Minutes - Planning Commission - 04/21/2005 - Special Meeting

Home

Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner Brauer, to recommend approval ~>i' an Ordinance amending driveway length and front yard setback regulations in the Town ()cnler Zoning District, noting the concern for pedestrian access and safety on 20-foot driveways, a~d rCcluesting specific feedback from the City Council, with consideration of eliminating ch'ivew[tys and widening streets to provide parking and sidewalks in lieu of driveways. M~)lion (:arried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Commissioners Johnson, Brauer, Levine, and Yat~ Scoy. Voting No: Cmnmissioner Watson. Absent: Commissioner Shepherd. (',om m i s.~ ioncr Watson noted he does not feel they should be sacrificing the length of driveways I'~r density. (iasc #6: Public ltearing - Proposed Ordinance to the Amend Accessory Structure Section of City Code; Case of City of Ramsey Pl~'cSell tatiofl Associate Planner Geisler advised that two-story and split level accessory structures are lm~hibitcd, in part, because they had been prohibited by the Building Code. She stated on March 24, 2003, the ban on two-story accessory buildings was eliminated from the Building Code. She inclicatcd ~wo-stoty accessory buildings are not necessarily uncommon, as many people want the c×lra ~q~acc for a hobby shop, office, or just more storage space. She stated this can be ~t{:commodatcd without increasing the allowable height for accessory buildings. /\ss(>ciate I)lanner Geisler explained the height of accessory structures is currently restricted to s;ix~ccn feet on parcels less than 2.5 acres and twenty-two feet on parcels 2.5 acres or greater in :-;i×c. She advised that two acres is the point at which accessory structures can be sided with metal panels that are color compatible with the home, and can be located nearer the front property linc than the principal structure if certain criteria are met. She stated it seems logical to u~ili×e a uniform size threshold for height, siding requirements, and location of accessory sirttctttt'cs. She indicated with the adoption of the cluster ordinance, which essentially eliminates the minimum lot size of 2.5 acres in the rural developing areas, the two acre threshold seems rt:asonablc to usc to restrict the height of accessory structures. Associate l'lanner Geisler stated the size of accessory buildings is limited by the size of a parcel. Nbc indicated the size restrictions seem to be reasonable with one exception. All properties large[' than 10.6 acres are lumped into the same category for allowable square feet of accessory building space. She stated it seems appropriate to create additional size categories that would r~lI¢)w l~>[' [norc square footage for accessory buildings on larger properties. Associate 1)lanncr Geisler advised that swimming pool and space regulations are currently I~)catcd in Chapter 8 of' City Code. She indicated that many of the regulations are related to zo]fin?, issues, and Staff believes that most of these regulations would be more appropriately Planning Commission/April 21, 2005 Page 17 of 23