Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015 12-17 PCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA DECEMBER 17, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Christensen at 7:02 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Chair Randy Christensen, Commissioners John MacMillan, Stephen Schonning, Rochelle Sweeney, Susan Tade and Carlos Morgan (arrived at 7:12 p.m.) were present, Commissioner Alexander Koenig was absent and unexcused. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission Tim Benetti, Director of Business & Development Gary Eitel, and Denise Bosch, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There was a motion by Commissioner Schonning, seconded by Commission MacMillan, to approve the agenda for the December 17, 2015 meeting. The motion passed. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—NOVEMBER 12,2015 There was a motion by Commissioner Sweeney, seconded by Commissioner Tade, to approve the minutes of the November 12, 2015 meeting. The motion passed. 5. CHAIR'S EXPLANATION Chair Christensen explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. 6. PLANNING APPLICATION ITEMS 6a) RE-CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING DECKS AND PORCHES AS AN ALLOWABLE ENCROACHMENT INTO CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL YARD SETBACK AREAS AND ADDING NEW DEFINITIONS OF DECKS AND PORCHES. Chair Christensen asked Mr. Benetti to give background information on why the ordinance amendment was being re-considered. PC Minutes 12-17-15 Mr. Benetti stated that Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson had originally brought the topic of discussion to light in mid-2013 by referencing an article that highlighted other cities changing their zoning codes by allowing porches to encroach into the front yards. After direction from the Council to begin study and work on the ordinance, the city staff liaison (Mr. Jesse Anderson) to the Housing Commission presented the concept to the Housing Commission in March 2015. Mr. Anderson phrased six or seven questions to the Housing Commission that only addressed porches and never mentioned decks and the Housing Commission agreed that they would like to see only porches as an allowable encroachment. Mr. Benetti stated staff added decks in the beginning phases of this study item, due in part to other cities referenced either decks and/or porches as allowable encroachments. Mr. Benetti stated the language being presented has been studied and analyzed by both the Housing Commission and Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission has conducted great discussion points and analysis with regards to allowing decks and porches - both enclosed and unenclosed. He believed that adequate language had been built into the ordinance identifying what a deck or porch could look like. Mr. Benetti continued by stating that after the last Planning Commission meeting (11/12/15), staff was preparing the recommended changes to the ordinance for the City Council's agenda, when the City Manager approached staff and asked why decks were being included, especially since the original intent seemed to focus only on porches. Staff went back to the Council and Housing Commission minutes, and discovered from the minutes that it may never have been the intent to allow decks as an allowable encroachment. The Housing Commission felt the City could keep the design of the porch compatible with the house, as opposed to a typical deck. Mr. Benetti stated that because of the original topic [title] brought up by Ms. Lawrence- Anderson, and knowing the Housing Commission was not in favor of extending allowable encroachments to decks in general, Planning Staff was requesting the Planning Commission to reconsider the draft ordinance, without reference to decks. Mr. Benetti stated that decks are still in the ordinance as an identifiable definition; and the ordinance will only apply to porches, either unenclosed or enclosed, with the intent to match the exterior architecture of the home. Home compatibility will be vetted during the permit process. He stated that the ordinance is not the final version and if Commissioners still want decks as an option for owners, they can make that recommendation. He stated that he thinks it is important to hear every voice here tonight and that the City Council will know about the Commission's past work on decks. Chair Christensen added that the intent as he understood it was that the City is trying to bring people back to the front yards, and with that in mind he thought that the City should allow people to put decks on. He stated that there were discussions on whether or not to allow the decks to be enclosed and avoiding the additions being used as livable space. He stated that there are a lot of ramblers in the City and now with this ordinance rewritten, residents would have to redesign the entire front of their home. He sees this as a deterrent to residents given the City's demographics and the cost of a porch versus a deck. Putting all those things together, he feels that the decks should not be taken out and he is at the point of saying either the decks stay in or he is not in favor of the porches because it goes against the intent of getting residents to the front yard. He thinks the City Council should consider implementing limitations on materials used for the deck PC Minutes 12-17-15 -2- and that staff could look at a materials list that would address their concern about the materials looking weathered. There was a motion by Chair Christensen, seconded by Commission MacMillan to recommend the ordinance as previously prepared (and recommended for approval at the November 12, 2015 meeting) with an allowance for decks. Commissioner Sweeney asked Mr. Benetti about a couple he had previously talked about and. what they wanted to do. Mr. Benetti replied that they were looking at an unenclosed porch or an open deck and they were at the 35-foot setback, so he told them they could not do it at this point, but to wait until Spring because that may change with the new ordinance amendment. Commissioner Sweeney stated that the Housing Commission's decision to remove decks from the ordinance when there is already interest from the community may be counterproductive. Director of Business & Development Gary Eitel stated that he understood that the Housing Commission never wanted decks. He presented background on the intent of changing the ordinance and the City Manager's concerns, and stated that the question was who was advocating for the decks. He conveyed his concerns about ensuring that the deck would be architecturally compatible to the home. He suggested that if the Commission wanted to include decks, they should consider an architectural review committee. He stated that the Commission could ask the City Council if they want to consider adding decks to the ordinance. Commissioner Schonning stated his concern about someone putting a "heliport" on the front of their house with shoddy materials. He thinks that there needs to be some sort of control. With what has been said by the Housing Commission and the City Council, this issue must be reconsidered because it is a good point to limit what could be put on the front of the house. He described an example of a tastefully done wraparound deck. He stated he would be concerned about giving free reign and having large decks in the front yard. After hearing that it was not the Housing Commission's intention, he feels this item deserves more discussion. Commissioner MacMillan asked if a building permit is needed for a deck. Mr. Benetti replied affirmatively. Commissioner MacMillan confirmed that the City would know in advance what the project would look like. Mr. Benetti replied affirmatively. Commissioner MacMillan stated that a deck is a lot less expensive than a porch and more affordable for residents. Mr. Benetti went over what is reviewed by a building inspector under a building permit. Chair Christensen stated that there had been discussion about the size of the encroachment and he could see how a deck could get larger, but a large deck would not be a minor undertaking and it would be reasonable to assume that appropriate materials would be used. He stated that other cities have an allowable materials list. He doesn't see a large majority of residents wanting to go PC Minutes 12-17-15 -3- to the expense of tying a porch into their home. He thinks the Commission needs to get more clarification on what the City Council wants from the Commission because they gave the ordinance to the Commission and it appears that the Commission changed it from what they intended. He thinks front yard decks are stili appropriate and he would like to see feedback on an allowable materials list including low maintenance materials. Commissioner Morgan talked about the booming housing market and that people want their property to look good. He thinks we should have faith that people won't build something ugly because overwhelmingly people want their places to look good, their property values to go up and won't jeopardize their property value. He spoke about the wonderful things that are going on in Brooklyn Center and the good changes that are taking place. He asked Chair Christensen to clarify an earlier comment. Chair Christensen stated that what he was referring to was the residents' ability to do a deck versus a porch. A deck would be a more affordable option. Chair Christensen asked if there is a difference in the assessed value of a porch or deck square footage-wise. Mr. Benetti replied that he believes it is minimal, but it would depend on the quality of the structure once it has been reviewed by a property assessor. Mr. Eitel stated that the porch would add more value to the home and that the City has architectural treatment limitations on porches, but not a lot of architectural controls. Commissioner Morgan stated that he understands the need to look at the proper materials and spoke about finding a middle ground with regard to regulations. Mr. Eitel stated that the Planning Commission would not be asking the City Council for input at this point, they would be asking the City Council for direction. Chair Christensen stated he wants the City Council to give the Commission direction and not input. Mr. Eitel stated he wants to make sure this is clear. Commissioner Sweeney asked if the City has a policy with regard to decks being built with engineered materials as some other cities do. Mr. Benetti replied that as long as the materials meet the State of Minnesota Building Code requirement, there is not much the City can say about what materials are used. He stated that a policy is guidance; whereby an ordinance is a must. If the materials are regulated by an ordinance, it must be enforced. Commissioner Morgan stated that he thinks that treated materials should be used on decks. Mr. Benetti stated that even treated materials have to be maintained. Currently, there is no treated materials limitation in place and the City can require the structure to be fixed but it cannot require a deck to be painted. PC Minutes 12-17-15 -4- Discussion took place regarding deck materials. Chair Christensen confirmed that the amended ordinance with the decks stricken mandates that the porch must be architecturally compatible with the dwelling. Mr. Eitel challenged the Commission to show him a deck that is architecturally compatible with a house. Chair Christensen stated that an.open porch format is putting a roof over a deck. Mr. Eitel stated that the roof would match the existing house. Chair Christensen asked "but the deck does not?" Mr. Benetti showed Commissioners examples of decks to determine the architectural compatibility. Chair Christensen stated that if the City wants to allow an open porch format, then it should allow an open deck format. Commissioner Schonning stated that the spirit of the ordinance change was to allow for an extension of the encroachment and we are not saying you can't build a deck. He talked about having issues with large decks. Commissioner Tade asked about maximum deck sizes. Chair Christensen stated that none of the sizes were changed, only the deletion of the decks and stated that an unenclosed porch is the same as a deck with a roof. Mr. Eitel stated that the architectural compatibility would still need to be determined. Chair Christensen stated that the Commission needs direction from the City Council on what direction the ordinance is supposed to be taking because it is confused. Mr. Benetti stated that the original intent was to do porches and as we progressed in the process, decks came in and now we are at a point of trying to present something and we are being questioned about the inclusion of decks. He thinks the ordinance can be presented to the City Council with a recommendation that the Commission still wants decks as part of the ordinance. Commissioner Morgan encouraged asking the City Council for more direction. Commissioner Tade asked if it could be presented that the Planning Commission does endorse the ordinance as it is with the porches and would like the City Council to consider the addition of decks as well. PC Minutes 12-17-15 -5- Chair Christensen stated he thinks the Commission's recommendation should be that we want to include decks. Discussion took place regarding the recommendation and motion. Chair Christensen asked if the City Council said they did not want decks. Mr. Eitel replied that the February 9, 2015 heading to the Council Work Session agenda item referred to "decks and porches" but the text from the original July 22, 2013 study session did not mention "decks", it just said "porches". He thinks that it has expanded and now we are building the rationale that this is what the Commission likes. The Planning Commission has talked about the maximum distance and size and said that a deck can be put on the front of a house. The question coming back is if there are examples of architecturally compatible decks. The examples have been of higher value homes. Chair Christensen talked about making homes a higher value by the addition of decks and stated he is unsure of the Commission's directive and according to this ordinance, residents cannot have a deck. Mr. Eitel stated that residents can have anything they want as long as they meet the setback standards. This ordinance addresses permitted encroachments. He stated that if this is the Commission's wish, then staff can shape and clarify the referral. He stated that if decks are added to the ordinance, someone should be reviewing them to make sure they are complementary to the neighborhood. Chair Christensen stated that the Commission doesn't have a definition of what architecturally compatible is and he doesn't think he wants to get into that definition. He recommended that the Commission not vote for the motion put forward because he doesn't think it is going to serve us the way it was intended. Chair Christensen then called for the vote to the motion made earlier on the table (motion by Chair Christensen, seconded by Commission MacMillan to recommend the ordinance as previously prepared): Voting in favor: None And the following voted against the same: Chair Christensen, Commissioners Koenig, MacMillan, Morgan, Schonning, and Sweeney. The motion did not pass (0 in favor to 6 against). Motion failed Commissioner Tade stated she thinks that we should tell the City Council that we have had these discussions about decks and that we want to consider it. She stated she is not 100% sure that decks are a great idea, but want them in the conversation. PC Minutes 12-17-15 -6- Commissioner Morgan talked about the importance of this issue and the difference between a policy and an ordinance. Chair Christensen stated that he is not prepared to send the ordinance forward. Mr. Benetti suggested a motion for staff to present the ordinance and discussion points up to this date to the City Council at a workshop session and ask for their direction. If the City Council directs the Planning Commission to include "decks" in the new ordinance language, then the original or similar ordinance (as presented at the November, 12, 2015 regular meeting) will be brought back to the Planning Commission for re-consideration and official recommendation. Conversely, should the City Council wish to exclude decks under this ordinance, the Planning Commission will need to re-consider a similar version of the revised ordinance presented tonight, with official recommendation forwarded back to the City Council. It was the majority consensus of the Planning Commission to accept this suggestion. There was a motion by Commissioner Tade, seconded by Commissioner Morgan to direct staff to bring language and discussion minutes up this point to the City Council for a work session item for the City Council's review and direction. Voting in favor: Commissioners MacMillan, Morgan, Schonning, Sweeney, and Tade. And the following voted against the same: Christensen The motion passed (5 in favor to I against). Motion passed. 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS 7a) PRESENTATION BY CITY PLANNING STAFF OF YEAR 2015 PROJECTS AND DEVELOPMENTS Mr. Benetti provided current pictures and information regarding the City's 2015 projects and developments. 7b) PRELIMINARY PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF NEW SENIOR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL ON FORMER CARS WITH HEART SITE—6121 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD Mr. Benetti provided information on the new senior housing development, The Sanctuary. 7c) REVIEW UPDATED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AND PROJECTS MAP—2016 PC Minutes 12-17-15 -7- Mr. Benetti provided information on 2016 development activities and projects including the Brooklyn Center Opportunity Site Plan concept, Jerry's Food Site, Embassy II site and 571h and Logan. He stated that he welcomed Commissioner's input and additions to the map. 7d) PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION OF NOMINATIONS/ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON FOR 2016 The timing and process of the chairperson nomination was discussed. There was a motion by Commissioner MacMillan, seconded by Commissioner Schonning to nominate Chair Christensen as Planning Commission chairperson. The motion passed. Commissioner Morgan stated that there was as possibility that Commissioner Koenig was open to serving as the Chairperson. Mr. Benetti stated that the election will take place at the next Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Koenig will be notified via e-mail of the nomination and election, if he indicates that he wants to serve, he is able to nominate himself. He stated that the election is typically done with paper votes. 7. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Benetti stated he will be sending out a Commission roster and wants commissioners to update their information. Chair Christensen asked about re-appointments. Mr. Benetti replied that Commissioners Morgan, Sweeney and Koenig were re-appointed at the December 14, 2015 City Council meeting. Commissioner Morgan talked about his pleasant experiences with the Luther dealership. Chair Christensen thanked staff for their hard work and help and stated he is looking forward to next year. 8. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner MacMillan, seconded by Commissioner Tade, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. Certification of Minutes CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ) PC Minutes 12-17-15 -8- The undersigned, being the duly qualified and assigned Secretary to the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, certifies: 1. That attached hereto is a full, true, and complete transcript of the minutes of a Regular Session of the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center held on December 17, 2015. 2. That said meeting was held pursuant to due call and notice thereof and was duly held at Brooklyn Center City Hall. 3. That the Planning Commission approved said minutes at its January, 14, 2016 regular meeting. Tim Benetti, Secretary Randall C istensen, Chair PC Minutes 12-17-15 -9-