Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 08-03-2011Approved Minutes City of Plymouth Planning Commission Meeting August 3, 2011 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair James Davis, Commissioners Dick Kobussen, Gordon Petrash, Scott Nelson, Bryan Oakley and Marc Anderson MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Nathan Robinson STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barbara Thomson, Senior Planner Joshua Doty, City Engineer Bob Moberg and Office Support Specialist Laurie Lokken 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PUBLIC FORUM 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Commissioner Petrash, seconded by Commissioner Kobussen, to approve the August 3, 2011 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 20, 2011 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MOTION by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Petrash, to approve the July 20, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. B. TRYGVE SVARD (2011047) Planning Manager Thomson stated that a revised resolution had been provided to the Planning Commission. MOTION by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Petrash, to approve the amended request by Trygve Svard for variances for front and rear lake setbacks to allow a solar panel system for property located at 12075 48th Avenue North. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS Approved Planning Commission Minutes August 3, 2011 Page 2 7. NEW BUSINESS A. DAVID FELT (2011039) Chair Davis introduced the request by David Felt for a home occupation license for a home service business for property located at 15620 9th Avenue North. Senior Planner Doty gave an overview of the staff report. Chair Davis introduced the applicant, David Felt, 15620 9th Avenue North. Mr. Felt said that he moved to Plymouth in 2007 and started his business right out of college. He said that as his business grew, he did not realize all the rules and regulations that go into a neighborhood and the way that a business should be run. He said that as his business grew in the earlier years, there was a lot of noncompliance with what the city regulations and guidelines were. He said that once he was made aware of that in December 2010, he did everything that he could to develop a new game plan on how to run our business. Mr. Felt said that he does not have employees working in the home. He said the biggest issue was the parking and the comings and goings of people in the early morning and in the afternoon. He said he thought that he had done everything in his power and that he had proven to the neighborhood that he is now following the guidelines set up by the city. He said he would do everything in his power to be in complete compliance with what those regulations are. He asked that the Planning Commission move forward with the home occupation license. Commissioner Nelson asked if since he made these adjustments in his business and not had the crews at his house, if he had any issues with neighbors or any further complaints. Mr. Felt responded not that he was aware of. He said that he does have an independent contractor, who is also one of his friends, and his vehicle looks like a work vehicle. He said that when he comes over, it is to hang out with him and it has nothing to do with work-related things. He said during the process of applying for the home occupation license, under the regulations and guidelines, he thought he could have one commercial vehicle at his home that had logos and decals and equipment in it. He said once he was made aware that was not legal until he actually received approval for the home occupation license, he removed that from the property as well. He said there are no employee vehicles, trucks with logos or equipment at his house that is out of compliance with what the city requires. Commissioner Kobussen asked where the 40 -foot ladder is stored. Mr. Felt replied that it is in the garage and that it does fit in there. Commissioner Kobussen asked how many personal vehicles he had. Mr. Felt responded that he has two vehicles and a boat as well. Commissioner Kobussen asked if there was plenty of room in the driveway for four vehicles. Mr. Felt replied that he currently does not park one vehicle in the garage due to issues with his garage door openers. He said that he could park the vehicle in the garage when he got that fixed and then he could add another parking spot. He said that he has a poured, concrete slab on the side of his garage for additional parking and that is where his boat is now. Approved Planning Commission Minutes August 3, 2011 Page 3 Chair Davis introduced Frank Hendricks, 840 Terraceview Lane North. Mr. Hendricks stated that when Mr. Felt moved in, he started his operations as he said. He said that the parking was atrocious. He said that he moved in to a residential area to live in a residential area. He said that there were up to seven cars parked in the street during the summer time. He said the city has somewhat narrow streets when the curbs have been improved and during the winter time it made it even more difficult. He said that he does not like being in this position but he commends him for running a small business. He said that he owns two small businesses and has resided in Plymouth with his two businesses for 20 some years. Mr. Hendricks said that he first approached Mr. Felt and told him there was a problem here, that there were too many cars parked in the streets. He said that he told him that it was hazardous and a nuisance. He said people are operating before the hours of 8:00 a.m., it's loud, ladders are clanging and that he needed to change it, especially because they are parking in front of his yard and turning around in his driveway. He said it is common courtesy that people can turn around in driveways but not when it is a daily occurrence of cars and trucks that are employees, some of whose vehicles are loud and in poor repair. He said that Mr. Felt took note of it and moved some of the cars so that they weren't parking right next to his house but then they were parking across the street. He said when a car is parked directly across from your driveway or blocking a mailbox or in the winter time when trying to back down an icy driveway, it is hazardous. Mr. Hendricks said that he approached Mr. Felt again around Thanksgiving of 2010. He said he told him that this has got to change and he needed to get an office space as there is plenty of light industrial available. He said Mr. Felt responded that he was just not going to do that. He said Mr. Felt left him with the impression that he would take care of it in the spring and that he might get some light industrial space. He said he told Mr. Felt that was fine and that he would let him finish out his season but if it started back up in the spring, he would file a protest with the city. He said that was what he was forced to do because the same habit started right back up in the spring. Mr. Hendricks said that it has been a long process. He said he has spoken to city staff. He said he just wanted to be clear that this isn't just a window cleaning business. He said it is Christmas lights in the winter time, when there are ice dams there are steamers out there, it's gutter cleaning, etc. He said to say it's a window cleaning service is questionable. He said he has cleaned up his act but he has no license. Mr. Hendricks provided the Planning Commission with copies of correspondence to and from city staff. Commissioner Petrash asked if Mr. Felt has been in compliance the last few months. Mr. Hendricks responded that it has been much better. He said there have been exceptions with overnight street parking and there are still cars parked out in front. He said he would not say that he was in full compliance. Chair Davis introduced Glenn Rood, 15610 9th Avenue North. Mr. Rood said this is nothing personal. He said it is about putting up with a home-based business next door for three years. Approved Planning Commission Minutes August 3, 2011 Page 4 He said he hopes it is successful and it sounds like it is. He said the complaint had to be filed because of the noise. He said that he doesn't want to live in a neighborhood with a business because once you have one, you may get another. He said that traffic was a problem. He said people parked in front of their home and in front of their mailbox. He said the biggest thing is that in three years, someone should know that you need a license to run a business in a neighborhood. He said that it has been shown that there wasn't the desire to work with neighbors; otherwise it wouldn't have gone on for so long. He said he is opposed to it but it sounds like it is going to move forward as a recommendation. He said he is not sure how we reward a recommendation when something was violated for three years. He said it is better and it did operate a little bit after it was not supposed to, which is more of an "I'm above the law" attitude. He said he just doesn't want it, whether that makes it right or wrong. Mr. Rood asked that if this is approved, who monitors the activity. He said that it already has been violated for three years. Senior Planner Doty responded in terms of the staff review, we need to review the application that is in front of us, based on the ordinance standards. He said that was what staff did and why we are recommending approval. He said that the business practice moving forward as described in the application does comply with the standards in the home occupation ordinance. He said the previous business practice did not and would not comply with the ordinance. Senior Planner Doty replied to the question of monitoring. He said a home occupation license may be terminated if it is shown not to be in compliance with ordinance standards. He said that the applicant would need to renew the license after the first year. He said we would respond to any complaints from neighbors at any time moving forward and we would respond to each complaint we received. He said that if the applicant moved forward in a manner that wasn't in compliance with the ordinance standards and we received a complaint, staff would follow up and perform inspections as necessary. He said if shown not to be in compliance, the home occupation license could be terminated. Planning Manager Thomson added the first complaint that came to the city was in December of 2010 and the city operates in a situation like this on a complaint basis. She said that once we get a complaint, we do follow up. She said prior to that time, no one had indicated there was an issue. Mr. Rood commented that it is really up to the occupant to monitor their own business. He asked if that would be the intention should this be approved. Chair Davis responded that they should be compliant to the privilege they were given to operate a business in their home. He said that the city doesn't police unless there is a citizen complaint, which the city would investigate. Commissioner Nelson added that this is similar to a situation we had last meeting where somebody had built a patio in their back yard and were unaware that they were within a setback of a wetland until somebody told them. Approved Planning Commission Minutes August 3, 2011 Page 5 Mr. Rood asked if these licenses grant you to operate seven days a week. Senior Planner Doty responded affirmatively. Planning Manager Thomson added that there are hourly restrictions during the day that would apply. Mr. Rood asked if we would want home occupation businesses running seven days a week in residential neighborhoods and if that is good practice for neighborhoods when there is industrial space available throughout the city. Planning Manager Thomson responded that the regulations the city has in place are designed to make sure businesses that do operate in residential areas are respecting the character of the neighborhood and that's why there's no exterior storage and there are hours of operation, etc. She said the regulations are designed to maintain a good residential setting. Commissioner Oakley said that we heard from two different sides on this. He said one of the things that he is not sure came out completely is the fact that the complaint was lodged in December, there was a letter sent December 27th with a deadline of February 15th, a follow up letter was sent March 15th with a deadline of May 6th and an application was finally submitted on June 3rd. He said that's not really an indication of complying with the rules as they've been set forth. He said it is important that people follow the rules, that's what holds society together and that applies to the city as well. He said that we have to follow our rules in authorizing home - licensed businesses. He said that he would vote in support of this request. He said there are a lot of conditions in the proposed resolution and he encourages the neighborhood to monitor the business and especially Mr. Felt to stick with the rules and make it a long-term business that can grow into office space in a place that's meant to hold it. Commissioner Nelson said that he echoed Commissioner Oakley's comments. He said one of the things that concerned him was seeing those deadlines that were passed by. He told Mr. Felt that he is a young business man just starting out in a tough economy and he admired him for that. He said with these kinds of things going forward, not only in his business life but in his personal life, and his neighborhood is things that he can't not pay attention to. He said that he would vote in support of this request. He said he encouraged the neighbors to actively monitor this situation and he would also encourage the city to monitor this situation. He said there should not be a lot of leeway given for any infringements on the ordinance and the rules going forward. He told Mr. Felt that if his business does continue to grow and he really hopes it does, he may be better served at looking at some light industrial space. He said he may be able to run his business more efficiently that way. He said he understood the hesitancy with costs and things like that as he, too, used to run a small business in a light industrial area but he has to pay attention to concerns going forward and follow the rules. Commissioner Petrash asked how a license gets revoked and who decides that. Senior Planner Doty responded that when we receive complaints, our housing inspector goes out and investigates the property. He said that his sole purpose is to determine if there is a violation of the ordinance or the license. He said that he would be looking for a specific violation and if one is found, we would be on stable grounds to terminate. He said that it is possible that the city may give some opportunity for compliance. Planning Manager Thomson added that when we have situations like this where there could be compliance questions, we try to work with homeowners Approved Planning Commission Minutes August 3, 2011 Page 6 and there is a legal process to follow. She said that she did not believe we have revoked any to date. She said that we typically do not get many complaints with home businesses. She said that people have tended to follow the rules and respect their neighbors so it has not been an issue. She said that we do have a process by which we can revoke if necessary. Chair Davis said that about four years ago, we had a similar request for a resident running a business out of their home and the neighbors complained so they had to file for a license. He said that they cleaned up their act, they got their license and their license has been renewed twice. He told Mr. Felt that situation is a model of how we would like this to turn out. He said we would like him to keep renewing this because the neighbors are happy. He said he would vote in support of this request on the condition that Mr. Felt follows the rules. MOTION by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner Oakley, to approve the request by David Felt for a home occupation license for a home service business for property located at 15620 9th Avenue North. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Chair Davis, with no objection to adjourn the meeting at 7:35 p.m.