08-05-92 PCCITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF 8/5/92
AT 8PM - PAGE 1 -
Meeting was called to order by Chair Swenson at 8PM.
The Following P.C. Members were present:
RON BLACK, C.R. GENE GOENNER BRUCE RASK
ING ROSKAFT MARK WALLACE CARL SWENSON
JIM KOLLES DENNIS MC ALPINE
The following staff members were present:
JUDY HUDSON ELAINE BEATTY BOB KIRMIS DAVE LICHT
The following Council Members were present:
LARRY FOURNIER MAYOR NORMAN F FRESKE
Roskaft motioned to approve the minutes of July 15,
1992, Wallace seconded the motion. Motion carried
unanimously.
#3 ON AGENDA= Hearing for Wilfred and Nancy Duerr -
11230 70TH ST NE, Albertville, MN 55301 - PID #118-800-253400
in Sec 25, Twp 121, R24 Unplatted land described as the E1/2
of the SW 1/4 and E1/2 of E1/2 of the W1/2 in the City of
Otsego. The request is for an Interium Use Permit Amendment
to allow expansion of a Home Extended Business. (Addition to
current building).
Chair Swenson explained how the Hearing would be
conducted. Kirmis then explained NAC's Report of July 16,
1992. Swenson asked Beatty if the proper notices were sent
out. Beatty replied that this Hearing was properly
published, mailed and posted.
Kirmis stated this is a legal Cond. Use Permit with no
conditions attached, buildings of up to 2,000 sq ft have been
allowed by the County in the past. The vegetation would
eliminate any adverse impacts to this business. Because NAC
feels that some regulations are necessary, and should have
been applied by Wright Co when this request was given, they
recommend the attached regulations apply. (See attached Pg 2
and 3) Kirmis read the recommendations.
Kirmis also noted this request was subject to comment by
DNR and it was found that the building location is removed
from the district. DNR had no problem with the request.
Chair Swenson asked for comments:
Nancy Duerr said they do have a garbage hauler and he
comes every other week. They put nothing but plain water
into the drain.
The Hearing was then opened to the public for comment.
No one spoke.
Bruce Rask asked if there was a restriction on building
size?
Kirmis answered for farm use, No but for Commercial use
yes. Hearing was closed.
Roskaft motioned to approve the Interim Use Permit
Amendment subject to Staff recommendations and NAC's Report.
Rask seconded the motion.
`slack askecl if this Cond. Use Permit can be assigned':
to nrnperr �nd �c,<,
CITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF 8/5/92
AT 8PM - PAGE 2 -
with the property.
This request will be added to the 8/24/92 City Council
Agenda.
Agenda item #4= Hearing on Otsego's Subdivision Zoning
Ordinance Amendment Re: Timeline for setting monuments.
Kirmis explained the Subdivision Zoning Ordinance
Amendment which is attached to these minutes, for comments.
Wallace motioned to approve the amendment. Roskaft
seconded the motion. All agreed.
Agenda item #5= Hearing on Otsego's Zoning Ordinance
Amendment regarding.4 per 40 Long Range Urban Service Area
and density requirements in the A-1 and A-2 Districts.
Swenson asked Beatty if Agenda Items #4 and #5 had been
properly notified. Beatty answered that they had been
Published and Posted.
Kirmis explained the Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.
which is attached to these minutes. He said they have
attempted to clarify the original language broken down into
previously undivided quarter/quarter sections and lots of
record. We have recognized existing land and lots said
Kirmis. He discussed building and deed restricting on one
per 40 acres. Swenson asked for comments.
Larry Fournier asked if we still have a chance to
cluster houses with 10 acre size? Kirmis said there is a
chance for clustering. He also noted that it is the City's
intent to preserve prime ag land. We do not want little
villages springing up, (spot zoning).
Swenson asked if there were any other questions?
If not we will close the Hearing and restrict any questions
to the P.C.
Rask asked about acre parcel and would it be able to be
built on? Kirmis said there would be deed restriction on it.
Roskaft said you have to rezone property to plat it.
Goenner said we should cluster as many homes as possible. Dc
we also have the right to placement of homes?
Kirmis said it is somewhat up to the developer. The
City would have a crutch in regards to tillable prime ag
lafd. If it was Ag land already t°ere, then what? Kirmis
said all things being equal it would be a hard thing to try
to enforce.
Wallace motioned to accept the Amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance as stated above. Rask seconded the motion.
Goenner asked if property that is currently being
constructed, there is a house that is being built in a field,
at what point does the City start to work it out? Kirmis
said hopefully, the City and developer would see it the same.
Swenson said if he understands, we probably can't tell
someone that they can't build somewhere. If you had a blank
40 acres and it's all prime ag they have a right.
f?patty �'xplailned that G,, -ginner is questioning an existing
.,i ..i i i, i.l �"•I! � r� i Yl . i .:_�, •,r :; Yi .-� !i,-, �,: �-1 Y": .fit . �- 1!'•11 )i' L ��. .i'i ."-i j,
CITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF 8/5/92
AT 8PM - PAGE 3 -
is currently ready to build. They came in for a Permit and
meet all the requirements.
McAlpine asked a question but answered his own question.
Motion carried unanimously.
Agenda Item #6: Consideration of possible Otsego Zoning
Ordinance Amendment Re: 52O-17-11: Single Family Dwellings:
(Page 111) Possible deletion of: #3. Shall have a minimum
roof overhang of one ( 1 ) foot.
Kirmis said the intent was to limit mobile homes
within the City. There has been certain designs that omit
the overhang. Our office doesn't have a problee with that.
There are other parts of the ordinance that regulate this.
This requirement has been used in other Cities. If you feel
it should be amended we can put together something for it.
Rask said he thought minimum on a colonial home was 14"
overhang. Wallace explained it.
Rask stated he is against changing the current
ordinance, and explained why.
Roskaft asked if this is a request by the builder?
Answer is no, the Building Inspector for the City brought it
up. More discussion was had on it.
Roskaft said when you build a roof you either have an
eve or an overhang.
Licht said as it pertains to colonials, two ends don't
have overhangs and it would accommodate drainage.
Goenner said he could tend to agree with eliminating the
overhang on the non -slope sides.
Wallace motioned to make no change_ Rask seconded the
motion. Motion carried with all voting yes except Goenner
was in opposition.
Agenda Item #7: Set a date for a Wild and Scenic
Ordinance Hearing (Possible date is 9/16/92 which is a
regular P.C. Meeting) and a discussion of the Wild and Scenic
Proposed Ordinance.
Licht spoke on the Wild and Scenic Ordinance and
explained it. Several months ago the City indicated that if
they get no response from the DNR, the City would proceed on
their own to adopt a Wild and Scenic Ordinance. He said NAC
has been directed to proceed. Elaine and Judy are putting
together a chronology of all that has taken place and will be
available for the Hearing. The draft of the Ordinance was
being done by Andy MacArthur of Radzwill's Law Office and Bob
Kirmis of NAC. We will not be changing boundaries at this
time (Dist. boundaries will stay the same).
Licht said he needs the Planning Commission's direction.
Pane #2 is one of the issues: This was not created as
the Shorelands areas were (Overlay), but as a separate
district. the overlay district is of benefit said Licht.
The area West of 101 is crucial at this time. as we see it.
We define what goes there and over the top we have ari overlay
CITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF 8/5/92
AT 8PM -PAGE 4 -
Commercial and Industrial Districts. The issue is the amount
of impervious surface you are looking for. The DNR has
offered 50% impervious surface. 70% is what we feel would be
the bare minimum. Option 3 is up to 90% impervious surface.
That has been discussed at various times by the City. Licht
stated that 90% gives us the most latitude. 50% in our
perspective is non -workable. What is crucial in this
impervious surface amount is that the standards of lowlands,
etc. have to be met first. We need additional direction from
YOU. We are looking at September 16, 1992 for a Hearing.
Swenson said if we use 90% we are building in protection
for the environment.
Goenner said it says that DNR has used over 50% in other
areas. Licht said in Wayzata they have allowed up to 100%
and explained.
Goenner asked what is the normal? Licht said there is
not a norm. What becomes the issue is how the City addresses
the other items. He explained further. What we say is that
each site will have to handle it's own water, etc. Because
we are dealing with the area West of 101, and not East of
101, we are not near the river. Licht said he feels 90%
impervious surface is a reasonable argument.
Andy MacArthur said that the basic standard and basic
rule is 30%. DNR said they would allow 50%. They took lot
lines in 1979 and we have petitioned an amendment to this.
MacArthur explained, rules establishing boundaries can change
thru rule amendment. When Otsego became a City there is no
existing rule. Each City has a particular Ordinance for that
particular City. We are required to do an ordinance for the
City. Since DNR is not being very responsible, we are saying
we are protecting the river. This has to be sent to the
Commissioner of DNR. There is a 30 day comment period and
another 30 days for response.
Swenson said we are looking for direction for Page #9=
Rask said he is in favor of 90% impervious surface
Wallace said he is in favor of 90%
Goenner said he is in favor of 900
Roskaft said he is in favor of 100%
Kolles said he is in favor of 90%
McAlpine said he is in favor of 90%
Black, the Council Representative said he has an opinion
butwill keep itto himself. He explained how he feels we
are being directed by these State agencies.
Freske said he agrees with Black. Fournier said he
agrees with 90% impervious surface.
MacArthur said in reading the rules there is nothing
that says you don't have a choice.
Overlay vs the Base District=
Swenson asked if there is anyone who is not in favor
of the overlay district? No one answered.
91_aC!;,._Ii.d it W. k4 _:7 *t me -,7 are trvin--
CITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF 8/5/92
AT 8AM - PAGE 5 -
to enforce the Wild and Scenic.
Swenson stated it is even worse when you figure the
particular district boundaries. You have people that are in
two districts and it is not very workable.
Next meeting it can be discussed also said richt.
Roskaft motioned to have a Public Hearing on the Wild
and Scenic Ordinance on September 16, 1992 at 8PM. Rask
seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Swenson asked if there was any other business? There
was none.
Wallace motioned to adjourn the meeting. Rask seconded
the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 9PM .
JAIWE R KOLLES , SEC E ARY
MINUTES BY: Elaine Beatty, Recording Secretary
EB