Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/08/1997 P&Z Minutes• • Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES ve+ Inning Coordrn� City Engineer Ahrens conam canning I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:33 p.m., January 8, 1997. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 11, 1996 Mr. Herr made a MOTION to approve the minutes of the December 11, 1996 Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board meeting, as submitted. He was supported by Mr. Robinson. Motion carried 6 -0. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - CHANGES /ADDITIONS There were none. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared the Open Mike portion of the meeting at 6:35 p.m. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the Open Mike portion of the meeting at 6:36 p.m. and was supported by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried unanimously, 6 -0. V. ACTION ITEMS A. 97 -1 Rezoning, Century Farms Development, Lilac Street, Rezone from Rural to R -1, PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Brixius stated that this application was tabled from the last Planning & Zoning Board Meeting. The application for five minor subdivisions was submitted • • • Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 2 without an application for rezoning. It was the consensus of the Board that approval of the five minor subdivisions should be done in conjunction with a rezoning application for the area, which has been submitted. Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 6:38 p.m. Mr. Brixius stated that the rezoning application is from Rural to R -1 Single Family. The properties are located along Lilac Street near the intersection of Laurene Avenue. The developer is proposing to purchase the rear portion of the five subdivided lots and include them as part of the future expansion for Behms Century Farm. Without the availability of sewer, these subdivided lots will be nonconforming, and a variance would have to be approved as part of the minor subdivision. In addition, these properties are not within the MUSA boundry. Mr. Brixius further stated that the main factor supporting approval is the cooperation of the five property owners who wish to sell their property to the developer to allow a future subdivision. They have agreed to hook up to the sanitary sewer when it becomes available, even though the City Charter would not require it. Mr. Brixius noted that the City's Comprehensive Plan identifies the area as low density residential which is consistent with the overall development of the Behms Century Farm preliminary plat. The subdivided properties will meet R -1 lot standards. The cost of extending the anticipated sewer would be paid for by the developer and stipulated in the development contract. Until the preliminary plat is completed, there would be no access to this site. Mr. Brixius stated that rezoning is a policy decision of the City. The appropriateness of rezoning is based on the proposed land use for the area and whether that land use is compatible with adjacent properties. Without the availability of MUSA or sanitary sewer, it may be determined that rezoning is premature. However, if the Board wishes to protect property interests and accommodate the property owners, rezoning may be appropriate. Seven conditions are listed in the staff report that are recommended should the minor subdivision be approved. Mr. Johnson asked if it is correct that there will be no sanitary sewer until the MUSA line is extended. Mr. Brixius responded that is his understanding. Mr. Johnson noted that two lots that would be created would have no street access and asked if that is in violation of any regulation. Mr. Brixius stated that the lot would not be buildable until there is street access. One of the conditions listed is that no building permits would be issued for Lots A, C, E, G and /or I until there is a preliminary plat and available sewer. Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 3 Mr. Dunn asked if a land trade, that was mentioned at the last meeting, is being • negotiated. • Mr. Uhde, Behms Century Farms Developer, introduced Mr. Peter Coyle from the Larkin Hoffman law firm. Mr. Coyle stated that his firm has extensive experience working with cities and developers to resolve Metropolitan Council issues, including MUSA issues. The Metropolitan Council would entertain an expansion to the Behms Century Farms property notwithstanding the compromise reached a year ago between the City and the Council not to expand MUSA north of I -35W until the Comprehensive Plan is updated and impacts to the interchange of I -35W and CSAH 23 are reviewed. Mr. Uhde has agreed to pre -fund for the City a traffic study of the corridor of I -35W and CSAH 23, so that an analysis can be presented to the Metropolitan Council. The minor subdivision would satisfy the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities Act to supply more affordable housing. Mr. Uhde would be open to a land swap if there is a property owner who would be willing to make that trade. However, it is difficult to get property owners with properties in MUSA to negotiate for properties outside of MUSA. He is cautiously optimistic that the Metropolitan Council will entertain MUSA expansion if transportation solutions are well designed from the traffic analysis. Approval of the minor subdivision is critical to the application to the Metropolitan Council to expand MUSA. The Council consistently tells developers not to submit MUSA applications until there is evidence that the City is committed to the project. Chair Schaps asked the time frame for action by the Metropolitan Council on the MUSA issue. Mr. Coyle responded that a reasonable time frame would be 60 to 90 days. Mr. Dunn asked if the City is comfortable with the proposed agreement. Mr. Wessel stated that all parties are cooperating and working together. Mr. Brixius stated that if the Board chooses to approve rezoning and the minor subdivision, the recommendations stipulate that if MUSA is not extended to include these properties, no further development can take place. No other building permits would be issued until sewer is available to the balance of the plat. Mr. Johnson asked what happens if these issues cannot be resolved in the near future and how would the City be able to protect development in that area. • Mr. Coyle stated that Behms Century Farms would have no development rights until MUSA is extended to these properties. He noted that the Comprehensive Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 4 Plan designates this property as R -1. State law now requires that zoning be in • compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. • • Mr. Brixius stated that if the minor subdivision is approved and the land conveyed to Mr. Uhde, the property owners relinquish their right to that land. Regardless of whether the land is rezoned to R -1, if sewer is not available, the property must be at least 10 acres to be buildable. With the proposed conditions in place on the minor subdivision, building permits cannot be pulled without an extension of MUSA. Mr. Herr stated that if MUSA is not approved, this action would be null and void. Mr. Brixius stated that rezoning would not be null and void if the land is conveyed. No development changes would be able to occur until MUSA is available. Mr. Dunn expressed his concern about current owners having sewer problems that affect this property after Mr. Uhde acquires it. He would not want to see lawsuits between current land owners and new land owners. Mr. Uhde stated that if a sewer problem occurs, he would request MUSA on an emergency basis. The current drain fields and septic tanks are entirely on the property that would remain with the current land owners. Once sewer and water are available, these land owners would be required to hook up. Mr. Brixius added that the condition to hook up to the sanitary sewer would be binding to all lots in the subdivision. Current property owners will be required to sign a waiver agreeing to hook up to the sanitary sewer when it is built. Ms. Wyland stated that property owners will be protected by the standard Minnesota Statute 429 requirements but cannot petition against the sewer improvement according to the City Charter if they sign the waiver. Mr. Uhde stated that when land owners sign the waiver, that does not necessarily mean they are forced to hook up when the sewer is available. They can use their own septic systems until there is a system failure. Chair Schaps asked if it would make sense to create two large lots rather than identifying each subdivision in order to place additional constraints on any development. Mr. Uhde stated that creating two lots could complicate the process because there are five purchase agreements. Those purchase agreements have not been closed because they are contingent upon approval from this Board and the Council. Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 5 Mr. Brixius stated that after the individual closings the lots could be combined • into one contiguous parcel. • • Ms. Wyland suggested condition No. 8 state that after the individual closings, Lots A,C &E be combined and Lots G and I be combined. Mr. Dunn expressed concern about rezoning this property to R -1 before finalizing the Comprehensive Plan, which will be completed this year. Mr. Gordy Johnson 115 Lilac Street, stated that he owns Lot D. He fought against Behms Century Farms, but it passed. He intends to move out of Lino Lakes to a more rural area. Mr. Uhde plans to purchase his entire property of 2.5 acres. He requested the Board to approve the rezoning and minor subdivision so he and the other property owners can move on. Mr. Mike Caulfield stated that he owns Lot F and supports this application. Mr. Jack Hurley stated that he owns Lot C and would not mind seeing more homes with more children in the neighborhood for his children to play with. He has no objections to this application. Ms. Wyland noted that notices were sent to property owners within 600 feet of these parcels. Two telephone calls were received from residents south of Lilac. Their main interest is whether the sewer would be brought closer to them. The City has received no objections. Mr. Wessel noted that there are several homes east of Behms Century Farms. He asked if those property owners signed a waiver for sewer and water. Ms. Wyland responded that they did not sign a waiver, but at that time there was no request for sewer or for property to be further subdivided. Typically a waiver is requested when property owners ask to reduce the square footage of their existing lot. Mr. Caulfield stated that at the last meeting Mr. Uhde's engineer indicated that his drain field is half on his lot and half on the proposed Lot E. His concern is that if his septic system fails, he does not want to be responsible for cleaning up the drain field on Lot E that will no longer be his property. Mr. Uhde stated that he would be willing to negotiate an agreement to grant Mr. Caulfield a drainage easement. If there is clean up to be done, he will take care of it for his property. Mr. Brixius stated that arrangement would be between the property owner and the developer with no involvement or enforcement rights on the part of the City. Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 6 Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. and was IIIsupported by Mr. Gelbmann. The motion carried unanimously, 7 -0. • • Chair Schaps stated that Lots B, D, F, H, and J will not have the right to petition against the sanitary sewer but otherwise would retain all rights under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. Mr. Johnson made a MOTION to approve rezoning from Rural to R -1 Residential Single Family for five single lots located along Lilac Street near the intersection of Laurie Avenue based on the following findings: Acquisition of Property. In 1994, the City approved a preliminary plat and rezoning for the Behms Century Farm subdivision. The five lots currently involved in the present application were exceptions to this preliminary plat. Through this subdivision, the applicant wishes to purchase the rear portions of these five lots for future inclusion into Behms Century Farm plat. This would result in a contiguous compatible land use pattern. At this time, each of the five property owners are amenable to selling a portion of their property and are supportive of the minor subdivision request. Comprehensive Plan. The City's 1991 Land Use Plan suggests low density residential use of the subject properties. The proposed future subdivision would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Adjacent Uses. The subject properties abut the R -1 zoned Behms Century Farm plat that was recently approved by the City. The requested subdivisions are being sought to provide additional land for a future expansion of the Behms Century Farm development. As such, the ultimate development of the subject properties would be consistent and compatible with the existing and or planned development area. Extension of Sewer. As the developer of the Behms Century Farm plat, the applicant is responsible for the extension of sewer lines to service the plat. The proposed lots cannot be developed in the future without connecting to City sewer service. The applicant, therefore, will be caused to extend lines to these lots as well, also bearing responsibility for the costs of the extension. The requested subdivision provides the City an opportunity to extend sanitary sewer to unsewered areas within the near future. Lot Design. The proposed lots all meet the lot area, width and depth requirements of the R -1 Zoning District. It should be noted that Lots A, C, E, G and /or I are proposed to be resubdivided as part of a future addition to Behms Century Farms. Mr. Dunn supported the motion. The motion carried, 6 -0. Mr. Robinson abstained. Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 7 Mr Dunn made a MOTION to approve the minor subdivision application, subject . to the following conditions: • • 1. The rezoning from R, Rural District to R -1, Single Family Residential District is approved. 2. No building permits shall be issued for newly created Lots A, C, E, G and /or I, as illustrated by Exhibit D, until said Tots are subdivided and platted in a manner consistent with the R -1 Zoning District and the sites are served by public sanitary sewer and water. 3. Newly created Lots B, D, F, H and /or J, as illustrated by Exhibit D, shall be required to connect to municipal sewer service at such time as service lines are extended to serve this area of the City, and the existing septic systems of said Lots B, D, F, H, and /or J demonstrate failure. 4. The applicant submit an interim sewer service plan to provide temporary sanitary sewer service to any existing dwelling units should any of the existing septic systems fail until such time as the area is included within the MUSA and sanitary sewer lines are extended. 5. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with any future MUSA amendment, including but not limited to a potential land trade not associated with the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan Update. 6. The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with a traffic impact study, to determine the potential impact of the proposed plat to Lilac Street and the Lake Drive /I -35W interchange. 7. The existing accessory structure on Lot C be demolished or moved to a location on Lot D, in conformance with all applicable setback requirements. 8. After the closing, Lots A,C and E shall be combined and Lots G and I shall be combined. Mr. Herr seconded the MOTION. The motion carried, 6 -0. Mr. Robinson abstained. D. Public Hearing Continued from December Meeting - Sign Ordinance Amendments Ms. Wyland stated that Mr. Brixius has reviewed the amended sign ordinance and has offered suggestions which staff would like to have an opportunity to discuss. The proposed ordinance does not include Mr. Brixius' comments, and staff is requesting that the public hearing be continued to the February meeting. • • • Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 8 Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 7:32 p.m. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to continue the public hearing to the February 12, 1997 Planning & Zoning Board meeting and was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion was unanimously approved, 7 -0. Mr. Brixius requested feedback from the Board on format. He suggested that some of the language is redundant and needs to be consolidated in Section II. Also, in Section III criteria are described to allow billboards. At this time billboards are allowed in the Rural District, and the question is whether the City wishes to allow billboards in rural areas until development occurs. It would be his suggestion that rather than making a billboard a conditional use, it be an interim use until the land is rezoned, included in MUSA or additional development occurs which requires the billboard to be removed. Mr. Johnson asked if there are any billboards in the Rural Executive District at this time. Mr. Brixius answered, yes. Ms. Wyland noted that allowing billboards is lucrative for the property owner. Mr. Brixius explained that in townships and rural counties Mn /DOT has jurisdiction over billboards along freeways and only allows them in commercial districts. In municipalities with zoning and sign ordinances, the City controls billboards. Ms. Wyland stated that from the City's perspective there is no interest in having prime industrial areas obstructed by huge advertising signs. A recent land use study for the City directed signage away from those areas. She noted that Mn /DOT signs already advertise food, gas and lodging. Ms. Dahl stated that she likes to see the signs when she is traveling and would not be opposed to them. She asked if the City has any public land in the Rural District or Rural Executive District that would be suitable for advertising signs. Ms. Wyland answered, no. Mr. Brixius recommended that if the Board were to make any changes to the ordinance, he would strongly recommend that the Economic Development Board review it first. Mr. Robinson stated that he would like to see an interim use allowed. Mr. Johnson stated that the Rural Executive District is a residential area. To put a billboard up would be counter productive and defeats the purpose of the Rural Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 9 Executive zone. However, he would allow them in the RBR District. He asked if • the City receives an economic return from billboards. • • Ms. Wyland stated that billboards require a conditional use permit fee, an application fee and a sign permit fee which is renewable each year. However, revenue is minimal. Mr. Wessel stated that he sees no definitive value to development to allow billboards, and they do not enhance the community. He would like to solicit the opinions of other Economic Development Board members. Mr. Brixius stated that there may be benefits for motorists and the property owners renting the space, but the advertising is not community specific. They do not generate an increased tax base. If the City decides to accommodate property owners who wish to rent space, he would recommend that it be on an interim basis. Mr. Brixius stated that in another part of the ordinance there are specific rules that identify wall signs and free standing signs for independent businesses. If a business is located in a shopping center that shares signage, that signage should be treated differently. In some cases the ordinance overlaps, and there should be clear distinctions. He would like to bring the ordinance back for review with language that gives better continuity and graduated standards. Language is needed to address multi- tenant buildings or shopping centers, so that everyone is identified. A sign that is 400 square feet for a sign of identification is a very large sign and should be reviewed as to how it relates to the site. Mr. Wessel agreed and stated that usually companies are either concerned with employee logistics or company visibility with regard to their signs. Those are two separate issues. The sign size and visibility of the company needs to be considered carefully. Chair Schaps suggested a morning work session for the Board to review the sign ordinance. Mr. Brixius stated that a work session would be helpful after the Economic Development Board has given input. Mr. Johnson stated that if the Board has a work session, it would be helpful to him to see pictures of existing signs to better understand sizes. It was the consensus of the Board to hold a work session on the sign ordinance on January 24, 1997, at 7:00 a.m. Planning & Zoning Board January 8, 1997 Page 10 VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS Chair Schaps noted that the Comprehensive Plan Task Force will meet the following evening at 6:00 p.m. to unveil a new town center plan. Mr. Wessel added that the City is soliciting input from residents to express questions and concerns. After the public meeting on January 9, 1997, the plan will go to the City Council at the January 27, 1997 meeting. Mr. Robinson asked if the plan to be approved by the Council is a concept plan. Mr. Wessel answered, yes, and stated that it is in the form of a master plan. Every project or improvement must go through the formal process, through the planning and zoning review. VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 8:09 p.m. and was supported by Ms. Dahl. The motion passed unanimously, 7 -0. • •