Loading...
08-09-04 PC Minutes Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 9,2004 A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday, August 9, 2004. Chair Pentel called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Chair Pentel, Commissioners Eck, Hackett, Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present were, Director of Planning and Development, Mark Grimes, and Administrative Assistant, Lisa Wittman. Commissioners Keysser and Rasmussen were absent. I. Approval of Minutes July 12, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting e Waldhauser referred to page five, paragraph nine and stated that the word "three" should be changed to "five". She referred to page nine, paragraph three and stated that the word "west" should be changed to "east". Eck stated that the July 12 Planning Commission meeting was held in the Council Chambers not in the Council Conference Room as stated. MOVED by Eck, seconded by Hackett and motion carried unanimously to approve the minutes from the July 12 meeting with the above noted corrections. July 26, 2004 Joint City Council/Planning Commission Meeting Eck stated that Commissioner Rasmussen was in attendance, but was not listed as present. He referred to page four, paragraph six and stated that his comments didn't reflect what he intended to say. He then explained how he wanted his comments to be written. e MOVED by Eck, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried unanimously to approve the July 26 minutes with the above noted corrections/changes. II. Discuss Additions to the Single Family Zoning District related to the Outdoor Storage of Recreational Vehicles & Boats and Driveway Requirements. Grimes referred to the recently adopted changes to the R-1 Single Family Zoning District. He explained that outdoor storage of recreational vehicles and driveway requirements are subdivisions in the R-1 Zoning District but that they were not adopted when the rest of the R-1 text changes were in March of 2004. The City Council did not want changes made to the Code regarding recreational vehicles until a later time of year when fewer recreational vehicle owners would be traveling. Pentel said she's becoming less concerned about recreational vehicles located on properties. She is more concerned about how the neighborhood is affected by maintenance issues, such as peeling paint and rotten wood. She asked Grimes how long a vehicle is allowed to be parked on a street. Grimes said vehicles, other than commercial vehicles, can be parked on the street up to 72 hours. e e Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August 9, 2004 Page 2 Pentel asked if there are requirements regarding cars having to be properly licensed. Grimes said that cars stored on a resident's property have to have current license plates and tabs and have to be operable. Eck referred to Subdivision 14 and said the wording is unclear regarding the outdoor storage of one recreational vehicle. His reading of the proposed change means if someone has a fish house on their property, they couldn't have anything else, such as boat or recreational vehicle. Eck referred to Subdivision 15(D) regarding parking of vehicles on a driveway or other hard surface and asked if that means any type of vehicle or just the vehicles discussed in Subdivision 14(A). Hackett asked for an explanation of why driveways need to be a hard surface and why the City is promoting the use of more impervious surfaces. Grimes stated that the City's Environmental Coordinator and the Watershed have said that gravel driveways are more problematic than impervious surfaces because the gravel runs into the storm sewers and the ponds and lakes. Pentel added that another reason the City has said that recreational vehicles need to be parked on a hard surface is to keep them out of front yards. Waldhauser stated that gravel isn't as permanent as concrete or asphalt and it can be more easily torn up if a new homeowner wanted to change the surface. Pentel asked if there is anything in the Code that states how a recreational vehicle is to be placed in a back yard. Grimes said no, and that in some ways recreational vehicles could be more offensive if they are located in back yards. Pentel said she thinks that it is unacceptable to say where things can not be located without specific standards about where they can be stored. Pentel said she would like to see all recreational vehicles placed in a way that is conforming to the requirements for placing accessory structures. Grimes said he thinks that would be difficult for people, especially for someone who lives on a corner lot and has two front yards. He added that the argument by some is that people are getting older and that the City is going to be seeing more recreational vehicles. Hackett asked who originated this proposed subdivision. Pentel said it came from the Planning Commission when they realized that one issue the City is facing is visual clutter in front of houses. Eck asked how this proposed Recreational Vehicle language compares to other cities. Grimes said he thinks other cities are a lot more restrictive. Pentel said she was comfortable with the language allowing only one vehicle in the front yard, but suggested not saying watercraft, camper, trailer or individual snowmobiles. Waldhauser asked if a trailer with four snowmobiles is worse than a huge recreational vehicle. Grimes said it is a question of the length of the vehicle. Pentel suggested adding language that says in no case can any recreational vehicle be located in the right-of-way. Grimes suggested as an alternative to require recreational vehicles to be at least three feet from side or rear yard property lines. - e Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission August9,2004 Page 3 Schmidgall asked who would enforce these requirements. Grimes explained that these types of issues are typically handled by complaints from residents. Eck referred to Subdivision 14(A) and suggested that the words "may be stored or parked" be changed to "is permitted". Waldhauser asked about limiting the number of vehicles allowed in the back yard. Grimes said if recreational vehicles are required to meet the same setback requirements as accessory structures then they can't be located in side yards or right next to garages. Grimes stated that he spoke with Rasmussen and her suggestion was to require homeowners to get a variance to allow recreational vehicles in the front yard. Hackett asked why the City shouldn't require residents to follow the 35-foot setback requirement in front. Eck stated that if that was case, most people couldn't put anything in their front yards. Hackett said his point is that some recreational vehicles are as big as an accessory structure only they have wheels. Schmidgall said he would rather have the City come down hard on this issue or not do anything different because it gets too complicated. Waldhauser suggested requiring recreational vehicles stored in rear yards to be screened. Pentel stated that she is fine with allowing one recreational vehicle in the front, but she is less ok with allowing any number stored in the back. She suggested that Subdivision 14(A) say only 1 mobile recreational vehicle is permitted in the front yard or side yard but it must be located on a driveway or hard surface. Grimes added that in the rear yard they would have to meet the accessory structure requirements. Pentel said she would like the Planning Commission to see another draft of Subdivision 14 and 15 before they have a public hearing. -- Short Recess-- III. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings No other meetings were discussed. IV. Other Business Pentel referred to the City being more aggressive about garage sale signs being placed improperly and said she would like to see the City go after Commercial signs that don't meet the Code requirements. Grimes said staff has written new language that is friendlier toward garage sales signs. V. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 pm.