. 7 (1 - 6). Granting of this variance also will mean that the 16' X 8' storage area which is presently attached to the Chapeau's garage will con- stitute a "storage building" and no other "storage building" will be allowed on the property. Mr. Joyer seconded the motion which carried unanimously. MIKE WISE - VARIANCE TO FENCING ORDINANCE Mr. Kluegel explained that Mr. Wise is requesting a variance which would allow him a 6 foot fence on his property rather than the 4 foot fence allowed per ordinance. Anoka County has requested the variance since the County Highway Department proposes to acquire additional right of way from the Wise property that will bring the right of way line within 11 feet of the side of the Wise house. A fence of this height would help mitigate the noise and other effects of the project. Mr. Schumacher noted also that the City needs to acquire land along the other side of the property for 4th Avenue, which will pose further hardship to the property. Mr. Kinnan was in attendance representing the County. MOTION: Ms. Nelson moved to recommend to Council approval of a variance to the fencing ordinance (Appendix B, Section 4, Subd. 29) for Michael Wise, 7999 4th Avenue, Lino Lakes, (application #87 -5). This variance would allow a 6 foot high fence rather than a 4 foot high fence, and is recommended due to the hardship of the land posed by right of way acquisition. The following findings of fact apply: (1) The property in question cannot be put to reasonable use under the conditions allowed in the fencing ordinance. (2) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. (3) The hardship is not due to economic considerations alone. (4) Granting of variance will not confer on • PLANNING C ZONING BOARD March 11, 1987 Page Four the applicant any special privileges. (5) The proposed actions will not unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the neighborhood. () The proposed actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Mrs. Averbeck seconded the motion which carried unanimously. ALBERT THILTGEN - HQUSE MOVELMMIT Mr. Kluegel explained that this request is for a house move -in permit for a 1,152 sq. ft. house and 352 sq. ft. garage from 2295 Long Avenue, Hugo to 7791 20th Ave. No., Lino Lakes. This house is planned to be moved after road weight restrictions are lifted. Mr. Kluegel said the house was up to code and was in good condi- tion, though the roof will need repair. MOTION:, Mrs. Averbeck moved to recommend to Council approval of a house move -in permit for Albert Thiltgen, to have Able Movers move a house from 2295 Long Avenue, Hugo to 7791 20th Avenue No., Lino Lakes. The house will be brought to code and be compatible with the houses in the area and meet ordinances with regard to setback requirements, etc. Mr. Prokop seconded the motion which carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF ZONING AMENDMENTS Ordinance 05 -87 Mr. Cody asked Mr. Kluegel if he is satisfied with the language within Ordinance 05 -87 and whether he could enforce the ordinance. Mr. Kluegel said yes, he could. MOTION. Mrs. Averbeck moved..to• recommend to Council adoption of Ordinance 05 -87 as set forth below. Ms. Nelson seconded the motion which carried with Mr. Joyer voting no. CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA Ordinance No. 05 - 87 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE, APPENDIX B, ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES BY ADDING DURABLE AND DUSTLESS SURFACE TO THE RULES AND DEFINITIONS SECTION The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota ordains: I. Ordinance No. 2 of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota passed by the City Council on May 24, 1983 is hereby amended by amending Section 3, Subdivision 2 Definitions to include the following: • AMENDMENT: PLANNING & ZONING BOARD March 11, 1987 Page Five Appendix B, Section 3, Subdivision 2 Definitions is amended to include 44(A): Driveway Surface - A durable and dustless surface shall include asphalt, concrete, or other surfaces as approved by the Engi- neer. Aglime and Class #5 shall not constitute a durable and dustless surface. II. Save as above amended, said Ordinance No. 2 shall stand as ini- tially passed and as previously amended. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to City Charter. Passed by the City Council this day of , 1987. • M. G. Anderson, City Clerk B. G. Benson, Mayor Ordinance No. 04 -87 The Board then considered Ordinance No. 04 =87, An Ordinance Amending the City Code, Appendix B. Zoning Ordinance of the City of Lino Lakes by Amending Design Requirements for Off- Street Areas. The amendment being considered read as follows: AMENDMENT: Appendix B, Section 8, Subdivision (4) Design and Set - back requirements for off - street areas is amended to read as follows: (C) Surfacing and Drainage. In Districts R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, NB, LB, SC, GB, LI, CB, GI, PSP and in open sales lots, off - street parking areas and load- ing areas and their related driveways and approaches shall be paved with a concrete, bituminous or durable and dustless surface. Such areas shall be so graded and drained as to dispose of all surface water accumulation within the area. Permitted Uses in the R, RE and ER districts shall be allowed to surface off - street parking areas with crushed rock and similar durable and dustless surfaces. • The Boardmembers voiced several alternatives to this amendment. MOTION: Mrs. Nelson moved to recommend to Council approval of Ordinance 04 -87 to read as follows: • PLANNING & ZONING BOARD March 11, 1987 Page Six AMENDMENT: Appendix B, Section 8, Subdivision (4) Design and Setback requirements for off - street areas is amended to read as follows: (C) Surfacing and Drainage. In Districts R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, NB, LB, SC, GB, LI, CB, GI, PSP, ER and in open sales lots, off - street parking areas and loading areas and their related driveways and approaches shall be paved with a driveway surface. Such areas shall be so graded and drained as to dispose of all surface water accumulation within the area. Permitted Uses in the R and RE districts shall be allowed to surface off - street parking areas with crushed rock and similar surfaces. Mr. Prokop seconded the motion in order to move on to the vote. On voting on the motion Ms. Nelson voted aye. All others voted no. Motion failed. • MOTION: Mrs. Averbeck then moved to recommend to Council approval of Ordinance 04 -87 to read as follows: • AMENDMENT: Appendix B, Section 8, Subdivision (4) Design and Setback requirements for off - street areas is amended to read as follows: (C) Surfacing and Drainage. In Districts R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, NB, LB, SC, GB, LI, CB, GI, PSP and in open sales lots, off - street parking areas and loading areas and their related driveways and approaches shall be paved with a driveway surface. Such areas shall be so graded and drained as to dispose of all surface water accumula- tion within the area. Permitted Uses in the R, RE and ER districts shall be allowed to surface off - street parking areas with crushed rock and similar surfaces. Mr. Prokop seconded the motion in order to move on to the vote. On voting on the motion, there were 3 aye votes and 3 no votes. Motion failed. MOTION: Mr. Joyer moved to recommend to Council that the present ordinance (Appendix B, Section 8, Subdivision (4) Design and Setback Requirements for Off- street areas) not be changed and that Ordinance 04 -87 be rejected. Mr. Prokop seconded the motion in order to move on to the vote. On voting on the motion, Mr. Prokop, Mr. Irwin and Mr. Joyer voted yes. Mrs. Averbeck and Ms. Nelson voted no. Motion passed. PLANNING f ZONING BOARD March 11, 1987 Page Seven Ordinance Amending Requirements for Motor Vehicle Parking in Residential Areas —^ Mr. Kluegel explained that the ordinance amendment being presented simply adds the words "or semi - trailers" and serves the purpose of clarifying the ordinance and making it more enforceable. MOTION: Mr. Prokop moved to recommend to Council approval of the amendment to requirements for motor vehicle parking in residential areas as follows. Mr. Joyer seconded the motion which carried unanimously. CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE No. -86 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE, APPENDIX B, ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES BY AMENDING REQUIREMENTS FOR MOTOR • VEHICLE PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. The City Council of the City of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota does ordain: • Section 8. Parking for All Zoning Districts. Section 8, Subdivi- sion (5) motor vehicle parking in residential areas is amended to read as follows: Section 8 Subdivision (5) Motor Vehicle Parking in Residential Areas. No motor vehicle exceeding a gross weight of 11,075 pounds or semi- trailers shall be parked or stored in a residential district except when loading, unloading or rendering a service. Section 2. Effective Date This ordinance shall be effective thirty (30) days after its passage and publication as required by City Charter. Passed by the Council of the City of Lino Lakes this day of , 1987. M. G. Anderson, City Clerk B. G. Benson, Mayor Ordinance Amending Requirements for Accessory Buildings Mr. Kluegel explained that the purpose of this amendment is to clarify the intent of the ordinance, i.e., that accessory buildings PLANNING & ZONING BOARD March 11, 1987 Page Eight must be separate and not physically attached to one another, and also to address the limit of square footage on attached garages (the current ordinance does not address this). Mr. Irwin stated that regardless of the intent when the current accessory building ordinance was put togethr, he preferred com- bining accessory buildings in some instances rather than to have several buildings scattered around a lot. Other Boardmembers pointed out that if square footage of all the allowed accessory buildings was to be combined, it could create one very large, unsightly building. Mr. Joe Hill was in the audience and stated that he lives on Sunrise, where the homes have around 660 square feet and he wants to build a 1,000 square foot detached garage. He felt the limit of 760 square feet for a detached garage was too small and that if 1,000 square feet is allowed for an attached, it should also be allowed for a detached garage. Mr. Prokop said that the Board should remember that the Accessory Building Ordinance took a lot of time to compile and 760 square feet was determined to be adequate for a detached garage. MOTION; Mr. Prokop moved to recommend to Council approval of an amendment to Appendix B, Section 4, Subd. 7 regarding accessory buildings as follows. Mrs. Nelson seconded the motion which carried with Mr. Joyer voting no. CITY OF LINO LAKES COUNTY OF ANOKA STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE No. -87 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE, APPENDIX B, ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LINO LAKES BY ADDING TO SUBDIVISION 7 ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES (11) A, B, C, D, E, F. I. One attached garage (maximum 1,000 square feet or not to exceed the square footage of main floor of residence). Each accessory building must be separate and not physically attached to another. II. Save as above amended, said Ordinance #14 -84 shall stand as ini- tially passed and as previously amended. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to the City Charter. PLANNING & ZONING BOARD March 11, 1987 Page Nine Passed by the City Council this day of 1987. M. G. Anderson, City Clerk B. G. Benson, Mayor Ordinance Adding_Ear -th— sheltered Homes as a Conditional Use in R, ER, R1 Districts Mr. Kluegel explained that earth - sheltered homes were discussed some time ago by the Board and the purpose of this amendment would be to allow earth - sheltered homes as a conditional use in R, ER and R1 districts which would allow the P & Z Board to review re- quests to build earth - sheltered homes. Mr. Johnson, City Planner recommended against such action so as not to discriminate against earth = sheltered homes. MOTION: Mr. Prokop moved to recommend to Council approval of an ordinance amendment which would allow earth - sheltered homes as a conditional use in R, ER, and R1 districts. Mr. Irwin seconded the motion. On voting on the motion Mr. Prokon and Mr. Irwin voted aye. Mr. Joyer, Ms. Nelson and Mrs. Averbeck voted no. Motion failed. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS Comprehensive Plan - Mr. Johnson, with the use of colored maps, showed the changes to the MUSA lines which the City Engineer recom- mended to Council at their last meeting. He also showed the over- all picture of what the City is requesting from Metro Council with regard to future planning for sewer and water lines and storage facilities. Mr. Johnson also suggested that the appropriate changes to the zoning ordinance and the zoning map be ready to be put in place when the City receives approval of the comp plan update from the Metro Council and after necessary approvals by the Council. Mr. Johnson said he would contact Mr. Schumacher for direction as to what work will be done by the City Planner and what would be done at the staff level. Reappointment of Mr. Johnson as City Planner - Mr. Johnson reminded the Board that should the members have any concerns with regard to the planning services provided by Mr. Johnson, he asks that they be communicated in order to help the working relationship. Mr. Cody commented that to date he has no concerns with the quality of service; he appreciates Mr. Johnson's up front presentations. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. by unanimous decision. Aye.