03-20-91 Planning Commission MINCITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
March 20, 1991 - 8PM
The meeting was called to order by Ing Roskaft, Chairman
at 8PM.
Roskaft asked for consideration of 3/6/91 minutes. Mark
Wallace motioned to approve the minutes. Larry Fournier
seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Members present were as follows:
Mark Wallace Carl Swenson Larry Fournier
Ing Roskaft Jim Kolles Kathy Lewis
Staff present were Dave Licht, Elaine Beatty. Also
present were Doug Lindenfelser, Council, Neil Goarder, John
Bly and Jacquie Rognli.
Next on the Agenda was the John Bly, Lola Sutherland
variance which was returned to the P.C. from the City Council
to look at drainage and utility easements. 9968 Kahler Ave,
Monticello, Mn. Lot 11, Block 1 Island View Estates.
a. Larry Fournier commented that the Council really
wasn't sure what they wanted to do with this so they sent it
back to the Planning Commission for more information.
b. Licht mentioned the potential of Mr. Bly getting an
easement from his neighbor. He wasn't able to obtain that
easement.
C. Mark Wallace stated as far as reasons we have looked
over and find the following:
1. The property in question was physically limited in
size and buildable area by a decision of the developer at the
time of platting. Attempting to "expand" the lot at this
point in time is inappropriate.
2. The house constructed by the developer/builder was
placed and designed to accomodate only an over -sized two car
garage. Other designs were possible which would have
accommodated a larger garage at the time of initial
construction. An attempt to modify the house design by yard
encroachment is inappropriate at this date.
3. The present owner bought the property with the
existing limitations. The price was likely, or should have
been, reflective of this situation.
4. The existing garage is in fact, an oversized two car
garage.
5. A three car garage is a convenience not a necessity.
Reasonable and convenient use of the property and house can
take place without the garage addition.
d. Larry Fournier also stated the following:
6. The creation of a three foot side yard setback is an
unacceptable situation based upon:
A. Area character and open space.
B. Need for possible utility & rear yard
access.
C. Infringement upon neighboring properities.
7. The precedent of relying upon a neighboring property
CITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF 3-20-91
AT SPM - PAGE 2 -
under different ownership is an unacceptable approach. The
,property which is usable as configured should be expected to
stand on its own. If this case is granted, the possibility
of numerous other cases which may request a similar
consideration is seen as a major problem. Such action also
unduly limits and causes possible future problems for the
neighbor in their utilization of their land.
S. The house is already non -conforming by 17 feet based
upon Wild and Scenic River Corridor requirements. A further
reduction of 10 feet is seen as out of character with the
area and sets a highly questionable precedent for this
protected area. A variance may damage the City's position on
a change to the Wild and Scenic River Corridor District and
place questions in the mind of the DNR and other such
organizatoins on the City's commitment to this
environmentally sensitive area.
e. Carl Swenson stated the basic issue here is we have
a violation of City Ordinances. It is looked on as a legal
non -conforming use. He didn't think it was wise to go any
further. 31 was from the footings and not the eaves so it is
even closer, maybe 21 or 1-1/2'setback. He asked Roskaft if
he thought the Council was asking for a more definate motion
on this? Ing stated yes.
f. Swenson motioned to recommend denial of the request
for variance based on the above information. Jim Kolles
seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. (Will be
brought up at the 3/25/91 Council meeting.)
Roskaft then turned the meeting over to Dave Licht:
1. The Brisbin property on *122 & #37 ties into the question
of lot size. The neighboring property owner has suggested
that they buy the Brisbin site with the idea they could
divide the portion on Co Rd #122 and attach the property to
the West property. They would like two (2) two and one half
acre parcels (2-1/2) fronting on #122. They would connect
the rest of the land onto hte Lindenfelser/Barry property.
Licht stated he has a problem with two lots connecting onto a
major street (#122). This area is in the long range Urban
Service Area. This area was also talked about as one of the
areas for Industrial. Licht stated he thought the inital
request was premature. Fournier asked what about splitting
into two (2) five acre lots (5 A) Licht stated maybe we
should be looking for ten acres (10 A) or maybe five (5 A).
Fournier stated it was a little early. Realignment of #122
and #37 was also talked about and it needs to be realigned.
2. Mark Woolston, Antelope Park:
Mark Woolston has submitted an application for Antelope Park
which was formerly Deer Park. It had a preliminary hearing
at Buffalo and nothing was approved. Licht stated what he
suggested is that they resubmit a sketch plan where they can
get staff comments. We had a Staff Meeting with Mr. Woolston
and one of the things we suggested is that he run access to
CITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF 3-20-91
AT 8PM - PAGE 3 -
the Dennis Moore pie shaped piece of property adjacent to
his, thru his plat. That will allow no direct access onto
#39 from the Moore property. By providing access thru, it
will relieve more traffic on #39. The Moore property is a
smaller property with power lines on it. Mr. Woolston has
property up into the blank area in the NW corner. This
street will come up and make connection into Darkenwald's
property. The balance of the land by the river is what the
Co is looking to acquire for Park. The other thing he has to
do is resubdivide some of the lots. Two other issues are the
future alignments.
First 96TH STREET:
This future connection has been designated MSA and a
collector street. It needs to be constructed to a higher
standard. As this street is now shown it was designed to
discourage traffic. The other problem we have is on the West
side of the plan. The off -set street should be aligned with
the street in Darkenwald's plat. Roskaft stated that it was
to be aligned. If you wish to have this off -set, it needs to
be further off -set (further away), as it is, it is not
sufficient. Roskaft stated that the lots need to be changed
also. Licht agreed. Roskaft stated if you make 96TH a
collector street, have they researched to find out if they
can get enough right-of-way? Licht answered a minor
collector is 681 and a major collector is 801. It exists
there today as a minor collecotr street. If, in fact,
sidewalks are built it may eliminate problems. Wallace asked
about sidewalks and which side they would be on. Light
stated either side. The Co is trying to buy the Park land.
Another thing we discussed is pedistrian ways into the park.
We require it to be dedicated right-of-way for these.
Fournier asked, on 96th Street, what happens if we get too
much traffic? Licht answered 96TH Street is a collector
street now and any comments the Planning Commission has to
offer would be appreciated as he is looking for finalizing
the design. Woolston has filed an Application, and if
necessary you can have him submit two different proposals for
it, if you want. He is wating for some direction. Swenson
asked how important is that connection? It was designated
MSA for the improvement of that street. You need to have it
run from a State Aid Highway to another State Aid Highway.
MSA does provide money for sidewalks. Swenson asked if an
alternate would be to go over to #37 and tie into it?
Lindenfelser said following a grid system is important.
Another concern is MSA standard is not used on Darkenwald's
Development. 96TH was only dead -ended to have it a thru-
street eventually.
Roskaft asked the Commission what they wanted to do?
Fournier suggested lining up the jogs and tie it in. Maybe
we should have Koshak's office address what should be done tc
slow down the traffic on 96TH ST. Maybe we can give them a
CITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF 3/20/91
AT SPM - PAGE 4 -
resolution or solution. Licht said we need to converse.
Roskaft asked again for a motion. Swenson motioned that on
the alignment of 96TH where it enters Darkenwald's to
recommend that the alignment be smooth and the Engineer be
requested to recommend the location of stop signs to slow
down the traffic. Lewis seconded the motion. The motion
carried unanimously.
Swenson had a question on the 96TH ST flow. Licht said it is
MSA and needs to take the bend. Possibly it can have a much
gentler curve. 96TH ST from Darkenwald's have to "T" into
that. The question is do we "T" that intersection? Roskaft
called for a motion. Lewis motioned that we recommend
streets of 96TH and Ohalnd as MSA intersection and it be a
continueous flow of movement with 96TH intersection 'IT -Ing"
with Ohland intersection. Fournier seconed the motion.
Motion carried unanimously.
Next was Dave Licht and the Comprehensive Plan for
Otsego - Policy Plan:
1. Pg 25 & 26 the Policy Plan is extremely critical.
It allows flexibility. It is the fundamental plan of the
City and it's importance cannot be stressed enough.
2. Pg 27 goals are stated in what we are striving to
achieve.
3. Pg 29 #4. Develop controls that regulate Ag
operations. Fournier asked if we need controls? Licht sated
that DNR is going to come out with regulations of pesticides
and fertilizers on shorelands. It is to address some
controls in terms of environment. Fournier said we want to
enforce the State and DNR regulations? Licht answered yes,
this establishes the basis for control. It will be addressed
later in Ordinances. As a City we have six months to get our
floodplain regulations in order.
4. Pg 29 #1. Roskaft asked if you are drawing lines?
This Policy says you will designate areas that are Urban and
Rural. Licht said this plan has more guidelines and
flexibility then the Co plan.
5. Pg 30 #11 In the inventory slopes and grades 12 to
18% are erodable or slippage type of soils. If you disturb
the solis, you will have erosion. You have to show us as
part of any development proposal as to where those soils are.
You have to help control erosion in those areas. Basically
you don't want development on a 12% slope, but you can modify
it so you don't have such a steep slope.
6. Pg 30 #9. it is not Industrial area. DNR is
concerned on water table. DNR won't drop water table. We go
back and check with the inventory and put in what pertains to
the specific Community.
7. Pg 33 #11 & #13 Appear to be contradictory. Licht
explained physical barriers are major street. Whenever
possible it should be reduced by paths, (trails).
8. Pg 33 #11 Industrial or Commercial against
CITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF 3-20-91
AT 8PM - PAGE 5 -
Residential, etc needs to be clarified. More intensive use
will have to screen from the less intensive use.
8. #20. Roskaft said he agrees with and the sooner the
bet -ter. Licht said #94 may be Industrial and maybe multi-
family, but probably riot be sewered. We need to discuss some
input to Industrial in #94 area, without sewer and water.
9. Pg 34 #22. Look at curvilinear design.
10. Pg 35 #33. Change possible to necessary.
11. Pg 35 #27 Incentives (what is it refering to?) Programs
where banks will offer low interest loans, etc. Outdoor
storage building will be addressed in Zoning. Can screening
be used in areas of outside storage? sure.
12. Pg 36 #4. From "Animals" to "Farm Animals".
Larry Fournier motioned to have the Planning Commission
Chairman contact Bruce Rask and ask him if he should
reconsider his committment to the Planning Commission and ask
him if he can come to the 4TH of April meeting. Kathy Lewis
seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 10:30PM.
JAMES R. KO�rtS, SECRETARY'
By:
Elaine Beatty Recording Secretary
eb