Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006.07.13 PC MinutesMINUTES HUGO PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 13, 2006 Call to Order Chairman Schumann called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Bailly, Hoffbeck, Kleissler, McRoberts, Schumann, Weidt ABSENT: Rosenquist ALSO PRESENT: Bryan Bear, Community Development Director (CDD) Rachel Simone, Community Development Intern (CD Intern) Kendra Lindahl, Planner Minutes of June 22, 2006 Weidt made motion, Hoffbeck seconded, to approve the Planning Commission minutes of June 22, 2006, as submitted. All Ayes. Motion carried. Grey Bernier Rezoning from R-3 to C-2 The Commission held a public hearing to consider the request by Greg and Elizabeth Bernier to rezone the eastern portion of their property from Single Family Detached (R-3) to General Business (C-2) located at 15409 Forest Boulevard North. The CD Intern explained the issue to the Planning Commission stating the surrounding properties to the north are zoned General Business (C-2) and the properties to the south are zoned General Industrial. The properties to the east and west of the said parcel are zoned Single Family Detached (R-3). There is an existing accessory building on the said parcel and is covered by a CUP which will limit the use to only storage of personal property and can not be used for commercial or industrial uses. In April of 1996 the City approved the subdivision of a .63 acre parcel from a 70 acre parcel to the east owned by the Peloquin's. The .63 acre parcel was purchased by the Bernier's and combined with the existing parcel. At the time of the subdivision the properties were zoned Agricultural which allowed the Bernier's to construct the 3600 square foot accessory building. A 40' x 90' accessory building was constructed on that portion of the property. The accessory building was approved with a conditional use permit (CUP) stating that the structure can only be used for cold storage of personal property and can not be used in any way for commercial/industrial use. The CUP will continue on the property even if the property is rezoned to commercial. This limits the Bernier's from using this structure for a commercial or industrial use. A City wide rezoning was adopted in June of 1999. At this time, the parcels adjoining Highway 61 in this area to the east were rezoned to General Business. The district was established along the property lines prior to the combination of the .63 acre parcel with the Bernier's property even though the Bernier's did combine their parcels. This resulted in Bernier's original parcel to be zoned General Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 Page 2 Business and the .63 acre parcel to be zoned Urban Residential. In 2002, the property to the east of the Bernier's property and a small portion to the south was platted as Oneka Ponds. In March of 2004 another property line adjustment was approved to combine the small portion of the Oneka Ponds development to the south to the Bernier's parcel. No rezoning was done at that time. In April of 2002 another City wide rezoning was done and changed the properties to the east from Urban Residential to Single Family Detached (R-3). This was done using the same zoning district lines that were used in 1999. This resulted in the east portion of the Bernier's property to remain Residential. The CD Intern also stated that Staff reviewed the rezoning to the four criteria in the zoning ordinance and the rezoning meets all of the criteria. Schumann opened the public hearing. Greg Bernier was present at the meeting and stated that he thought that a wrong map was used in the City wide rezoning and that is why the portion of his property is zoned Residential. He also stated that he found out about the zoning at a meeting with his surrounding property owners and that Staff has worked closely with his to get this corrected. Craig Wahlstrand, 5957 Goodview Trial Alcove North, asked if the Bermer's would be able to use this property for Commercial uses if it gets rezoned. The CDD stated that the property is currently covered by a conditional use permit that limits that Bernier's from using the property for commercial/industrial uses. But if he decides to use it for a commercial/industrial use he would have to go though the process of a CUP Amendment, which would result in having another public hearing that Mr. Wahlstrand would be notified for. There were no more comments and Schumann closed the public hearing. Schumann stated there were valid reasons for the rezoning and generally felt ok with it. Overall the Planning Commission found the rezoning acceptable. Weidt made a motion, Bailly seconded, to approve the rezoning of the eastern portion of the Bernier's property from Single Family Residential (R-3) to General Business (C-2). McRoberts moved to amend the motion, stating that since the zoning may have been the City's error that the Bernier's should get a break on the rezoning costs. The CDD stated that the City has been working with the Bernier's on the costs and they are only being charged for the cost of the Staff review of the application. Schumann asked Mr. Bernier if he was satisfied with the cost. Mr. Bernier stated that he was satisfied with the cost. McRoberts withdrew his motion to amend. Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 Page 3 All ayes. Motion carried. Sunset Shores Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit The Commission held a public hearing to consider the application of Benchmark Companies, 4200 Central Avenue North East, Columbia Heights, for rural preservation program (RPP) preliminary plat and conditional use permit (CUP) for Sunset Shores. The plat would consist of 42 single family homes on 142.74 acres located north of 120th Street, south of 125th Street and west of Sunset Lake. The property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) and is located outside of the MUSA. The Planner presented the preliminary plat and CUP to the Commission. The base density for a RPP development, if all of the minimum land area and open space requirements are met, is 2 single family lots per 10 acres for a total of 28 lots on the site. Additional density bonuses, to allow up to 3 lots per 10 acres for a total of 42 lots on the site, could be permitted based on the standards identified in the RPP ordinance. The proposed density of the development is 3 lots per 10 acres for a total of 42 lots. The applicant is requesting the maximum amount of density bonuses. The proposed building pads comply with all building setback requirements. The proposed plans are preserving 85 acres of open space, which is approximately 60% of the gross land area. Outlots C, D, E and F will be owned and maintained by the homeowners' association. The applicant is proposing to dedicate Outlots A and B to the City of Hugo as parkland. The Outlots will be separated from each other by the new public streets or the single family lots, except for Outlots A and C, which will be separated by a stormwater management pond. The HOA will be responsible for maintaining the private stormwater ponds in Outlot B. This has been included as a condition of approval. The applicant has provided a draft open space management and restoration plan prepared by NAWE, which City staff has reviewed and finds it to be generally consistent with RPP standards. The applicant submitted a draft conservation easement in favor of the City for Outlots C through F. However, the letter from the applicant dated June 29th indicates that the applicant is now pursuing the option of dedicating a conservation easement in favor of the Minnesota Land Trust or a similar land trust organization. The applicant will also be required to provide a conservation easement either in favor of the City or a land trust entity or both for all of the open space. The rear yards of 28 of the lots abut the central park and surrounding wetland area (Outlot B), which is also encouraged by the RPP lot design standards. The rear yards of the other 14 lots abut a smaller open space corridor (Outlot D). However, Lots 1-3, Block 4 are located in close proximity to 125th Street and Lot 6, Block 8 is located in close proximity to 120th Street. The existing single family home on the site will be incorporated into the development as Lot 2, Block 1. The home has a driveway access on 125th Street that is oriented towards the road. The current property owner will retain ownership of this lot and the adjacent lot (Lot 1, Block 1). Both lots are approximately 3 -acres in size, which is larger than the average lot sizes within the development. The proposed building pad for Lot 1, Block 1 should be shown on the plans and the driveway access should be provided from the new public street. This has been included as a condition of approval. Municipal sewer and water are not currently available to the site and are not planned to be provided in Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 Page 4 the near future. The applicant is proposing to construct an on-site community well and community wastewater treatment system. North American Wetlands Engineering (NAWE) has been retained by the developer to design the community well and wastewater system. The system will be maintained by licensed professionals. The septic beds, tanks and the control building will be located in Outlot E. The backup septic bed area, located next to primary bed septic area, does not appear large enough to replace the primary system in the event of a failure. The community wastewater treatment system plans need to be revised to provide adequate room for the backup septic bed areas. The applicant has prepared preliminary Home Owners Association (HOA) documents, which staff has reviewed. The HOA covenants state that the HOA will be responsible for the maintenance of Outlots C through F, the community well and wastewater system, all of the stormwater ponds and rain gardens and the open space amenities. The Parks Commission reviewed this application at their meeting on July, 12, 2006 and recommended approval of the plan. The Planner reviewed the requirements for bonus densities. The Commission would need to determine if the project was consistent with the purpose and intent of the Rural Preservation Program. Schumann asked about the vacation of 125th. The Planner stated it is not part of the proposal. Tim White from Benchmark Companies was present at the meeting and gave a small presentation stating that the developers do not want to see the open space ever become developed. That is why they are involving the City, the HOA, and the Minnesota Land Trust. There will be four sided architecture, front porches required and the ablility to do side load garages. He also stated that the trails and clean up of public areas will be the responsibility of the HOA. There will also be community well and septic. He thanked city staff for their help. Schumann asked whether the HOA would be joining the Sunset Lake HOA. White stated that they have not talked about it at any meeting. Hoffbeck asked if the public open space is maintained by the HOA and what happens if this does not happen because will they want to clean up something the public can abuse. White stated that the open space would be maintained by the HOA. Schumann asked about how the architectural theme was established and if all are just suggestions. White stated they do have guidelines, but some are broad to not limit creativity. The Planner recommended that they should strengthen the architectural theme language and the Commission would have to decide if they meet the requirements for the bonus. Hoffbeck asked how the back yards would be distinguished from the open space. White suggested plantings or fences, but is open for suggestion. The Planner stated that Staff has seen many of developments that use nice fencing to keep the back of the Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 Page 5 lots from the open space and sometimes plantings are used too. Hoffbeck asked if it was a four season park and if snowmobiling would be allowed on the trials. White stated no snowmobiling on trails will be allowed. Hoffbeck asked who is responsible for the wells. Shane Sparks from North American Wetlands Engineering gave a presentation on how his company will maintain the well and septic. He talked about how many gallons of water the wells would pump. The neighboring wells would also be monitored by the state when the pumps are installed. Schumann stated that he is comfortable with the well and septic. Schumann opened the Public hearing. Dave Wlaschin, 4678 144th Court SE, Belleview, Washington, a family member that owns and takes care of the property talked to the Commission about their family's decision to choose Benchmark Companies as the developer of the property. A family member will still be living on the property and if the HOA does not do its job of maintenance of the open space the family will enforce the covenants. He also stated that their family has been welcoming to all the neighbors that have moved to the area around their property. Sherre Collins, 12115 Illies Avenue north, asked why the City is still moving forward with the cluster even though there are questions to the ordinance and concerns of the neighbors about the development. Mrs. Collins wanted to know about the impacts to her property taxes, water, roads, pollution, and parks. She also felt that the City did not take any input from the residents at any of the meetings. Dorthy Furlong, 12521 Homestead Drive, stated she does not mind cluster housing but does not know if this development fits. Mrs. Furlong asked if the wells will be monitored after the 42 houses are built, as she does not want to have to dig a new well. Dale Good, 12581 Homestead Drive, stated that he has contacted Pheasants Forever, Minnesota Land Trust, and the Nature Conservancy and they all stated that there should be a conservation easement on the entire open space in perpetuity. There should be no street lights in the development. Mr. Good asked if 125th would be vacated when the development is finished. He also asked about the maintenance of the parks. He stated that Sunset Lake is small and already has problems and there will be more as more people have easier access to the lake. Mr. Good also gave Staff a packet of information on the Minnesota Land Trust and the Nature Conservancy and a letter with his concerns with the project. Jim Laumer, 12623 Homestead Drive, stated that be was generally ok with the Rural Preservation Program but had questions about the development proposed. He stated that the developer had a limited list for the neighborhood meeting and did not invite all that were interested. He stated that 125th is a dangerous corner, and there is no parking by the lake. He asked who pays for the taxes for the outlots. He asked if the community septic is included in the open space calculations. Mr. Laumer stated that he is concerned with the lot that looks to be right on 125th. Mr. Laumer gave staff a packet with comments of what he was concerned about with the project. Schumann stated that the HOA will be responsible for the taxes and insurance. Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 Page 6 Dick Charest, 12683 Homestead Drive, stated that he thinks the development is being put in a place that does not have anything like it around. Rural Preservation Program is gray in terms of the bonus densities. Mr. Charest also stated that he thinks the development is too dense for the area. He does not feel this development meets the intent of the RPP. John Belisle, 12315 Heather Ave north, asked where the public would park if they wanted to use the public parks. Mr. Belisle also stated that he had questions about the architectural theme and how they were meeting that bonus density. Jim Laumer asked if the open space would be under a conservation easement and who would own the open space. He also asked if the septic area was used in the calculation of open space. The Planner stated the septic was used in the calculation of open space. She also addressed a lot of the comments made stating that the parks are public, the outlots will have easements, the city will work the HOA to develop guidelines for the maintenance of the open space. Shane Sparks from North American Wetlands Engineering talked about the pumping of the wells and the monitoring of the neighbor's wells. He talked about when they monitor and test the wells it is done at a level way above what the development would actually pump. Mr. Sparks also talked about the drain fields in the development. If the developments wells end up showing a drain in the neighboring wells they would be required to lower the wells. Sherre Collins asked if the City has done any traffic studies on County Road 7. The CDD stated that the county may ask for more Right of Way dedication. There were no more comments and Schumann closed the public hearing. Hoffbeck stated that she was contacted by the CDD about her having a conflict of interest with the development because she lives close to the development. Hoffbeck gave Staff a letter she wrote about being contacted about having a conflict of interest. She feels the development has gone too fast, and the development does not have rural character. She recommended not approving the development in regards to density. She is concerned with the property values in the area if the development went forward and contacted the County Assessor and they stated that her property value would go up. She wants the average person to be able to live in the area. Density bonuses should not be given from the architectural theme or the landscape theme. She does not like the idea of the parks in people's backyards, and that the Commission does not have to give these bonuses. Bailly stated the development was a little denser than she expected. Park paths should be connected to the lake and traffic should be slowed on 125th. She is not in favor of street lighting. She wondered about fence requirements and what kind of fences would be used. She also stated that the architectural theme needs to be strengthened. She also suggested more landscaping for homes in view. Weidt stated that the ordinance is on the books and so that is what we are using today. The architectural theme is very vague and needs be strengthened. The "should's" in the architectural theme need to be "shall's" and required instead of encouraged, then he could support this. Kleissler stated that the density bonuses are difficult to grant. She agreed with Hoffbeck. This is not rural Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 Page 7 preservation; it does not preserve rural character. She was concerned about the maintenance of the open space and the conservation of the open space. The lots on 125th are too close to the road. The architectural themes need to be stronger. She was also concerned with the existing large lots on the north portion of the site. McRoberts stated that he does not think they meet the density bonuses. He also stated that the densities do not meet the intent of the ordinance. The architectural theme is not there and they are not preserving enough open space. Schumann stated that there are some subjective and objective portions of the ordinance and that we should deal with the objective. Hoffbeck talked about how they do not meet the density bonus percentages. The CDD stated that this is what we expected to see, but the criteria needs to be reviewed for the ordinance and the development must meet the intent. Hoffbeck stated that Staff has not taken citizens opinion and what the staff expected to see is different from what the residents expected to see. Schumann stated that we do have an ordinance in the book with a development proposal that needs to be addressed. A separate meeting will be scheduled to discuss changes to the ordinance. McRoberts stated that if there were fewer lots and they reconfigured them to have more open space he would have a hard time not approving it, but he will not approve 42. Weidt talked about the density bonuses. He thinks that they should get ten percent for the endowment, ten percent for the access to parks and public areas, and ten percent for the landscape theme. No bonuses for the architectural theme because they need to strengthen the language. Bailly agreed. McRoberts stated that they should lose the six lots and put parking in for the park. Schumann stated if they strengthen the language in the architectural theme they would get three lots back. Kleisser wanted to see more creativity in the development. Weidt made a motion, Bailly seconded to approve the development with 39 lots and include parking for parks. Ayes: Bailly, Schumann, Weidt Nay: Hoffbeck, Kleissler, McRoberts Motion failed. Kleissler made a motion, Hoffbeck seconded to deny the development as is. Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 Page 8 Ayes: Hoffbeck, Kleissler, McRoberts Nay: Bailly, Schumann, Weidt Motion failed. Project goes to City Council with no recommendation. Amendment to Hugo City Code to Allow Meat Processing by a CUP in the C-2 District The CD Intern gave a presentation on the proposed concept plan from Kian Jalali and Spencer Grundhoffer for a meat market and meat processing business located at 15449 Forest Boulevard. They plan to keep the existing building located directly in front of Just Two Bikes and plan to renovate the inside for the meat market and processing facility. The property is currently zoned General Business (C- 2) and a meat market is a permitted use in the ordinance, but the meat processing portion is not allowed. At the June 19, 2006 City Council meeting the Council reviewed this issue and directed staff to draft an amendment to the ordinance to allow meat processing as an accessory use to a meat market with a Conditional Use Permit. Staffs recommend approval of the text amendment and asked the planning commission to review the performance standards and include anything else they thought should be in place. Mr. Jalali and Mr. Grundhoffer were present and talked through the meat processing portion of the meat market. McRoberts stated the wording in the performance standards should be changed to "The processing portion of the meat market can only be 50% of the total floor area of the meat market". Schumann opened the public hearing. Greg Bernier, 15409 Forest Blvd, stated that a meat market and meat processing facility go together and feels comfortable with it. The CDD stated that it would be normal in a meat market to have meat processing, but this is unique because it is non -inspected USDA meats. Grundhoffer talked about the non -inspected USDA meats and how it will be taken care of. Hoffbeck asked it the USDA inspected meats would be kept separate from the non -inspected USDA meat. Grundhoffer said they would be separate. There were no more comments and Schumann closed the public hearing. Schumann stated that he was OK with the performance standards provisions with the change. McRoberts stated that Staff should also change the text amendment to state that slaughtering is not allowed. McRoberts made a motion, Hoffbeck seconded to recommend approval of the ordinance text amendment Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 Page 9 with the suggested changes of having the meat processing portion of the meat market to be only 50% of the total floor area of the meat market and that no slaughtering will be allowed. All ayes. Motion carried. Amendment to Hugo City Code to Allow the Expansion of Non -conforming Commercial/Industrial Uses. The CD Intern gave a presentation about Rick Burr sending the City a letter stating that he would like to expand his existing business, Gusset Design Inc., located at 15587 Forest Blvd. The property is zoned Commercial but the building use is Industrial. The structure was built before the zoning changed to a Commercial District so it is allowed to remain. According to the City Municipal Code, it states that the business is not allowed to expand because the use is nonconforming to the current zoning. This issue was brought to the EDA and the City Council and both suggested having a meeting with the surrounding property owners to determine what their thoughts were on rezoning the properties back to industrial. Almost all property owners stated that they wanted to keep the current commercial zoning. Staff brought this subject back to the Council on its June 5, 2006 meeting reporting on what the outcome was of the meeting with the surrounding property owners. The Council directed staff to draft an ordinance text amendment to allow the expansion of legal non -conforming commercial/industrial uses for consideration by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. Staff has drafted an ordinance text amendment to allow the expansion of a legal nonconforming commercial/industrial use with a Conditional Use Permit and with specific finding by the City Council that the proposed expansion will reduce the impacts of the legal non -conforming commercial/industrial use on the surrounding properties in terms of activity, noise, traffic, light, appearance, outside storage of vehicles, equipment, or materials, or other issues pertinent to the specific property and use involved. Staff did some research on other communities that allow this. Staff feels that allowing the expansion of legal non -conforming commercial/industrial uses will help reduce the impact of the uses in the City on the surrounding properties. Mc Roberts asked for clarification on commercial/industrial uses. The CD Intern stated that they can expand either commercial or industrial uses. Schumann asked if they would be held to commercial standards since it is zoned commercial or to industrial because the use is industrial. The CDD stated that they would be held to commercial standards. Schumann stated that he does not want to apply any more strain on these property owners by not allowing them to expand and that the City zoned it to make it a legal non -conforming use. He talked again about how Staff would enforce the commercial building standards. The CDD said we can discuss this issue when plans come in for approval and staff would work with the applicant. Schumann opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes — July 13, 2006 Page 10 Rick Burr, 15587 Forest Blvd, talked about his issues with not being able to expand and that he wants to stay in Hugo. Schumann asked if he had any plans for the expansion. Burr explained that he has not done much with his plans because he was not able to expand. There were no more comments and Schumann closed the public hearing. McRoberts made a motion, seconded by Hoffbeck to approve the text amendment to allow the expansion of legal non -conforming commercial/industrial uses. All ayes. Motion carried. Miscellaneous WORKSHOP The CDD reminded the Commission of the workshop scheduled for Thursday, July 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. to discuss code enforcement. Adiournment McRoberts made motion, seconded by Bailly, to adjourn at 10:15 p.m. All Ayes. Motion carried. Rachel Simone, CD Intern