Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout05-11-1999PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — MAY 11, 1999 PRESENT: LENNY LEUER, FRANK MIGNONE, CAROLYN SMITH AND JERRY BROST. ALSO PRESENT, PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR LOREN KOHNEN, CITY CLERK PAUL ROBINSON AND PLANNING AND ZONING ASSISTANT SANDIE LARSON. ARRIVING FOR 7:30 START: ELIZABETH WEIR, KATHY COOK AND BRUCE WORKMAN. ABSENT: SUSIE MACKAY 6:00 P.M. — COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCUSSION Paul Robinson outlined what he had prepared for tonight. Lenny Leuer made the comment that maps should be dated in the title. Paul said that he included a draft date on each map but would also reference each reference each map with a date when finalized. Section 1: The first sentence in the first paragraph should be made shorter or into two sentences. Second paragraph — 2nd sentence This plan should reference Medina's plan. Planning Period — 2nd sentence — delete and revise next sentence. — Page 2 — line 22 — reword using $11 million figure but delete — "this facility cost - - 2 - change # of employees to 275. Map #1-1 and #1-2 were discussed — liked having them on one page but would also like to see parks and public and semi-public shown on map. Section 2: Page 1 — line 15-16 — Delete sentence starting "Thirty seven residents - 2 . Change last sentence to read: "Residents voted unanimously to change the name to Medina". Page 6 — line 9 — change "well to do" to possibly prosperous. Numbers in all the tables in this section to be checked — Page 10 — line 7 — Map # 4-6 — will also reference a page number for the map, since it will be in a different section — page 11 — after B — the next areas to indented as numbers 1 —2 — 3 — 4 and under 4 indented as a-b-c- Section 3: Page 14 — line 18-19 — include that the sewer line in there — page 15 — lines 25-26 — delete 2nd sentence starting with "vacant land - 2 —page 18 — line 13 — change increasing to decreasing — line 24 — change resubdivision to division page 20 — add a few more standards under Residential PUD — line 20 — delete 1st significant — line 33 — change three to two — page 21 — line 26 — end of line, change and to in page 22 — line 38 — start "commercial activities" with B4.P4 — page 23 — line 5 — delete "the quality of the" — page 27 — lines 15-18 should be after Table 3-8 The next meeting will be Tuesday, May 25th at 6 p.m. for continued comprehensive plan discussion. The public hearing for the comprehensive plan will be Tuesday, June 22nd with an open house from 5 —8 p.m. and the public hearing from 8 — 10 p.m. 1 Action Items Chairperson Lenny Leuer called this portion of the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. The first item on the agenda is moved to the end of the agenda per applicants request. 1. THOMAS TURNHAM — 1512 DEERHILL ROAD — VARIANCE REQUEST FOR SOIL REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVIDING — PUBLIC HEARING Loren Kohnen read his memo to the planning commission and put up an overhead of the site — he pointed out where the different soils were, etc. Kathy Cook asked to explain the 2 acre soils and trench systems. L. Kohnen explained and also said that mound systems need more space, but could divide down to 2 acres with trench systems — if a trench system could not be put in, then 5 acres of good soils — a trench system is trenched into the ground, while a mound system is built up above ground, usually with the area dimensions about 75' long and 40-50' deep — the ground where a mound system is cannot be compacted soil, never driven on, etc. — a mound system takes up more room because of all the materials, washed sand, etc. that are brought on site for the system. Elizabeth Weir wanted mottled soils explained. L. Kohnen explained that the PCA says mottled soils are the point where the water table exists and the soils turn to a rust color — he said that the best soils we have are in the SE area of the city. Thomas Turnham, 1512 DeerHill Road, pointed out on the overhead where he was proposing to divide the property. He said that there are mutual easements with the Skreens for driveways over each others land. He pointed out where his home was located and said that the southern portion had 5.7 acres of good soils and would qualify for a lot. Tract B, the northern section where the house is would have 2.67 acres of good soils — the house was built in 1960, have raised 5 sons and the septic system still works well. He said that he had perc tests done and there is a place for a mound system should his present system fail. He said he could not get 5 acres of contiguous good soils on the northern piece and it could not be a trench system today on that piece — he said that in 39 years the trench system has not been a problem. He said that if the property is split as he proposes, the northern lot would be substandard without a variance — he said his hardship is that the only reason he is subdividing is so that his son and his wife can build a house on Tract A — would be wonderful to have them close — he said he is getting older and his son has a good back and his is getting weaker — it would be a hardship if this does not work — he also said there are not enough contiguous soils and cannot connect with the other 20 acres he owns to get a legal lot. He also said that in 1986 the City upgraded Tamarack and the engineers came out and said they had 2 buildable lots, so were assessed for two lots for the road improvement — he said we upheld our part of the bargain (paid the assessments) and now the City is 2 saying only one lot — he said they feel they are being wronged — he said he knows they do not meet the current ordinance for subdividing but they were assessed for 2 buildable lots. Phil Zietlow, 875 County Road 24, said that he works with the boy scouts and one of the things that he teaches them is citizenship and community. He said we need government for rules and Medina wants large lots and to protect the environment. In this case we are talking 2 large lots- the current septic system has worked for 39 years — we want to protect the environment and this lot seems to be doing that — He said he has called the University and researched mottled soils — in one persons opinion there, mottled soils can be present if there is a substantial amount of clay soil that has been combined with rain and not necessarily a high water table. He said that in this case he thinks it meets: 1) large lots and 2) protects the environment. Jack Schuett, 1205 Tamarack Drive, said they have been here 27 years and their trench system did not work and they needed a mound system. He said the Turnhams' have been here 39 years on 16 acres and they deserve to be able to subdivide. Frank Schneider, 1675 Dusty Drive, said that he has land east of the Turnham and he has been an exemplary citizen for 39 years — he deserves to divide his land. (clapping by audience) J. Schuett asked what the hardship would be for other people if this was done. L. Kohnen said that we have never granted a variance like this one. J. Schuett said that the city assessed him for two lots. L. Kohnen said he cannot correct that and said he did not make the ordinance. J. Schuett said he cannot believe that the planning commission would waste their time on this. Lenny Leuer said we are peers, we live in the city also and the ordinances are the rules of the city - we are here to recommend whether to change those rules. Jack Wahlfors, 1525 DeerHill Road, said we have to look at that he (Turnham) has been here 39 years, he is not a developer, wants to sell the land to his son and wouldn't do it if it was not going to work — the new lot is buildable. Brian Pashina, 1352 DeerHill Road, said that he wanted to know the facts before he had an opinion on this — He said he (Turnham) has a legitimate request for a variance — He said he loves the city and living here and has been here 20 years — if I did not feel this was in the best interest of the city I would say so — but feel this is o.k. Bruce Workman asked for clarification of the 2 and 5 acres and mound systems. 3 L. Kohnen said that a mound system is on 5 acre soils. B. Workman said if his current system failed where would he put a new system, on Tract A or on the parcel where the house is. L. Kohnen said where the house is if there was room for it. B. Workman said we are going by the rules and not what his land could to and Loren said yes. Frank Mignone said what about being assessed for two lots. There was discussion of why the city would do that and the consequences. Jerry Brost asked if Tract B would quality for a lot today and Loren said no. Tom Turnham said if his trench system fails he can put in a mound system, but a new home could not do that. L. Kohnen said a new home would not be prevented from doing it, what would be prevented is dividing a lot because of the soils. E. Weir said it would seem if they were assessed for two lots and the city had a part in it, this would be a hardship. Kathy Cook said there is no gain for the city — she is inclined to support the variance request. MOVED BY KATHY COOK AND SECONDED BY CAROLYN SMITH TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY THOMAS TURNHAM. Motion withdrawn for further discussion. L. Leuer said that he had a letter dating back to April 1997 from the city attorney talking about conventional and innovative systems. He said the key sentence is that according to state law since conventional and innovative systems are now both considered standard systems, we need to improve our ordinance to eliminate the difference between conventional and innovative. It also says that a lot of record before July 1, 1999 needs 2 acres of good soils to support a trench type system. L. Kohnen said there is a difference between our subdivision and septic ordinances. C. Smith said it seems like we have conflicting ordinances. 4 L. Leuer asked Phil about the difference in the ordinances and Phil said yes, it is black and gray. E. Weir said if we need a variance, we have to consider the impact on others coming in to divide their property. L. Kohnen said that we have to answer the variance criteria as stated in the ordinance. L. Leuer said that in his experience he has been happy finding one of the criteria that apply. There was discussion of the variance criteria and how the Turnham request fitted in with each one as stated in ordinance 825.45 MOVED BY KATHY COOK AND SECONDED BY CAROLYN SMITH TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE VARIANCE TO SOILS REQUIRED FOR SUBDIVISION FOR THOMAS TURNHAM. HARDSHIPS BEING: 1. City charged homeowner for 2 buildable lots for Tamarack Drive road improvement 2. Consistent with other land use discussions we have had 3. There is functional septic system on Tract B and if it were to fail, soils on Tract A would not be used for a new system. L. Leuer said the request met F in the variance criteria. E. Weir said she felt C also applied — was not applicants responsibility that laws changed and also the 2 road assessments Loren did not feel that the assessments were revelant here. C. Smith said D also was a no brainer — if similar proposal came in would say yes to that also. F. Mignone asked if we have denied anyone similar. L. Kohnen said yes, but others have stopped when told their proposal does not meet the criteria for subdividing and it does not get to the planning commission. B. Workman said that he wants to accommodate Turnham, but is fearful of setting a precedent, said he wants to do it, but does not want to create a liability for past requests. MOTION PASSED. 2. GARY KIRT — 1595 HAMEL ROAD — 3 LOT SUBDIVISION — PUBLIC HEARING 5 Loren Kohnen read his memo to the planning commission and put up an overhead of the proposal. He stated that although we had not received a letter from the city engineer, he had called and his recommendation is to have a 10' trail easement graded over the 30' road easement that is in place on the west boundary line of the lots. He pointed out the area on the overhead. Todd Rapp, attorney for Gary Kirt, started by saying he is pleased there are no soil issues here — he then said that he had gone over the staff memo with Mr. Kirt and there are no problems with the conditions mentioned, but was concerned with the 10' trail easement, but now know that it is consistent with the city's trail plans. He said that the current animal structure was more than the 150' from property lines. The current 30' easement was discussed. Lenny Leuer asked Sheldon Coplin (former owner of the property) about the outbuildings and if he still had horses in the stable. Sheldon said that the horses were now gone and Lenny asked if the new owners would have horses. T. Rapp said that the applicant will not live here, but the someone may in the future. L. Leuer said we should recognize that the stable meets the 150' setback, but that the sheds cannot be used for animals. He also wanted to know the necessity for the proposed road marked on the survey. L. Kohnen said that the applicant wanted it for possible use for access for Lots 2 & 3 from Blackfoot Trail. It was discussed that staff had talked about Blackfoot Trail and the agreement for the amount of accesses — a new agreement was being written up. Kathy Cook asked why the park dedication fee for one lot. Sandie Larson explained that park fees are paid on lots of less than 10 acres and because there is only one new lot of less than 10 acres, that one would be assessed a park fee. The other lot that is less than 10 acres in size, is where the current home is and would not be charged a park fee. MOVED BY FRANK MIGNONE AND SECONDED BY BRUCE WORKMAN TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF BELL KNOLL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Park dedication fee be paid on Lot 3. 2. All easements on property lines be provided 3. Right of way for Hamel Road be provided 4. Shed on Lot 3 to be removed before final plat approval by city council 5. Any structures not meeting the 150' setback, if used for animals, to be removed. 6 6. Recognize that the stable does currently meet the 150' setback. 7. All conditions that the city engineer may have are to be complied with including that a 10' trail easement be graded over the 30' road easement that is currently in place. MOTION PASSED. 3. HARVEY ANDERSEN — 3121 LAKESHORE AVE. — SET -BACK VARIANCES FOR DECK — PUBLIC HEARING Loren Kohnen read his memo to the planning commission and put up an overhead of the site. He explained that this was a deck replacement with an addition of the stairway. Harvey Andersen said that the stairway was not an addition, but being moved to a different location. Elizabeth Weir asked if there was any other location for the stairway. H. Andersen said that they may eliminate it all together. Lenny Leuer said that some of the old deck is gone, but the footing are still there. He said his attitude is that replacement of the deck is reasonable as is, but the plans show the staircase closer to the lake than before and is also very close to the retaining wall which has a 4' drop. He was concerned that firemen could not get between the staircase and retaining wall with hose if needed so he has reservations about the location of the stairway. H. Andersen said the location is about 2' closer and there would be no less than 3' between the stairs and retaining wall. L. Leuer asked if the stairs could be moved by the hot tub. H. Andersen said that would be of an inconvenience than going thru the house. He said if the stairway was not approved they would eliminate it and just might anyway. L. Leuer said the stairs as shown on the plan are a problem. H. Andersen said that he had spoken with neighbors on either side of him and they have no problem with his plans. The public hearing was closed. MOVED BY CAROLYN SMITH AND SECONDED BY ELIZABETH WEIR TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A 3.6' SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE AND A 35' LAKE SETBACK VARIANCE FOR HARVEY ANDERSEN AT 3121 LAKESHORE AVE FOR DECK REPLACEMENT WITH THE FOLLOWING HARDSHIPS: 1. Lot size 7 2. Topography of lot 3. Existing deck that need renovating for safety reasons 4. Consistent with others in the neighborhood MOTION PASSED. 5. — MAUREEN CONNOLLY/2225 WILLOW DRIVE AND FINN HAUG/2275 WILLOW DRIVE — LOT LINE RE-ARRANGEMENT/RE-PLAT — PUBLIC HEARING Loren Kohnen read his memo to the planning commission and put up an overhead of the site. He explained that back in 1994, this proposal had received preliminary approval and this was the same request as back then. Maureen Connolly explained that she had a very irregular lot line and the piece they were talking about made more sense to go with the Haug parcel. She said that the Haug riding ring is right next to this parcel and if fact is over the present line a little so this logically makes sense to move the line. Lenny Leuer said that he could not find the stake for the lot line and asked about the low land and the creek. Finn Haug pointed out on the overhead where the creek was and said the stake was a little off of the line because of the creek. L. Leuer asked what the 30' easement was on the Connolly piece and Maureen said it was Crosby creek and Lenny asked what the other drainage area and she said that was the backwash for the creek. The public hearing was closed. MOVED BY BRUCE WORKMAN AND SECONDED BY ELIZABETH WEIR TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE RE -PLAT OF THE CONNOLLY AND HAUG LOTS WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Updated abstracts for both parcels be provided to city attorney for review 2. Drainage and utility easements be provided on new lot line 3. Existing drainage and utility easements on existing lot line be vacated at a public hearing by the city council. MOTION PASSED. 4. THOMAS AND CLAUDIA KELLY/3131 TAMARACK DRIVE AND DOUG AND ALICIA MALIKOWSKI/1152 NAVAJO ROAD — LOT LINE RE -ARRANGEMENT AND RE -PLAT — PUBLIC HEARING Loren Kohnen read his memo to the planning commission and put up the overhead of the area. 8 Alicia Malikowski said that the little piece by the road looks like it should be ours and visa versa. Claudia Kelly said this is a good neighbor thing to do. She said they have been maintaining each others piece and it makes common sense to re arrange the lot line. She asked if it mattered that their lot would be under 10 acres and the good soils would be under 3. Loren said that it would not matter. Thomas Kelly explained the new proposed lot line. Lenny Leuer questioned condition #1 in Loren's memo and how they would do that. L. Kohnen said someone that does perc tests would have to do this. Carolyn Smith said she is having trouble understanding #1 and our ordinance. A. Malikowski said that Steve Schirmers has been out and tested both sites and has said that either kind of system would work. Copies will be provided to the city. L. Leuer asked about the Malikowski barn and would not want to approve this re- arrangement and then have a variance request come in for a barn addition. L. Kohnen said there is 25' to spare. A. Malikowski said that an addition would be towards Navajo so would be fine with the 150' setback. MOVED BY ELIZABETH WEIR AND SECONDED BY JERRY BROST TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE RE -PLAT OF THE KELLY AND MALIKOWSKI LOTS WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Recognize that the re -arrangement will not compromise the 150' setback for the current barn. 2. Applicants must provide documentation to the city that a trench type septic system can be installed on both sites. 3. Updated abstracts be provided for the city attorney to review. 4. Any existing drainage and utility easements on current lot line that is being changed to be vacated at a public hearing by the city council. 5. New drainage and utility easements be provided on both sides of new lot line. 6. Any conditions city engineer may have. MOTION PASSED. 9 7. MINUTES OF APRIL 13, 1999 MOVED BY CAROLYN SMITH AND SECONDED BY ELIZABETH WEIR TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED. Carolyn Smith talked of a conference she had attended on land development and offered to share the booklet she brought back. The next comprehensive plan meeting to be on Tuesday, May 25th at 6 p.m. MOVED BY BRUCE WORKMAN AND SECONDED BY ELIZABETH WEIR TO ADJOURN. MOTION PASSED. Meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Planning and Zoning Assistant Date 10