Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 8, 2000CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS~ MN 5542 !-3878 (612) 782-28OO TDD 782-2806 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES August 8, 2000 MEMBERS Tom Ramsdell, Chair Kevin Hanson Ted Yehle Stephan Johnson Tammere Ericson The August 8, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was called to order by at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Ramsdell. Members present were Ericson, Johnson, and Ramsdell. Commissioners Hanson and Yehle were not in attendance. Also present were Kathryn Pepin (Secretary to the Planning and Zoning Commission), and Tim Johnson (City Planner). MOTION by Johnson, seconded by Ericson, to approve the minutes from the meeting of July 11, 2000 as presented in writing. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. NEW BUSINESS Ao Public Hearing Variance Case #2000-0820 Ralph Pautsch Construction RE: 4524 Fillmore St. N.E. Columbia Heights, Mn. Mr. Johnson presented the request of Ralph Pautsch on behalf of Barb Reed the property owner of 4524 Fillmore Street for a setback variance of eight inches from the rear property line to allow the construction of a 20' x 30' detached garage with the doors facing the alley at 4524 Fillmore Street. The applicant had originally proposed to build a garage measuring 22 feet by 30 feet as outlined in the original request, which exceeded the maximum lot coverage. This request has been downsized to meet the maximum 30% lot coverage in place. The applicant is now proposing to build a detached garage measuring 20 feet by 30 feet (600 square feet) at 4524 Fillmore Street. The variance is being requested to allow for a proposed garage to be built nineteen feet and four inches (19' 4") from the rear property line abutting the alley. The proposed garage would face the west or towards the alley. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance requires garages to be set back a minimum distance of twenty (20) feet from the property line when the garage doors face a street or alley. He explained that the proposed garage would infringe eight inches (8") into the setback area. The existing house occupies 1,691 square feet of property with the proposed detached garage occupying an additional 600 square feet. The total amount of lot coverage proposed with the addition of the detached garage would be 2,291 square feet. Ordinance 9.104(5) allows for a maximum lot coverage of 30%. The lot measures approximately 7,744 square feet and allows a maximum lot coverage of 2,323 square feet. Mr. Johnson stated that this proposal meets lot coverage requirements. Mr. Johnson further stated that the purpose of the request is to provide off-street enclosed parking for existing tenants of the two unit dwelling. The tenants currently park on a concrete slab abutting the alley. THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2000 PAGE 2 Accessory structures are regulated under Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance with requirements as follows: No accessory structure shall exceed the height of the principal structure or fifteen (15) feet, whichever is less. The height of the garage should be within these limits. No accessory structure or combination of accessory structures shall exceed 1,000 square feet. The proposed detached garage covers 600 square feet meeting requirements. Any lot over 6,500 square feet in size may have a lot coverage of up to 30%. The lot is 7,744 square feet. The maximum allowable lot coverage for this lot is 2,323 square feet. This proposal would cover 2,291 square feet. This proposal meets lot coverages. Detached accessory structures must be six (6) feet or more from the principal structure. The proposed detached garage will be approximately six (6) feet away from the principal structure. Whenever a garage is designed so that the vehicle entry door is facing a street or alley, the distance between the door and the lot line shall be 20 feet or more. The proposed detached two-car garage will be placed nineteen feet, four inches {19'4") from the rear lot line, with the garaoe doors facing the alley. The proposal requires an eight inch (8") variance. Mr. Johnson stated that Staff has visited the site and believes that a slight hardship exists with relation to the topography of the site, which limits where and how a garage could be built without reasonable difficulty. There are also existing concrete blocks surrounding the current slab area that are at or below grade. Because of these issues staff has looked at possible options for building a reasonable sized garage to fit within the setbacks. The proposed garage could be placed on the property to meet setbacks if the garage doors were faced to the north. However, this proposal would require the owner to remove the existing sidewalk that leads up to the house on the south property line, as well as removing an existing patio area for the tenants. It was Mr. Johnson's opinion that the proposed two-plus car garage would intend to complement the property and would also provide covered and secured parking facilities for the tenants as well as a great improvement for the property. Mr. Johnson reminded the Commissioners that hardship needs to be established or circumstances unique to the property in question need to be established in order for a variance to be granted adding that Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance also states that the Commission shall hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this Ordinance in instances where their "strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and to recommend variances only when it is demonstrated that such action will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance". He stated that Section 1 of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Four of the purpose statements are identified as follows: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2000 PAGE 3 protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; dividing the City into zones and districts restricting and regulating therein the location, height, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, and the density and distribution of population; providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to property; and, preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating the use of land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land and buildings surrounding them. Mr. Johnson stated that Staff recommends approval of the request because there does appear to be a hardship on which to base approval of the variance and the proposal appears to be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. He added that it is staff's opinion that, because the lot coverages will be met, the property will not be overcrowded, and adequate light, air, and convenient access to the property will be maintained and be improved. There is also an existing garage with doors facing the alley adjacent to this property, that is approximately 14 feet from the property line. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. The public hearing was closed as no one was present to speak regarding this request. Motion by Johnson, seconded by Ericson, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the eight (8) inch setback variance request to allow the construction of a 20 foot by 30 foot detached garage facing the alley at 4524 Fillmore Street N.E. due to topographic hardship and existing sidewalk and patio as well as the proposal being in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE AUGUST 14, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. Public Hearing Variance Case #2000-0821 Kevin Dory 1845 Fairway Drive N.E. Columbia Heights, Mn. Tim Johnson presented the request of Kevin Doty for a setback variance of eight feet, six inches to allow the construction of an addition to the attached garage space measuring 13 feet wide by 24 feet deep (312 square feet) at 1845 Fairway Drive. The variance is being requested to allow for the proposed addition to be built 21.5 feet from the rear property line. The proposed addition would be on the east side of the existing structure. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that Section 9.107(4) of the Zoning Ordinance requires principal structures to be set back a minimum distance of thirty (30) feet from the rear property line. He added that the proposed garage would infringe not closer than 21.5 feet to the rear property line. Attached garaoes are considered as part of the principal structure and are subject to the same setbacks as the house. The existino house occupies 1,066 square PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING-MINUTES AUGUST 8,2000 PAGE4 feet of property, the existing attached garage occupies an additional 424 square feet, and the proposed addition occupies 312 square feet. The total lot coverage of the house with the additions will be 1,914 square feet, which would be well within ordinance requirements in the R-1 (single family residential) Zoning District. Mr. Johnson explained that the purpose of this request is to gain additional enclosed parking and storage room. The applicant currently has a two-car garage, but one stall was partially converted into extra kitchen space by previous owners, thus leaving only one usable enclosed parking space. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that there are no previous Planning and Zoning Commission cases pertaining to this site. However, he stated that in December of 1995 a variance case for the property at 1850 N.E. 49th Avenue, which abuts 1845 Fairway on the north, was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. The variance of thirteen feet (13') was approved for an addition onto the rear of the house. Mr. Johnson stated that residential structures are regulated under Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance and are as follows: Minimum lot size shall be 8,400 square feet. The subject property is 9,838 square feet which meets this requirement. · Minimum lot width is 70 feet. The subject property is 105 feet wide which meets this requirement. · Front yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet from property line. The existing house is approximately 28 feet. · Rear yard shall be at least 30 feet. The existing house is approximately 26 feet from the rear property line at its closest point. A majority of the house meets the 30 foot setback from the rear property line as the lot configures at an angle on the north lot line. The existing deck is also within the 30 foot setback area, and is approximately 15 feet from the rear lot line. The house and deck are considered "legal non- conforming". · Side yard shall be a minimum of seven (7) feet. The existing house and proposed addition will be placed at no closer than 7.5 feet from the side yard, which meets this requirement. · An accessory structure shall be considered to be an integral part of the principal building if it is connected to the principal building. · For single-family homes, no accessory structures or any combination of accessory structures shall exceed 1,000 square feet. The existing garage is 424 square feet and the proposed addition is 312 square feet totaling 736 square feet which meets this requirement. · Any lot over 6,500 square feet may have a lot coverage of up to 30%. The maximum lot coverage on the property is 2,951 square feet. The applicant has proposed 1,912 square feet which meets the requirement. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2000 PAGE 5 Mr. Johnson stated that, with the exception of the rear yard setback requirement, the proposal meets the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The existino attached garaoe and the proposed attached garage do not meet the setback requirements noting that the structure was built in 19(]5, prior to the adoption of these regulations, so it is considered legally non-conforming. Section 9.104(3) of the ordinance states that normal maintenance of a non- conforming structure is permitted, provided it does not extend or intensify the non-conformity. He added that the proposal would further encroach into the setback area, as the garage will be expanded on the east side of the lot. Considering that the non-conformity will be intensified, a permit cannot be granted without the approval of a variance. He stated that the addition matches up with the existing attached garage but is closer to the lot line because of the shape of the lot. Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance states the following "In recommending a variance, it shall be found that by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of lot or whereby reason of exceptional topography, soil conditions, tree number or location or water conditions the owner of such lot would have an undue hardship in using his lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the rules of the zoning district." Mr. Johnson stated that Staff has visited the site and believes that a hardship exists with relation to the shape of the lot, which restricts an addition onto the east or north of the house because of the setbacks. Because of these issues, staff has looked at possible options for adding additional attached garage space within the setbacks. There appear to be no other locations on the lot that could reasonably accommodate this addition or a similar addition to meet setbacks. If the lot were square or rectangular shaped, the addition would meet setbacks. If a detached structure were built to meet setbacks, the depth of the garage would be approximately 15 feet, which could not accommodate a normal sized vehicle. It was Mr. Johnson's opinion that the proposed garage addition would intend to complement the property, would also provide additional covered and secured parking for the owners and would be a nice improvement to the property. The proposed addition would appear to match up with adjacent homes and their properties. However, there is only one other home on the same block that has the appearance of a three-car garage. Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance also states that the Commission shall hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this Ordinance in instances where their "strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and to recommend variances only when it is demonstrated that such action will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance". Section 1 of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Four of the purpose statements are identified as follows: protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; dividing the City into zones and districts restricting and regulating therein the location, height, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, and the density and distribution of population; providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to property; and, preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating the use of land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to surrounding land and buildings. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2000 PAGE 6 Mr. Johnson indicated the positive aspects of this proposal are that the proposal will create additional enclosed and secured off-street parking for two vehicles, which will help to enhance the character of the residential neighborhood and provide needed parking space for the single-family structure and the addition will follow an established building line that matches the existing structure. He added that the negative aspects of this proposal would be that the addition will intensify and extend a non-conforming structure and infringe into the rear yard setback area and thereby could set a precedent for approval of other similar type proposals. Mr. Johnson stated that a prior variance granted to the neighbor at 1850 N.E. 49~h Avenue was five feet closer than the proposed variance currently requested. It is staff's opinion that because minimum lot coverages will be met, the property will not be overcrowded, and adequate light, air, and convenient access to the property will be maintained and improved upon. It was his opinion that the proposal is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. He added that staff does have some concerns about this site and some proposed future additions that would also need variance approvals. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. Chairperson Ramsdell asked Mr. Doty if the tree in front of the proposed addition would be removed and if the width of his driveway would be increased. Mr. Doty stated that the tree would be removed. It is also his intent to increase the curb cut for his driveway to the maximum width of twenty-two feet. In response to Planner Johnson's concerns with future variance requests and the possibility of a precedent being set, Chairperson Ramsdell stated that each variance request is different and is considered on an individual basis based on the information provided and the existing conditions when they are presented to the Commission. Chairperson Ramsdell closed the public hearing. Motion by Ericson, seconded by Ramsdell, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the 8.5 foot setback variance request due to the irregular shape of the lot as well as the fact that the proposal is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE AUGUST 14, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. Motion by Johnson, seconded by Ramsdell, to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed, j Secretary to th~ PlannidQ, a~d Zoning Commission kp