Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 22, 1995 o o~ QIIJ-lctS o CITY of ANDOVER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - AUGUST 22, 1995 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Monthly Meeting of the Andover Planning and zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Jay Squires on ~ugust 22, 1995, 7:00 p.m. at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota. commissioners present: ' Maynard Apel, Catherine Doucette, Bev Jovanovich, Jeffrey Luedtke, Jerry Putnam Randy Peek City Planning Director, David Carlberg Others Commissioner absent: Also present: APPROVAL OF MINUTES August 8,'1995: Page 3, third paragraph, change: "Commissioner Luedtke felt the definition in the ordinance is not flawed." ' Page 6, third paragraph, Correct: "Mr. Carlberg stated the ordinance regulating the height of fences regarding swimming pools was adopted in 1979 and has not changed. It is a 4-foot high minimum around pools." o MOTION by Jovanovich, Seconded by Doucette, to approve the Minutes as corrected. Motion on a 5-Yes, I-Present (Putnam), l-Absent (Peek), vote. \, PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL USE PERMIT - IN-HOME BEAUTY SALON - 981 140TH LANE NW - CURTIS CHESNESS 7:02 p.m. Mr. Carlberg reviewed the request by Curtis Chesness for a Special Use Permit to operate an in-home beauty salon at 981 140th Lane NW. He noted the applicable ordinances, conditions for the use and criteria to be considered. "One salon chair only" means that there will be only one cutting station. He did not believe construction of the salon has been started. He is aware of six or seven other in-home beauty salons in the City. Staff is recommending approval. MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Jovanovich, to open the public hearing. Motion carried on a 6-Yes, I-Absent (Peek) vote. 7:10 p.m. o Cindy Chesness, 981 140th Lane NW - thought at the most two people could be done at one time. As a rule, just one family comes at a time. The number of people per day will vary, but she intends to do this part time. Mr. Carlberg stated if there is a concern about the number of vehicles, Section 4.30 of Ordinance 8, Horne Occupations has a provision that regulates additional vehicles and is included as a contingency in the proposed Resolution. In no case should there be more than three additional vehicles on the property. He also reported he reeeived one call from a neighbor who was concerned with the traffic patterns because this is in a cul~de-sac. CJ u ,. Regular Andover Planning and zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 22, 1995 Page 2 CJ (Public Hearing: Special Use Permit/In-Home Beauty Salon - 981 140th Lane NW - C Chesness, Continued) Ms. Chesness - couldn't imagine having more than two cars at one time. Commissioner Jovanovich asked if there needs to be a concern with chemicals. Commissioner Apel didn't think so and stated she must comply with the State Cosmetology Board. 'l'here was a discussion on the hours of operation. Ms. Chesness preferred evenings over mornings. She thought Monday and Tuesdays until 9 p.m., Fridays and every other Saturday. Commissioner Apel was not in favor of regulating the specific hours of operation. He preferred a range of hours of operation to allow her flexibility to change hours as it meets her needs. ,. pouo Frve, 2721 134th Avenue NW - stated a neighbor who has a beauty shop has just sold her home. If there is a concern with the number of shops, it should help to know that another one is being closed. Commissioner Apel did not think there has ever been complaints about those existing in-home beauty salons. o lfOTION by Luedtke, Seconded by Jovanovich, to close the public hearing. 11otion carried on a 6-Yes, 1-Absent (Peek) vote. 7:16 p.m. NOTION by Apel, Seconded by Luedtke, that the Planning and zoning cCliliLlission forward to the City Council a Resolution granting a Special Use Permit request of Curtis Chesness, and add to the Resolution Condition 4 in the agenda material as Number 10, The salon must comply vi i th the State Cosmetology Board requirements. Number 6, hours of ogeration shall be 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. on weekdays, and 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturdays. Motion carried on a 6-Yes, 1-Absent (Peek) vote. This will be placed on the September 5, 1995, City Council agenda. 7:18 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL USE PERMIT - IN-HOME BEAUTY SALON - 840 146TH LilNE NW - KAROLYN RUCKS \' 7:18 P.M. Mr. Carlberg reviewed the Special Use Permit requested by Karolyn Rucks to operate an in-home beauty salon at 84- 146th Lane NW. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Rural. The difference from the last request is that this is in the non-sewered area; therefore, a winimum of 39,000 square feet of lot size is required and the septic system must be inspected annually and be in compliance with Ordinance No. 37, the On-Site Septic System Ordinance. The salon is considered as one bedroom in terms of usage. MOTION by Luedtke, Seconded by Jovanovich, to open the public hearing. Motion carried on a 6-Yes, 1-Absent (Peek) vote. :~ Mr. Carlberg stated application. Staff received no calls relating to this (J () (J Regular Andover Planning and zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 22, 1995 Page 3 ,. (Public Hearing: Special Use Permit/In-Home Beauty Salon - 840 146th Lane NW - K Rucks, Continued) DOUG Frye, 2721 134th Avenue NW - stated there is another home on Gladiola that has just been sold and the owner is moving to Coon Rapids. That home also had an in-home beauty salon, so that is two uses that will no longer be operating in Andover. Karolyn Rucks, 840 146th Lane NW - basically agreed with the hours of operation given in the previous request except on Fridays and Saturdays she would prefer to start earlier, that is at 8:30 a.m. After a brief discussion, Ms. Rucks and the Commission agreed to the following hours of operation: 9 a. m. to 9 p. m. on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday; 8:30 a.m. to 9 p.m. on Friday; 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday. NOTION by Putnam, Seconded by Doucette, to close the public hearing. lfotion carried on a 6-Yes, 1-Absent (Peek) vote. 7:27 p.m. :~ NOTION by Jovanovich, Seconded by Doucette, to forward to the City Council approval of the Resolution granting the request of a Special Use Permit of Karolyn Rucks to operate an in-home beauty salpn at the property located at 840 146th Lane NW, with the hours of operation as agreed to. There was a public hearing and there was no opposition. Add Item 13, The salon must comply with the State Cosmetology Board cequirements. Motion carried on a 6-Yes, 1-Absent (Peek) vote. This ,Jill be placed on the September 5, 1995, City Council agenda. 7:29 p.m. DISCUSSION: AMEND ORDINANCE NO.8, SECTION 3.02, DEFINITIONS - AN Al-1ENDMENT REDEFINING uFAMILY" Ilr. Carlberg explained the proposed amendment to the definition of "family" is the result of the discussion at the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposal and finds it acceptable. Commissioner Doucette wondered if the Council considered structured relationships to include fraternities and sororities and should language be written to exclude them. After some discussion, the feeling of the Commission was that this would probably not be a problem since there is no college or university in the vicinity. If it does become a problem, the City can deal with it at that time. Commissioner Putnam noted St. Louis Park recently dealt with this issue, and he suggested Staff contact them for further informatton. Mr. Carlberg agreed. '. ) MOTION by Apel, Seconded by Jovanovich, to forward this ordinance amendment to the City Council with our recommendation for approval. Hotion carried on a 6-Yes, 1-Absent (Peek) vote. This will be placed on the September 5, 1995, City Council agenda. (J :J ~J C) o Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 22, 1995 Page 4 VARIANCE CONTINUED - FENCE HEIGHT AND DECK ENCROACHMENT IN REAR YARD - 14015 PARTRIDGE STREET NW - LOREN KUCH Hr. Carlberg reviewed the discussion at the August 8, 1995, meeting regarding the variance request for a 9-foot fence along the property line at 14015 partridge Street NW. The fence was constructed in 1983, but Staff could find no documentation on the deck or fence. There is a permit for the pool, and there should have been one for the deck. The Commission questioned the setback of the deck at the August 8 meeting. Staff has found that the deck is located 7 feet from the rear lot line. ~he minimum setback requirement is 10 feet; however, at the time it was buil t, the minimum setback requirement was 5 feet. The change in requirements occurred in 1990. Technically the deck is a legally non- conforming use. If the Commission agrees with that interpretation, no variance is required for it. Mr. Carlberg stated the question still remains with the issue of the 9- foot high fence. The maximum height for a fence located on the property line is six feet. This was built at 8 feet and another 9 inches added. If the Commission is in favor of a variance, Staff's only concern is ~hat it may open the door for additional fence issues. ~,oren Kuch, 14015 partridae Street NW - stated he is not the original owner of the property but is of the house. He installed the pool and l:ence around it because of the issue with youth getting over it. If the ~ence is lowered, children will be able to get over it as they did before. The rationale for the additional 9 inches was to place a spike on top so children couldn't grab it and climb over. Commissioner Apel vas still in favor of the variance, feeling this is an issue of one neighbor trying to get back at another. The fence was to" keep the children out. He did not want to be a part of requiring him to lower it i~o six feet, creating the possibility that someone will get hurt. Consideration must be given to the safety aspect. Commissioner Luedtke did not feel a variance should be granted just because the fence has been ,there for 12 years, but he is not in favor of cutting it to six feet around a pool just so it is in compliance with the ordinance. HOTION by Apel, Seconded by Luedtke, that the Planning and zoning Commission forward to the City Council a Resolution approving the variance request for Loren Kuch. WHEREAS, the Planning and zoning Commission determined that said request does not meet the criteria of Ordinance No.8, Section 5.04, we do feel, however, that even though it does not meet the letter of the law pertaining to the ordinance, the safety aspect of the fence remaining there is so important to the issue at hand that the Planning and Zoning Commission feels that the fence should stand. The Planning and Zoning Commission hastens to add, however, that the only reason the variance is being considered is the safety aspects of the situation. The Planning and Zoning Commission does not condone fencing being built contrary to the ordinance. This particular case is a very special case, however. Motion carried on a 5- Yes, I-No (Squires), I-Absent (Peek) vote. This item will be placed on the September 5, 1995, City Council agenda. " ~) / "- ~~) " Regular Andover Planning and zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 22, 1995 .. '\ Page 5 '-./ VARIANCE - ACCESSORY BUILDINGS EXCEEDING 75 PERCENT LAND COVERAGE OF PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE - 2721 134TH AVENUE NW - DOUG AND BETH FRYE Mr. Carlberg reviewed the variance request of Doug and Beth Frye to allow the construction of an accessory structure exceeding the requirements of Ordinance No.8, Section 4.05, Accessory Building and Structures. The Frye's are proposing to construct a 12' x 20' storage shed which exceeds the maximum allowed land coverage by 180 square feet. The house, which is 912 square feet, was constructed in 1960; however, ~he Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1971 and the specific regulations on accessory structures and land coverage were adopted in 1983. There is a detached garage on the parcel. Accessory structures combined cannot exceed 75 percent of the square footage of land cover of the principal ~;tructure, and the detached garage is being considered an accessory structure. If granted, the accessory structure will meet or exceed all setback requirements. Staff supports the variance. Commiss~oner Apel argued that since the City requires garages, they would not be considered accessory buildings. All the Frye's have to do is construct a breezeway between the two buildings and it is considered attached. He did not believe the City ever considered a garage as an accessory lmilding unless it is a second garage. -) Ur. Carlberg explained Staff considered this request similar to the one in 1993 on Crosstown Boulevard where the applicant wished to add on to Q detached garage, which resulted in exceeding the coverage requirement. .ii variance was granted in that case. He then read the ordinance definition of accessory structure. Commissioner Apel felt the key word is "subordinate". Garages are required and are a part of the principal use; accessory buildings are subordinate to the principal use of the property. He felt the variance will resolve this request. The issue of detached garages being considered as accessory structures was discussed in the past, but he did not think it was resolved. MOTION by Doucette, Seconded by Jovanovich, that we pass this to the City Council with our recommendation of approving the variance request by Doug and Beth Frye to allow for the construction of a 12' x 20' accessory structure that exceeds the requirements of Ordinance 8, section 4.05(B)(2) by 180 square feet located at 2721 134th ~venue NW. Hotion carried on a 6-Yes, I-Absent (Peek) vote. This item will be placed on the September 5, 1995, City Council agenda. In further discussion, the Commission felt the issue of characterizing a detached garage as an accessory structure to include in the allotment toward the 75 percent coverage requirement should be reviewed by Staff. Otherwise it has the effect of punishing those with detached garages. On the other hand, unlimited garage space is not desirable either. Mr. Carlberg agreed to research the history and bring it back to the Commission for discussion. " \ , \ I (J ,-, ( ) \.../ Regular Andover Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes - August 22, 1995 Page 6 ~~-) OTHER BUSINESS ... Hr. Carlberg updated the Commission on the actions of the City Council taken at their August 15, 1995, regular meeting. [lOTION by Doucette, Seconded by Luedtke, to adjourn. Motion carried on a 6-Yes, I-Absent (Peek) vote. The meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~~~ IIarceJ:-la A. Peach Recording Secretary " '. ) ... \, . " \_ .l