Loading...
PL 03/19/2003 - 30903r"� �� � CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 19, 2003 CALL TO ORDER: Vice-Chairperson Kondrick called the March 19, 2003, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:32 p. m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Dave Kondrick, Larry Kuechle, Brad Dunham, Barb Johns Diane Savage, Dean Saba Stacy Stromberg, Planner Kurt Becker, 124 Glen Creek Road APPROVE THE MARCH 5 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES: MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Dunham, to approve the March 5, 2003, Planning Commission meeting minutes. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #03-04, by Kurt Becker, for a second accessory structure (storage shed/shop), generally located at 124 Glen Creek Road. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to open the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:33 P.M. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner is requesting a special use permit to allow the construction of a 576 square foot second accessory structure in the rear yard or southem yard of his double frontage property at 124 Glen Creek Road. The building will be used as a workshop. Ms. Stromberg stated the property is zoned R-1, Single Family, as are all surrounding properties. The home faces and is squared up to Glen Creek Road. Chesney Way borders the property on the southem side. Properties with frontages on both sides of their lots need to meet front yard setback requirements for accessory structures located in the rear yard. The petitioner will be applying for a variance to locate the accessory structure within 10 feet of its southem property line instead of the required 59 feet which is determined by setback averaging requirements. Ms. Stromberg stated Section 205 of the City Code requires a special use permit to allow accessory structures, other than the first accessory structure, over 240 square feet. The total square footage of accessory structures shall not exceed 1,400 square feet. The total square footage of the existing garage and the proposed accessory structure is 1,060 square feet. The proposed garage location will meet lot coverage requirements. The petitioner is requesting that the hard surface driveway requirements be waived for the proposed accessory structure. Since PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 19, 2003 PAGE 2 the primary use of the structure will be used as a workshop, City staff would be in support of the � petitioner's request. However, if at any time evidence of use of the yard as a driveway is observed, a hard surface driveway will be required. - Ms. Stromberg stated City staff received comments from one neighboring property owner who expressed concems about the location and the size of the proposed structure. Ms. Stromberg stated City staff recommends approval of this special use permit with the following stipulations: 1. Staff shall conduct regular inspections of the site. If, at any time, a trail simulating a driveway is present, a hard surface driveway as approved by the City will need to be installed within 90 days. 2. If an overhead garage door is used, it should be installed on the east accessory structure face to allow a longer driveway approach, if the accessory structure is used for vehicle storage in the future. 3. All local and state noise regulations shall be observed and met. 4. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. 5. The structure shall not be used for home occupation or living area. 6. Total square footage of all accessory structures must not exceed 1,400 square feet. 7. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary siding and color scheme. 8. Special use permit approval is dependent upon approval of the petitioner's variance request. ,� Mr. Kondrick asked about stipulation #3 stating all local and state noise regulations shall be observed and met. He stated the tools required for woodworking (table saws, shapers, routers, etc.) can be quite noisy. He has no problem with this, but if he was a neighbor and if it was real noisy, he would be upset. So, how can they help the petitioner understand this stipulation and the noise regulations? Ms. Stromberg stated that when the petitioner comes in to get his building permit, staff will review the noise ordinance with him. The decibel level goes down after 9:00 p.m. so that would mean he probably wouldn't be able to do much woodworking after 9:00 p.m. Mr. Kondrick asked about the neighbor who had complained about the location and size of the proposed structure. Ms. Stromberg replied the neighbor's home is on Chesney Way and will face the proposed structure, so he just had some concems about the size of the structure and where it was going to be located. Mr. Kondrick asked if the neighbor was satisfied with staff s answers. Ms. Stromberg stated she could not say for sure if he was satisfied. She stated she had invited him to come to the Planning Commission meeting. Ms. Johns asked if there were only three properties where the garages or houses are accessed from Chesney Way. � Ms. Stromberg replied that is correct. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. MARCH 19, 2003 PAGE 3 ^ Mr. Kondrick asked if it would be fair to assume that the City would require that there be no entrance to this new structure from Chesney Way, that it be from Glen Creek Road? Ms. Johns referred to stipulation #2, that the City is requiring the garage door on the east side. However, the drawings that have been presented show the garage door on the south side with a small garage door. Ms. Stromberg stated that is correct. However, after reviewing the petitioner's drawing, staff determined that they would prefer to see the overhead garage door located on the east side versus the south side. Ms. Johns asked why staff recommended that. Ms. Stromberg stated staff determined that the 10 feet from the petitioner's property line to the accessory structure wasn't enough space for a vehicle to park outside. If the structure was ever accessed from the east side and a driveway put in, that would make a longer driveway approach which would allow vehicle parking outside. Mr. Kurt Becker, 124 Glen Creek Road, stated that when he o�cially applied for the variance, he requested a smaller variance, he asked for it down to 4 feet, instead of the 10 it shows on here. The reason for that is a large oak tree. The large oak tree closest to the house would have to come down if he were to go with the 10-foot variance so he dropped that back to 4. Mr. Becker stated that in talking with all the neighbors and particularly the neighbors directly behind him, one of the concems was the actual parking of vehicles. That is why he wanted to � put that garage door on the south side. It he got the variance, 6-7 feet would be the length of any driveway that could be put in there in the future, thereby negating the ability for anybody to park a car there because it would stick out into the street. Mr. Kondrick asked if Mr. Becker agreed with all the stipulations. Mr. Becker replied, yes, except for stipulation #2 about having the garage door on the east side. He prefers to have it on the south face, so that in the future no one can park a c�r out there because there is no room to do it. He stated three garages are accessed off Chesney Way. The neighbor who faces East River Road has a driveway that is closer to the street than his variance request, and he is unable to park vehicles out there because of the shortness of the drive. Having the short driveway solves the problem or the concem for the neighbor behind him. Regarding any noise concem as brought up by Mr. Kondrick, he plans to insulate the whole structure as well as put on insulated siding which provides an extra sound barrier as well. Mr. Becker stated he is asking the Commission to consider having the garage door on the south side. Mr. Kuechle asked Mr. Becker what he felt the hardship was in having the garage door on the east side. Mr. Becker stated City staff had pointed out that at some point in the future, someone could put a driveway in if the structure was accessed from the east side. The driveway could probably be 16-18 feet long, and then, obviously, cars could park there. The idea is to prevent that parking � from occurring. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 19, 2003 PAGE 4 Mr. Kondrick stated that if the petitioner sold his house, wouldn't it be an advantage to a future � owner to have a driveway from Chesney Way and a four car garage situation with more room to store cars? - Mr. Becker stated that if it was just for himself, it is not a concem as he doesn't ever plan on parking vehicles back there. He might put his boat into the shop to work on it or whatever, but he wouldn't be putting a vehicle back there. One of the neighbors' specific concerns was that they didn't want traffic back there and that it is quiet back there. So, having the garage door on the south side solves the problem. A future owner could always move the garage door to the east side. Ms. Johns stated that if the petitioner put a structure onto that property and then if the door has to go on the east face, he is eating up quite a bit of the back yard with the driveway as well. There is very little backyard for a selling point on the house. To a man having a four-car garage is a good idea, but having a back yard would be more important to her. Mr. Kuechle stated a car would also back up right into the road, and he has a problem with that. Mr. Kondrick stated he agreed. Mr. Dunham commented the four-car garage will sell better. MOTION by Mr. Dunham, seconded by Ms. Johns, to close the public hearing. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:52 P.M. � Mr. Kuechle stated he is comfortable with the special use permit. The size of the garage is well within reason. The petitioner's lot is large enough where it is not going to appear overcrowded, and the request is well under the 1,400 square feet. The petitioner still needs to get a variance from the Appeals Commission. He would be in favor of making a motion to recommend approval to the City Council with the stipulations as listed. He believed he would be in favor of the garage door opening on the east side. Visually, it would look better, and it would have less impact on the houses across the street by having a nice finished wall to look at rather than a garage door. Mr. Dunham stated he is complete agreement with the garage door facing east. He doesn't like the idea of the south side at all. Ms. Johns stated she preferred the larger back yard versus the four-car garage, but she could handle it either way. MOTION by Mr. Kuechle, seconded by Mr. Dunham, to recommend to City Council approval of SP #03-04, by Kurt Becker, for a second accessory structure (storage shed/shop), generally located at 124 Glen Creek Road, with the following stipulations: 1. Staff shall conduct regular inspections of the site. If, at any time, a trail simulating a driveway is present, a hard surface driveway as approved by the City will need to be installed within 90 days. 2. If an overhead garage door is used, it should be installed on the east accessory � structure face to allow a longer driveway approach, if the accessory structure is used for vehicle storage in the future. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, MARCH 19, 2003 PAGE 5 � 3. All local and state noise regulations shall be observed and met. 4. The petitioner shall obtain all necessary building permits prior to construction. 5. The structure shall not be used for home occupation or living area. 6. Total square footage of all accessory structures must not exceed 1,400 square feet. 7. The accessory structure shall be architecturally compatible with existing home and finished with complementary siding and color scheme. 8. Special use permit approval is dependent upon approval of the petitioner's variance request. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Kondrick stated this special use permit request will go to City Council on April 14. 2. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 6, 2003, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MEETING. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to receive the minutes of the February 6, 2003, Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 18. 2003. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY � & ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING. MOTION by Ms. Johns, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to receive the minutes of the February 18, 2003, Environmental Quality & Energy Commission meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS: Ms. Stromberg stated the next meeting on April 2, 2003, has been cancelled. ADJOURN MOTION by Mr. Dunham, seconded by Mr. Kuechle, to adjoum the meeting. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, VICE-CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED AND THE MARCH 19, 2003, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:55 P.M. RespectFully submitted, ��� ��� ,..� Denise M. Letendre� Recording Secretary