Loading...
06-20-2000 PCM c MINUTES HUTCHINSON PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, June 20,2000 1. CALL TO ORDER 5:30 P.M. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Arndt at 5:30 p.m. with the following members present: Jason Olsen, Dean Kirchoff, Dave Westlund, Jim Haugen, Jeff Jones and Brandon Fraser. Also present: Julie Wischnack, AICP, Director of Planning/Building/Zoning; Holly Kreft, Planning Coordinator and Richard Schieffer, City Attorney. 2. CONSENT AGENDA Mr. Jones moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Kirchoff seconded the motion. Motion carried. 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) CONSIDERATION OF VACATION OF EASEMENTS FOR LOT 5, BLOCK 2 OF ISLAND VIEW HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION AS REQUESTED BY WILLIAM GUGGEMOS Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 5:33 p.m. with the reading of publication #6179 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 8,2000. Ms. Wischnack explained the request and displayed maps showing the area proposed to be vacated. She added that the lots could not be combined because they were part of two separate subdivisions. She stated that there were no utilities within the easement to be vacated, but that staff did recommend perimeter easements be dedicated in the Outlot. Mr. Haugen moved to close the hearing at 5:35 p.m. Mr. Kirchoff seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Kirchoff moved to approve the request for vacation of easements with the following conditions: 1. There be an additional perimeter easement dedicated on Outlot A, and 2. That the properties must act as one parcel; Outlot A may not be sold separately or constructed upon without Lot 5, Block 2. Mr. Haugen seconded the motion. Motion to approve with the above conditions carried unanimously. b) CONSIDERATION OF A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE WITHIN A FRONT YARD AS REQUESTED BY TIM SMITH (841 2ND AVENUE SW) Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 5:36 p.m. with the reading of publication #6180 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 8,2000. Ms. Wischnack explained that the Zoning Ordinance does not allow for an accessory structure to be placed within a front yard. She added that some cities consider the lake side the front yard on properties such as this. She also stated that the proposed building does meet all of the other required setbacks. She explained that staff recommended approval with a list of conditions, and that staff felt the limited access to the rear yard and its location in the floodplain did prove a hardship. Mr. Haugen questioned if the large tree shown in the photograph would be saved. Mr. Smith stated that it would be. Mr. Kirchoff questioned the use of the proposed garage. Mr. Smith replied that it would be for vehicles because the area previous used as an attached garage was now part of the living quarters. Mr. Jones questioned if the exterior of the proposed structure would match the house. Mr. Smith replied that it would. Mr. Kirchoff moved to close the hearing at 5:40 p.m. Mr. Olsen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Haugen moved to approve the variance with the following conditions: 1. An attempt be made to save the existing tree in the garage area, 2. The garage dimensions be constructed as provided in the plans, 3. The garage may not exceed 16 feet in height and 4. The garage will not be a pole building. Mr. Westlund seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried unanimously. c) CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT DUGOUTS IN THE Minutes Planning Commission - June 20, 2000 Page 2 FLOODWAY OF THE SOUTH FORK OF THE CROW RIVER AS REQUESTED BY THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON (300 LES KOUBA PARKWAY - RIVERSIDE PARK) Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 5:41 p.m. with the reading of publication #6181 for the conditional use permit as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 8,2000. Ms. Wischnack explained the request and showed the location relative to the floodplain. She added that a conditional use permit is required for structures constructed in the floodway. She also added that construction had already started. Ms. Wischnack stated that the construction plans were verified with the City Engineer and Department of Natural Resources and that it was determined that it would not obstruct flow. Mr. Kirchoff moved to close the hearing at 5:43 p.m. Mr. Jones seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Kirchoff moved to approve the conditional use permit with the following condition: the Park and Recreation Department must acquire a building permit for completion of the project. Mr. Haugen seconded the motion. Motion to approve with the above condition passed unanimously. d) CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMITTO UTILIZE AN EXISTING BUILDING IN THE I/C DISTRICT FOR A SCHOOL AS REQUESTED BY CROW RIVER SPECIAL EDUCATION COOPERATIVE (820 CENTURY AVENUE SW) Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 5:45 p.m. with the reading of publication #6182 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 8,2000. Ms. Kreft presented the request and stated that staff recommended approval with the listed conditions. Mr. Mike Young, Director of Special Education Services, stated that he was in agreement with all of the proposed conditions and that their lease was for only one year. He also added that potentially 30-40 students would be on-site, but it would probably be less than that. Mr. Haugen moved to close the hearing at 5:50 p.m. Mr. Olsen seconded the motion. The motion to close the hearing carried unanimously. Mr. Haugen moved to approve the conditional use permit with the following conditions: 1. On-site parking must be provided for or arrangements must be made with other facilities on-site, 2. All necessary improvements must be made and inspected by the Building Official and 3. This conditional use permit shall expire one year after issuance, unless an extension is requested. Mr. Jones seconded the motion. Motion to approve with the above conditions carried unanimously. e) CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A FENCE AT A HEIGHT GREATER THAN 30" WITHIN A FRONT YARD SETBACK AS REQUESTED BY LANCE WIGGERT (805 LINDY LANE) Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 5:51 p.m. with the reading of publication #6183 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 8,2000. Ms. Kreft presented the request and explained that since the line-of-sight would not be obstructed, staff recommended approval. Mr. Jones questioned what type of fence it would be. Mr. Wiggert replied that the proposed fence would be a six foot wood fence. Mr. Kirchoff moved to close the hearing at 5:55 p.m. Mr. Olsen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Westlund moved to approval the conditional use permit with the condition that if the proposed fence is built within any easement, the property owner shall be responsible for repair needed for any fencing damaged during maintenance or improvement of utilities within said easement. Mr. Olsen seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried unanimously. Minutes Planning Commission - June 20, 2000 Page 3 f) CONSIDERATION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR AN 11-LOT SUBDIVISION TO BE KNOWN AS BEAU RIDGE TO BE LOCATED AT 500 GOLF COURSE ROAD NW AS REQUESTED BY JEFF MUNSELL Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 5:56 p.m. with the reading of publication #6186 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 8,2000. Ms. Wischnack explained the request. She displayed maps showing the proposed plat as well as the proposed Right-of-Way Plat NO.5. Right-of-Way Plat NO.5 will reroute Golf Course Road to Highway 7. She added that the project will be done in conjunction with the reconstruction of Highway 7, which is proposed for 2006. She stated that the proposed plat meets the minimum standards for lot size. Only one access will be from Golf Course Road and the City Engineer has stated that this access must go as far east as possible for Lot 1. She added that staff did recommend approval with the numerous conditions listed in the staff report. Mr. Jones questioned if the lots on the western border would be reduced due the construction of Right- of-Way NO.5. Ms. Wischnack replied that they would not be reduced because the surveyor included the Right-of-Way plat. Mr. Marty Campion of Otto and Associates and project engineer stated that both he and the developer agreed with staff's recommended conditions. The Commission questioned the close proximity of the homes on the eastern border. Ms. Wischnack stated that most the homes were probably built prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Jones moved to close the hearing at 6:00 p.m. Mr. Kirchoff seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Jones moved to approve the preliminary plat with the following conditions: 1. Must obtain final approval from the City Engineer regarding construction plans, 2. Must execute subdivider's agreement prior to consideration of the final plat by the City Council, 3. Watermain must be oversized and pressures must be verified, 4. The drainage issues must be addressed, 5. Street construction detail must be modified, 6. Street name must be changed and 7. Legal description for the property must be modified. Mr. Haugen seconded the motion. Motion to approve with the above conditions carried unanimously. g) CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMITTO CONSTRUCT A TRANSMISSION LINE IN THE FLOODWA Y OF THE SOUTH FORK OF THE CROW RIVER AS REQUESTED BY HUTCHINSON UTILITIES COMMISSION (REVISED ROUTE) Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 6:01 p.m. with the reading of publication #6184 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 8,2000. Ms. Kreft presented the request and explained that this was a revised route. She displayed maps showing the previously approved route as well the revised route. She added that the previous route had been approved by the City Council, but it had not been approved by the County Board for the portion outside of city limits. Ms. Kreft also stated that the topographic survey had not been done as of yet. Mr. Kirchoff questioned if the item should be tabled until a topographic survey is provided. Ms. Kreft stated that staff did not feel this was necessary if a condition is attached that staff could review the survey prior to construction. Craig Lenz, Hutchinson Utilities Commission member, stated that there is a need to move forward with the process. Mr. Jones questioned why the route had been revised. Mr. Lenz replied that the route had been revised to address concerns of property owners. Mr. Fraser questioned the timeline. Mr. Lenz stated that a lease would be up soon and that bids would need to be let for the 2001 construction. Mr. Haugen moved to close the hearing at 6:05 p.m. Mr. Olsen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Haugen moved to approve the conditional use permit with the following conditions: 1. Any permits required by other agencies (i.e. MN DNR, Corp of Engineers) shall be obtained and copies of such permits provided to the City., 2. Plans or documents certifying that the floodproofing measures are consistent with the regulatory Flood Protection Elevation and associated flood factors for the particular Minutes Planning Commission - June 20, 2000 Page 4 area, 3. Any topographic surveys shall be made available to the City Planning Staff for review, prior to construction, and 4. All available precautions shall be taken so as not to affect the proposed location of the Compost Facility or any other proposed City projects. Mr. Kirchoff seconded the motion. Motion to approve, with the above listed conditions, carried unanimously. h) CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMITTO CONSTRUCT A FENCE 3' PICKET FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND A FENCE EXCEED 6' AS REQUESTED BY KEITH EVENSON (626 HARMONY LANE) Chairman Arndt opened the hearing at 6:07 p.m. with the reading of publication #6185 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on Thursday, June 8,2000. Ms. Kreft explained the request and displayed a sketch outlining the heights and locations of the fence. Mr. Jones questioned the precedent set by allowing a commercial use of property in a residential district. Ms. Kreft replied that staff was not concerned with this use at this time because it was not an intensively commercial use of the property. She also stated that the applicant, as well as other area photographers, already used city parks for such purposes. Mr. Schieffer stated that he did not agree with the recommendation for approval and added that if violations did occur that staff would be responsible for enforcement. Mr. Evenson stated that he did not feel this use would not be any different than going to someone's home or the city parks for photographs. Mr. Jones questioned the need for the 8' fence. Mr. Evenson replied that it was needed to block the activities from the neighbors. Mr. Kirchoff moved to close the hearing at 6:15 p.m. Mr. Haugen seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Westlund moved to approve the conditional use permit with the following conditions: 1. If the proposed fence is built within any easement, the property owner shall be responsible for any repair needed for any fencing damage during the maintenance or improvement of utilities within said easement and 2. The proposed fences must have a finished side on the exterior. Mr. Jones seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried unanimously. 4. NEW BUSINESS a) CONSIDERATION OF A LOT SPLIT AS REQUESTED BY JASON AND NICCOLE SCHWARTZ (500/502 LAKEVIEW LANE SW) Ms. Kreft presented the request and stated that the proposal met all of the required lot sizes and setbacks. Mr. Fraser questioned if the siding should be placed in the association agreement. Mr. Schieffer stated that it should be included and that this condition should be attached to all lot splits with existing buildings. Mr. Haugen moved to approve the lot split with the two conditions: 1. A building inspection shall be completed prior to review by the City Council and 2. An association agreement should be drafted and submitted prior to review by the City Council. Mr. Kirchoff seconded the motion. Motion to approve carried unanimously. b) CONSI DERATION OF ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON HWY 7 EAST AS REQUESTED BY FRANK FAY Ms. Wischnack gave the history of the requested annexation and reiterated that the petition was initiated by the property owners and not the City. She stated that a previous request for annexation that included all of the property along Highway 7 East had been rejected by Hutchinson Township. She added that there are actually two items before the Commission, a petition for annexation and a joint resolution drafted by Hutchinson Township. Ms. Wischnack reviewed the positives and negatives of the annexation listed in the staff report. She Minutes Planning Commission - June 20, 2000 Page 5 added that as the resolution stated that the City would be responsible for providing services immediately, paying for the Township's legal costs and allow the adjacent property owners an indefinite amount of time for annexation. Mr. Jones questioned if there were currently any buildings in the proposed annexed area. Ms. Wischnack replied that property owned by Mr. Heikes does have a building on it. Mr. Jones questioned the reasoning behind having the condition that the excluded property owners could wait to be annexed. Ms. Wischnack replied that the township had indicated that it wanted to protect those property owners. Mr. Jones also questioned what staff would recommend for timeline for annexation of the properties currently excluded. Ms. Wischnack replied that staff would recommend a timeline of five years. Mr. Westlund questioned that would happen if those properties did not need services at time of annexation. Ms. Wischnack said that the City Council would need to decide what to do in such a case. Mr. Kirchoff questioned if water service would run along Highway 7. Ms. Wischnack replied that it would. Mr. Haugen asked if the properties were annexed if the City would need to provide services immediately. Ms. Wischnack stated that as the resolution read the City would need to provide services, but it was not in a position to do so. Mr. Olsen questioned if the properties north of the proposed annexed area were interested in annexation. Jon Christensen, property owner, stated that he lived on a family farm and that they had no interest whatsoever of annexation. Mr. Fay stated that Hennen's had signed a purchase agreement for the property located to the south of Highway 7 and east of Highway 22. He added that they only needed water and not sewer services at this time. Mr. Westlund questioned if the buyer's were aware of the cost for these services. Mr. Fay stated that they were. Jon Christensen, Chairman of Hutchinson Town Board, stated that at their meeting the township had suggested seven years as the timeline for annexation by the properties not included. Bob Weir, owner of Yamaha Motorsports, stated that he had signed a purchase agreement in 1998 for property located south of Highway 7 and west of Highway 22. He added that a township meeting he had attended three months ago the township had recommended approval of the annexation with the condition that the area not annexed be allowed seven years before annexation. Mr. Jones questioned what Mr. Weir would do if he were not annexed. Mr. Weir stated that he would still move to the new location and would need a conditional use permit in the Joint Planning Area. Craig Lenz, owner of Ag Systems, stated that as a property owner not wishing to annex at this time, he felt that the process was too rushed. Mr. Schieffer stated that he had concerns relative to the contract language regarding services provided by the City. He also questioned if the planning behind the proposed annexation was appropriate since the area is not contiguous with the city limits. Mr. Lenz stated that he would like more details as to the cost the planning of services for this area. Mr. Weir questioned staff if a study had been done in this area. Ms. Wischnack replied that there had been a study done this year to address the Highway 22 Bypass area. Fred Seltz, property owners, stated that he and his wife had purchased the land about five years ago. He added that a predevelopment meeting had been held and that no one had indicated any problems with the proposal at that time. Mr. Jones questioned Mr. Lenz as to why he did not want to be annexed. Mr. Lenz said that he realized that annexation was inevitable, but felt that it should be in a more orderly fashion at a time when services would be available. He also added that orderly annexation would allow for budgeting of assessment costs. Mr. Olsen questioned what the next step should be. Ms. Wischnack stated that if the Commission wished to table the item, they should have a list of the additional material needed. Mr. Jones stated that he felt there were too many loose items to reach a decision at this time. He added that he would like to see more information regarding the plans for the sewer services. Mr. Fraser stated that he would also like to see what the proposed plans are for the area outside of the annexation. Mr. Arndt added that he would like to see any development in this area under the city's control. Ms. Wischnack summarized the additional information regarding: the sewer study, the land use study Minutes Planning Commission - June 20, 2000 Page 6 for the corridor and that the concerns regarding the resolution be relayed to the Township attorney. There was discussion as to whether or not a special meeting should be held. Due to the upcoming holiday, the Commission decided that a special meeting would not be feasible. Mr. Jones moved to table the item until the July 18, 2000 meeting to allow time for staff to gather the additional information listed above. Mr. Olsen seconded the motion. Motion to table the request passed 6-0-1 with Mr. Kirchoff absent. 5. OLD BUSINESS 6. COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF a) REVIEW OF OUTLINE FOR AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE REGARDING HOME OCCUPATIONS Ms. Wischnack reviewed the proposed changes of the zoning ordinance regarding home occupations. Mr. Westlund questioned how this would affect the existing uses. Ms. Wischnack replied that they would be treated as a non-conforming use and if they wished to enlarge or change the use, then Code would require compliance. Mr. Jones felt that a definition of employees should be included. He gave the example of a home business that had many employees who visited once a day to receive their instructions for the day. Discussion also was held relative to whether or not there should be a distinction between owner and employee. Ms. Wischnack stated that she would place the item on July's agenda for a public hearing. b) CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF REZONING OF ANNEXED AREA ON DALE STREET The consensus was to see if the revised home occupation language would address most of the concerns in this area. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mr. Jones moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:05 p.m. Mr. Arndt seconded the motion. Motion carried.