02-19-2002 PCM c
MINUTES
HUTCHINSON PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, February 19th, 2002
1. CALL TO ORDER 5:30 P.M.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Bill Arndt at 5:30 p.m. with the following members present: Jim
Haugen, Dean Kirchoff, Lynn Otteson, Jason Olsen, Brandon Fraser, Kathy Hanneman and Chairman Arndt.
Also Present: Julie Wischnack, AICP, City of Hutchinson Director of Planning/Building/Zoning, Marc Sebora,
City Attorney and Bonnie Baumetz, Planning Coordinator
City Attorney, Marc Sebora, swore-in Kathy Hanneman as a member of the Hutchinson Planning
Commission.
2. CONSENT AGENDA
a) CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES DATED January 15, 2002
Mr. Haugen stated there was and error in the minutes regarding the election of officers. The
sentence "Jim Haugen nominated Bill Arndt as Chairman of the Planning Commission" is to be
deleted. Mr. Haugen made a motion to approve the minutes with the change, seconded by Mr. Olsen,
the motion carried.
3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A) DAVID TIFFT, OWNER OF PROPERTY AT 705 CHURCH STREET S.W. IS REQUESTING A
VARIANCE FROM 25 FEET TO 24 FEET FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 28 X
32 FOOT DETACHED GARAGE
Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 5:35 p.m. with the reading of publication #6676 as published in
The Hutchinson leader on Thursday, February 7,2002.
Ms. Baumetz commented on the request by Mr. Tifft noting the staff recommendations dated February 1,
2002. She stated the garage was not to be used for a home occupation. Mr. Tifft stated the garage was
for personal storage and workshop area.
Mr. Kirchoff moved to close the hearing, seconded by Mr. Olsen the hearing closed at 5:45 p.m. Mr.
Fraser made a motion to approve the request with staff recommendations. Seconded by Mr. Kirchoff.
There was discussion regarding the access curb cut unto Miller Avenue. Access will be provided at
owner's expense. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Wischnack stated the item will be placed on
the City Council consent agenda for their meeting February 26, 2002.
B) JEFF HAMilTON, PROPERTY OWNER, IS REQUESTING VARIANCES TO REPLACE A
DEMOLISHED STRUCTURE AT 605 BROWN STREET. THE HOME WOULD BE RECONSTRUCTED
ON TOP OF THE EXISTING FOUNDATION. THE VARIANCES WOULD BE FOR THE FOllOWING
REGULATIONS: REDUCE FRONTYARD SETBACK TO 17 FEET AND CORNER SIDE SETBACK TO
18.7 FEET (REQUIRED SETBACK IS 25 FEET) AND REDUCE REQUIRED lOT AREA FOR A TWO
FAMilY DWELLING UNIT FROM 10,000 SQUARE FEET (5,000 SQUARE FEET PER UNIT) TO 8,500
SQUARE FEET.
Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 5:50 p.m. with the reading of publication #6677 as published in
The Hutchinson leader on Thursday, February 7,2002.
Ms. Wischnack commented on the request and presented pictures of the house which has been
demolished. She explained the request is to accommodate a two-family dwelling unit. She stated many
lots in the area would have a similar front yard setback situation. Staff is aware the foundation work was
in process and the owner has been notified the work is to cease until receiving approval of the variance.
Ms. Wischnack stated Building Official, Barry Greive, has noted the garage to the east is closer to the
house than allowed by Uniform Building Code and will require that the existing garage openings next to
the house need to be removed or protected to one-hour construction. The wall adjoining the newly
constructed house must also be protected by materials approved for one-hour fire resistance as per
code. She noted access curb cuts must be 20' from the intersection. Addresses will be issued at a later
date.
Minutes
Planning Commission - February 19, 2002
Page 2
Jeff Hamilton, owner, presented a blueprint to show the building plan. He stated the garage will be 16'
wide not 14'. A 6' setback from the interior lot line is allowed. Discussion followed regarding the average
setback requirement. Ms. Wischnack explained in the R-1 district there is a requirement to that affect.
However, Mr. Hamilton's foundation is pre-existing.
Lon Sweeny, Winsted, stated the proposed porch appears to extend into the setback.
Ms. Hanneman questioned Mr. Hamilton regarding the setback. Mr. Hamilton stated the porch is 5' deep.
Ms. Wischnack stated a covered porch was not presented in either setback variance requested.
Jeanette Lee, 560 Brown St., voiced concern that allowing two-family dwellings in the area would be too
congested for the small lots.
Lori Lomis, 626 Brown St., is concerned with allowing a rental area instead of home-owned properties.
She stated she would like to see more neighbor oriented.
Mr. Hamilton addressed the parking concerns, stating he has provided sufficient parking area. He stated
will live in one of the units.
Craig Nelson, 218 Milwaukee Ave., also is concerned the lot is not large enough for a two-family
dwelling. He stated in the past many vehicles have been parked in the back yard and is concerned the
parking lot in the back and may continue to be used.
Nancy Murphy, 570 Brown St., is concerned about property values dropping in the area and the upkeep
of the property. She is also concerned about the plans for off street parking. Ms. Murphy questioned the
requirements of square footage per dwelling unit. Ms. Wischnack explained the ordinance was amended
in 1996. She explained the City Council at that time approved 5,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit is sufficient.
She stated this area of the city has small lots.
Mr. Hamilton stated the rent will not be inexpensive and will be owner occupied in one unit. He explained
the parking in back will not be used as parking and will be lawn area.
Discussion followed on the 17 and 18 foot setbacks and lot size for this public hearing.
Mr. Haugen moved to close the hearing, seconded by Ms. Otteson the motion carried and the hearing
closed at 6:15 p.m.
Ms. Hanneman made a motion to recommend to approve the variances as requested with the conditions
from staff excepting #4 and the addition of fire code wall on the east as required by Building code.
Seconded by Mr. Fraser, discussion followed. Mr. Haugen added with approval of the building plan. Ms.
Hanneman stated the hardship is the lot size in an older part of town. Mr. Kirchoff stated staff
recommendation #5 should read building staff. Ms. Otteson commented on addressing the issues to
hear the neighbors. She stated the building will be a vast improvement and owner occupied should calm
concerns of the neighborhood. She also stated rental cost should alleviate concerns with type of renter.
There is an advantage with the homeowner living in the other half of the building. The owner should
respect the neighbors concerns. The motion to approve carried unanimously. The item will go before
the City Council on February 26, 2002.
C) CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 01-304 AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 11 (ZONING
ORDINANCE) ADDING LANGUAGE FOR A NEW ZONING DISTRICT NAMED "GATEWAY ZONING
DISTRICT"
Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 6:20 p.m. with the reading of publication #6678 as published in
The Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, February 7,2002.
Ms. Wischnack explained an ordinance addressing aesthetics is to be adopted before the moratorium
may be lifted in the area. She commented on the changes made to the draft. The setback in Subd. 7
(A) was changed to 30' as a response to MNDot. Also, Transitional Yard Subd. 7 (D) has been defined.
Bob Weihr Yamaha Motorsports, voiced his concerns with some sections of the ordinance. He asked to
add motorcycle sales and service to the conditional use section. He also has concerns with the 30'
setback and does not understand the philosophy of the close setback and rear of building to the
highway. Ms. Wischnack commented on the examples in the city with similar development along the
highway. Mr. Weihr is concerned with all buildings placed the same distance from the highway and he
Minutes
Planning Commission - February 19, 2002
Page 3
questioned what happens if the highway is expanded. Discussion followed regarding possible variation
in setback with the objective to create interesting spaces. There was further discussion on workable
restrictions maybe 30' minimum and 50' maximum. Discussion followed on the types of landscaping and
parking to break up and protect the look and avoid conformity. It was the consensus of the Planning
Commission to change the ordinance to minimum 30', maximum 50'.
Ms. Wischnack stated Subd. 9 (A) seemed too restrictive and has been changed to give some leeway to
use other materials. Bob Hennen stated concerns with the restrictions. He stated business that is
market driven is good in theory. However, selection is most important to owners in competition with other
businesses.
Jim Heikes stated he is on same team to keep the entrance to the city looking aesthetically pleasing. He
questioned to accomplish the goals in less restrictive ordinance. Mr. Weihr presented pictures of his
proposed building. Ms. Wischnack explained that through the conditional use permit process the
planning commission would address each building proposed as stated in Subd. 9 (A) Sec. 6.
Discussion followed on the ability of the applicant to deviate from the ordinance. Applicant must present
all information to the commission.
Mr. Weihr asked to clarify pylon sign and to consider chain link fence that is opaque with more latitude
on height of fence. He suggested 10' height. Discussion followed on security issues with opaque fences.
Bob Hennen commented on the flexibility of the ordinance he has fewer concerns.
Landscaping issues were discussed. Ms. Wischnack stated landscaping plans would be presented at
the time of the proposal with the conditional use permit application. She will add language "in
consultation with Forester". There were concerns by Mr. Hennen on the requirement to screen delivery
vehicles. Ms. Wischnack will clarify section.
Commissioner Olsen left the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
Jim Heikes stated concern with wording of the ordinance for future interpretation.
There was discussion on landscaping portions of undeveloped land. Identify any spaces not planned
for improvements. Ms. Wischnack stated language could be added regarding undeveloped areas.
Discussion followed on transitional yards being a green belt screen between business and residential
developments.
Mr. Heikes voiced concerns with parking placement Subd. 7 (F). Mr. Hennen stated his furniture
business depended on parking in front of the building. Ms. Wischnack presented a concept for the
parking requirements.
There was lengthy discussion on fencing requirements including types of materials used, maintenance
concerns and landscaping possibilities. Ms. Wischnack stated she will review and change wording to
maintain flexibility in the ordinance.
John Mlinar asked to clarify "permanent means of watering...." found in Subd. 12, C, Sec. 2 (h). Ms.
Wischnack stated she would take out the word permanent.
Discussion followed on Subd. 12 (E) regarding perimeter landscaping on off-street parking lots. There
were concerns regarding snow removal in parking lots with islands throughout the lot. Ms. Wischnack
explained the island concept along the parking lot to denote property. She explained the sidewalk
concept is to promote connection to bicycle friendly community.
Ms. Otteson moved to close the hearing, seconded by Mr. Kirchoff, the hearing closed at 8:00 p.m.
Mr. Fraser made a motion to approve the ordinance with the following changes: Add motorcycle sales
and service; front yard setback minimum 30', maximum 50'; identify unimproved areas; delivery vehicles
excluded as on-site storage; include front parking lot changes; allow opaque chain link fences; remove
the word "permanent" in section (h) (Watering Plant Material); allow 10' fences, change off-street loading
visible from all streets shall be screened. Mr. Haugen seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Wischnack stated the ordinance would be forwarded to the City Council for their meeting February
26, 2002, and a copy of the changes would be sent to the affected property owners.
D) CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Minutes
Planning Commission - February 19, 2002
Page 4
Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 8:05 p.m. with the reading of publication #6679 as published in
The Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, February 7,2002.
Jay Blake, Senior Planning Consultant, complimented the Planning Commission on their efforts made in
adopting a Gateway Ordinance. He cautioned them to enforce the ordinance when making decisions for
the area.
Mr. Blake commented on the Comprehensive Plan and stated the process began 295 days ago. He
explained there were numerous meetings with community members. Mr. Blake stated there would be
some changes in the housing language making it more specific. He commented on the goals of the plan
to encourage appropriate housing mix for community, give attention to the expanding commercial and
industrial base of community and enhance the river. Ms. Hanneman complimented and thanked all who
worked on the comp plan. She stated it is an impressive plan.
Lon Sweeny, Winsted, explained his mother lives in Hutchinson and commented on the safety of
pedestrians in the downtown area, he noted the traffic problems were addressed in the plan. Mr. Haugen
made a motion to close the hearing, seconded by Ms. Otteson the hearing closed at 8:25 p.m. Ms.
Hanneman made a motion to approve the plan, seconded by Mr. Fraser the motion carried unanimously.
The City Council will review the plan. There will be an AUAR plan for next month.
4. NEW BUSINESS
a.) FINAL PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS SUMMERSET SECOND ADDITION
Ms. Wischnack commented on the plat and reminded the Planning Commission of the preliminary plat.
This is phase two and will consist of 36 lots. Staff is requesting the developer to verify street names, and
provide Subdivision Agreement for second phase. Mr. Haugen made a motion to approve with staff
recommendations. Ms. Hanneman seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Ms. Wischnack stated the final plat will be on the City Council agenda on February 26, 2002.
5. OLD BUSINESS
None
6. COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF
a.) Registration for Land Use Planning Workshops
Ms. Wischnack commented on the workshops to be held in March. She encouraged commissioners to
call Bonnie Baumetz to register for the workshops they wish to attend.
7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.