Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-04-2004 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting August 4, 2004 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m., August 4, 2004. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Miller, Stevenson, Scotch, Hegland, Zwirn, Song Members Absent: None. Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson and Planner Prososki ________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page Consider Amendment to the Zoning Code Regarding 2 Driveway Setback Requirements Consider Amendment to Zoning Code Regarding Funeral 5 Homes and Mortuaries Discuss Public Comments Unrelated to Planning and Zoning 6 Matters _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Approve Minutes a. July 7, 2004 MOTION/SECOND: Scotch/Miller. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for July 7, 2004 as Presented. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission August 4, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda William Werner of 2765 Sherwood Road addressed the Commission and asked why citizen requests and comments are at the beginning of the meeting. Chair Stevenson indicated that is to allow residents to discuss zoning or planning matters that are not on the agenda and to adjust the agenda, if necessary. Mr. Werner indicated he was wondering why Mr. Ericson is taking on the task of dealing with public statements made by planning commissioners. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that as the liaison to the Planning Commission it was his duty to bring this information to the Commission to address what has been, in the past, commonly accepted practices and procedures and get feedback to determine if there is consensus to address this in the by-laws. He then said that he is not sure who would be more appropriate because this is part of his job as liaison to the Commission. Mr. Werner asked if Council or the Mayor directed Mr. Ericson to do this. Director Ericson responded that he received no council direction regarding the memo associated with Item 7 on the agenda. Mr. Werner indicated he is on the Charter Commission and this kind of thing is something he would consider within the Charter Commission domain of discussion as to how to run meetings and any restrictions placed on it. Mr. Werner asked if the Commission was planning to change the by-laws. Chair Stevenson indicated it is on the agenda for discussion this evening. Mr. Werner asked if the Chair considered it improper to discuss the matter now. Chair Stevenson recommended adding comments when this is heard on the agenda. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Consider an Amendment to the Zoning Code Regarding Driveway Setback Requirements Community Development Director Ericson indicated this matter was before the Commission on July 21 for discussion as Council feels that the one-foot setback that private property owners may grant or deny to their neighbors may give someone more rights than they should be provided and may take away rights from a property owner if the neighbor says no. Mounds View Planning Commission August 4, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson indicated the Council feels there are other issues that may justify going back to a five-foot setback and, if there are situations where less than five feet is needed, then it should go through the variance process. He then addressed previous concerns raised by the Commission regarding driveways that would become nonconforming as a result of the amendment. He summarized the City Code relating to nonconforming driveways in that permanent driveways constructed prior to October 1999 could remain in place even if they were nonconforming, however a nonconforming driveway permitted after October 1999 had no corresponding protection. He further stated that the driveway requirements in the city code are confusing and difficult to enforce and administer. Director Ericson suggested the Commission could review these code sections and make a recommendation that would clarify the language at a subsequent meeting. Director Ericson indicated that if the City had granted approval for a driveway less than five feet from a property line and a true hardship exists then that would be justification for a variance. He also indicated that there would be the option for an administrative variance provided the neighbor does not object. Commissioner Hegland indicated there are driveways in town that are unimproved and he is concerned that this may discourage those property owners from improve the driveway. Director Ericson indicated that Section 90202 of the Code discusses nonconforming driveways but separates out the permanent and nonpermanent and only provides that protection to permanent driveways so, if the driveway is dirt or gravel, then it could not be rebuilt or expanded regardless of what is adopted this evening. Director Ericson suggested the City could create a program to assist property owners by providing an incentive to improve the driveway such as by entering into a contract for discount asphalt with one of the local asphalt companies. Director Ericson indicated that a majority of driveways with setbacks of less than five feet probably have no apparent hardship which would require the reduced setback. He further commented that he does not feel that this amendment would adversely affect more than a handful of properties as most properties have sufficient room for a driveway. Commissioner Miller indicated that this would eliminate the need to get permission from the neighbor. Chair Stevenson asked Staff to read the reasons the Code is being changed. Director Ericson read them. MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Scotch. To Approve Resolution 768-04, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Code Amendment to the Zoning Code Regarding Driveway Setbacks. Mounds View Planning Commission August 4, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Zwirn indicated that he has seen in the community homes with a pad in front of the garage and then unimproved surface to the street. He then asked how this would impact those residents. Director Ericson indicated that the City has taken the position that residents can bring in Class Five as periodic maintenance of an unimproved driveway. He then explained that the permanent portion would be allowed to remain but the unimproved surface would need to conform to Code requirements. Commissioner Zwirn asked whether the City takes a position one way or the other with respect to completing the driveway. Director Ericson indicated that he City has taken the position that it does not want to force property owners to complete driveways but other cities have done so. Commissioner Zwirn indicated he has issues with this proposal because he feels it could discourage people from improving their property if they have to go through the whole process. Chair Stevenson commented that he does not see how the changes have any different effect on how the property owner would improve the driveway because they are not allowed to go to one foot now unless they have neighbor approval. Commissioner Hegland indicated he has no issue with the proposed change but would like the other issues to be dealt with. He then commented that there have been a lot of changes to the Code to accommodate new construction and he does not want to impose things on people that do not apply to already developed and existing properties. Director Ericson indicated that if a resident wishes to have a one foot setback and the neighbor says no then the resident is required to come before the Planning Commission. Director Ericson indicated that this would be added to the agenda for further driveway discussions. Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission August 4, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ 6. Consider an Amendment to the Zoning Code Regarding Funeral Homes and Mortuaries Planner Prososki indicated that the City’s Code only allows for funeral homes and mortuaries in an R-O zone and, since there is only one R-O zone in the City that is very restrictive. She then said that this limitation was unintentional and Staff recommends a Code amendment to allow funeral homes and mortuaries in other appropriate zoning districts. She then reviewed her research findings with the Commission. Planner Prososki indicated that the Commission may wish to consider funeral homes and mortuaries separately, as one would have people coming to the establishment for services and the other would have the actual chemicals and things involved in preparing a body in addition to services. Planner Prososki asked the Commission to discuss whether it would like to differentiate between them and which districts they would be most appropriate in. She also asked the Commission to consider whether crematories should be included. Chair Stevenson commented that most facilities now have both funeral services and mortuary services in the same facility. Commissioner Hegland asked if Staff intended to make it a permitted use and, if so, they are not the same thing and the City should look into where a mortuary would be appropriate. Chair Stevenson indicated he would like to address crematories separately. Commissioner Scotch indicated that most facilities offer both funeral services and mortuary services. She then said that she feels it would be appropriate to allow them in the business district. Commissioner Zwirn commented that lumping them together would entail chemicals from the mortuary services. He then asked if those chemicals would be prohibited in certain districts. Planner Prososki indicated they would not. Commissioner Hegland asked how these businesses are regulated. Planner Prososki offered to look into it further but stated she believes they are licensed and regulated by the state. Commissioner Zwirn asked if there would be any necessary modifications to structures or buildings for disposal or drainage of the chemicals and how that would impact the district and neighboring facilities. Mounds View Planning Commission August 4, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 6 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Hegland indicated he is concerned about objections from the business community. Commissioner Zwirn indicated he would not want a funeral home or mortuary in Mounds View Square. The Commission agreed to look at them separately. ______________________________________________________________________________ 7. Discuss Public Comment Unrelated to Planning and Zoning Matters Community Development Director Ericson indicated this item is brought to the Commission for consideration at his own doing and he was not directed to put this together nor asked to address the Commission. Director Ericson commented that free speech is important in this country and the right to ones opinion should be embraced. He then said that his comments and the request this evening to consider does not take away the right to make comments and to address issues someone feels are important. He further commented that it is something that everyone has the right to do and to have an opinion and to express it says a lot about a person because a lot of people do not share opinions. Director Ericson suggested there may be more appropriate places for commissioners to express personal opinions unrelated to planning and zoning matters. He then commented in response to Mr. Werner’s question, that the reason for the public comment section on the agenda is for resident input and it is to get feedback from the community on planning and zoning issues and community development matters in general. Director Ericson explained that the Planning Commission, like all City Commission, are appointed and serve a specific purpose which is to review issues and provide feedback and recommendations to the City Council. He then said that the specific duties of the Planning Commission are to review variance requests, review the Comprehensive Plan, rezoning requests, conditional use permits, planning and zoning matters and subdivisions. Director Ericson indicated that public comment, as a Planning Commission Member, is expected and encouraged, as the City wants opinions. He then said that is why members were appointed because the City values volunteer input as being important to the process. However, there is an understanding that public comment is limited to planning and zoning issues and related to the duties of Planning Commissioners and, if someone has an opinion or concern unrelated to planning and zoning, they should take those comments to the appropriate body whether that be the City Council, the Park and Recreation Commission or the Economic Development Commission, otherwise it clouds the issue of whether this is one person’s opinion or the opinion of the Commission. Mounds View Planning Commission August 4, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 7 ________________________________________________________________________ Director Ericson commented that for a Planning Commissioner to take a position regarding politics or policies of the administration of the City would be going above and beyond what a commissioner was appointed to do. He then reiterated that being appointed to a board or commission does not take away anyone’s right to express a personal opinion, but that there may be a more appropriate place to make those comments. Director Ericson indicated that in addition to discussing this matter, he would like consensus for direction to put language into the Bylaws for Commission review that would discuss appropriate public comment and like statements. Chair Stevenson indicated that he feels that an amendment to the Bylaws would be absolutely appropriate and he would prefer not to see commissioners and other residents using this meeting for something other than planning business. If someone did come in off the street wanting to conduct their own personal statements on items not related to planning, with something in the by-laws, he would feel more empowered to ask them to stop and direct them to the appropriate body to hear those comments. Commissioner Song indicated she agrees with Chairperson Stevenson in that it would be fair and appropriate to redirect unrelated comments otherwise the Commission could waste a lot of time hearing comments that this body is not able to deal with. Commissioner Scotch agreed with Commissioner Song and said that the Commission could listen to unrelated comments but is unable to assist or address those concerns the way Council could. She further stated that the meetings are often long and unrelated comments and personal statements would make the meetings unnecessarily longer. Commissioner Miller said she agrees that it would be helpful to have something in the Bylaws that relates to the purpose of the Commission and comments that could or should be made and in what setting. Commissioner Zwirn asked whether, as it stands right now with regards to items not on the agenda, his taking advantage of that or if he was in violation of anything written into bylaws or codes or anything at this point. He then said that his comments were restricted to within a three to five minute period as suggested by general rule. Director Ericson indicated that there is nothing in writing right now and the Commission usually does not limit time for comments. Commissioner Zwirn asked if Mr. Ericson, while generating his Staff report on free speech and suggesting restricting citizen requests and comments, was soliciting opinions from people within the City as to whether or not he should be terminated. Director Ericson said, “not at all” and then said that some members of the City Council had in fact suggested he be removed from office. Mounds View Planning Commission August 4, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 8 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Scotch asked what the comments were pertaining to at the last meeting. Commissioner Zwirn indicated he was availing himself of the opportunity to address issues not on the agenda and there is nothing restricting ones ability to make statements and since this Commission is part of, or reports to, the City Council that, in his opinion, is having some problems and struggles with running the City properly he felt he could make the comments. Chair Stevenson asked if Commissioner Zwirn understood that if comments he wished to make did not pertain to planning and zoning matters then this would not be the appropriate venue. Commissioner Zwirn indicated there is nothing that restricts him from that at this point. Chair Stevenson stated that, as Chair of the Planning Commission, he is restricting further comments on items not related to planning and zoning matters or business of the Commission. Commissioner Hegland said he agrees that if it is not Commission business then there are better venues for it and, it is Chair Stevenson’s responsibility to manage the meeting so if having something in the Bylaws makes that easier for the Chair to do so, he would agree. He then said that he felt this was something that was understood by Commissioners. Commissioner Miller suggested stating under Item 4 on the Agenda that the comment period is for items related to planning business of the City. Director Ericson indicated that Staff could do that. He then said that Commissioner Zwirn is right in that there is nothing currently that would restrict the comments and that is why he feels it is appropriate to bring this before the Commission for a possible amendment to the Bylaws to help regulate the types of public comments heard at the previous meeting. Mr. Werner said he liked the emphasis on freedoms in the Staff’s memo on the matter. He then asked who drafted the Bylaws for the Planning Commission. Chair Stevenson indicated that there have been Bylaws since the original Commission was established and the Commission reviews them annually for any necessary changes. Mr. Werner indicated that the Chair should have the authority to limit comments that are not appropriate to the discussions. Chair Stevenson indicated he would feel better doing so if there was something in the Bylaws that stated he was allowed to do so. Commissioner Hegland indicated he felt the Bylaws should state what the purpose of the Commission is and that the Commission is to stick to the business of the Commission. Chair Stevenson asked Staff to review the bylaws to determine whether it clearly states the purpose and duties of the Commission. Mounds View Planning Commission August 4, 2004 Regular Meeting Page 9 ________________________________________________________________________ Mr. Werner commented that he would say the Commission should take it upon themselves to work this problem out rather than having input from Staff or Council. Chair Stevenson indicated that the Commission is looking at this as a way to clarify how meetings are run. Mr. Werner asked that this be done without restricting the freedom of speech. Director Ericson agreed to review the Bylaws and have this matter on the agenda for consideration at the next meeting. ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Next Planning Commission Meeting: August 18, 2004 ______________________________________________________________________________ 9. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:04 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.