Loading...
03-19-97 PCCITY OF OTSEGO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MARCH 19, 1997 8:00 PM 1 Chair Swenson will call meeting to order: Vice -Chair; Eugene Goenner called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 8:OOPM ROLL CALL: Present: Vice -Chair; Eugene Goenner, Commission Members; Ing Roskaft, Arleen Nagel, Jim Kolles, Richard Nichols, and alternate Bill Jones. Bruce Rask and Carl Swenson - excused absence. Alternate Council Representative; Suzanne Ackerman Staff: Bob Kirmis, City Planner; Elaine Beatty, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator; Carol Olson, Secretary Mayor; Larry Fournier 2. Consideration of the Planning Commission Minutes of March 5,1997* Ing Roskaft motioned to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of March 5, 1997. Richard Nichols seconded. All in favor. Motion carried. 3 Hearing for Lin -Bar Development, Ind 5475 Parnell Ave NE, Rogue, MN. Hilary Barry, PID#118-500-284300 The South Half of the SE Quarter of Sec 28. Twp 121, R 23, Wright Co City of Otsego, MN with the exceptions located NE of Co Rd #37170th St NE & Odean Ave NE). Request is as follows: A. Preliminary Plat Approval. VC Eugene Goenner went over the applicants request. Mr. Kirmis - Lin -Bar Development, Inc. has requested preliminary plat approval of a 34 lot single family residential development. The proposed subdivision overlays 45 acres located north of Co.Rd.37 and east of Odean Avenue. Future extension of Odell Avenue and 72nd St. have been provided for. The discussion regarding the acceptability of the use rendered by the city council was not consistent with the planning commission or NAC. The rezoning has been determined and the discussion tonight is to be associated with the preliminary plat design. In terms of the design the applicant has done a good job. Both 70th St. and Odean Avenue are high volume streets, therefore interior design street access is good. The plat is well designed and responsive to city concerns. In response to the city attorney's letter dated March 13, 1997, regarding the home values, NAC does not deem it appropriate to impose conditions that are not within city requirements. Referring to Hakanson Anderson's letter dated March 14, 1997, Mr. Kirmis stated that there are some minor adjustments which can be addressed prior to final plat approval. In conclusion the City Council has previously determined that the proposed use upon the subject site is acceptable. Acknowledging this prior decision, NAC recommends approval of Lin -Bar Estates 2nd Addition preliminary plat subject to twelve conditions in their report dated March 10, 1997, which he read. VC Eugene Goenner asked the City Clerk if all the proper publishing and posting for this meeting has been done. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of March 19, 1997 cont'd Page 2 Elaine Beatty - Yes, all publishing, posting, and mailings have been made. VC Eugene Goenner went over the proper hearing procedure and asked if the applicant would like to comment. Ron Black, Attorney Speaking on behalf on Lin -Bar Development Mr. Black 913 Main St. stated that exception was taken to condition number one of NAC's Elk River MN report which addressed the plan for future resubdivision. On November 12, 1996 the applicant specifically requested PUD zoning with the resubdivision being waived as part of the PUD. On October 14, 1996, the city did rezone the property subject to two conditions, one that the final plat be approved, and that a cluster sewer system would be investigated and implemented. The second condition was addressed on December 27, 1996 and approval of on-site systems was given. It is the applicants position that the concept plan and the waiver of the resubdivision requirement was made at the time of rezoning. All the applicant is asking for is to be treated the same as the Heritage Plains Plat (prior to this application) where no resubdivision plan was required. The main reason is that the houses won't fit on the lots. Mr. Black submitted drawings demonstrating the problems with resubdividing (see attached). The applicant is asking for approval of the preliminary plat as it is presented. There are no objections to any of the other conditions. With respect to City Attorney comments, if sewer and water becomes available, we do not believe it can apply to this development now. What Lin -Bar would like is to be able to present some upscale alternative housing and believe they are entitled to approval based on Heritage Plains being the precedent. VC Eugene Goenner opened the hearing to the public. Rex Osterbauer Concerned with the neighborhood looking decent and wants the 7380 Odean Ave end result to look nice. He will be looking at the houses and if they have to crunch the houses on the lot by putting the garages out front he doesn't want to be looking at garages. They are trying to come in with something to help with taxes and he would like to see the applicant get what they are asking for. If people can afford a $250,000 - $300,000 home they could afford sewer and water when it happens. VC Eugene Goenner brought the discussion back to the Planning Commission. Richard Nichols asked Mr. Kirmis if he agreed with Mr. Black's comments regarding Heritage Plains. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of March 19, 1997 cont'd Page 3 Mr. Kirmis - No, the reason the resubdivision plan was waived in that instance was the PUD was used to allow that property to develop with lot widths less than 150 feet and to allow flexibility in the lot width, a resubdivision plan would not work. In this case 150 ft lot widths are being proposed, therefore, a resubdivision plan is required. Richard Nichols - In NAC's report, page 5, under Access - Both CoRd.37 and Odeann Avenue are designated collector streets and direct single, family lot access to such streets is to he discourages Is that discouraged or prohibited? Mr. Kirmis - Discouraged. It is an adopted policy within the Comp Plan. Regarding the resubdivision plan one thing to realize is that 150 feet is the minimum lot width. There is nothing prohibiting them from making a wider lot and reducing the depth to get the one acre minimum. I agree with the contention of the applicant's engineer that this configuration as presented works best. VC Eugene Goenner - Didn't the Heritage Plains plat have additional requirements on their PUD application? Mr. Kirmis - The city granted them flexibility from the strict terms of the ordinance regarding lot width. In this case the PUD is used to avoid amending the land use plan and changing the urban service area boundaries, but the city is not waiving any of its performance standards. VC Eugene Goenner - Conditions 2, and 3, a regarding a temporary cul -du -sac on Odell Avenue and determining the immediate need for construction of 72nd Street, should an escrow be required and will the city be maintaining Odell Circle. Mr. Kirmis - Some of the issues that need to be addressed are, will easterly development occur within the next few years. Will freeze and thaw do damage to the road before adjacent development occurs? It is the city's policy to require construction of streets within all platted ROW. This is a unique situation, Mr. Koshak, City Engineer has provided comment in a letter dated March 14. 1997. Richard Nichols -asked the developer to comment as to whether or not the cul -du -sac could be eliminated. Bob Rohlin We could service that lot with a longer driveway then that lot Meyer Rohlin, Inc. would have 60 ft frontage on the street and widened out as you go back. Mr. Kirmis preferred they meet the 150 ft lot width. VC Eugene Goenner reopened the hearing for comment. There was none. The public hearing was brought back to the Planning Commission for discussion. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of March 19, 1997 cont'd Page 4 Richard Nichols motioned to approve Lin -Bar preliminary plat with the exclusion of item #1of NAC's recommendations with the addition of the four items on page 2, of the City attorney's report dated March 13, 1997. Seconded by Arleen Nagel. Motion carried with Richard Nichols, Arleen Nagel, Ing Roskaft, and Jim Kolles voting in favor. Eugene Goenner was opposed. Bill Jones abstained. Discussion between the motion and the actual vote: VC Eugene Goenner - Is more in favor of leaving the resubdivision requirements and having the applicant increase the frontage to allow for future resubdivision. Mr. Kirmis - Commented that the point of the resubdivision plan is for the property owners protection to allow them to reduce assessments. The city is being responsible by letting people know about future sewer hookups and if they are informed of that, that is the intent of the resubdivision plan. Elaine Beatty - This will be on the City Council Agenda of March 24, 1997 at 6:30 PM. 4. Hearing initiated by Vernon & Celine Greeninger, 10544 70th St. NE, Albertville, MN. Owners of Property, PID#118-800-264300. The West 380 Feet of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec 26, Twp 121, R 24, Wright Co., City of Otsego, MN. Request is as follows: A. CUP to allow a one per forty subdivision of more than 2-1/2 acres. B. A Variance to allow a 1 per 40 split more than 10 acres. VC Eugene Goenner went over the applicants request. Vernon and Celine Greeninger are requesting a conditional use permit to allow a one per forty subdivision of more than 2 1/2 acres, and a variance to allow a one per forty split of more than ten acres. Mr. Kirmis - The property is located north of 70th Street, between Co.Rd.19 and Kadler Avenue. The property is approximately 80 acres and is actively farmed. The applicant is proposing to split off 10.6 acres. Justification does exist to allow a lot to be created that is larger then 2-1/2 acres. According to the zoning ordinance lot sizes larger than 2-1/2 acres in an A-1,Agricultural Rural Zoning District must meet one of the two requirements. One area surrounding the single family dwelling and accessory buildings encompassing structures is larger than 2-1/2 acres, and the second item is that the land is deemed unusable for agricultural use. The property is tillable, however it is only necessary to meet one or the other to allow for the lot size. The reason for the request of the 10.6 acres is the access drive. (Exhibit C) NAC, in regard to the variance, feels it is possible for the applicant to conform to the provisions of the ordinance by shifting the drive to the west and narrowing the lot by 23 feet. A genuine non economic hardship hasn't been demonstrated to allow the granting of that request. With that NAC has recommended approval of the CUP to allow the potential 10 acre lot size subject to the eight (8) conditions from NAC's report dated March 11, 1997, which Mr. Kirmis read. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of March 19, 1997 cont'd Page 5 VC Eugene Goenner asked the applicant if he wished to speak at this time. Vern Greeninger The main reason for the request for a variance over and above the 10544 70th St. NE 10 acre one per forty split was to encompass the existing driveway and all buildings. Also to keep the north property line of the proposed split on the quarter mark. This in turn would facilitate any and all future development, as far as keeping clean lines. Moving my driveway to the east is the wrong direction. It has to go to the west to make it 10 acres. There is low ground to the west and also the septic system which is only 5 years old. Can not afford to move a driveway and a septic system. I have a retirement home just about complete with a construction loan due June 1st. Only selling the buildings and the driveway to try to keep the rest Ag.. Trying to keep the rest Ag. and satisfy everyone, part of the seven acres in front is marginal for farming. Mr. Greeninger handed out some sketches of other proposals keeping it under 10 acres, but in every instance it makes future development tough. (see attached) Moving the driveway means $25,000. I'm on a fixed income and can't afford it. Larry Blesi One property owner to the east. I have no objection to the 7129 LaBeaux Ave. applicants request and feel moving the driveway to be inappropriate. VC Eugene Goenner reopened the hearing to the public. No one wished to be heard. The hearing was then brought back to the planning commission. Mr. Kirmis - Stated that the granting of a variance can not be based on an economic issue. Richard Nichols - asked the applicant about the encroachment on the septic system. Mr. Greeninger - Pointed to his septic system and drainfield on the map and the only way to move the driveway would be to go around the septic system and it would be a mess for future development. Richard Nichols - Two factors that enter into the request of the variance are two property hardships. One, making him move the line over and encroaching on the septic system, which is not good city policy, and secondly, there are two low spots which may be wetlands. There appears to be enough reason to grant a variance. He is in favor of keeping the line where it is and not get into odd shaped property. Bill Jones - Agreed with Richard. The applicant has done a great job and meets the spirit of the ordinance. The original house was built to far back and we can fault him for that. We are talking about 23 feet, not enough to justify moving the driveway. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of March 19,1997 cont'd Page 6 VC Eugene Goenner - Reopened the hearing to the public for comment. There was none. The public hearing was closed and brought it back to the Planning Commission for discussion. Richard Nichols motioned approval of the CUP for the division larger than 2-1/2 acre. Seconded by Bill Jones. Motion carried 5 to 1. Richard Nichols, Bill Jones, Arleen Nagel, Eugene Goenner, and Jim Kolles voted in favor of the motion. Ing Roskaft opposed. Richard Nichols - One comment before making a motion regarding the variance. Mr. Jones commented that granting the variance would meet the spirit of the ordinance. In my opinion, based on the two earlier conditions, requirements of the ordinance are being met. Richard Nichols motion to approve the variance as submitted, to allow for a 1 per 40 split of more than 10 acres. Following reasons. 1. Encroachment of sanitary sewer system. 2. Possible mitigating factor of low area possibly having to be filled in. Seconded by Jim Kolles. Motion carried 5 to 1 with Richard Nichols, Jim Kolles, Arleen Nagel, Eugene Goenner and Bill Jones voting in favor. Ing Roskaft opposed. Elaine Beatty - This will be on the City Council Agenda of April 14, 1997 at 6:30 PM. S Review draft amendment of one per forty transfer of property rights clustered VC Eugene Goenner turned discussion over to Mr. Kirmis. Mr. Kirmis - Reviewed draft amendment, handed out a list of the conditions that apply to 1 per 40 density transfers. The draft was done at the request of the planning commission and establishes a maximum cluster cap of two parcels. This was originally adopted, then deleted in 1993, leaving no cap on clustering. This is a possible interim use solution. The whole issue of density in the Ag. area is something that will need to be talked about as part of the comp plan update. A public hearing date may be set. Richard Nichols requested an explanation of how this would be incorporated and it is actually saying. This is a fairly broad definition. Can only have two homes next to each other, the existing home and the new home? Mr. Kirmis - There are gray areas subject to interpretation. If you want to transfer some property rights into a 40, the most you could do would be two. You could get into discussion of separation requirements and maximum number of dwellings within a forty. VC Eugene Goenner - It is confusing how it is written, someone could do two this year, two in six months, etc. It is unclear and should to be clearer before having a hearing. I would like to see something go forward at this time, but it needs to be better defined. When will the decision be made regarding sewer and water and the comp plan looked at. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING of March 19, 1997 cont'd Page 7 Richard Nichols - In most areas more and more clustering appears to be going the way it is going. He is not convinced that clustering costs more and would like to see figures that support that. We need to do some homework on this and defined it better. This is tied to the comp plan and we have to figure out how the city will develop. It appears we have three options, one don't do anything now. Second, move on the proposed draft. Third, come back with a more rigorous proposal. Ing Roskaft - We should let it be, not make any changes. It may not effect anyone again for ten years. Would like to table this for the next meeting. Elaine Beatty - The deadline for a decision on sewer and water is for April 28, 1997. Jim Kolles - Agreed with Eugene Goenner, doesn't agree with this proposal. Bill Jones - Agreeing with Richard not to do anything right now and deal with it on an individual basis. Mr Kirmis - As part of the comp plan, the whole density issue will be re-evaluated. The question is, do you want to spend time and money on an amendment that will potentially have to be reworked. Ing Roskaft motioned to table until the April 2nd Planning Commission Meeting. Jim Kolles seconded. Motion carried 4 to 2 with Ing Roskaft, Jim Kolles, Arleen Nagel, Richard Nichols voting in favor. Bill Jones and Eugene Goenner opposed. 6. Any other Planning Commission Business: None 7. Adjourn* Bill Jones motioned to adjourn. Ing Roskaft seconded. All in favor. Motion carried. Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:50 PM. Jolles, Secretary Recorded by: Carol A. Olson