Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutPC minutes 08-13-19 1 CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes Tuesday August 13, 2019 1. Call to Order: Chairperson Reid called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Planning Commissioners Aaron Amic, Peter Galzki, Beth Nielsen, Cindy Piper, Robin Reid, and Rashmi Williams. Absent: Planning Commissioner Kerby Nester. Also Present: City Planning Director Dusty Finke and Planning Intern Ben Schneider. 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda No comments made. 3. Update from City Council Proceedings Finke reported that the Council met recently and directed staff to continue the research on setbacks related to decks. He stated that the Council also opened a public hearing related to the issuance of conduit bonds which will be continued at the August 20th meeting. He noted that the Council also discussed a study group requested by the Hamel Fire Department. He stated that the Council also discussed plans and specifications for a quiet zone crossing. He advised that the City picnic will take place the following night at the Mayor’s home and Celebration Day will take place on September 21st. 4. Planning Department Report Finke provided an update. 5. Public Hearing – 1582 Homestead Trail – Megan and Tim Elam – Conditional Use Permit and Variance for Accessory Dwelling Unit and Accessory Structures Schneider presented a request for two Conditional Use Permits (CUP) and a variance. He stated that the applicants have a 34-acre rural residential lot that currently has an existing home, stand alone garage, gazebo, and child’s playhouse. He noted that there was a second home on the property that was demolished prior to the applicant’s purchasing the property. He provided details on the proposed accessory dwelling unit and cabana proposed. He noted that one CUP would be required for the accessory dwelling unit and the second CUP would be required for the other accessory structures on the property. He provided details on the stormwater management that would be required in return for the additional hardcover on the site. He noted that the variance would be required because of the requested size of the accessory dwelling unit. He noted that because there was a second dwelling on the property previously, it could be reasoned that is a unique circumstance. He stated that because of the large size of the lot, the property could be subdivided into two lots to support the request and therefore if two homes could exist on the lot that would be in harmony with the zoning ordinance. He stated that staff received an email the previous day from the property owners at 1492 Homestead who expressed support for the requests. 2 Nielsen asked if the option to subdivide was reviewed. Schneider explained that it would be easier said than done to subdivide and meet setbacks because of the desired locations. He noted that the applicants also desire the property to remain one lot. Finke explained that the property owners would like to hold the property as one parcel rather than subdividing, which maintains the rural character. Tim Elam, applicant, stated that they are asking for a positive recommendation on the CUP’s and variance request. He stated that when they purchased the lot, they thought it would be easy to build another home because of the previous second home that existed on the property. He stated that his intention is not to subdivide as they would like the property to remain under their ownership as 34 acres. He stated that they intend on residing on the property for many years. Amic asked how the previous second home was constructed. Finke noted that two permits were issued previously, one for each home that existed. Tim Haislet, 1562 Homestead Trail, asked for additional input on the ordinance language related to the previously existing second home. Finke provided additional background on the history of the ordinance. He noted that the practices of the City may have been different as there are a number of properties in Medina that have guest quarters. Reid opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. Amy Allworth, 1602 Homestead Trail, provided a petition with the names of 10 adjoining property owners that support the requested variance and CUP’s presented tonight. She read aloud the names and addresses of those residents on Homestead Trail that support the requests. Reid closed the public hearing at 7:22 p.m. Finke stated that the ordinance would have permitted a parcel over 40 acres to have two principal structures and provided an example of another property that has two homes. Nielsen asked why an 18,000 square foot home that was constructed in the 1990’s was torn down. Piper replied that the home was in bad shape and mechanically was not working and therefore needed to be torn down. Galzki commented that he did not see a problem granting the CUP’s or variance as this is a unique situation where the City had provided previous approval for two homes. He stated that in looking at the size of the allowable accessory dwelling, this property is very large and therefore the proposed size is comparable. Nielsen stated that she has no opposition to the requests. 3 Williams confirmed consensus. Amic noted that he is not opposed. Piper commented that this is a great idea. She asked if the property would be able to subdivide in the future, should the owners wish to sell the property. Finke stated that there may be some challenges to subdivide the property with the two homes in the future. He noted that the accessory dwelling could be demolished in order to subdivide, if that was the intent. Reid commented that this request fits the variance criteria as the circumstances are unique to the property and not caused by the landowner. Motion by Galzki, seconded by Piper, to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permits and Variance request subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Nester) Finke noted that the intent would be to move this forward to the City Council at their September 3rd meeting. 6. Public Hearing – Ordinance Amendment – Chapter 8 of the City Code Related to Residential Setbacks, Required Yards and allowed Encroachments Finke stated that this is a continuation of a discussion that began the previous month related to setbacks and decks. He stated that the draft ordinance was created from that discussion and includes three primary changes. He stated that the changes include allowances for encroachment into the larger setbacks adjacent minor collector roadways and changes to the setbacks adjacent minor collector roadways. He noted that the changes would be applied to every non-rural residential district. He stated that it is uncommon for communities to have these larger setbacks adjacent collector roadways and therefore the allowed encroachment could be seen as more similar to other communities. He noted that a number of communities also allow decks as an encroachment much further into the setback, up to within five feet of the property line. He stated that staff proposes an increase of the setback along minor collector roadways from 35 feet to 40 feet in the R-1 and R-2 districts. He explained that this would allow the homes to stay set back while allowing the decks to encroach within. He noted that two properties would become nonconforming with that change. He stated that the third change to the ordinance would be more technical, amending the encroachment section to allow window wells as encroachment within the setback but not within drainage and utility easements. He stated that currently bay windows are allowed to encroach, but only in the rear setback. He noted that there has been some interest in bay windows in the front setback, and therefore that could be a discussion as well. He stated that there have been a number of cases where properties were limited on their ability to construct decks adjacent wetland buffer setbacks. He provided additional information on the required wetland buffer and setback, noting that a home would be set back between 40 and 50 feet of the wetland. He explained that the purpose of the wetland setback is different than the purpose of the roadway setback and therefore it did not make sense to include wetland setbacks for this allowed encroachment. He noted that as proposed only decks would be allowed to encroach. Reid asked if the revised ordinance would allow the property owners that came forward the previous month to build their deck. Finke commented that he believed that this change would allow that activity. 4 Reid stated that the lot depth is being increased and asked if developers would be dismayed to find the change in lot depth. Finke replied that there have not yet been those discussions. He explained that the lot would need to be deepened in order to have a building pad for the home with the changes to setback. Reid stated that overall more modulation should be required on the back of walkout units but noted that would be a different discussion. Reid opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Matthew Cole stated that this has been an interesting process and appreciated everyone’s time. He stated that he is happy with the changes as proposed and thanked the Commission for its consideration. Reid commended staff for the great job in finding this solution. Piper also thanked staff for their hard work. Nielsen commented that this would not prohibit a deck from being constructed on the ground, which could be more intrusive. Reid asked how a ground level deck and patio could be differentiated. Finke stated that staff actually viewed it the opposite. He stated that this would allow for encroachment from a main level deck but would not allow encroachment from a second story deck. He explained that staff viewed a second story deck as more looming and intrusive. He confirmed that a deck would be allowed from the ground level, or main level from the back. Reid closed the public hearing at 7:53 p.m. Motion by Nielsen, seconded by Piper, to recommend approval of the ordinance as written. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Nester) Finke noted that this item will also be presented at the September 3rd City Council meeting. 7. Approval of the July 9, 2019 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Motion by Galzki, seconded by Williams, to approve the July 9, 2019, Planning Commission minutes with noted changes. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Nester) 8. Council Meeting Schedule Finke advised that the Council will be meeting the following Tuesday and Galzki volunteered to attend in representation of the Commission. 9. Adjourn Motion by Reid, seconded by Galzki, to adjourn the meeting at 8:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.