Loading...
02-27-06 PC Minutes e Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 27, 2006 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, February 27, 2006. Chair Keysser called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Commissioners Cera, Eck, Hackett, Keysser, Kluchka, Schmidgall and Waldhauser. Also present were Director of Planning and Development, Mark Grimes, and Administrative Assistant, Lisa Wittman. e 1. Approval of Minutes February 13, 2006 Planning Commission Meeting MOVED by Eck, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried unanimously to approve the February 13, 2006 minutes as submitted. 2. Informal Public Hearing - Repealing in its entirety Section 11.70 Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations and adopting a new Section 11.70 Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations. Also Repealing Loading and Parking Requirements in the Commercial, Light Industrial, Industrial, Business and Professional Offices and Institutional Zoning Districts Grimes reminded the Commission that they reviewed the new Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations ordinance at their last meeting. He explained that the next step is to have this public hearing in order to repeal the existing Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations ordinance and the references to parking requirements in all of the zoning districts and also to adopt the new parking ordinance. Kluchka asked if there are major changes being made to the parking ordinance. Grimes explained that currently parking requirements are located in several different sections of the zoning code and having them located in one ordinance will be a lot less confusing for people. He discussed some of the changes being proposed such as the amount of parking spaces required for manufacturing and warehouse uses. He said that staff has found that most warehouses don't have a lot of employees and the city is ending up with a lot more parking than is needed. Kluchka referred to Section G and asked if there is a definition for rain gardens. Grimes said he would add a definition regarding rain gardens to the code. Waldhauser said she would eventually like to see some sort of trade-off for people who use rain gardens and permeable surfaces for parking. Grimes explained that permeable surfaces are not recommended for spaces that are going to be used all of the time and that it is used more for occasional overflow parking like at the State Fair e or something similar. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 27, 2006 Page 2 e Hackett referred to the angle parking diagram and asked for clarification regarding letter "E". Grimes said he would review it. Kluchka referred to section X regarding bicycle racks and suggested that language be added about requiring that they be secured to something. Grimes said he could add language stating that bicycle racks need to be secured to the ground or a building. Waldhauser referred to Subdivision 3, colleges and universities and asked what "based on design capability" means. Grimes suggested changing the language to base the parking on a school's capacity. Waldhauser asked if commercially zoned areas get credit for on-street parking spaces. Grimes explained that that is very difficult to do. Some commercially zoned projects are PUDs which can vary from the parking requirements. Waldhauser referred to the landscape design language and asked about the approval process and standards. Grimes explained that landscaping plans are part of the application or PUD review process done by staff. e Keysser opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to speak Keysser closed the public hearing. MOVED by Eck, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to approve the following: . Repeal in its entirety Section 11.70 Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations and adopt a new Section 11.70 Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations. . Repeal Loading and Parking Requirements in the Commercial, Light Industrial, Industrial, Business and Professional Offices and Institutional Zoning Districts 3. Informal Public Hearing - Deleting and adding definitions in Section 11.03 entitled "Definitions" relating to parking and multiple dwellings Grimes explained that this public hearing is required in order to delete and add certain definitions to the zoning code relating to parking and multiple dwellings. Keysser opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to speak Keysser closed the public hearing. e MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to approve the following: Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 27 , 2006 Page 3 . Delete the following definitions from Section 11.03: #35 Elderly (Senior Citizen) and Handicapped housing #70 Parking Lot #71 Parking Ramp #72 Parking Space Add the following definitions to Section 11.03 #30.5 Dwelling - Senior and Physical Disability Housing #33.5 Dwelling Units #52.3 Kitchen #52.6 Kitchenette #76.5 Rain Garden 4. Informal Public Hearing - Repealing in its entirety Section 11.22, Two-Family Residential (R-2) and adopting a new Section 11.22, Moderate Density Residential Zoning District (R-2) e Grimes explained that this is another ordinance that the Planning Commission has been working on over the past several months. He discussed some of the changes being proposed such as the minimum lot size is being changed from 12,500 square feet to 11,000 square feet and allowing single family homes in the new R-2 zoning district so as not to create non-conforming houses. Waldhauser referred to Subdivision 11 (A)(1) and noted that the language regarding the location of accessory structures was not correct. Grimes said he would change the language to make sure it matches the language in the R-1 zoning district. Waldhauser referred to Subdivision 11 (E) and noted that the words accessory "building" should be changed to accessory "structure". She suggested that a table be made that highlights the various requirements in each zoning district such as setbacks, garage requirements, etc. Grimes said staff could write something. Kluchka referred to Subdivision 11 (G) regarding central air conditioning units and asked if the language is consistent in the other zoning districts. Grimes said yes. Kluchka asked if there are setback areas for central air conditioning units. Grimes said he didn't think so but he would check with the Building Official. Keysser opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to speak Keysser closed the public hearing. e MOVED by Eck, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to repeal in its entirety Section 11.22, Two-Family Residential (R-2) and adopt a new Section 11.22, Moderate Density Residential Zoning District (R-2) Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 27, 2006 Page 4 e 5. Informal Public Hearing - Adopting Section 11.23, Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3), Section 11.24, High Density (R-4) and repealing in its entirety Section 11.25, Multiple Dwelling Zoning District Grimes explained that the reason staff is recommending changes to the Multiple Dwelling zoning district is because there is a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan matching the Zoning Map. He explained that the proposed new ordinances replace the existing Multiple Dwelling zoning district. Grimes reminded the Commission that at their last meeting there was some discussion about the density bonus regarding underground parking. He explained that the reason he is recommending the density bonus in the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts is because underground parking is utilized at a much higher rate than enclosed garage spaces and it will give the City a little more open space. Waldhauser asked about parking ramps. Grimes said he hasn't seen ramps used in residential developments. e Cera asked why the R-3 district allows for front porches to be built to 17 feet to the front property line, but the R-2 district doesn't. Grimes stated that R-3 buildings would generally be 15 to 20 units per acre and would have more open front yard space whereas R-4 buildings would probably be high rises without front porches. He stated that he would talk to the Building Official about adding language regarding balconies. Waldhauser referred to Subdivision 9 in the R-4 ordinance and asked about the height limit of 14 stories. Cera recommended that any building above 8 stories would require a conditional use permit. The commissioners agreed. Kluchka stated that a 10% density bonus is not a sizable bonus if the City is looking a providing a bonus for affordable housing. He said that perhaps a better bonus could be added to the ordinance in the future. Keysser opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to speak Keysser closed the public hearing. MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Cera and motion carried unanimously to approve the following: . Adopt Section 11.23, Medium Density Residential Zoning District (R-3) . Adopt Section 11.24, High Density (R-4) . Repeal in its entirety Section 11.25, Multiple Dwelling Zoning District e Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 27, 2006 Page 5 tit 6. Informal Public Hearing - Amending Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1) Subdivision E regarding the size of accessory structures allowed in the R-1 zoning district Grimes explained that the current zoning code allows up to 1,000 square feet of accessory structure space in the R-1 single family zoning district. He stated that the issue of allowing larger accessory structures came from the BZA because they have heard several requests from residents wanting more accessory structure space because they have larger lots. He stated that the reason accessory structures are limited to 1,000 square feet is because they could be larger than the principal structure or they could be potentially used for home occupations. He reminded the Commission that the last time they talked about this they thought 1,250 square feet should be the maximum amount of accessory structure space allowed. Waldhauser added that the BZA thought that if people had enough room it seems reasonable to allow them to have more accessory structure space. Keysser opened the public hearing. tit Willie Anderson, 5249 Golden Valley Road stated that his lot is almost an acre with a small house and a small attached garage. He said that he is trying to design a new detached garage and is trying to understand what his options are. He stated that he is happy about the proposed code change that would allow 1,250 square feet of accessory structure space because it would allow him to store his stuff inside. MOVED by Cera, seconded by Hackett and motion carried unanimously to approve changing the R-1 Single Family zoning district to allow 1,000 square feet of accessory structure space for parcels up to 15,000 square feet in size and 1,250 square feet of accessory structure space for parcels greater than 15,000 square feet in size. 7. Informal Public Hearing - Amending the Institutional, Commercial, Business and Professional Offices, Light Industrial and Industrial Zoning Districts to allow for accessory structures. Grimes explained that currently accessory structures are not allowed in any non- residential zoning districts. He stated that there have been requests from businesses for gazebos and garage space for storing lawn equipment, etc. He said that allowing up to 1,000 square feet of accessory structure space may be appropriate in certain locations. Kluchka asked if generators or back-up generators would be including in accessory structure space requirements. Grimes said things like that would not be considered accessory structures, but they still have to meet setback requirements. tit Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 27, 2006 Page 6 . Schmidgall said that he has concerns about cluttering up some of these Institutional or Commercial properties. He said that these uses can be incorporated in to the inside of buildings and that he is adamantly opposed to using these proposed accessory structures for smoking structures. Grimes said that his understanding of the smoking ordinance is that as long as a structure is 25 feet from an entrance, no one is eating or drinking and employees don't use it, then people could smoke in them. Keysser said he thinks the issue of smoking in these types of structures would be covered under the smoking ordinance because they would still be at a place of employment. Schmidgall said his understanding is that this proposed ordinance change is being driven by companies that want smoking structures. Cera suggested moving it forward to the City Council and have them decide. Kluchka added that he wants it noted that smoking in these proposed accessory structures is a big concern of the Planning Commission. Keysser suggested having the City Attorney give an opinion. e Grimes suggested that accessory structures could be allowed in these zoning districts with a Conditional Use Permit. Schmidgall said he is concerned about having accessory structures all over the place. Waldhauser stated that most of the big projects are going to have storage space inside of their buildings and will most likely be a PUD. Eck said he doesn't understand the issue about smoking because people are going to go outside to smoke anyway so who cares if they go under a shelter to smoke. Grimes said he would write about the Planning Commission's concerns in his staff report to the Council. Keysser opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no one wishing to speak Keysser closed the public hearing. Schmidgall stated that he is opposed to the recommended ordinance. He said he would like every structure to come before some type of City body so tin shacks are not put up. Keysser noted that the accessory structures in question would still require a building permit and that the ordinance does address the design of accessory structures. e Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission February 27,2006 Page 7 e Kluchka said it is important for the Inspections Department to know that this issue is important to the Planning Commission. Keysser reiterated that he would like the City Council to seek a legal opinion. MOVED by Eck, seconded by Waldhauser and motion carried 6 to 1 to approve amending the Institutional, Commercial, Business and Professional Offices, Light Industrial and Industrial Zoning Districts to allow for accessory structures. Commissioner Schmidgall voted no. --Short Recess-- 8. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings No other meetings were discussed. 9. Other Business e Keysser informed the Planning Commission that Commissioner Hackett is resigning from the Planning Commission. He stated that as the Planning Commission continues to address design guidelines he would like to use Hackett has an advisor. Keysser referred to the Planning Commission's Annual Report and stated that he would like to present it to the Council at their March 21,2006 meeting. Keysser referred to the GTS seminar brochure that was in the agenda packet and encouraged the Commissioners to register for seminars they might be interested in. Waldhauser stated that MnAPA is going to be re-creating a citizen planning committee. She stated that the committee will have 3 or 4 professional planners on it to help advise the citizen planners and offer training. She suggested that they discuss this committee again in the future. 10. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 pm. .