Loading...
12-20-2005 PCM MINUTES HUTCHINSON PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, December 20, 2005 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: John Lofdahl, Jim Haugen, Lynn Otteson, Mike Flaata, Farid Currimbhoy, Robert Hantge and Chairman Kirchoff. Absent: None Also present: Julie Wischnack, AICP, Planning Director, Kent Exner, City Engineer, Marc Sebora, City Attorney and Bonnie Baumetz, Planning Coordinator 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) Consideration of Minutes dated November 15, 2005 Ms. Otteson moved to approve the minutes of November 15, 2005 as submitted. Seconded by Mr. Flaata. The minutes were approved unanimously. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE REGARDING LOT COVERAGE IN THE R1, R2 AND R3 DISTRICT SINGLE AND TWO FAMILY Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 5:35 p.m. with the reading of publication #7412 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on December 8, 2005. Ms. Wischnack commented on discussions from last month not to change the definition. She explained the present ordinance allows to count the structures only when calculating the coverage. She stated Barr Engineering wrote the Stormwater Management Plan and are here to explain the plan. Mr. Exner commented on the staff discussion and that they are uncomfortable with increasing the lot coverage because of drainage. The plan was written in 1996, since then, three regional ponds have been constructed. Mr. Exner stated Mr. Bob Obermeyer, Barr Engineering, will explain the plan. Discussion followed on how often the plan is updated. Mr. Exner stated the construction of the ponds are sometimes assessed by the City and sometimes the development pays for the ponds and are credited for the pond. There was discussion regarding the danger of large regional ponds as opposed to the several smaller ponds. Mr. Exner explained the types of ponding. He stated the City has an easement to the pond but the ponds are located on the platted lot. Atty. Sebora stated the ponds are owned by the property owner. Mr. Bob Obermeyer, Barr Engineering, commented on the reason for ponding to cut down the size of the infrastructure. He explained the Minutes Planning Commission - December 20, 2005 Page 2 benefits of the stormwater management plan based on ultimate management conditions and the amount of hard surface. The plan is based on the amount of hard surface. He commented on levels of service and levels of protection. He stated the plan provides uniform design standards across the City. The plan includes all hardsurfaced areas in the City. Discussion followed on the recommended coverage and the change proposed. Mr. Obermeyer commented on the doubling of coverage in the higher density zoning districts. He again reminded a uniform level of protection must be provided within the entire City. There was further discussion of the reasons to address coverage and enforcement for single family and multi-family. Ms. Wischnack commented on the recent single family lot coverage issue creating a drainage problem. There was discussion on how to determine the percentage of coverage and shedding of water and what the percentage should be. Development generates more water volume to the river. Ms. Wischnack stated the Corps of Engineers study was done in the 90's to determine elevations. She explained the process of approving the elevations when there is an application for a building permit. She stated the City must follow what the engineers have designed for elevations and drainage. Staff does review the elevation of the grading plan. Discussion followed on the need for requiring an as-built after the survey. Mr. Exner stated the MPDS permit requires updates unless the land use plan changes there is no need to change the Stormwater plan. Discussion followed on the possibility of overloading the ponds. Mr. Exner stated the city monitors the ponds during storm events. Ponds are recertified every 20 to 25 years or if there is greater runoff. Mr. Lofdahl stated he would recommend a 40% coverage and not grant variances. There was discussion of changing the definition. Mr. Lofdahl stated the definition could remain as the structures. Definition must be solid. Mr. Obermeyer explained 40% may not impact if there are a few units. There could be a problem if there would significant increases. Mr. Brandon Fraser, 510 Jackson St., commented on the potential issues of R1 coverage with larger garages. The trend may be overloading the runoff. Mr. Haugen made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Currimbhoy. The hearing closed at 6:30 p.m. Mr. Lofdahl commented on the definition of the coverage calculations. Ms. Wischnack explained the method of calculating the coverage today. Mr. Haugen asked about a disclaimer to have engineering sign-off. There was discussion of what happens in the older part of town. Atty. Sebora commented on true hardship which must be demonstrated by the property owner. Ms. Wischnack will take 5 permits in the older part of town and present at the Minutes Planning Commission - December 20, 2005 Page 3 next meeting. Mr. Haugen made a motion to table the item to January. Seconded by Mr. Hantge. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Wischnack stated this will be readvertised next month. b) CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE EXEMPTING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR MOVING HOUSES IN THE CITY LIMITS FOR THE HOUSES ALONG THE HWY 7 CONSTRUCTION AREA Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 6:40 p.m. with the reading of publication #7413 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on December 8, 2005. Ms. Wischnack explained the concern of moving houses along the Hwy construction area and the length of the conditional use permit process. She stated they will still need a moving permit. She explained the ordinance would end in 2008. Mr. Exner explained the bidding process for the houses. The MNDOT bid approval process will be complete in April. Ms. Wischnack commented on the demolition process and permitting and abandonment of services. There is a potential of 15 houses being moved. Some of the accessory buildings also could be moved. Discussion followed regarding the process and giving a handout to MNDOT in the bidding process to outline the conditional use permit requirements. Ms. Otteson made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Haugen the hearing closed at 6:50 p.m. Ms. Otteson made a motion to recommend not to exempt the Hwy construction process for conditional use permits to move structures. Seconded by Mr. Hantge. The motion carried unanimously. 4. NEW BUSINESS a) CONSIDERATION OF A ONE LOT SKETCH KNOWN AS JENSEN ADDITION SUBMITTED BY NEIL JENSEN Ms. Wischnack commented on the proposed sketch. Discussion followed on the proposal and the staff recommendation to plat the entire property into one lot. b) CONSIDERATION OF EXTENSION OF FRASER'S SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT Ms. Wischnack explained the requirement to extend the preliminary plat one year from the 2yth of Dec. Mr. Lofdahl abstained. Mr. Haugen made a motion to approve the request. Seconded by Mr. Flaata discussion followed. Ms. Wischnack stated the vacation of Honey Tree Rd must be petitioned by both property owners. The abutting property owner must Minutes Planning Commission - December 20, 2005 Page 4 also sign for the vacation of the "as-traveled" road. The motion carried unanimously. c) DISCUSSION OF ZONING CHANGES ALONG THE HWY 7 CORRIDOR Ms. Wischnack explained this is an informational discussion of the potential use of property along the Hwy 7. She stated there must be an intense land use plan. There is a possibility of houses turning into offices. The Planning Commission is to express your concerns and ideas. Ms. Wischnack stated this could be a 6 month process. d) UPDATE ON WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROGRESS Ms. Wischnack revisit of the landscaping plan of the water treatment plan. Mr. Exner explained the landscape plan design. Earthtec provided rederings of the landscape plan. Mr. Exner commented on the elevation of the tank and the building. Discussion followed on the need for extensive landscaping. The landscaping design is included in the bid. The location dictates the discussion of buffering. There will be 50 feet from the Hwy road edge to the tank. There was further discussion of screening on the front of the tank. The consensus of the Planning Commission is for EarthTec to return with a new rendering after we see the bid results. There should be a bid with different options. 5. OLD BUSINESS There was discussion of Applebee's parking requirement. Ms. Wischnack stated she would review the original permit. There was also discussion of 3M screening for new development on the property. 6. COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.