Loading...
11-21-2006 PCM MINUTES HUTCHINSON PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, November 21, 2006 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: Also present: Rebecca Bowers, Planning Director, Kent Exner, City Engineer, Marc Sebora, City Attorney and Bonnie Baumetz, Planning Coordinator 2. CONSENT AGENDA a) CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES DATED OCTOBER 17,2006 b) CONSIDERATION OF LOT SPLIT SUBMITTED BY BRUCE NAUSTDAL LOCATED AT 1150 BLUEJAY DRIVE S.W. Mr. Haugen moved to approve agenda items 2 (a) and 2 (b) with the following staff recommendations for 2(B): 1. The proposed lot split would meet the standards of the R-2 zoning district, subject to the conditions stated and airport zone building square footage requirements. 2. Moving or removing of services will be at property owner's expense. 3. Separate services are required for each lot. 4. Lots at 50% coverage will not be allowed to add sheds, patios, decks or gazebos. 5. At the time of platting, money was escrowed for two trees per lot. The new lot division will require one additional tree per lot at $200.00 per tree. This will be collected with the building permit fees. Seconded by Mr. Hantge the consent agenda items were approved unanimously. Item 2 (c) was moved to New Business on the agenda for further discussion. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO REZONE LOTS 2-6, BOYLES ADDITION FROM R4 (HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) TO IIC (INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL) FOR A 9 LOT COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION Minutes Planning Commission - November 21,2006 Page 2 Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 5:45 p.m. with the reading of publication #7526 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on November 21,2006. Ms. Bowers commented on the request and current zoning. She stated a business park is proposed. She explained the location and surrounding property uses. She presented background on the considerations of rezoning. She explained the Comprehensive Plan is the guide for future land use. She stated rezoning should be consistent with the City's long range plans. Ms. Bowers stated the latest sketch plan and the revised access is more preferable to the staff. She commented on the process after the property is rezoned. She reported staff recommended denial because the property is guided for residential and because of the impacts to the surrounding residential properties. She commented on the staff report which lists conditionally permitted uses. She explained in the I/C District each use must go through the conditional use permit process. There is no minimum lot area requirement in the I/C District and only recommended setbacks. She commented on the following staff concerns: 1. The proposed I/C zoning is not consistent with Comprehensive Plan and the future land use guide plan, which identifies this property as Mixed Use Residential. 2. There are no adjacent or nearby I/C zoned properties that would provide for a logical zoning transition. There is an existing commercial area across Highway 15 that it is zoned C-4. 3. The number of lots proposed to be developed (9 lots) is too dense for the site. 4. Rezoning to I/C would negatively impact the adjacent residential areas due to increased industrial andlor commercial traffic. 5. Review and approval of the County Engineer is required regarding access off County Road 12/North High Drive. 6. There are wetland areas to the north of the existing apartment building that could determine potential for development of these areas. 7. Increasing commercial andlor industrial traffic could negatively impact the township gravel roadway and residences to the north. Ms. Bowers commented on the potential for a round-about on Hwy 15 and North High Drive and possible changes to the plat. Discussion followed on spot zoning. There is C4 across Hwy 15 but the uses would not fit the development. She stated I/C made more sense for the proposed uses in this development. Gus Wurdell, applicant, stated he does understand the comprehensive plan guides for residential. He explained nothing has happened with this property for 29 years and he would like to see it developed. He stated the I/C district would give the City control with the conditional use process. Mr. Hantge made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Currimbhoy. The hearing closed at 5:56 p.m. Mr. Flaata made a motion to recommend denial of the request because of staff concerns 1-7. Minutes Planning Commission - November 21,2006 Page 3 Seconded by Ms. Otteson, the motion carried unanimously. Ms. Baumetz stated this item will be placed on the City Council regular agenda at their meeting held November 28, 2006 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m. unless the applicant withdraws the request. b) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW TOWING COMPANY OFFICE WITH IMPOUND LOT LOCATED IN THE C4 (FRINGE COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT AT 700 AIRPORT ROAD Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 5:57 p.m. with the reading of publication #7523 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on November 9, 2006. Ms Bowers commented on the request and the previous amendment to the ordinance to allow towing companies with impound lots by conditional use permit in the C4 District. She explained the site plan shows part of the fence over a portion of the parking lot. She would recommend changing the staff conditions on placement of the fence. She reported there are more parking spaces than required by the ordinance. She stated the request meets the conditions for the conditional use permit. Lowell Baumetz, applicant, commented on the southern portion of building he would be renting for the business. He stated there are existing studs for the office area and an existing area for bathroom facilities is available. He explained the septic tank placement and the need to clear the septic area. He stated the proposed fence placement will give the area the best screening of the back portion of the area. Discussion followed on the placement of the fenced area. Mr. Baumetz explained the need for enough maneuvering area with the truck. He stated the law allows impounded vehicles for 45 days before they are junked. He stated he tries to move them as soon as possible. He commented on the good job the police department does at cleaning up abandoned cars. He explained he is working with the Car Shop to get the dead beat cars moved. Mr. Lofdahl made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Haugen the hearing closed at 6:11 p.m. Mr. Lofdahl made a motion to recommend approval with the following staff recommendations 1,2 and 6: 1. City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, and the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area and the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The Council has determined that the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 6. The property owner shall combine the two lots at the County. Seconded by Mr.Flaata, the motion carried unanimously. Ms. Baumetz stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent agenda at their meeting held November 28, 20076 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m. Minutes Planning Commission - November 21,2006 Page 4 c) CONSIDERATION OF VACATION OF 10' OF A 20' DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, HANSONS SUBDIVISION OF PETERSON ESTATES, 320 JEFFERSON COURT Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 6: 13 p.m. with the reading of publication #7524 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on November 9, 2006. Ms. Bower explained the location of the property. She explained the property was developed prior to being annexed into the City. The County easement requirement when platted was 20'. The property owner is requesting to vacate 10 feet of the easement. She stated there are trees to work around. Engineering and utilities met with the applicant on site. Mr. Exner stated the City must be able to get to the pond to the rear of the property until property to the south develops. Ms. Bowers commented on the following staff recommendations: 1. Subject to a written agreement between the property owner and the City to allow and make accommodations for the City crews to access the stormwater pond adjacent to their property if maintenance of the pond is necessary by the City. This arrangement would end when the parcel to the south is developed and appropriate infrastructure with corresponding easements is constructed. 2. The detached garage may not be placed in the remaining easement area and all regulations must be followed regarding detached garages. Mr. Exner commented on the meeting with the applicant on-site. He commented on the land locked pond. He stated, in the future, there will be an outlet pipe when the property to the south develops. We have no easement along the city limits line. He explained there is an old tile line which is presently a limited outlet. Discussion followed on who built the pond. Mr. Padrnos stated the pond to the south was built as a result of the pond to the west. He explained the developer went to the property owner to construct the pond. Mr. Exner stated there is an agreement with the property owner. He explained the placement of the large shed which is the only area to place the shed on the property without moving trees. Mr. Hantge made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Lofdahl the hearing closed at 6:22 p.m. Mr.Currimbohy made a motion to recommend approval of the request with staff recommendations 1-2. Seconded by Mr. Haugen. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Baumetz stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent agenda at their meeting held November 28, 2006 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m. Minutes Planning Commission - November 21,2006 Page 5 d) CONSIDERATION OF VARIANCE TO REDUCE SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 20 FEET TO 5.6 FEET FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SMOKING ROOM AT THE HUTCH BOWL, 1150 HWY 7 WEST Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 5:39 p.m. with the reading of publication #7525 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on November 9, 2006. Ms. Bowers explained the applicant is requesting to table the item. Atty. Sebora commented on his meeting with Mr. Plaisance regarding the proposed nonsmoking ordinance. Discussion followed on establishing a portion of the building a smoking area. Hutch Bowl is presently exempt under the County Ordinance. The proposed city ordinance is more comprehensive than what is required presently. Mr. Plaisance commented on his reasons to table the request. He explained he is constructing an inside version of the outside smoking room. Mr. Hantge made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Ms. Otteson. The hearing closed at 5:44 p.m. Mr. Haugen made a motion to table this request. Seconded by Mr. Hantge. The motion carried unanimously. e) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OVER 1000 CUBIC YARDS OF FILL IN FLOOD PLAIN FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WASTE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY EXPANSION Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 6:25 p.m. with the reading of publication #7527 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on November 9, 2006. Ms. Bowers explained the location of the request and the need for 3,600 cubic yards of fill. Mr. Mehr, Sr. Waste Water Operator, commented on the request and the expansion to handle additional flows. He explained the pond was a borrow pit used to construct the present facility. He commented on the need for additional space. They looked at other areas on the site to locate the facility. The high voltage lines and costs made other areas difficult. Mr. Exner explained the joint notification process to the DNR, County Environmentalist and Army Corps of Engineers. He stated he had a verbal approval from the DNR and County and written email approval from the Corps. He explained this is not a wetland but the City did go through the application process. He stated the facility must be above the Minutes Planning Commission - November 21,2006 Page 6 100 year flood plain. Discussion followed on the changes to the new dam and changes to the 100 year flood elevations. Mr. Exner showed the building footprint. He explained 8400 sq. ft. of wet area will be impacted. Discussion followed regarding placing documentation from the Corps of Engineers in the Planning Commission packet. He stated construction will begin in early spring. He explained the construction process will take over a year. It was suggested the Corps of Engineers documentation be given to the City Council. Ms. Otteson made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Lofdahl. The hearing closed at 6:37 p.m. Mr. Hantge made a motion to recommend approval of the request with staff recommendations and adding documentation from the DNR, County and Corps to the City Council. Seconded by Mr. Flaata. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Baumetz stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent agenda at their meeting held November 28, 2006 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m. 4. NEW BUSINESS a) CONSIDERATION OF LOT SPLIT REQUESTED BY PAUL BETKER LOCATED AT 235 OTTAWA SE Ms. Bowers explained the application was submitted past the deadline but, because of the time of year, we put it on the agenda. She commented on the request for a twin home reporting it does meet the requirement. This building is at 50% coverage and no additions would be allowed. She commented on the following staff recommendations: 1. The proposed lot split would meet the standards of the R-2 zoning district, subject to the conditions stated and airport zone building square footage requirements. 2. Moving or removing of services will be at property owner's expense. 3. Separate services are required for each lot. 4. Lots at 50% coverage will not be allowed to add sheds, patios, decks or gazebos. 5. At the time of platting, money was escrowed for two trees per lot. The new lot division will require one additional tree per lot at $200.00 per tree. This will be collected with the building permit fees. Discussion followed on verifying the property does not go over the 50%. The question was asked the if the second phase will the stormwater system have to be revisited and pipes and ponds sized accordingly? Mr. Lofdahl would propose tabling to the next meeting. Chairman Kirchoff stated this is not an automatic these lot splits will not be the same as before. Minutes Planning Commission - November 21,2006 Page 7 Mr. Betker stated he is trying to keep on schedule. He explained the plat was approved for twin homes and he understands he has to have lot splits. He does not agree with the process. He stated lot split surveys are expensive to pay twice. He stated he will stay under the 50% coverage. Discussion followed on the past and present process. Mr. Betker commented on his perception of the process from the City Council meeting. He stated cost factors are an issue and he has 8 lots left to split. Mayor Cook stated Mr. Betker could have asked for a special meeting. Ms. Bowers explained the past procedure was contrary to the ordinance according to the City Attorney. She stated this is legal procedure and staff is comfortable with the Planning Commission's decision. Consensus of the Planning Commission was the applications must be submitted in a timely manner. They suggested the remaining lots could be split ahead of time so Mr. Betker does not have future problems with building his twin homes. They would not require a full blown survey however legal descriptions are necessary. Mr. Betker asked about the tree issue. He stated tree escrow was provided per ordinance of 2 per lot. Discussion followed of where the trees were to be planted. Mr. Betker stated he is upset with the changes. Ms. Bowers stated she intends to revise the ordinance to make things easier for the developer. Mr. Betker asked staff and planning commissioners to talk to the developers before the decisions are made when revising the ordinances. Mr. Lofdahl made a motion to recommend approval of the lot split. Seconded by Mr. Currimbhoy. The motion carried unanimously. Ms. Baumetz stated this will go to the City Council consent agenda November 28, 2006. 5. OLD BUSINESS There was discussion of where storage units would fit in the City. Ms. Bowers stated IIC was intended for existing sites. She stated Mr. Knisely will be back for an amendment of the ordinance and series of applications. 6. COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF Mr. Exner commented on requests for timed parking in the Main Street area. He stated that would be difficult to enforce and difficult to monitor. It was suggested the Downtown Association discuss the request and decide how it should be handled. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m.