HomeMy WebLinkAbout12.A. Text Amendment Regarding Play Structure Setbacks
/2. R-
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director
RE: Possible Text Amendment regarding Play Structure Setbacks
MEETING DATE: January 6, 2009
INTRODUCTION:
At the October 21, 2008 Council meeting, resident Fatima Franzen of 1830 Switchgrass Lane
lodged a complaint with the Council about a neighbor she contended had intentionally put up a
swing set/play structure so close to her property line as to intend damage to her fence. She urged
the Council to adopt a setback for such structures, and Council directed staff to research the issue
and bring forward alternatives for consideration. The Planning Commission discussed the
alternatives at its December 4, 2008 meeting, and recommended to the City Council that no text
amendment regarding this matter be approved at this time. Ms. Franzen is expected to be at the
January 6, 2009 meeting to address the Council regarding the recommendation.
The information that follows was contained in the report provided to the Planning Commission
on December 4, 2008.
DISCUSSION:
Staff surveyed several communities in the Metropolitan Area to determine whether they did or
did not regulate setbacks for play structures, and if they did, what those regulations might be.
The responses revealed four basic approaches;
1. No identified setback for play structures/swing sets;
2. A one (I) foot setback for temporary play structures/swing sets;
3. No play structures/swing sets allowed in drainage and utility easements;
4. A five (5) foot setback for play structures/swing sets.
In addition, Ms. Franzen had suggested to the Council a ten (10) foot setback. The first two
approaches clearly do not address the concern expressed by the resident to the Council. The
approach of not allowing them in drainage and utility easements appears to staff to perhaps be
the cleanest approach. However, such easements are often only five (5) feet on either side ofthe
property line, and may not totally avoid damage as to a fence along the property line. On the
other hand, a blanket setback for such temporary structures that is ten (10) feet (i.e. a setback that
may be greater than for other, more permanent accessory structures) appears to staff to be
H:\CC\2009\01-06\TA play structure setback O1062008.docx 1
excessive. If a setback is adopted, then each of the residential zones in the Zoning regulations
would be amended to reflect the change.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Direct staffto prepare a text amendment that would impose a five (5) foot setback on
temporary play structures/swing sets, and schedule a public hearing before the Planning
Commission on the proposed amendment.
2. Direct staff to prepare a text amendment that would prohibit temporary play
structures/swing sets from drainage and utility easements, and schedule a public hearing
before the Planning Commission on the proposed amendment.
3. Direct staff to draft an alternative amendment, and schedule a public hearing before the
Planning Commission on the proposed amendment.
4. Do not direct or adopt a change in the City zoning code regarding setbacks for play
structures/swing sets.
5. Table this item and request additional information from staff.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
On December 4, 2008 the Commission voted 5-1 to recommend to the City Council that it not
adopt a text amendment setting forth a setback for play structures/swing sets.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Consistent with the Planning Commission recommendation, do not direct preparation of, or
adopt a change in the City zoning code regarding setbacks for play structures/swing sets.
~~
R. Michael Leek
Community Development Director
H:\CC\2009\01-06\TA play structure setback 01062008.docx 2