Loading...
04-20-2004 PCM MINUTES HUTCHINSON PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, April 20,2004 Hutchinson City Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER 5:30 P.M. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dean Kirchoff at 5:30 p.m. with the following members present: Brandon Fraser, Jim Haugen, Lynn Otteson, Mike Flaata, Farid Currimbhoy, Robert Hantge and Chairman Kirchoff. Absent: Also present: Julie Wischnack, AICP, Planning Director, Marc Sebora, City Attorney, John Rodeberg, Director of Engineering and Bonnie Baumetz, Planning Coordinator 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) Consideration of Minutes dated March 16,2004 Mr. Haugen moved to approve the minutes, with minor reVISions, of March 16, 2004 as submitted. Seconded by Mr. Flaata. The minutes were approved unanimously. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUESTED BY MIKE CORCORAN, PROPERTY OWNER, TO PLACE HARDSURFACED PARKING UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE LOCATED AT 934 HWY 15 SOUTH Chairman Kirchoff reopened the hearing at 5:45 p.m. with the reading of publication #7159 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, March 4, 2004. Ms. Wischnack updated the Planning Commission on the confusion regarding the amount of parking lot to be paved. She explained the owners of the apartments to the west did not sign the agreement. She commented that all the property owners affected must sign the application and a parking lot access agreement. She commented on the phases of paving being requested. Ms. Wischnack commented on the following staff recommendations and drawing: 1. The property owners enter into a cross parking agreement/easement which would document the situation. The easement should clarify responsibilities regarding maintenance, snow removal etc. 2. Improve the catch basin system that is accumulating a large amount of siltation. This could be accomplished with plantings and grass around the catch basis. Minutes Planning Commission - April 20, 2004 Page 2 3. The parking lot must be setback 3 feet from the west and south property lines. Mike Corcoran, property owner, explained this was more complicated and at this time would request to move forward to pave Phase I and sometime in the future pave Phase II according to the staff recommendation and drawing. Ms. Wischnack explained a variance does not expire in six months. Mr. Rodeberg explained the new drawing with a 0 foot setback on the North edge of the property and a 3 foot setback on the west and south with landscaping to protect the catch basin. Mr. Hantge asked if this property would require a storm septor. Mr. Rodeberg stated this property is under an acre of impervious coverage and does not need to provide storm water ponding. Ms. Wischnack stated there is now an agreement between Mr. Corcoran and Mr. Fahey for cross use of the parking lot. She stated utilities has no issues with the lot. Ms. Otteson questioned if this goes on 2 to 3 years should there be reference to the plan that must be followed and use the date on the plan dated tonight. Mr. Haugen made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Hantge, the hearing closed at 5:55 p.m. Mr. Fraser made a motion to recommend approval of the request with staff recommendations and drawing dated 4/20/2004. Seconded by Mr. Hantge. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Wischnack stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent agenda at their meeting held April 27, 2004 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m. b) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY BRIAN PONA TH, PROPERTY OWNER, TO CONSTRUCT A 3-PLEX WITH GARAGES LESS THAN 400 SQ. FT. LOCATED AT 446 PROSPECT STREET N.E IN AN R3 DISTRICT Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 6:00 p.m. with the reading of publication #7171 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, April 8, 2004. Ms. Baumetz commented on the request stating this is the same request as submitted in June of 2003. She explained the request for construction of a 3-plex with garages less than 400 sq. ft. She commented on the zoning history allowing up to 7 dwelling units on the property. There is an existing 4-pex built in 1997. Ms. Baumetz explained the entire development must be hardsurfaced before the new building is occupied. There are 18 parking spaces required for this property. She stated the Minutes Planning Commission - April 20, 2004 Page 3 Planning Staff is in favor of granting the Conditional Use Permit with the following conditions adding number 6 regarding trash containers: 1. Parking must be hardsurfaced before new building is occupied. 2. There must be a 20 foot minimum hardsurfaced driveway to the 4 - plex on the property for emergency access. No Parking will be allowed on the driveway to the 4-plex. 3. Verify water and sewer service location. 4. Relocation of natural gas or electric services will be at owner's expense. 5. Verify electric load requirement. 6. Section 6.06 of the Zoning Ordinance requires trash receptacles must be shown on the site plan and must be shielded. Mr. Fraser made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Ms. Otteson. The hearing closed at 6:05 p.m. Ms. Otteson made a motion to recommend approval of the request with 6 staff recommendations. Seconded by Mr. Currimbhoy. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Baumetz stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent agenda at their meeting held April 27, 2004 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m. c) CONSIDERATION OF 3-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS MEADOW LINKS VIEW SUBMITTED BY BUTCH HAUSLADEN, PROPERTY OWNER Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 6:06 p.m. with the reading of publication #7173 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, April 8, 2004. Ms. Wischnack commented on the preliminary plat and reminded the Planning Commission of the previous plat known as First Addition to The Meadows. This plat will incorporate one lot from the previous plat. This is a 3 lot plat. Staff discussion centered around the sewer accessibility. Mr. Rodeberg explained the route for service would be to run sewer line in 12th Avenue and under School Road. He stated a neighborhood meeting would be held as soon as possible. He explained sanitary sewer would be placed in the wide easements provided. Ms. Wischnack commented on the fees connected with platting lots and the fact there are many trees on the parcel which the Planning Commission may want to waive the tree escrow requirement. Butch Hausladen, property owner, commented on the tree escrow requirement and explained the placement of trees already on his parcel. Ms. Wischnack stated the ordinance allows for the Council to waive the requirement. Minutes Planning Commission - April 20, 2004 Page 4 Scott Plowman, neighboring property owner, asked about the cost of the project. Mr. Rodeberg stated the estimated cost is $100,000 to $125,000 to get to the other side of School Road. Mr. Hantge made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Haugen, the hearing closed at 6:10 p.m. Mr. Haugen made a motion to recommend approval of the request with the following conditions: the tree escrow required may be waived, relocation of utilities will be at preoperty owner's expense, fees for SAC/WAC, parks, and electric service territory are required and there will be additional assessments concurrent with the sanitary sewer line. Seconded by Mr. Hantge. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Wischnack stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent agenda at their meeting held April 27, 2004 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m. d) CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE REQUESTED BY KERRY KRUEGER, PROPERTY OWNER, TO REDUCE FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 25 FEET TO 18.5 FEET BY REMOVING A 6' X 8' NON-CONFORMING PORCH AND CONSTRUCTING AN 8'X 21' 3 SEASON PORCH ONTO HOUSE LOCATED AT 545 ERIE ST. S.E. Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 6: 11 p.m. with the reading of publication #7172 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, April 8, 2004. Ms. Baumetz commented on the request to reduce the front yard setback from 25 feet to 18.5 feet for construction of an 8 foot by 21 foot 3 season porch to replace and existing 6 foot by 8 foot porch. She explained the staff were not unanimously in favor of granting the variance. She commented on the staff recommendations as follows: 1. The variance is for the project as identified in the site plan dated March 17, 2004. Any deviations from that plan would require further review. 2. Utility relocation would be paid for by the applicant. Mr. Rodeberg stated the hardship was the question by some of the staff. However, there is no major impact if the variance is granted. Kerry Krueger, property owner, explained the hardship of the age of the home and the fact the porch must be removed and the variance is needed to replace the porch. Ms. Otteson made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Hantge, the hearing closed at 6:17 p.m. Mr. Flaata made a motion to recommend approval of the request with staff recommendations. Seconded by Mr. Currimbhoy. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Baumetz stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent agenda at their meeting held April 27, 2004 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m. Minutes Planning Commission - April 20, 2004 Page 5 e) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY HUTCHINSON MFG TO CONSTRUCT 2 - 40X80 POLE TYPE STORAGE BUILDINGS IN THE IC DISTRICT LOCATED AT 720 HWY 7 WEST Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 6:19 p.m. with the reading of publication #7174 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, April 8, 2004. Ms. Wischnack explained the new request for two 40'x80' pole type buildings located at Hutchinson Mfg. She reported there have been many discussions with Mr. Daggett and staff. She commented on the Memoradum of Understanding and the following conditions: 1. A memorandum of understanding be signed by the property owner and the City regarding the landscaping improvements. 2. Written verification that the storm water pond on the western portion of the property is in working order. 3. That there be paved access to the building constructed when the Highway 7 improvement is completed in the area or no later than 2007 (if the highway project does not occur). The paved access shall begin at the end of the highway improvement project pavement, and continue 110 feet to the south on the most easterly access to the parcel. 4. An additional hydrant and water looping must occur when the frontage road is constructed. A separate assessment hearing process will be provided for this consideration. 5. Building code compliance must be discussed with the building official. 6. The conditional use permit is valid for six months, unless an extension is requested or construction of the addition has commenced. Mr. Hantge questioned the conditions staying the same with the memo of understanding covering remaining issues. Ms. Wischnack stated the property owner requested more detailed recommendations along with a memorandum of understanding. Mr. Rodeberg stated there will be much construction in the area with the Hwy 7 project. He explained the timing is not right to complete paving at Hutch Mfg right now. The conditions need to be defined. Atty. Sebora stated a memorandum of understanding is important in a case like this. It puts both parties on notice. He explained #5 deals with future assessments through the 429 process. Mr. Fraser made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Haugen, the hearing closed at 6:27 p.m. Ms. Otteson made a motion to Minutes Planning Commission - April 20, 2004 Page 6 recommend approval of the request with staff recommendations 1-6. Seconded by Mr. Hantge. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Wischnack stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent agenda at their meeting held April 27, 2004 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m. 4. NEW BUSINESS a) CONSIDERATION OF LOT SPLIT REQUESTED BY PAUL BETKER, PROPERTY OWNER, LOCATED AT 165 - 5TH AVE NW Ms. Wischnack commented on the frontage width and the drainage challenges because of the topography changes. She stated the property is approximately 3-4 feet lower than the street area on the eastern portion of the property. She explained the history of the lot being platted as lot 5 originally. Before 1984, the property was tax combine with Lot 6 (to the west) and then split off again sometime in 2001. Ms. Wischnack stated the 1991 McLeod County Soils survey indicates this property is within a 414 soil which is Hamel soil type. Hamel soils indicate severe wetness for shallow excavations. She commented on the review of the site for drainage issues completed by Barr Engineering in August of 2003. She commented on the subdivision regulations, Section 12.4, Subd. 3 regarding drainage and flood hazard areas. Ms. Wischnack reported staff would recommend denial because of drainage issues. Mr. Rodeberg stated flooding was a problem in the area last year. He stated the entire farm field to the north drains onto the property which needs four times the amount of storage to protect the property in a 100 year event. He explained there is one portion above the curb in the SW corner. There could not legally be a building permit issued for the second lot. He commented on possible options to purchase property to the north. Discussion followed on filling the lot. Mr. Rodeberg stated the water would be directed to other properties creating liability issues. There is no easy solution. Ms. Wischnack stated the lot might accommodate one home but not two. Mr. Rodeberg agreed with Ms. Wischnack. Randy Redman, Your Home Realty, representing Mr. Betker, commented on the approval of the homes to the east and west which are at a higher elevation. He stated there will not be basements in the homes to be built. He questioned that the lots were buildable at one time noting there are two curb cuts and two utility services to the lots. Mr. Redman stated grading on the west and east properties have flooded this property. Mr. Rodeberg stated he doesn't know what happened in the past. There are no records. He explained the property has not flooded many times. Minutes Planning Commission - April 20, 2004 Page 7 Discussion followed on the recent filling on the property. The grading has been changed Ms. Wischnack stated the 1985 topographic is at the same elevation as the recent survey. Mr. Hantge asked how slab on grade homes at the same elevation would change the drainage flow. Mr. Rodeberg stated there is a catch basin on the property. Mr. Wischnack stated we research lowest floor elevations when issuing a building permit. Mr. Rodeberg stated we do not allow building on low areas and this lot has always been low. He again stated there can not safely be created two buildable lots. The property was purchased by Mr. Betker in 2001. Mr. Currimbhoy commented on the soils. Mr. Flaata asked if anything has changed on the property since 2001. Mr. Redman stated Mr. Betker would like it split like it was before. Ms. Wischnack explained the previous split is not in our records. Mr. Rodeberg stated the city would work with Mr. Betker to build on the lot. Atty. Sebora commented on a court action involving the parcel. He stated the neighbors have concerns regarding the drainage. The water must not be diverted to other properties. Mr. Redman asked if it would be possible to elevate to build a house on slab. Mr. Rodeberg stated there may be a way to look at mitigating but they don't have the right to do anything to affect the neighbor's property. This lot has historically been the lowest lot. Discussion followed on the original plat with this as a platted lot. Mr. Fraser made a motion to reject the lot split request due to the engineering assessment of the drainage and soil type issues. Seconded by Mr. Currimbhoy. The motion carried unanimously. b) CONSIDERATION OF SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTED BY BRIAN BURGESS LOCATED AT 1383 JEFFERSON ST. S.E. Ms. Wischnack commented on the sketch plan reminding the Commissioners there was a different sketch plan last month. She explained the property owner revised the plan since last month to include Minutes Planning Commission - April 20, 2004 Page 8 lots for twin home development. She stated many times the developer will design the lots to accommodate single family homes and later split the lots for twin homes depending on the market. She explained common practice is to place a 32 foot street on the plat. Staff contemplated this cul-de-sac as a private road. Ms. Wischnack stated a wetland delineation is required to determine the wetland areas. She commented on the stormwater management, timing of the project and the fees. She explained the need to reconfigure the lots to meet lot size requirements. The property must be rezoned to R2 if twinhomes are to be constructed on the lots. Discussion followed on private street confusion to the property owners. Associations are challenging. Mr. Rodeberg explained to get the density wanted, associations are created. He pointed out this sketch is overly dense for the property. Density is driven by the developer to meet the market. Brian Burgess, property owner, stated he has hired an engineering firm to help with the plan. He explained this is not exactly what will be presented in a preliminary plat. He stated the density is to make it work financially. Wesley Foss, property owner, stated this is just a preliminary layout sketch. He stated they can downsize the lots to meet the minimum requirements. They do not want to pile people on top of each other. There is approximately 4 - 6 buildable acres. Mr. Burgess asked for input on the possibility of a private road. Mr. Rodeberg stated the street sign colors are blue on private streets and green on public streets. Mr. Burgess asked for direction on the sketch plan. Mr. Rodeberg explained the City has private roads all over the City. He stated that is common in the metro area. He explained working with an engineer is the right direction to take. He commented on the issues with private roads. There must be an association to deal with the maintenance of the private road. The consensus of the Planning Commission is to continue with the plat. They are on the right track. Set up an association to deal with the private road. Ms. Wischnack stated this item does not go to the City Council. c) CONSIDERATION OF SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTED BY LOWELL WRIGHT LOCATED ON JEFFERSON ST Ms. Wischnack explained the location of the property on Jefferson Street. She stated the property owner is looking for feedback. There are three lots proposed with a narrow flag lot. She stated the lot depth language is Minutes Planning Commission - April 20, 2004 Page 9 a concern. There must be a survey and there will be development fees as with all other plats. She explained the staff had a divided opinion on the sketch plan. One opinion is that this is a rural area and the plat should be allowed. The other opinion is to be mindful of future development in the area. Mr. Fraser commented on the large assessments in the area because of the large lots. Mr. Rodeberg stated it is a large deferred assessment. He noted there are services available to the two front lots. He explained this is a difficult situation because of the large assessments. He commented the area is well suited for rural not urban. He stated interest in platting will be added when activated after 10 years. The City is trying not to put a hardship on properties. Mr. Rodeberg commented on flag lots. The City tries to limit the risk of creating flag lots but it is a benefit to the City to allow it in some areas. Lowell Wright, property owner, stated the lot was bought in 1977. He understood the lots could be split when the engineer recommended to put in service to the front lots at the time Jefferson Street was reconstructed. Jerome Karl, Fahey Realty, commented on the shared driveway and the rezoning to R2. Mr. Rodeberg stated they overcompensated on stubs so the City would not have to rip up the street again. It is not being assessed unless used. Consensus of the Planning Commission is to move forward with the plat and meet with staff. d) CONSIDERATION OF FINAL PLAT TO BE KNOWN AS SOUTH FORK RIDGE SUBMITTED BY FARR DEVELOPMENT Ms. Wischnack commented on the final plat and the Phase I area. She commented on the 8 recommendations in the preliminary plat. We have received the homeowners documents. Numbers 3 - 5 are completed, 6 they have added language to clarify drainage, 7 street lighting is still a condition and 8 phasing of the development. She stated there are no new issues with the plat. Mr. Currimbhoy made a motion to recommend approval of the plat with the staff recommendations. Seconded by Mr. Flaata , the motion carried with Ms. Otteson abstaining. 5. OLD BUSINESS a) RECONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY PLAT/PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT KNOWN AS RAVENWOOD SOUTH SUBMITTED BY BRUCE NAUSTDAL Minutes Planning Commission - April 20, 2004 Page 10 Ms. Wischnack recapped the approval last month and the discussion of setbacks. She stated staff has reviewed the following recommendations with the developer: 1. A letter requesting an improvement for public bonding must be received. 2. Grading and utility plans must be reviewed prior to City Council review of the preliminary plat. 3. The timing of the construction of the homes on this property shall be determined in the subdivision agreement. 4. A subdivision agreement must be executed at the time of final plat. 5. The setbacks shall be 20 feet in the front, 20 feet in the rear, and 8 feet on the side on lots 1-7, 10 and 11 and 6 feet on the remaining lots. Mr. Haugen made a motion to recommend approval of the revised conditions. Seconded by Mr. Flaata. The motion carried unanimously. b) DISCUSSION OF AMENDING SECTION 8.01 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING EXISTING TWO FAMILY HOMES IN THE R1 DISTRICT Ms. Wischnack commented on the amendment and stated a public hearing will be necessary to amend the ordinance. Mr. Fraser made a motion to go forward with the amendment. Seconded by Mr. Flaata. The motion carried unanimously. 6. COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF Ms. Wischnack updated the Commissioners on the aerial photography progress. She stated they flew over the City last week and the map should be produced by July. Ms. Wischnack reported on the survey results stating there were 12 more surveys, 8 of which were very positive. There was 86% customer satisfaction in total. Ms. Wischnack stated comment cards will be sent with permits in the future. Chairman Kirchoff commented on an example of a Planning Commissioner job description and responsibility information. Mr. Hantge asked about the Habitat for Humanity request. Ms. Wischnack stated they withdrew the request before City Council met. There was a meeting with the Habitat people and two City Council members. They may apply again. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further the meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m.