Loading...
10-26-1995 PC MIN - SPECIAL . . . &ff~@WE~ SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT SALK JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL COMMONS AREA THURSDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1995 Members Present: Chair Kuester, Commissioners Dillon, Kreger, Minton, Tacheny, Sullivan and Thompson Members Absent: None Staff Present: Steven B. Ach, City Planner; Stephen Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, Terry Maurer, City Engineer; Peter Beck, City Attorney, Debbie Kleckner, Recording Secretary Pursuant to due call and notice thereof. the special meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission was called to order at 7 p.m. by Chair Kuester. 2> .. . G0l1sidefl0l26/9$HPlal1r"1inacdrrirriissioI1Agenoa COMMISSIONER THOMPSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 26, 1996 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. COMMISSIONER DILLON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. ................---.............."'....-.-.-..-............".....-.-.---_..,..........",....".........--........."............................ .3. ................U...ConsidefDran..ComorehensivePlar"l@pDblidHeanno...... Chair Kuester provided background information on the Comprehensive Plan process. The goals of the Comprehensive Plan are updated every 6 to 8 years. The City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan was last updated in 1988. The Plan is used by the Planning Commission, as well as the staff, as a significant tool in reviewing planning and development requests. Commissioner Minton explained how the steps involved in completing the update of the Comprehensive Plan by the Steering Committee (see attached Exhibit A). He explained how the members of the committee were chosen to represent the various committees, boards and groups throughout the City (see attached Exhibit B). Commissioner Minton expressed his thanks to the committee for their work, the citizens who regularly attended the Steering Committee meetings, and to staff. Chair Kuester explained that the specific transportation plan and the park plan would not be considered at this meeting. These two topics will receive individual attention at meetings to be held in December or January. Chair Kuester noted the Planning Commission has received the following correspondence related to this publiC hearing: 1) Letter from business and commercial property owners on east Highway 10, . . . Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 2 expressing their desire for the extension of municipal water and sewer. The following signatures were noted: Charlie Houle, Houle Oil Company, Inc.; Kusum Shah, Red Carpet Inn; Harry Bebo, NAP A of Elk River, Inc.; Larry Hickman, Furniture & Things; Les Lundquist. Riverview Sports & Marine; Nancy Chase, Sun & Swim Pools; Scott Powell, Elk River Ford/Chrysler. 2) Letter from Mark Malzahn, asking the Planning Commission to adopt the recommendations of the Steering Committee regarding the East-West corridor proposal. 3) Letter from residents on 213th Avenue, in support of maintaining the 10 acre minimum lot size in the A-1 zoning district. and also, their opposition to the clustering concept. 4) 5) Letter from Dave Anderson, Steering Committee member. Letter from Richard Foster regarding commercial development of the East side of the Highway 169 corridor. The Draft Comprehensive Plan was reviewed in sections as follows: IV. Utilities Commissioner Minton noted that the Steering Committee recommended sewer and water be extended into the southeast section along both sides of Highway 10 down to the Kelley Farm, or, 165th Street. Steve Ach explained that staff recommends expanding the urban service area to include a larger area to be developed in phases over several years. The northern boundary of staff's recommendation is 193rd Avenue, extends east to the eastern City limits, down to County Road 12, one-half mile west then south along the Fillmore alignment down to 165th, where the boundary extends west one-half mile then south to the Oliver Kelley Farm. Chair Kuester opened the public hearing. A resident questioned whether or not Yale Street was included in the area proposed for extension of the urban service district. Commissioner Minton indicated that Mississippi Heights was excluded based upon the request of 100 percent of the residents. He added that if the residents would like to hookup at some point in the future, they would be able to do so by petition and amending the Comprehensive Plan's urban service boundary, but that the costs would be significantly more. Mark Martin, 11063 205th Avenue NW, questioned why City staff included a recommendation that is different than the Steering Committee's recommendation. Steve Ach explained that staff's recommendation is a result of other options presented to the Steering Committee during their review of extension of the urban service area. Staff offers this option for the Planning Commission's consideration because of the inevitable development pressures the City will be Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 3 . faced with in the future, and also, that if the wastewater treatment facility is expanded, that this area meets those expectations. Mark Martin questioned if the additional area was being added to the Steering Committee's recommendation because John Plaisted has purchased a large amount of property in that vicinity. Commissioner Kreger stated that the property included in staff's recommendation was previously discussed by the Steering Committee. He added that a much larger area than staff's recommendation was discussed as well as including the entire eastern area. Commissioner Minton stated that the Steering discussed how to preserve land east of the downtown area, in case the larger landowners want to develop it in the future (Le., larger lot sizes). Commission Minton explained the difficulty in subdividing the 2-1/2 acre lots. He added that if the urban area of the city is eventually going to push eastward, it should be made known at this time. Commissioner Minton felt that the Steering Committee ended up recommending a smaller area for extending the urban service, as a reaction to the comments from the public at those discussions. He felt that staff is looking further into the future, and this was a wise choice. . Steve Ach explained the phasing concept that is being used in extending the urban service area to the west, and how phasing could be accomplished in the eastern area. He noted that designating the area for future extension of services lets people know what is planned and they should not be surprised later. Ron Ebner, 17015 Highway 10, questioned why the City was thinking of extending water and sewer down east Highway 10, since the three largest landowners did not want it; those being Cargill, Specht and the Kelley Farm. He stated that because a small handful of the business owners on Highway 10 wanted the utilities extended, they do not represent the 50 percent of landowners. He was told when the township was annexed that water and sewer would not be extended in an area unless at least 50 percent of the property owners petitioned for the services. Mr. Ebner stated he did not want sewer and water, since he had recently upgraded his septic system. He asked that cost figures be made available to them before discussing the issue. Mr. Ebner stated that the property owners that wanted it should pay for it. If an assessment were put on their property, they would be forced to sell their property. Commissioner Kreger explained that the City does not want to put in sewer and water where it is not wanted or needed. Rather, they are trying to define an area on the map where there may be a demand for water and sewer in the future, so that the treatment plant and the mains can be designed to meet the expected capacity. . Don Geisting, employee of Cargill, expressed his opposition to being included in the proposed urban service area. Mr. Geisting explained that approximately 700 acres of Cargill's land would be in the assessment area, at a cost of several million dollars. Cargill is an agricultural business employing 35 people, and they have been at their location for 37 years. He explained that Cargill has 5 wells on their property and numerous septic systems. Mr. Geisting felt Cargill would be . . . Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 4 forced out of business if they were assessed, and asked that they be excluded from the urban service area. Dennis Chuba, 10451 175th Avenue NW, asked that the Planning Commission make it clear that if the proposed area is included in the urban service district, development will be severely restricted. Commissioner Kreger stated that the current ordinance prohibits subdivision of land in the urban service area, but the Planning Commission is considering an ordinance amendment with language to allow some development to occur. Roland Benson, 17276 Highway 10, stated he operates a monument business out his home, located between NAPA and Saxon, and the Mississippi side of Mr. Powell's land. He expressed his concern that an assessment would force him out of business. He felt there were other pockets of residents that would be against water and sewer, as he and Mr. Ebner are opposed. Truman Moyer, 16807 Highway 10, expressed his concern that his business neighbors would be forced out of business. He felt the feelings of the people that have lived here a long time should be considered. He felt that if the Mississippi Heights residents were able to opt out of the urban service area, it is only fair that others should be able to do so, as well. Mr. Moyer stated that he was told at a previous Council meeting, everyone in the affected area would be notified of the proposed amount of the assessment. As of this date, he has not received anything. Marcia Moen, 19227 Tyler Street, expressed her opposition to being included in the urban service area. Mark Coombs, 19753 Cleveland Street, opposed to the proposed urban service area. No one wants it and he felt that some of the "country" of Elk River should be left alone. There being no further comments from the public on this section of the Draft Comprehensive Plan, Chair Kuester closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO POSTPONE ACTION ON SECTIONS I, II, AND III, UNTIL AFTER CONSIDERATION OF THE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL SECTIONS. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. IV. RESIDENTIAL Commissioner Minton reviewed the changes in the "Residential" section of the Draft Comprehensive Plan recommended by the Steering . Committee. Commissioner Minton explained that the Steering Committee heard from residents in the Agricultural District (generally, the area north of County Road 33) that wanted to be able to subdivide their property if they chose. Later, another group of residents spoke in favor of maintaining the 10 acre minimum. The Steering Committee recommended maintaining the 10 acre minimum lot size, with an option for clustering up to 8 homes per 40 acres, with the stipulation that 50 percent of the developable land would be forever preserved as open space. Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 'il Page 5 . The Steering Committee also recommended that there was not a need for additional multiple family zoned property at this time, and reduced the amount of property with this zoning designation by changing it to some other use such as commercial, business park or office space. Some of the minimum lot sizes were changed in the residential districts, as well as adding "average" lot sizes. Also, some areas designated for 10,000 square foot minimum lot sizes were changed to require larger lot sizes (up to 14,000 square feet). Chair Kuester opened the public hearing for discussion of the residential section of the Draft Comprehensive Plan. . Cecilia Scheel, 10271 213th Avenue NW, stated that she and her husband, Eugene, own 160 acres north of County Road 33. Mrs. Scheel stated that some of her neighbors have had large parcels of land in their families for about 100 years. She felt that when 40 acre farmers came into the area, the 100+ acre farmers were not happy; when the 20 acre farmers came in, the 40 acre owners where not happy; when the 20 acre farmers came in they were unhappy with the 10 acre people, and, the 10 acre property owners don't want the 2-1/2 acre people. After people acquire their land, it seems the rules change. She stated that she and her husband have invested in their land, just as some people invest in stocks or bonds. Since they (the Scheels) do not tell people what they can do with their stocks and bonds, others should not be able to dictate what they can do with their land. Mrs. Scheel stated that she has learned from Anoka County and Sherburne County that vacant land in this area is selling for $4,000 - $6,000 an acre. Across from her land, property is being developed in Burns Township (Anoka County) in 2-1/2 acres, and the same is true in Livonia Township to the north. Mrs. Scheel expressed her opposition to the clustering proposal. Mrs. Scheel felt it was unclear whether or not the dedicated open space would remain in their custody, who would manage it, and if the property owner would pay taxes on it. Mrs. Scheel stated that at a value of $4,000 - $6,000 per acre for the dedicated open space, she and her family would essentially be charged $80,000 - to $120,000 for developing their land. In addition, there are other costs associated with development such as roads and utility easements. She did not feel that anyone would be willing to donate $120,000 to the City and questioned why this would be asked of the residents in the northern area of the City. She stated she would like the City Attorney's opinion regarding State Statutes that would permit the clustering concept with dedicated open space. She felt it was unconstitutional to separate out certain people for certain things. Mrs. Scheel stated that if land is to be given up to the City, property owners should be paid for it. She concluded that the City is placing a hardship on her and her neighbors that have reached retirement age by not allowing them to develop their property. Craig Robinson, 10113 213th Avenue NW, stated he was opposed to a change in the minimum 10 acre lot size, as well as the clustering concept. . Commissioner Kreger explained the clustering option recommended by the Steering Committee as follows: In addition to the current zoning standard which allows 4 lots per 40 acres in the Agricultural District, an alternative option would be allowed for 8 lots per 40 acres. The landowner would donate 50 percent of the land for a land trust or preserve it as open space in some other way. To develop a 40 acre parcel in the most profitable way, the landowner would subdivide 7 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 6 . lots, 1 to 2 acres in size, and the 8th lot would contain the balance of the 20 acres. Roughly 7 to 10 acres would be taken by the 7 lots and the 8th lot (probably containing the original homestead), would be approximately 10 acres in size. At some point in time (50, 60 or 100 years), the 10 acre parcel could possibly be developed, and the 20 acres of open space would continue to be preserved. Commissioner Kreger stated that this option would probably only appeal to someone who felt strongly about the community and conserving nature for the future, and would allow them to get an extra 4 lots when developing their land. Eugene Scheel, 10271 213th Avenue, stated that the clustering recommended by the Steering Committee was just like what was put into Mr. Kreger's landfill -- "garbage" . Also, "any fool can make a plan; it takes a wise man to implement it." Mr. Scheel was opposed to maintaining the 10 acre minimum lot size, and supported property owners being to subdivide their property . Lynette Robinson, 10113 213th Avenue, explained she distributed a petition and obtained signatures from 14 of the 16 property owners on 213th Avenue, in favor of maintaining the 10 acre minimum lot size and opposed to clustering. She felt the clustering concept would attract nuisances with the smaller lots. Also, the open spaces would be difficult to maintain and would require extensive regulation. Ms. Robinson stated that persons whose names appeared on the petition have received harassing phone calls by a neighbor who stands to make a profit on the sale of small lots, asking why they had signed the petition and what did the neighbor ever do to them to make them sign it. She stated that the person making the calls serves on the City Council and will be voting on this issue. She felt this person has a personal interest in this issue, and it is a conflict of interest. She stated she was willing to go up and down County Road 33 to get more signatures of people opposed to changing the 10 acre minimum lot size. Robert Holland, 21375 Brook Road, stated he has owned 52 acres on County Road 21 for 20 years. He stated he did not see any sense in the clustered housing. He indicated the federal government stated many years ago that a 2-1/2 acre site was adequate for drawing water and maintaining a septic disposal system. He stated that he did not believe the article in the Star News that stated 2-1/2 acre lots will pollute the City of Elk River. In addition, he felt that many of the people opposed to reducing the 10 acre minimum were 25 to 30 years old. He added that when they become 60 to 65 years old they will change their mind and want to reduce the size of their property, as well. Robin Tuttle, 12390 Ranch Road, voiced her concern that many of the people present tonight have not attended the previous meetings to express their opinion. Dick Anderson, 21850 Jarvis Street, expressed support for maintaining the 10 acre minimum lot size. Angie Anderson, 20760 Quincy Street, stated she supported the 10 acre minimum lot size. She expressed concern that Elk River is not fully developed like Coon Rapids where she grew up. She felt that Elk River has potential to be a unique and outstanding community. . Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 7 . Mark Martin asked for an explanation of the difference between a goal and policy. Chair Kuester explained that a goal is an overall idea and a policy states how the City intends to accomplish the goal. Mr. Martin stated he felt that a majority of the property owners present at the Steering Committee meeting to discuss the transportation plan ,wanted to see the agricultural area stay rural. He was concerned that if the 10 acre minimum lot size is reduced to 2-1/2 acres, what happens if sewer and water is extended in the future. Wesley Hunt, 11149 205th Avenue, felt that requiring a landowner to dedicate 50 percent of their property to open space in order to develop it was unfair. He felt that park lands should be paid for by everyone in the City. He felt it was like asking people that work for large companies with retirement programs to split up their money with the residents of Elk River when they retire. Dan Boman, 13921 1215t street, stated he owns 110 acres off 213th Avenue. He is struggling with the concept of "where City Meets Country". Currently he is involved in mitigation of a wetland on his property. In order to develop property in the agricultural zone, the City wants "city" standards -- 32 foot wide roads, asphalt curbing, storm retention ponds; everything that is in a urban subdivision with smaller lots. Yet the City requires the 10 acre lot sizes which do not support the cost of the required improvements. He stated that since there are people on both sides of the issue, they will never come to an agreement and the city will have to find a balance. . Jeff Scheel, son of Eugene and Cecilia Scheel, stated that he does not own property in the City but that he is affected by decisions made regarding his parent's property since it will be part of his inheritance someday. He explained that when he parents purchased their property twenty-five years ago, it was not part of the City of Elk River. He felt it was unfortunate that the people that have recently moved out of the metro area on 10 acre parcels are dictating what the people can do with their land who have lived here for many years. He felt that the people who are supposed to give up 50 percent of their land as open space should be compensated by those who want it to remain open space. Mr. Scheel stated that by maintaining the 10 acre minimum and implementing the clustering option, his parents will lose close to a million dollars. He did not feel those people objecting to development of smaller lots have the right to take his parent's investment away from his family. He did not feel anyone sitting on the Commission would be willing to give up half of their land, just for a concept "Where City and County Flow Together". He also felt that the 10 acre property owners were blight on the neighborhood, with their junk piles and horses on the road, and felt this does not happen on the 2-1/2 acre lots. He concluded by stating he felt the recommendations for the agricultural zone which restricted his parents from developing their property were totally unfair. Mr. Scheel stated that his mother, Cecilia Scheel, would not be voting on this particular issue. Tom Gustafson, 213th Avenue, stated he was in support for the 10 acre minimum. He felt the large property owners have rights and should be compensated for their investment in the land. . Dennis Chuba, 10451 175th Avenue, stated that it is inevitable for development pressure to come to Elk River. He cautioned the 10 acre property owners that if they want to live in a rural environment, they should look for property much Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 8 . further north, because Elk River is going to be developed, whether they like it or not. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to keep the public hearing open and continue the discussion on the remainder of the Draft Comprehensive Plan. Peter Beck responded to an earlier comment by stating that their are various options for clustered housing, and that clustering has not been determined to be "unconstitutional" . Chair Kuester stated that there are brochures and a video tape available regarding clustered housing, and anyone interested in this information should contact city staff. IV. COMMERCIAL . Commissioner Minton explained the important role of commercial development in maintaining a healthy tax base. The Steering Committee has recommended that the commercial zoning extend north on the east side of Highway 169 to 197th Avenue, and no further than the 194th Avenue alignment on the west side of Highway 169. Commercial areas are proposed in the vicinity of Joplin and west Highway 1 a and also on east Highway 1 a. It is recommended that the commercial standards be upgraded along the southeost portion of Highway 1 a, to provide a more appealing entrance to the City of Elk River. The Steering Committee adopted the complete report and recommendations of the Chamber of Commerce Downtown Task Force. An additional recommendation calls for an early central theme for the downtown, as well as allowing a mix of residential in the downtown commercial area. Commissioner Minton thanked Jackie Schuelein and Bill Rubin for their work on the task force report. Lynn Weaver, resident in Hillside Estates, questioned why more commercial area was being recommended when there are so many buildings empty in the downtown. Mike Fox, 11747 197th Avenue, stated that the 14 of the 15 member Steering Committee previously supported limiting commercial on the west and east sides of Highway 169 to the 194th Avenue alignment. He added that staff supported that recommendation as well. Later, the Steering Committee made a motion to extend the commercial to 197th on the east, by a vote of 4-2-1, with only 7 members of the Steering Committee present. Mr. Fox asked that the Planning Commission reject the Steering Committee's recommendation for the extension of commercial on the east side of Highway 169. Phil Johnson, 19440 Holt Street, expressed his agreement with Mr. Fox's comment. He questioned why the Steering Committee's recommendation was changed. . Steve Ach explained that staff is recommending a focus area study be undertaken for the area east of Highway 169 between 193rd and 197th, to determine the transportation needs, appropriate land uses and to consider the adjacent residential areas. Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 9 . VI. INDUSTRIAL Commissioner Minton explained the reasons for the Steering Committee's recommendations to increase the amount of industrial-zoned property. He stated that much of the land currently zoned for industrial is not available for development. Areas around the Sherburne County Courthouse and existing business park were recommended for rezoning to Business Park, in case the Sherburne County Fairgrounds is ever moved in the future. In the southeast section of the City, the Steering Committee has proposed an area for Business Park zoning, as well as an industrial park directly east of the downtown area off County Road 12 and adjacent to the Industrial Hardfacing site. Steve Ach felt it is necessary to assemble industrial areas in an orderly fashion in order to obtain a property land use mix. Commissioner Kreger questioned why staff was not in favor of the industrial park along County Road 12 and 13. Steve explained that developing a business park in this area may detract from the success of the business park on West Highway 10, where water and sewer is already readily available. . Robin Tuttle, 12390 Ranch Road, stated that there is a large industrial area where the gravel mines are currently located. She questioned why the City needs more industrial area and how many people do the citizen's of Elk River want in their community. VII. PARKS AND OPEN SPACES Chair Kuester explained the revised Master Park Plan will be reviewed at a later date. This discussion will cover the goals and policies in the Draft Comprehensive Plan. There were no comments from the public regarding the Parks and Open Spaces goals and policies. VIII. TRANSPORTATION PLAN Chair Kuester noted that only the goals and policies will be considered, and not specific transportation routes or issues. Merlin Bertilson, 19078 Waco Street, expressed his concern that Waco Street not be used as a collector street for an east-west route. He felt that Zebulon would be a better alternative. . The Planning Commissioners discussed whether or not to consider discussion on specific collectors, since collectors were listed in the goals and policies. The City Attorney advised that comments be allowed since the public hearing was open. Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 10 . Scott Brobeck, 13822 208th Avenue, felt that the policies listed under the goal for an east-west corridor assumes that there is a need for one. Chair Kuester pointed out that the goal reads, "explore the possible need". Ruth Brown, 10815 Tyler Street, expressed her objection to the collector line referred to as "E." under Item 1. Collector Links. (193rd Avenue between U.S. Highway 169 and County Road 13 (Tyler Street)). She stated that a link in this location would cross through her property. Robin Tuttle expressed her concern that this issue was being discussed after the audience was told it would not be discussed and people here for this issue have already left the meeting. Bill Zacarda, 13346 Ranch Road, questioned why the Planning Commission feels they must hear comments on the east-west corridor. He stated he felt many people did not come to the meeting because they were told it would not be discussed. Mr. Zacarda questioned what is happening with the committee that was suggested by the Steering Committee to review this issue. Peter Beck stated that the specific plan is not being discussed and citizens are being allowed to expressed their comments only. Chair Kuester stated that the Planning Commission cannot legally make a motion to close discussion on the transportation plan when the public hearing is still open. . Mark Martin stated he feels it is important the Planning Commission make it very clear that the collector links be taken out of the Comprehensive Plan when this section is adopted. IX. IMPLEMENTATION Ruth Brown commended the Steering Committee for their hard work dealing with the difficult issues associated with the Comprehensive Plan. She felt that it is very important to plan for the future of Elk River. Ms. Brown feels that progress means more than growth; it also means improvement of services for the people who currently live here. She encouraged the Planning Commission to preserve the quality of life for the citizens of Elk River which includes being supportive of its residents, promotes good values and makes the community a place where people want to raise their children. There being no further comments from the public on the Draft Comprehensive Plan, Chair Kuester closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER KREGER MOVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TAKE A FIVE MINUTES RECESS. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. . Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 11 . Chair Kuester encouraged members of the audience to consider serving on the Planning Commission to become move involved in their community. She expressed her thanks to those people who have attended the Steering Committee meetings and provided their input. The Planning Commission reviewed and took action on the various sections of the Draft Comprehensive Plan as follows: IV. RESIDENTIAL Commissioner Minton suggested that the cluster concept be modified to allow only 4 lots per 40 acres, rather than the 8 per 40 as recommended by the Steering Committee. He added that he felt the 1 acre minimum lot size and 50 percent open space requirements still apply. Chair Kuester questioned what happens to the open space. Chair Minton stated that it could be maintained by the landowner and possibly still farmed, but the land could not be developed. . Steve Ach suggested that the Planning Commission could recommend that the clustering concept be encouraged, and under "Necessary Actions" it could include a recommendation that a clustering ordinance be established which addresses the specifics. Peter Beck agreed that rather than recommending specific densities at this time, the concept of clustering could be recommended. Commissioner Kreger suggested the following language: Based upon the Steering Committee's recommendation for clustering in the A-1 zone, the City will need to further investigate and develop a potential ordinance and determine appropriate density. He added that costs associated with cluster development should not be paid by the City. Commissioner Dillon expressed his opposition to clustering. He felt this was leap- frog development and needed further investigation before recommendation in the Comp Plan. Commissioner Minton suggested that a reference should be made for the location of townhomes. He questioned the location of the 3rd paragraph under "D. Future Plan" and whether or not it should be switched with the last paragraph of that section on Page 33. These changes were also noted: -Paragraph 5 - insert the word "the" before "Elk River" -Page 31 - 2nd bullet point - remove the word "City" -Include statement to address establishing standards to maintain integrity of housing in the community. . COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SECTION IV. - RESIDENTIAL PLAN, WITH THE FOllOWING CHANGES: - TYPING AMENDMENTS . . . Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 12 - ADD STATEMENT TO ADDRESS TOWN HOMES AND THEIR LOCATION - CHANGING THE RECOMMENDATION REGARDING CLUSTERING CONCEPT TO ADD A NECESSARY ACTION - EXPLORE CLUSTER POSSIBILITIES AND CREATE AN ORDINANCE TO SUPPORT IT - UNDER GOAL NO.6 - ADD AN ADDITIONAL POLICY TO ADDRESS MAINTAINING HOUSING STANDARDS. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-2. COMMISSIONERS DILLON AND SULLIVAN OPPOSED. Commissioner Sullivan stated that she voted against the motion as she is in agreement with the language proposed by the Steering Committee. Commissioner Dillon stated he is opposed to clustering. VI. COMMERCIAL PLAN Commissioner Minton proposed the following changes: _ Under "Future Plan" mention that the Steering Committee adopted the Task Force Plan in full. _ mention should be made regarding upgrading the commercial standards along East Highway 10 as a "Policy". _ Under Goal No.4, add a policy "explore the possibility of a residential and commercial mix in the downtown. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SECTION VI. - COMMERCIAL PLAN, WITH THE CHANGES PROPOSED BY COMMISSIONER MINTON MENTIONED ABOVE. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. VI. INDUSTRIAL PLAN The Planning Commission and staff discussed whether or not the intent was to rezone the area at County Road 12 and 13 Business Park or Light Industrial. COMMISSIONER KREGER MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SECTION VI. - INDUSTRIAL PLAN, WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITION: GOAL NO.1, POLICY NO.1 BE CHANGED TO READ, "ENCOURAGE CLUSTERING OF INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS ALONG THE CITY'S MAJOR ROADWAYS." COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. ----------------------------------------------------- I. GROWTH MANAGEMENT II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION . . . Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 13 COMMISSIONER KREGER MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SECTION I. - GROWTH MANAGEMENT, AND SECTION II. - BACKGROUND INFORMATION. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. III. UTILITIES PLAN Commissioner Minton questioned the reference to the City's capital improvement program which was clarified by the City Engineer. Commissioner Kreger requested that the word "should" be changed to "may" in paragraph 1, Page 23, under 2. Water System. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SECTION III. - UTILITIES PLAN, WITH THE CHANGED NOTED BY COMMISSIONER KREGER. COMMISSIONER TACHENY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. ------------------------------------------------------- VIII. OPEN SPACES The following change was noted: Paae 56 NO.6 - Change to read, "Monitor", rather than "Track and monitor" Paae 55 Bullet No. 1 - Change to read "Encourage the preservation of shorelands, wetlands, and drainage ways." Bullet No.2 - change to read, "Encourage the preservation of natural contours and soils, and preservation of natural vegetation." Commissioner Dillon questioned why there was no recommendation from staff on this section. Steve Ach explained that staff was in agreement with the language as presented. COMMISSIONER DILLON MOVED THAT CONSIDERATION OF SECTION VII. - PARKS AND OPEN SPACES, BE TABLED UNTIL THE MASTER PARK PLAN IS REVIEWED AT A PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN SECONDED THE MOTION. Commissioner Minton stated that he was in favor of the Planning Commission taking action on the goals and policies at this time. He felt the Park and Recreation Commission spent a great deal of time on these issues and would like to affirm their recommendations and those of the Steering Committee. THE MOTION FAILED 4-3. COMMISSIONER KREGER MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SECTION VII. - PARKS AND OPEN SPACES WITH THE CHANGES AS PROPOSED ABOVE, AND, THAT THIS SECTION BE REVISED TO REFLECT ANY CHANGES AS A RESULT OF THE FUTURE Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 14 . PUBLIC HEARING ON THE DRAFT MASTER PARK PLAN. COMMISSIONER TACHENY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-2. VIII. TRANSPORTATION PLAN Commissioner Kreger suggested that the section which discusses collector links be removed from consideration of the Transportation Plan. COMMISSIONER DILLON MOVED THAT CONSIDERATION OF SECTION VIII. - TRANSPORTATION PLAN, BE TABLED UNTIL THE FUTURE PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD ON THIS ISSUE, AND THAT WHEN THE COMPLETE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IS FINALIZED AND ADOPTED IT WILL BECOME PART OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-1. IX. IMPLEMENTATION COMMISSIONER KREGER MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF SECTION IX. - IMPLEMENTATION, AND APPROVAL OF THE VARIOUS TABLES, FIGURES, TABLE OF CONTENTS, APPENDIX, ETC. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE MAP SECTIONS. COMMISSIONER MINTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. . URBAN SERVICE AREA MAP The Planning Commission and staff discussed the Steering Committee recommendation for the Urban Service Area map, as well as staff's recommendation. Commissioner Kreger expressed concern that some type of interim use be allowed for development of property placed in the expanded urban service area. Commissioner Dillon stated he could see no need to extend the urban service district. Discussion followed regarding future expansion of the wastewater treatment facility and the impact of extension of extending the urban service boundary. Chair Kuester questioned whether a phasing plan was suggested by the Steering Committee for extending sewer and water. Commissioner Minton stated that the Steering Committee felt it was difficult to speculate a time frame, given all the economic variables involved. He felt the Council will determine whether extension of sewer and water will be strictly development-driven or whether phasing will be implemented. . Terry Maurer explained that if a request is made by a developer/landowner who owns 35% of the proposed assessment area, the City Council may approve the assessment by a majority vote. If the City Council initiates an assessment, it must Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 15 . be by a 4/5's vote of the Council to approve a project. Terry reviewed the assessment process which was followed for the Western Area Improvements. Terry also explained that the City Council is considering the extension of sewer and water east along Highway 10, and discussions will likely continue after the Comp Plan is adopted, depending on costs and need. Steve Ach explained that following action on the urban service area, the land use plan will be changed to reflect those changes. Later, rezoning will be considered, and ultimately, public hearings would be held regarding the assessments. Steve noted that it is necessary that the land use and zoning maps be amended to be consistent with the urban service area. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR EXTENSION OF THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY, WITH A CONSIDERATION FOR SOME TYPE OF INTERIM MEASURE TO BE ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCil AllOWING lANDOWNERS SOME TYPE OF OPTION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY UNTIL SEWER AND WATER IS AVAilABLE. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-1. LAND USE MAP Steve Ach explained staff's recommendations for the Land Use Map: . Area 1 - East Highway 10 area recommended "Light Industrial" by the Steering Committee Area 2 - Change to MR to be consistent with the urban service area just adopted by the Planning Commission Area 3 - County Road 12 and 13 area remain residential, recommended for either Business Park or Light Industrial Area 4 - Area east of Highway 169 between 193rd and 197th be left as Steve recommended a focus area study for this area to look at land use and transportation issues. The Planning Commission discussed the staff's recommendations, particularly Area 4. Members expressed an interest to designate a land use for this area which would permit a future PUD zoning designation. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE FOllOWING LAND USE CHANGES: AREA 2 - MR (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) AREA 3 - LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) AREA 4 - HB/MEDIUM DENSITY COMMISSIONER KREGER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-2. . COMMISSIONER KREGER MOVED TO RECOMMEND THAT AREA 1 HAVE A lAND USE DESIGNATION OF lR (lOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL). COMMISSION THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1995 Page 1 6 . COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED THAT THE MEETING BE CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 27, 1995 (12:00 A.M.). COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE OF THE REMAINING CHANGES MADE ON THE LAND USE MAP AS SHOWN ON FIGURE 2-R. COMMISSIONER TACHENY SECONDED THE MOTION. COMMISSIONER DILLON MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE CITY PROPERTY WEST OF HIGHWAY 169 FROM ACTION ON THE LAND USE MAP. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-3. COMMISSIONER MINTON'S ORIGINAL MOTION REGARDING THE LAND USE MAP PASSED 7-0. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REMAINING EXHIBITS, AND, THAT THE ZONING MAP BE REVISED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CHANGES MADE IN THE LAND USE MAP. COMMISSIONER KREGER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-2. . There being no further business, COMMISSIONER KREGER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. The Special Meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 12: 1 0 a.m. &:s~ Debbie Kleckner Planning Secretary .