Loading...
02-19-97 PCCITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING FEBRUARY 19, 1997 8:00 PM 1. Chair Swenson will call P.C. meeting to order: Chair Swenson called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 8:00 PM. ROLL CALL: Present: Chair; Carl Swenson, Commission members; Eugene Goenner, Jim Kolles, Bruce Rask, Ing Roskaft, and Richard Nichols. Arleen Nagel, excused absence. Staff: Bob Kirmis, City Planner, Elaine Beatty, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator, Jerry Olson, Building Official, Carol Olson, Secretary. Council Representative, Vern Heidner Present: Mayor; Larry Fournier, Councilmembers; Suzanne Ackerman, Mark Berning 2. Consideration of the Planning Commission Minutes of February_ 5,1997: Bruce Rask motioned to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of February 5, 1997. Ing Roskaft seconded. All in favor. Motion carried. Dennis Chuba of Heritage Landing Development. PropM of Alvin & Ge�i�• i Requesi is as follows: A. Jrreliminary Plat approval for Heritage Hills. SwensonChair over applicant's• ' Mr. Kirmis - Heritage Landing Development prepared a preliminary plat entitled Heritage Hills consisting of 38 lots. This 64.5 acre site lies south of 85th Street and west of Odean Avenue. This property was recently rezoned from A-1 to R-3 zoning designation which allows one acre lots. Exhibit C on the screen showed the physical features that explain the street and lot layout. Odean Avenue is a major collector street and 85th Street a minor collector and direct driveway access to lots is discouraged. A wetland delineation will be done by the developer when weather permits. This will be an added condition. NAC recommends approval with seven conditions plus the wetland requirement. Mr. Kirmis read the eight conditions of NAC's Report. Mr. Koshak - Regarding the stormwater drainage issues, Outlot A is designated as a regional ponding area. Properties are Vasseurs Oak Grove 3rd Addition, the west end of Walesch Addition and undeveloped land with the watershed behind it. When the wetlands are delineated the water table can determined. The wetland delineation is an important contingency to this plat. Lynn Caswell We have worked with staff to come up with the John Oliver & Associates, Inc. design of the plat and are willing to work with the city regarding the ponding. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of February 19, 1997 cont'd Page 2 Chair Swenson - At this time the hearing was opened to the public. Jim & Eileen Gerads Concerned with complaints about mobile homes and NE 85th Street mobile home owners being pushed out. Chair Swenson went over the public hearing procedure and explained the public will have another opportunity to comment. Chair Swenson asked Planning Commission for any questions or comments. Eugene Goenner - Asked Mr. Koshak if Ochoa could be taken to Odean instead of a cul- de-sac. Mr. Koshak - The developer and engineers have discussed that a number of times. The grade and slope there makes that difficult. We want to serve this property without an access onto Odean Avenue. Chair Swenson - Took hearing back to the public. No one wish to be heard. Chair Swenson closed the public hearing. Eugene Goenner - In the southwestern corner where drainage easement is, what is being done to protect the existing tile line serving Vasseurs Estates at this time. Mr. Koshak -When converted to residential property the ponding area will be delineated the 100 year flood level will be set and anything over that will be controlled in outlet by a storm sewer pipe. The tile is basically a private tile, it is broken and actually blocked and services only that property. The major drainage plan is to find a ponding area and an overflow to Halls Pond. The pond size is based on the full development of the area and is part of the trunk storm sewer facilities. Lynn Caswell - Addressing Exhibit C on the screen, Mr. Caswell showed the ponding and tiling areas. We do not expect a negative impact. Eugene Goenner motioned to approve Heritage Hills Preliminary Plat with the conditions, including the wetland delineation. Richard Nichols seconded. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Elaine Beatty - This will be on the City Council Meeting of March 10, 1997, at 6:30 PM. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of February 19, 1997 cont'd Page 3 Chair Swenson went over the Applicant's request. Mr. Kirmis - Kenneth and Patricia are requesting a CUP to allow a single family residence to lie upon an existing lot of record located east of MacIver between 67th and 62nd Streets. The home to be relocated was constructed by Fridley High School students. It is a brand new home that has met all the building requirements. This would be a 1 per 40 split which can be approved at an administrative level. The pending split is necessary and will be part of the nine conditions which he read. NAC recommended approval of the applicant's request subject to the conditions listed in NAC's report dated February 10, 1997. Elaine Beatty - Posting and publications have been met. Chair Swenson asked if the applicants wished to speak. They did not. The hearing was then opened to the public for comment. There was none. Bruce Rask asked why a performance security is charged to a home owner. Thought this should be non-restrictive and only applied to developers because they are transient. Mr. Kirmis explained that this is policy and the intent is to ensure that the applicant does what he indicates he will do. The applicant doesn't lose any money if they do so. Jerry Olson, Building Official - The performance security is applied to move in homes because once the home is set the tendency is to think the job is done. The problem is there is still septic, grading, and a lot of outside work left to be done. The money is a useful tool and we have needed it in the past. This is not charged on a new home because the power of the (C.O.) certificate of occupancy is used. Unless done to city standards the C.O., needed at the time of closing, is not given. The amount usually runs from one to three thousand dollars ($1,000.00 to $3,000.00). At times a letter of credit can be provided. Chair Swenson - Going back to the public, asked if anyone wished to be heard. No one did. Chair Swenson closed the public hearing at this time. Richard Nichols motioned to approve the CUP subject to the nine conditions of the NAC's Report. Ing Roskaft seconded. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Elaine Beatty - This will be on the February 24, 1997, City Council Meeting at 6:30 PM. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of February 19, 1997 cont'd Page 4 Chair Swenson - The City Council has directed the Planning Commission to conduct a rehearing of the Conditional Use Permit originally granted to Cheryl Adams for a dog kennel facility. Gerald Paulson, Attorney - I believe there are pertinent matters that need to be Monticello, MN addressed to any hearing on this matter. Representing Cheryl Adams Chair Swenson explained - You will have an opportunity to be heard. At this time we have a staff report by the Building Official Mr. Olson. Jerry Olson, Building Inspector - Mr. Olson gave staff report addressing site inspections reported in letters dated October 4, 1996, and February 19, 1997. He stated that there are letters of complaint on file regarding the barking. Copies of all County and State kennel inspection reports are to be forwarded to the city. That has now been done. Copies are now on file at the city. Ms. Adams has made some improvements since the first visit. Chair Swenson - At this time Adams representative may speak. Mr. Paulson, Attorney - The city council has told you to rehear this Conditional Use Permit. The CUP itself defines when it can be reheard and that is when there are gross violations as noted on the kennel reports. There are none since the CUP was issued. There has to be repeated violations of city ordinances. If a person is found to have violated a city ordinance they need to have been cited, charged and adjudication before there can be one violation much less repeated violations. The city council hasn't given regard to its own CUP. The CUP sets the rules that everyone has to abide by. The Adams have to abide by the rules and so does the city. The city has not met the prerequisites for rehearing this matter. I have heard no evidence that the Adams have been found to have violated, by a court of law, such violation is a misdemeanor, and a person hasn't violated an ordinance till found guilty. The Wright County Humane Society has found this operation to be in full compliance. A doctor of veterinarian medicine indicates that this is an exceptional facility. There has been two letters of complaint since 1993 when the CUP was issued. I would anticipate that the city has investigated any complaints and that the Adams would cooperate, but the fact that there are complaints does not mean that violations occurred. A complaint is an allocation and it is incumbent upon the city to determine if indeed a violation has occurred before it is given to you for a rehearing. The Adams want to be good neighbors and comply with all the conditions of the CUP. The Adams have indicated that they intend to erect a privacy fence as a visual barrier to help with the barking. Chair Swenson - The city has received numerous complaints on an ongoing basis. With the concurrence of our legal attorney, the planning commission was asked to hear this so we would be able to hear from the public and determine if indeed there are an violations. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of February 19, 1997 cont'd Page 5 Mr. Paulson - With all due respect, this is not the forum to determine whether violations of a city ordinance have occurred. That is in a court of law after a citation has been issued by the police department or another agency of the city. Chair Swenson - We have heard your comments and we have several options. As long as the people are here we will hear them. We have the option to continue the hearing and give us the opportunity to discuss your comments with our attorney. We may want a site inspection. I assure you we will operate according to the ordinances and the planning commission rules. Chair Swenson opened the hearing to the public. At this time the following people voiced their support for Cheryl Adams kennel operation. They had many words of praise, respect and encouragement for the hard work that she is doing. Barb DeMars, Mason Avenue Cynthia Jones, Robinsdale-worked for Hennepin Co. Humane Society Kathy Roberts, lives within one mile of the Adams Nancy Anderson, Mason Avenue Jan Thompson, Zimmerman Deb Hardkey, 99th Street Jeff Dow, State Investigator for Mn. Federated Humane Society for 10 years., and Wright Co. Investigator for 10 years. kennel inspector -Never found any violations of any statutes. Dr. Jim Kurkpatrick, Cokato-performs surgeries for Cheryl. Signie Shield, Minneapolis- worked with rescue groups Shelly Packard, Monticello The following spoke in opposition to the Adams kennel operation: Butch Rasmuson, neighbor - Concerned with the housing conditions for the dogs. Referred to the city council meeting of October 28, 1996 discussion regarding violations, citations and possible criminal prosecution. Mary Ann Domic, Buffalo - While visiting Mr. Rasmuson overheard the dogs barking constantly. Concerned with care. Russ Greninger, 10247 95th Street -Issue is, compatibility with neighbors. Biggest complaint is barking, which has gotten better since October. Should limit number of dogs and dogs should be from within the city. Ken Sour, Kahler Avenue -Need is there, but questions compatibility. Fencing may help. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of February 19, 1997 cont'd Page 6 John Kozat, Brooklyn Park- Manger. Riverwood-Concern is exchange taking place in Riverwood's parking lot. People calling them regarding the animal adoptions. Don't want Riverwood to be connected. Cheryl Adams - Addressed concerns with Riverwood. The contract has the address on it and sometimes people come out without an appointment, our knowledge or consent. That will be changed to a P. O. Box to help with that. Is dedicated to the animals and wants to do what's best for all concerned. Explained that the outside time is limited to exercise and kennel cleaning. They are monitored. Officer Hermanson has listened to complaints and has sat out here many times and does not consider the barking a nuisance. Officer Hermanson couldn't make it tonight, but has left that statement with the city. We are trying to make improvements so everything can work well. Chair Swenson - Because of the legal questions raised by Mr. Paulson, I am going to ask for a motion to continue the hearing to the next meeting. We could have a site inspection. Bruce Rask - Against site inspection, Jerry's job until a gross violation is determine. The two letters from the inspector has recommendations. If the CUP doesn't have it written out, it is hard to determine violations. Number of dogs allowed, fencing, indoor shelter, are these conditions of the Conditional Use Permit? Can't make a ruling without written proof of denial. Chair Swenson - The word violation is causing a problem. In this situation our attorney should be present to proceed. Ing Roskaft motioned to continue hearing to the next Planning Commission Meeting. Richard Nichols seconded. Motion carried 5 to 1 with Ing Roskaft, Richard Nichols, Carl Swenson, Eugene Goenner, and Jim Kolles, voting to continue. Bruce Rask opposed the motion. Discussion: Bruce Rask - I'll agree to continue, I'll vote either way, but if Mr. Paulson is right and it doesn't belong here, we just cancel it. Upon Andy's letter, I would like Andy to answer does it really belong here. 6. Any other Planning Commission Business• Chair Swenson asked for any other Planning Commission business. There was none. 7. Adjourn: Ing Roskaft motioned to adjourn. Bruce Rask seconded. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. The Planning Commission Meeting adjourned at 10:00 PM. J' Kolles, Secretary Recorded by: Carol A. Olson PC? 1997. WPS