INVER GROVE HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA

INVER GROVE HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 2017 – 7:00 p.m.

City Council Chambers - 8150 Barbara Avenue 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR JANUARY 17, 2017

3. APPLICANT REQUESTS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS

4.01 ANDY HANSON - CASE NO.17-04V

Consider a Variance to allow a 31.5 foot driveway width whereas 30 feet is the maximum allowed for the property located at 4083 87th Street. Planning Commission Action _______________________________________

4.02 BILL AND HELEN FRANCOMB - CASE NO.17-05V

Consider a Variance to install a solar array within the rear yard setback for the property located at 9800 Alaureate Ct. Planning Commission Action _______________________________________

4.03 HERB PILHOFER - CASE NO.17-02PUD Consider a Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development for a two lot subdivision to be known as Argenta Hills 10th Addition located at Outlot J, Argenta Hills 8th Addition. Planning Commission Action _______________________________________

4. OTHER BUSINESS

a. Elections b. Call for Special Meeting

5. ADJOURN This document is available upon 3 business day request in alternate formats such as Braille, large print, audio recording, etc. Please contact Kim Fox at 651.450.2545 or [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 – 7:00 p.m.

City Hall Chambers - 8150 Barbara Avenue

Commissioner Scales called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commissioners Present: Pat Simon

Tony Scales Jonathan Weber Armando Lissarrague Dennis Wippermann Luke Therrien

Commissioners Absent: Elizabeth Niemioja (excused) Annette Maggi (excused) Joan Robertson (excused) Others Present: Allan Hunting, City Planner Heather Botten, Associate Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES The December 20, 2016 Planning Commission minutes were approved as submitted. OTHER BUSINESS City of Inver Grove Heights – Case No. 17-03X Allan Hunting, City Planner, explained the request as detailed in the report. He advised that the Planning Commission is being asked to consider whether the Bancroft Way Area Reconstruction Project is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The project was initiated by a petition from the property owners and will cost approximately $2,000,000. A public hearing will be held at the January 23 City Council meeting. Motion by Commissioner Wippermann, second by Commissioner Weber, to recommend that City Project No. 2016-09E - Bancroft Way Area Reconstruction is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Motion carried (6/0). This item goes to the City Council on January 23, 2017. Commissioner Simon asked when the project would take place. Mr. Hunting replied his understanding was that it would take place this construction season. PUBLIC HEARINGS JCN INVESTMENTS – CASE NO. 16-60PR Reading of Notice Commissioner Simon read the public hearing notice to consider the request for a major site plan review to add an approximate 3,000 square foot building addition and parking lot expansion, for the property located at 2940 – 65th Street. 15 notices were mailed.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 January 17, 2017

Presentation of Request Heather Botten, Associate Planner, explained the request as detailed in the report. She advised that the applicant’s property is 30,000 square feet in size. Currently there is a 1,700 square foot building on the property. The applicants are proposing a one-story, 3,000 square foot building addition, along with 2,800 square feet of parking and sidewalk improvements. Staff recommends approval of the request with the nine conditions listed in the report. Staff has not heard from any of the surrounding property owners. Opening of Public Hearing Mike Kraft, Mike Kraft Architects, 1442 – 90th Lane NW, Coon Rapids, and Dr. Ross Crain, one of the owners of Inver Grove Chiropractic, advised they were available to answer any questions. Commissioner Scales asked Mr. Kraft if he read and understood the report. Mr. Kraft replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Scales closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Recommendation Motion by Commissioner Simon, second by Commissioner Lissarrague, to approve the major site plan review to add a building and parking lot expansion, for the property located at 2940 – 65th Street, with the conditions listed in the report. Motion carried (6/0). This item goes to the City Council on January 23, 2017. DARIN CRAPSER – CASE NO. 17-01ZPA Reading of Notice Commissioner Simon read the public hearing notice to consider the request for an ordinance amendment to allow single-family residential as a permitted or conditional use in the B-1, Limited Business District, for the property located at 6047 Cahill Avenue. No notices were mailed. Presentation of Request Allan Hunting, City Planner, explained the request as detailed in the report. He advised that the applicant is proposing an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow a mix of residential and commercial uses for a property on Cahill Avenue, which currently contains a house, barn, and garage. The applicant has been marketing the property for some time and found a potential buyer who would like to utilize part of the property as a commercial use consistent with those uses allowed in the B-1 district, but would also like to live in the existing home. There are currently 29 B-1 parcels in the City; the majority lie along Cahill Avenue which has a mix of commercial and residential zoning abutting the roadway. Of those properties 13 contain businesses, five contain single-family homes, two are vacant, and two have both a residence and a business. Staff supports the idea of adding residential to the B-1 district. Staff is proposing that this apply just to the B-1 district, and that a use listed in the B-1 district must be established on the property and that the residential use would be accessory to the operating B-1 use. Staff is also suggesting that the residence be used for residential purposes only. Also, an existing or new residence would be required to comply with the same standards found in the R-1C district. Staff recommends approval of the request. Commissioner Lissarrague asked for clarification that the current owner would be selling the property to a new owner, who would be the party responsible for running a business out of the barn and would then be living on the property.


Mr. Hunting replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Wippermann asked if the proposed change would apply to all B-1 properties. Mr. Hunting replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Wippermann asked if the proposed change would allow expansion of existing residences, rebuilding, or the building of new residential buildings. Mr. Hunting replied if there is an established B-1 use on the property, and there is enough room, the property owner would be allowed to build a new house or add onto the existing house. Commissioner Wippermann asked if the proposed ordinance change would affect the existing B-1 properties with residences on them which were considered legal non-conforming. Mr. Hunting replied it would not affect them as that would be looked at as the principle use of the property and they would remain legal non-conforming. If the City’s vision was to have these properties become business, Commissioner Wippermann questioned why they would want to do something that would delay that process or eliminate the possibility of it ever becoming business. Mr. Hunting advised that is something the Planning Commission may wish to discuss. Commissioner Weber asked if the applicants were aware that a construction business would not be allowed in the B-1 district. Mr. Hunting advised that staff explained to them that they could have an office but they could not have equipment on site. Commissioner Weber asked for clarification regarding the proposed hair salon. Mr. Hunting advised that a hair salon was a conditional use in the B-1 district. Commissioner Weber noted that he wanted to confirm that the applicants were aware of that. Opening of Public Hearing Darin Crapser, 14381 221st Avenue, Elk River, advised he was available to answer any questions. Commissioner Scales asked the applicant if he read and understood the report. Mr. Crapser replied in the affirmative. Ryan Callahan, the potential buyer of the property, asked whether an operating business would have to be in place before they would have the ability to live in the residence. Mr. Hunting replied that technically that would be true; however, there may be some flexibility if they were working simultaneously to move to the property. Mr. Callahan advised he has been working with the Chief Building Official to make the house a legal residence.


Mr. Hunting stated if Council approved a conditional use permit for the salon, and there was a building permit applied for to remodel the barn, it could likely be looked at as steps being taken to establish a business. If the residence met all building code requirements the City could probably work with them and allow that to happen. Commissioner Scales asked if they would be allowed to move into the house before the business was operational. Mr. Hunting stated they would not be allowed to do so by the strict interpretation of the ordinance; however, the suggestion he made was to try to make their proposal work under the ordinance proposal. Commissioner Scales asked how it would be handled should they never open the business. Mr. Hunting replied the residence would likely become a non-conforming use if there was not a commercial operation in place, which is why he suggested they get a conditional use permit for the salon and have permits to begin construction. Commissioner Lissarrague asked the applicant for details regarding his business. Mr. Callahan replied that they are a general remodeling residential/commercial construction company. He and his wife currently home office out of their house and store the construction equipment on property they own in the north metro. The barn on the subject property offers the ability to have multiple offices. Commissioner Lissarrague asked the applicant how many employees he had. Mr. Callahan replied he had two employees in addition to him and his wife. Commissioner Lissarrague asked the applicant what kind of equipment he had. Mr. Callahan replied a cargo van, a truck, a couple job trailers, and an equipment trailer. He advised they do not have any cranes, excavators, etc. Commissioner Lissarrague asked what would happen if the applicant began storing heavy equipment on the Cahill property. Mr. Hunting replied if there was a complaint filed it would be a violation of the ordinance and code enforcement would address the issue. Mr. Callahan advised that he was aware of others in the City with home offices who had complaints filed against them and were required to move their equipment off site. He advised he was aware that he could not store his equipment on site and noted that his wife hoped to eventually turn the upstairs of the barn into a salon. Commissioner Scales closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Discussion Commissioner Scales supported the request and was happy to see someone wanting to live and bring business to the City. Commissioner Wippermann was opposed to the request as he was concerned about the precedent this would set and the potential for others to want to allow residential in other commercial zoning


districts. His main concern was that the ordinances were originally set up to encourage changing the area to business; however, the proposed amendment would delay and perhaps eliminate that possibility. He also questioned how the City could enforce allowing someone to rebuild their home if there was a business on it but disallow it if there was not a business. Commissioner Weber noted that the current residential use is legal non-conforming, and asked if it was being used as a residence. Mr. Hunting replied that it had been used as a residence in the past; however, it had been vacant for over a year and therefore lost its grandfathering status. Commissioner Scales advised that in the 1980’s the City wanted to turn the subject area into commercial. It never really happened; however, and over the years it has become a mix of uses. He supported the ordinance amendment as he did not believe the City would support changing it into a commercial area like it once did. Tony Sampair, Coldwell Burnett, advised he has been marketing the property and found 99% of the interest to be from individuals wanting to operate a business. He stated there was a grandfathered use on the property when they purchased it and they were planning on remodeling the home and moving forward with the grandfathered use when they discovered they had missed the deadline by 3-4 weeks. Commissioner Lissarrague asked if staff was aware of any similar situations in which the City had to get involved because of code violations. Mr. Hunting replied he was not aware of any offhand but noted that planning staff would not be involved in such matters. Commissioner Lissarrague stated he was concerned about potential code enforcement issues. Commissioner Weber noted that the applicant has stated his equipment would remain on his property in the north metro. Planning Commission Recommendation Motion by Commissioner Simon, second by Commissioner Wippermann, to deny the request for an ordinance amendment to allow single-family residential as an accessory use in the B-1, Limited Business District, for the property located at 6047 Cahill Avenue, due to the precedent this would set, the potential for others to want to allow residential in other commercial zoning districts, the potential for approval of the amendment to delay and perhaps eliminate the possibility of changing the area to business, and the concern about it being turned into a contractor’s yard. Motion failed (3/3 – Weber, Therrien, and Scales). This item goes to the City Council on February 13, 2017. OTHER BUSINESS (continued) Mr. Hunting advised that officer elections will be held at an upcoming meeting. Mr. Hunting advised that Commissioners will be notified once a date is set for the City Council/Planning Commission joint meeting to hear a variance presentation. Commissioner Simon asked when the comprehensive plan update meetings would likely take place.


Mr. Hunting replied that a meeting calendar had not yet been established. Commissioner Scales asked if the Commission was required to elect new officers by any specific date, to which Mr. Hunting replied he was unsure. The meeting was adjourned by unanimous vote at 7:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kim Fox Recording Secretary

Documents

INVER GROVE HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA