Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/18/1994 P&Z Minutes• • • ?L:nning & Zoning Board - Special Meeting May 18, 1994 CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING nder si;chj ,Nordin schaps, Schanel chneider ED ;B Direc: arning Consultant BrixiuE �ning Coordinator WyFlan�t I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: III. OPEN MIKE: No one was present to speak under Open Mike. IV. ACTION ITEMS: A. Public Hearing, Behm's Century Farms, Rezoning /Musa Exchange Mr. John Johnson, representing G. M. Development and Mr. Uhde, was present and thanked the P & Z for the opportunity to review this item. He stated that the proposed development is anticipated to take from 6 -8 years with the western portion being developed last. Current City work has revealed that the developable area within the MUSA is less than originally anticipated due to wetland constraints and this development would be a logical extension of the MUSA Area. Al Brixius reviewed the staff report which outlined the reasons why the proposal was back before the P & Z. These reasons included development patterns and an inventory of remaining buildable land within the MUSA showing a very limited supply due to wetland constraints. The City is now at a crossroads for defining future growth within the community. Mr. Brixius reviewed past development patterns, current lot and MUSA supply, and anticipated MUSA demand. He also outlined the criteria the P & Z should use in considering this request. Mr. John Uban, Planner for Mr. Uhde, was present and reviewed the City's infill policy. He presented some renderings of the proposed development indicating its proximity to existing development and density as compared to adjoining areas. He explained that the Behm Farm itself will have a proposed 1 • • • 'Planning & Zoning Board - Special Meeting May 18, 1994 density of 2.1 units per acre while the area to the north /west will be .09 units per acre. The proposed development is to be phased over six years and will not be rapid growth. The existing homes are an average of 100' apart. The homes in Behm's Farm will be an average of 80' apart. A berm and plantings are proposed for the Farm that will, eventually, screen the area very similar to the existing landscaping along Lilac. This will assist in maintaining the rural character of the area. Mr. Johnson stated that he believes the proposed rezoning and MUSA expansion meets the criteria for future growth as outlined on page 7 of the Planners report dated May 13, 1994. Tom Mesich asked Mr. Johnson what size were the lots north of the Prison. He indicated that there were approximately 11,000 square feet in area. Mr. Mesich stated that was a far cry from half acre lots as indicated by Mr. Uban. Mr. Uban explained that his density figures were "gross" density. Mr. Schones asked what is the critical mass necessary to make this development work. Mr. Johnson stated that they have determined the need for approximately 150 units. Chairman Schaps asked what is the procedure for a MUSA Exchange. Al Brixius explained that it would involve an amendment to the comprehensive plan that would be reviewed and approved by both the P & Z and CC. The Net Council then has 90 days to review it. Tom Mesich asked where the property trade /exchange would come from. Mr. Brixius indicated that initially we would look at trading some land north of Main Street with the condition that when the MUSA is expanded it would be given back to that area. City Engineer Schneider added that the area we are considering for the temporary exchange is not currently being taxed as MUSA property per the request of the property owners. Other land within the MUSA is generally taxed at a higher rate than non -MUSA property. PUBLIC HEARING - CITIZEN COMMENT Gordy Johnson of 115 Lilac asked how many acres in the proposed development and how many housing units. Mr. Uban explained that the overall density was 1.6 units per acre. There would be a total of approximately 150 homes on the 93 acres. Mr. Johnson felt this was too many. The property owner at 7810 Sunset indicated that he would like to see the area north of Carl Street kept at 2 1/2 acres. He is also concerned about drainage and wet basements. He currently raises animals on his property and would not want that to change. 2 • • Planning & Zoning Board - Special Meeting May 18, 1994 Lee Whitmore also expressed concerns about drainage and concern that future property owners would not be aware of the noise from the airport. City Engineer Schneider explained that development of this property with the drainage plans necessary should actually improve the overall drainage for the area. Tom Mesich asked who would be responsible for drainage problems down the line. Mr. Johnson explained that they would be required to meet the requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, Rice Creek Watershed District, FHA, Corps of Engineers, etc. We will make sure the neighbors are not adversely affected. Wendel Nelson of 87 Lilac agreed that there is a water problem in the area. The drawing submitted looks good - but is that a reality. He asked if there would be improvements made to Lilac Street with turn lanes etc. He suggested that if the project goes through that the existing property owners be allowed to connect to the utilities at no charge. Jay Molitor of 7806 Sunset stated that he is in favor of the development. He would like to know what his options would be if sewer and water were not extended. Could he develop 2 1/2 acre lots - he is interested in developing his property in the near future. Rene Curley of 101 Lilac was present and stated that they have been coming before the City for almost a year now. She is concerned about the density. There are still 153 lots proposed - she feels that is too dense for the area. Clayton Went of 391 Thomas was present and stated that he too is concerned about drainage in the area. The PUBLIC HEARING was closed at 7:45 P.M. Kathy Nordine asked Mr. Brixius where should the MUSA Expansion area come from? He explained the criteria for considering a MUSA expansion as outlined in his report which included consideration of contiguous growth patterns, logical extensions of infrastructure, development driven utility extensions, and environmental sensitivity. Tom Mesich asked for a definition of rural expansion, urban residential and expansion residential as indicated in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Brixius explained that rural expansion relates to 2 1/2 acre lots with the potential for resubdivision when utilities become available, urban residential relates to the R -1 and R -1X lots that are provided with utilities, and expansion residential are those area logical for future sewer extensions before the year 2010. 3 • • • Planning & Zoning Board - Special Meeting May 18, 1994 Mr. Schones stated that at $750,000 for utilities, the assessments for this development would be about $5,000 per lot. In his area the proposed assessment was estimated at $30,000. Mr. Schneider explained that the $750,000 was for sewer and water trunk costs only, additional costs would be assessed for street improvements, surface water management, water and sewer laterals, etc. for a total assessment considerably larger than $5,000 - approximately $20,000 or more. Final costs for this project have not been determined. Mr. Schones then asked the developer if he would be considering a PDO for the project. Mr. Johnson indicated that it was his understanding that the PDO is available to offer some degree of flexibility in the platting process and that they might consider it on the western edge of the site. Mr. Schones stated that he would not be in favor of any PDO on the property. He also asked Mr. Brixius to review the criteria to be used in considering a zoning change. Tom Mesich stated that the Board has become intimate with this particular project. The area is unique because of the wetlands, the large existing lots, and the air park. He expressed concern about destroying the uniqueness of the area. He agreed that the comprehensive plan should be updated but did not necessarily agree that we need 250 roof -tops per year. He would like to see some proof that this is necessary. There has been considerable development in the last few years and taxes have only gone up. He would like to see a board of citizens redo the comprehensive plan. He has a problem with reviewing this proposal again as it was turned down by the Board and it appears as if they are asking for the same thing without any more justification then presented originally. Al Robinson stated that when the area was looked at in 1987 it was thought that development would occur before 2010 - and sure enough - it has happened. What other use is there for this property than R -1. We are not looking at a subdivision today, we are looking at a rezoning. There are many questions that will need to be addressed when a plat is submitted. Drainage is a problem in the area and it will have to be adequately designed and approved by the City. Several years ago when the air park was developed we did not have the staff that we do today - that is why that developments drainage was inadequate. City Engineer Schneider added that, in his opinion, the proposed development of Behm's Farm will actually correct drainage throughout this area. Mr. Robinson concluded his remarks by stating that Mr. Uhde's projects in the south part of the City are excellent. He is probably one of the best developers we have in the City. Rick Gelbmann stated that the City of Lino Lakes is going through some changes. We are experiencing growth at a rate greater than anticipated in 1987. The Comprehensive Plan has indicated that when expansion occurs, it is to happen in certain areas, this is one of those areas. Given those 4 • • • Planning & Zoning Board - Special Meeting May 18, 1994 circumstances, I feel this area is appropriate for a change in zoning to R -1. I also believe that there is a benefit to the entire area in extending sewer and water closer to areas with septic systems that have some potential for becoming unusable. I see more damage to the environment by the lack of sewer systems than by the presence of homes. John Landers stated that he has four concerns: 1. Traffic, there will be over 300 additional trips /day on Lilac Street. 2. Run -off 3. Density 4. Schools - our tax burden will be increased with the need for additional schools. Tom Mesich felt that if we are talking about a MUSA Exchange, he would like to know where the MUSA is being taken from and do those property owners know yet. Al Brixius advised the P & Z that we are looking at some areas north of Main street to use as an exchange at this time. These properties, although within the MUSA Line have actually been taken out, at the request of the property owners, for tax purposes. Additionally, utility extension to these sites is not reasonable in the near future. It is also intended that the MUSA designation would be returned to these properties in the very near future when an overall MUSA reallocation is considered. MOTION: John Landers made a motion to deny the rezoning request. Tom Mesich seconded the motion. On Roll Call: Ayes: Landers, Mesich, Schones, Nordine Nays: Robinson, Gelbmann, Schaps Motion carried on 4 to 3 vote to deny rezoning request. Mr. Schones summarized his reasons for voting for denial as follows: "I feel the parcel can not handle 150 new homes without a PDO. The wetlands are there for a purpose and far be it from me to take that away. Questions regarding transportation, land use comparability and the availability of utilities. Performance standards fall short because of the wetlands." Mesich, Landers and Nordine agreed with these reasons for 5 Planning & Zoning Board - Special Meeting May 18, 1994 • recommending denial of the rezoning. • B. 94 -13 -S, U -Dor USA, Apollo Drive, Site Plan Review Brian Wessel introduced this item and explained that EDAAB has endorsed this project and feels UDOR is the type of established and growth oriented business well suited for the Apollo Business Park. Mary Kay reviewed the staff report which recommended approval of the site plan review with several conditions including a variance for lot area. The Code requires a 3 acre minimum in a GI District, the parcel in question is only 1 acre in size. Mr. Wessel further explained that the lots within the business park will vary in size and the 1 acre proposed for this project is more than adequate to meet the needs of the developer. He added that there will be some TIF Financing involved in this project. After some discussion Ed Schones made a motion and was supported by Tom Mesich to approve the site plan review and variance with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall sign a development agreement and post financial guarantees as specified by the City prior to issuance of any building permits. These guarantees shall insure, among other items, proper grading, landscaping on the front and rear portion of the property, signage, lighting, trash handling, loading, striping of the parking area according to ADA Guidelines, etc. 2. Noise levels emitted from the facility shall not constitute a nuisance as defined by the City Code or exceed applicable PCA Standards. 3. Total number of employees shall be specified to confirm compliance with off - street parking requirements. 4. Off - street loading areas shall be defined on the site plan. 5. Trash handling equipment shall be contained in a closed container and screened from the front property line. 6. Exterior lighting shall be indicated on the site plan and directed away from adjoining properties. 7. The City Engineer shall review and approve the site drainage and grading plan. 8. Approval of a variance to allow a lot less than 3 acres in size. 9. A shared driveway agreement shall be prepared and approved by the City Attorney. 10. Other comments by City Staff. All voted aye. Motion carried. V. DISCUSSION: 6