Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006.09.28 PC MinutesMINUTES HUGO PLANNING COMMISSION September 28, 2006 Call to Order Chairman Schumann called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Bailly, Hoffbeck, Kleissler, McRoberts, Rosenquist, Schumann ABSENT: Weidt ALSO PRESENT: Bryan Bear, Community Development Director (CDD) Michele Lindau, Planning Commission Secretary Minutes of September 21, 2006 Kleissler made motion, Rosenquist seconded, to approve the Planning Commission minutes of September 21, 2006 as amended. All Ayes. Motion carried. Rural Preservation Program Ordinance Amendment (Continued) The Commission continued discussion on revisions to the Rural Preservation Program (RPP) Ordinance. At its September 14, 2006 meeting, the Commission held a public hearing to consider revisions to the ordinance. The Commission tabled the discussion until their September 21, 2006 meeting where, after much discussion, the Commission again tabled the item. The CDD reviewed the PowerPoint he presented at the first meeting. McRoberts recalled at the previous meeting, the Commission had generally agreed it was not a Rural Preservation ordinance because it was not preserving rural. He said the starting point for development should be one home per ten acres, and there needed to be something more permanent to protect from future rezoning. The Commission discussed the ordinance name and agreed it does not accurately specify what was being preserved. McRoberts said that it would be open space preservation if there were easements to keep it that way. Without the easements, it was cluster housing. Schumann asked if the land was in a land trust, could future Council change that. The CDD explained that if the Council wanted to, they could possibly find a way. There needed to be motivation to not do it. Planning Commission Minutes — September 28, 2006 Page 2 Hoffbeck said there needed to be at least three layers to keep easements into perpetuity but the controls have not been tested and there was no background on it. Rosenquist asked about getting the County to sign on it. The CDD said they could donate it to the County but the County would need motivation to enforce it. McRoberts said there needed to be three layers, one of which was outside the City such as a land trust or the County. Bailly was concerned they would lose the chance to obtain parkland. Rosenquist said the choice of parkland or easement would be made at the time it was developed. Bailly asked what would happen if a developer could not find anyone to take the easement. Hoffbeck commented that they would have not tried hard enough. The CDD explained that the land trust goals were different and they may not accept the land if the development is not done as they wanted. He agreed that three layers would add a level of difficulty to change an easement. He said it could be put in the HOA documents that a conservation easement could not be sold for profit. McRoberts was more concerned about the property being rezoned. Hoffbeck pointed out there were many land trusts available, national and state. Bailly was concerned about the land trust dictating where the home would be located. Hoffbeck said if they wanted the bonus houses, they would find a land trust that would work for them. Bailly said the easements needed to have a third party owner or a way to prevent them from being sold. McRoberts said they would need to give something to get over four homes per forty acres. The CDD pointed out there would be no incentive to use the ordinance if they did not receive eight units in exchange for 50% open space. McRoberts commented there would be large amounts of open space with only four homes on 40 acres; more than 50 % would be open. Schumann questioned whether they were doing short term or long term planning. Someone could purchase all ten homes in the future and put in higher density. McRoberts said it could not happen unless it was rezoned. Schumann commented that a future Council could rezone it. Hoffbeck said she could not conceive someone purchasing what would be large estates. She commented Planning Commission Minutes — September 28, 2006 Page 3 that land owners and developers are pushing the idea of development under the ordinance because it makes more money, but it does not do the rural community any good. Rural would be taken away because rural activities such as horseback riding could not take place on small lots. Schumann said everyone has the right to want the rural quality and lifestyle but you can't put your wants into perpetuity. Neighbors have the right to want something different. McRoberts made motion, Hoffbeck seconded, to rename the ordinance to "Open Space Preservation Program" and require a third party holder on conservation easements. Ayes: Hoffbeck, Kleissler, McRoberts, Rosenquist Nay: Schumann, Bailly Motion passed. The Commission discussed Subd. 1 Purpose. Hoffbeck made motion, Bailly seconded, to change the statement to specify that significant natural features needed to be deemed so by the City and DNR, and to add the word "potentially" to specify it may "potentially" reduce the cost of constructing and maintaining public facilities. All Ayes. Motion carried. The Commission discussed Subd. 2 Intent. McRoberts made motion, Hoffbeck seconded, to scratch items A, B, C, and E. All Ayes. Motion carried. Kleissler made motion, Hoffbeck seconded, to scratch item H. All Ayes. Motion carried. McRoberts made motion, Kleissler seconded, to amend item J to change "rural preservation" to "open space", item L to remove "low density residential uses", and item N to change "encourage" to "permit" the consolidation of small parcels... All Ayes. Motion carried. The Commission discussed Subd. 3. Procedure. McRoberts made motion, Hoffbeck seconded, to amend item 1 to say that all applicants "must" meet with the potential conservation easements holders..., item 2f to change the requirement for items shown on the plat to be within 1000 feet, not 500 feet of the tract, item 3a to be on a scale of one inch equals 1000 feet instead of 500 feet, and item b to change "rural preservation" to "open space". Ayes: Bailly, Hoffbeck, Kleissler, McRoberts, Rosenquist Nay: Schumann Motion carried. Planning Commission Minutes — September 28, 2006 Page 4 The Commission agreed there may be changes to I regarding septic systems and it would be discussed at a later time. The Commission discussed Subd. 4 Density and agreed to put that section last in the ordinance; Development Standards needed to be listed first. The Commission moved on to Subd 5 Development Standards. Rosenquist made motion, McRoberts seconded, to amend A to change "Rural" to "Open Space", remove "where possible" from Al, rephrase item A2, remove the first line in item A3 which required an architectural theme, add an item to require that monument signs blend in with the neighborhood, remove "and shall incorporate materials appropriate for the development" from item A4, remove item A7, and change Item A8 to read "maintenance" instead of "creation". All Ayes. Motion carried. The Commission took a short break. After break the Commission continued discussion of Subd 5 Development Standards. Schumann suggested all references to Rural Preservation be changed to Open Space and the Commission agreed. The Commission discussed revisions to 131 a and agreed to change the second bullet point to require at least 30 acres, and delete the last bullet point. The Commission talked about the existing and proposed parks not being included as buildable area and whether existing homes should be part of the Association to be part of the plat. Also discussed was what the minimum lot size should be. Hoffbeck made motion, McRoberts seconded, to require a minimum lot size of one acre. Ayes: Hoffbeck, Kleissler, McRoberts Nay: Bailly, Rosenquist, Schumann Motion failed. Dale Good, 12581 Homestead Avenue North, said the Council had asked for Sunset Shores to revise the plan by putting in smaller lots. Jim Latimer, 12623 Homestead Avenue North, questioned whether property owners were getting an advantage by subdividing property off the larger parcel and then including it in the entire plan. He felt these homes should be subtracted from the open space. The Commission decided to table discussion until their next meeting on October 12, 2006. McRoberts made motion, Kleissler seconded, to adjourn at 10:07 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes — September 28, 2006 Page 5 All Ayes. Motion carried. Michele Lindau, Secretary Planning Commission