Loading...
1i3 Zoning Ordinance AmendmentsCITYOF 690 City Center Drive PO Box' 147 Chanhasse,, Minnesota 55317 P/Ione 952.937.1900 General Fax 952. 93 7. 5739 Engiueering Department Far 952.937.9152 Bldlding Deparonent Fax 952.934.2524 Web Site www. ci. cha uhassen, mn. us MEMORANDUM TO: Scott Botcher, City Manager FROM: Planning Department DATE: May 14, 2001 Zoning Ordinance Amendments SUMMARY Staff is proposing changes to standards in the parking and loading section of the ordinance to eliminate conflicts between the city ordinance and state requirements (handicap parking) as well as conflicts within the city ordinance (drive isle width) $ec20-1124 Required number of on-site parking spaces (1)OO One (1) handicappcd parlcing stall shall be placed for cach fifty (50) stalls. Handicapped parking spaces shall be in compliance with the Uniform Building Code and state law. Discussion: The State Building Code requires handicapped parking stalls be provided for each 25 parking stalls. The zoning ordinance requires one stall for each fifty stalls. The State Building Code regulates handicapped parking. The amendment will not state a standard but will reference the State Building Code. Section 20-1118 Computing requirements. 20-1118(a) **Aisles which arc not between two (2) rows of ninety degree angle parlcing spaces may be twenty two (22)feet wide. There is a conflict regarding minimum drive aisle widths. Section 20-1011 requires that a minimum width of 26 feet be provided for two-way traffic in business, industrial or office districts and 24 feet in multi-family districts. It is staff's recommendation that drive aisle widths meet the standards in section 20- 1101. To eliminate the conflict, staff is recommending the deletion of the section. PLANNING COMMISSION UPDATE The Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 17, 2001, to review the proposed ordinance amendment. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed amendment. Scott Botcher, City Manager May 14, 2001 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION "Staff recommends the City Council approve the following code amendments: Delete section 20-1118 (a) "**" and the corresponding note. Delete the first sentence of Sec20-1124 (1)00" ATTACHMENTS 1. Amending Ordinance 2. Planning Commission Minutes of 4/17/01 g:\plan~bg~oa 4-17-01 parking.doe CITY OF CHANHASSEN CARVER AND HENNEPIN COUNTIES, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20 OF THE CHANHASSEN CITY CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE The City Council of the City of Chanhasscn ordains: Section 1. Section 20-1124, Required number of on-site parking spaces, hereby amended by deleting (1) f. and replacing it with the following: Sec20-1124 Required number of on-site parking spaces (1)(f) One (1) handicapped parldng stall shall bc placed for each fifty (50) stalls. Handicapped parking spaces shall be in compliance with the Uniform Building Code and state law. Section 2. Section 20-1118, Computing requirements, hereby amended by deleting the (a) ** footnote as follows: **Aisles which are not between two (2) rows of ninety degree angle parMng spaces may be twenty two (22)feet wide. Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Chanhassen City Council this 2001. of ATrEST: Scott A. Botcher, City Manager Linda C. Jansen, Mayor (Published in the Chanhassen Villager on ) Planning Commission Meeting - April 17, 2001 Aanenson: The City Attorney did review these so, I understand where you're having a little bit of ambiguity and maybe that can be enhanced by adding the word basement somewhere in the drawing or another word that defines the space that we're trying to talk about. Blackowiatc Alrighty. Well with that, can I get a motion. Sacchet: Yes Madam Chair. I move that we, the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council of the following code amendments, as defined with the added that it's, then it is considered in the story definition. And I would ask that staffputs a reference to the drawing. Kind of link the two together a little clear, because the drawing does explain it. The language if we have hooked in the language, that would be fine. That's my motion. Blackawiak: Okay, is there a second? Sidney: Second. Sacchet moved, Sidney seconded that the Planning Commission recommends approval to the City Council the following code amendments, (with clarification by the City Attorney of the term basement): Section 20-1 Definitions, add: Body shop is an establishment primarily engaged in the repair of auto bodies, automotive painting and refinishing. Standing Seam Roof is a deck roof consisting of flat metal joined by, vertical or overlapping seams. Story means that portion of a building included between the surface of any floor and the surface of the floor next above it. Or if there is no floor above it, then the space between the floor and the ceiling next above it and including a basement used for the principal use. If the height (H) of the basement is more than 12 feet at any point, of if the height (h) is more than 6 feet for more than 50 percent of the perimeter of the building then it is considered a story. This definition refers to nonresidential properties only. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 7 to 0. Blackowiak: This will go to City Council with our comments on the definition. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE CHAPTER 20, WETLAND BUFFER STRIPS. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Blaekowiak: Okay commissioners, any questions? Uli. Sacchet: Yeah Madam Chair, real quick question. So the purpose is that we control the amount of impervious surface. I mean that's how it says in your language. Now, we run into that before is a deck impervious surface or not so basically we won't get into that swamp anymore? Deck is part of it and that's that? Planning Commission Meeting - April 17, 2001 Generous: Well a deck is a structure and a structure must meet the setback. Saeehet: Okay. Okay. Generous: A playground equipment would be a structure. That would have to meet the. Saechet: Okay, even if it has holes for the water to go through. Generous: Right. Saechet: I just want to make sure we're clear about that, thanks. Blaekowiak: Okay. Any questions? Sidney:. Yes Madam Chair. I guess I should have looked in the code book but, like if somebody would want to put in a volleyball court or something of that nature, an asphalt paved portion and by the buffer strip, is that considered a structure or how do we address something like that? Generous: They don't come to us for permits on that. Aanenson: I don't believe that for the sand structure, sand blanket, something like that. Sidney:. Pardon? Aanenson: I don't believe for a sand blanket you'd need a permit. You need a permit if you're putting in -a fence. A dog run. That sort of thing. ~ Sidney:. Something like that would be okay to do? Aanenson: Yes. Sidney:. Really? ' Black0wiak: I don't think I'm, you asked specifically asphalt. Paved. Sidney:. Definition of a structure. Aanenson: This ordinance is addressing structure setback. We started going down the path of impervious. This ordinance doesn't talk about this. This is strictly talking about accessory structures. That's a separate issue. Sidney:. So structure is not, doesn't encompass then an asphalt, paved or anything like that? I guess I'm trying to understand when you say structure. Aanenson: No. No. I think the building code defines a structure as something over 2 feet in height or a foot and a half in height or something. Sidney:. Oh okay, like a fence. Planning Commission Meeting- April 17, 2001 Aanenson: You may need a permit because you're increasing your impervious surface but that's separate from this topic right here. Sidney:. Okay, so it's more focused toward decks and sheds and things like that? Aanenson: Correct. Swingsets, because we have that come up all the time. Someone wants to put, we've had people that do batting cages in the buffer strip so there was ambiguity in the language regarding what's a structure and what's a setback. What can and cannot be in the primary, secondary setback. The buffer strip, excuse me and the setback. So that was the intent of trying to clarify this. It's separate from the impervious calculation. But when a deck is attached to the house, it's considered part of the principal structure and that must meet the setback. Sidney: Does the city, or do we have any protection against like what I was saying, if somebody wants to put asphalt right down into, no you're saying? Aanenson: Well, then we would look at the impervious. The impervious. You know we've had people that want to do woodchips and a batting cage or a dog run or something like that...case by case basis. Claybaugh: I guess what you're referencing is two different things. For the setback, that's pretty much a stand alone requirement and depending on what they're putting in, they may or may not have to conform to the hard cover requirements. Aanenson: Correct. Claybaugh: So that's where the language for the impervious surface is, okay. Blackowiak: Any further questions? Okay, this item is open for a public hearing. If anybody would like to come and make comments about this item, please step up to the microphone and state your name and address for the record. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, why don't we start down at this end this time. Do you have any comments? Karlovich: I don't have any comments on this one. It looks straight forward to me. Blackowiak: Okay. Kind: Madam Chair, I do have one question I thought of as we were going along here. I looked up the definition for accessory use or structure, and it says it means a use or structure subordinate and serving the principal use or structure on the same lot and clearly and customarily incidental thereto. If I had a swing set, I'm not sure ifI would be allowed with that definition to put it in the buffer strip or not. I guess I would have to assume no. Aanenson: No. Not in the buffer. Generous: And that's in the wetland setback. Kind: I shouldn't say the buffer, I'm sorry. In the setback. In the wetland setback. Generous: You can't encroach in that. That's an accessory structure. Planning Commission Meeting- April 17, 2001 Aanenson: If you recall this discussion before, we went through and tried to decide what would be acceptable. Would a swing set? But what if it had asphalt underneath? What if it had a rubber... Kind: My recollection of the discussion was that some of us were okay with swing sets being in that wetland setback. And so I'm trying to decide ifI agree with this ordinance the way it's written right I1OWo Aanenson: But then the question came up back to batting cages. Again when you built one, there's just dirt underneath it. Do you allow things if there's impervious? Sacchet: IfI may jump in. I like the fact that it's relatively clear. Once you start making an exception for a swing set, it gets messy right away so there may be nothing wrong with a small swing set but is something wrong with a real big one with all the different towers and things? I mean it just becomes a mess right away so I'm leaning towards let's leave it crisp and go with it. Kind: I agree. I think this is the clearest way. That's the only exception I can see and I think if we make exceptions, then we're just going to muddy it up and I agree with the way staff has proposed it. Blackowiak: Okay. Craig, any comments? Claybaugh: I think it's acceptable as is. Blackowiak: Okay. Sidney: Seems fine. . Sacchet: Let's do it. Blackowiak: Okay. Well I'd like to hear a motion please. Sidney: I'll make a motion that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City Council the following code amendment adding accessory structure to the setback requirements as shown in the memorandum to the Planning Commission dated April 17, 2001. Blackowiak: Alright, there's a motion. Is there a second? Sacchet: Second. Blackowiak: It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Karlovich: The only discussion I have is, I'm not sure if my swing set conforms with this or not. Aanenson: You're non-conforming. Just don't expand. Karlovich: Yeah, it's a pre-existing non-conformity. Slagle: Jay, you'll report back to us won't you? Planning Commission Meeting - April 17, 2001 Karlovich: What? Slagle: You'll report back to us after you measure. Blackowialc Okay. Well it's been moved and seconded. Sidney moved, Sacchet seconded that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the following code amendment adding accessory structure to the setback requirements: ARTICLE VI. Wetland Protection. Wetland Type Principal and Accessory Structure Setbacks Section 20-406 Wetland buffer strips and setback (a) _Pristine Natural Buffer Strip Buffer Strip Minimum Average Width % of Native Vegetation in Buffer Strip Ag/Urban Utilized 100' 40' measured 40'measured 0' from the from the outside edge outside edge of the buffer of the buffer strip strip 20-100' 10-30' 0-20' O' 50' 20' 10' 0' Entire Entire Optional Optional All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously 7 to 0. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDER AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE CHAPTER 20, OFF STREET PARKING. Bob Generous presented the staff report on this item. Blackowiak: Okay, are there any questions for staff?. I guess I just have one Bob. This 22 feet versus 24 and 26, can you have me any examples of recently where it may have made a difference in how things were handled, or has it traditionally been 24 and 26 feet? Generous: Well it's for the two way operations. It says if it's one way you can have a 22 foot aisle, but if we had parking on both sides, you can't have a 22 foot aisle, even if it's one way. And so that's where we were concerned that someone would come in and say well, there's a, I'm really constrained on my site and this is the only way I can do it if I picked up that additional 4 feet of area. And so that's the purpose. We were looking at, it was the Emplast building actually that came out and we were looking at it for that one and we noticed that there was that issue. 10