Loading...
03-14-2006 PC MIN MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 2006 Members Present: Chair Anderson, Lemke, Offerman, Ropp, Scott, Stevens and Westgaard Members Absent: None Staff Present: Scott Harlicker, Senior Planner; Chris Leeseberg, Planner; Terry Maurer, City Engineer; Debbie Huebner, Recording Secretary 1. Call Meeting To Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chair Anderson. 2. Consider 3/14/06 Planning Commission Agenda MOVED BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO APPROVE THE MARCH 14, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ITEM 5.3. – POSTPONED TO THE APRIL 11, 2006 MEETING. ITEM 5.4. – POSTPONED TO THE APRIL 11, 2006 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 3.1. Consider 2/14/06 Planning Commission Minutes MOVED BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WESTGAARD TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 14, 2006 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 4. Planning Commission Representative to Attend City Council Meeting Chair Anderson will attend the March 21, 2006 City Council meeting. 5.1. Request by Aggregate Industries to Amend Conditional Use Permit for Mineral Excavation, Public Hearing – Case No. CU 06-03 Commissioner Westgaard excused himself from discussion of this item due to a potential conflict of interest. Environmental Administrator Rebecca Haug reviewed the request by Aggregate Industries to amend their Conditional Use Permit for expansion of the boundaries of their current mining permit. They propose to stockpile material on an adjacent parcel and occasionally run a crushing operation in the fall of 2006 and 2007. Ms. Haug reviewed issues associated with the project and staff’s recommendations. Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 March 14, 2006 --------------------------- Commissioner Stevens asked for clarification regarding tree protection in the 50-foot setback. The applicant stated that they will not be mining in this area since it is mostly sand. Commissioner Lemke asked what measures will be taken to ensure that wells in the area will not be impacted. Ms. Haug stated that the applicant will be required to monitor the water level. Commissioner Anderson opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Anderson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Stevens asked if the applicant will include language to protect the trees in the area near the city trail. Ms. Haug stated that the applicant has stated they have no plans to mine in that area. Dan Quie, applicant - Stated that he has talked to the neighbors and that Aggregate Industries is willing to establish a 500-foot setback. Commissioner Stevens asked what the applicant plans to do with the area. Mr. Quie stated that they have no plans. Commissioner Stevens stated that he would like a statement written into the conditional use permit stating so. Mr. Quie stated that he will need to discuss the issue with the owners, but he felt it was likely then would agree. Chair Anderson asked for clarification on plans for the area within the red boundary. Mr. _____ explained that the area will be mined in a clockwise direction, first south, then west, and then north. They plan to stockpile material on the areas that won’t be disturbed. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ROPP TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW MINERAL EXCAVATION, WITH THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE AGREEMENT, AND, THAT THE ISSUE OF PROTECTION OF THE TREES BE NEGOTIATED FOR INCLUSION IN THE AGREEMENT. Commissioner Lemke asked what would happen if no agreement was reached. Commissioner Lemke stated that it was his intent to leave the motion vague in order to allow staff some flexibility in negotiation. Commissioner Lemke suggested that if the applicant needs to take some trees, that they use best management practices to protest the rest. Commissioner Stevens stated that it doesn’t appear they will be mining where the trees are. Ms. Haug stated that there already is language in the agreement for the protection of trees. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. Commissioner Westgaard returned at this time. 5.2. Request by Jason Huber for Preliminary Plat Approval (Carverwood Hills), Public Hearing – Case No. P 06-01 Senior Planner Scott Harlicker stated that the applicant proposes to subdivide a 53.43-acre parcel into five residential lots under the 4 for 40 rule which allows four lots in 40 acres. Four lots will be 2.5 acres and the fifth lot will be 41 acres. Mr. Harlicker reviewed the location of the parcel, surrounding uses, topography, zoning and land use. He noted that this area is identified for rezoning to 2 ½ acre lots in 2008. Mr. Harlicker explained the lot Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 March 14, 2006 --------------------------- and street layout, access issues, and Parks and Recreation Commission recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the request with the conditions outlined in the staff report, and adding a 17 condition to include the request by Sherburne County asking that the cul- th de-sac be included as platted right-of-way. Chair Anderson asked what the length of the cul-de-sac was. Mr. Harlicker stated that it was longer than 700 feet. Commissioner Westgaard asked if the driveway would be eliminated for the existing house on the proposed Lot 5. Mr. Harlicker stated yes, that the access for this lot would be on 208 Avenue. th Commissioner Lemke asked how the issue of the cul-de-sac would be addressed. Mr. Harlicker stated that the terms would be included in the developer’s agreement, and that the County would also be tracking it. Commissioner Stevens stated that it appears most of Lot 3 is unbuildable. Mr. Harlicker stated that there is some dry area on the lot and it would need to meet the City’s requirements. Chair Anderson opened the public hearing. Richard Wynn, 21587 Brook Road – Felt the applicant is really asking for a permanent access and calling it temporary. He also stated that the applicant is trying to side-step the 2008 development date and felt it should be required to wait. Commissioner Stevens stated he also felt the applicant was side-stepping what will happen in 2008. He stated he preferred to see a larger area than just this piece developed. He was not in favor of the request. Chair Anderson stated he questioned the temporary road scenario. Since it is uncertain what will happen in the future, he felt they need to plan for accessibility of adjacent parcels. He felt that it was premature to plat this property now. He felt they need to take into account a larger area than just this parcel, given the topography and wetlands. He also was not in favor of recommending approval of the request. Commissioner Scott asked who came up with the road plan. Mr. Harlicker stated that the City Engineer worked with the developer to locate the best places for future roads, and that the plan was reviewed by the Wetland Technical Evaluation Panel. Commissioner Scott asked if this plan would hold up any future intersections. Mr. Harlicker stated no. Commissioner Scott stated he also questioned the plan. Commissioner Offerman stated he did not feel they had enough information regarding the parcels to the north and south and needed to see more of the “big picture”. He stated he could not support a recommendation of approval. Dave Schwarting of Bogart, Pederson, representing the applicant – Explained that the plan was developed based on the unique nature of the parcel and limited options. The plan minimizes the impact on the wetlands. He stated that the 4 per 40 is allowed now by ordinance and that is what they are requesting. Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 March 14, 2006 --------------------------- Joseph Huber, applicant – He stated that they cannot predict what will happen to the north and south in 2008, and that the property may not be developed for 20 years. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUEST BY JOSEPH HUBER FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CARVERWOOD HILLS, CASE NO. P 06-01, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: ? THE COMMISSION FEELS IT IS PREMATURE TO DEVELOP THIS PARCEL INTO 2 ½ ACRE LOTS AT THIS TIME AND THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE HELD TO THE EXISTING MINIMUM 10 ACRE LOT SIZE. ? THE PROPOSED LOTS ARE SMALLER THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT. Commissioner Lemke stated that he is not ready to deny the request, but that he has some of the same concerns expressed by the other Commissioners. Commissioner Offerman stated he was in favor of denial. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO AMEND THE MOTION FOR DENIAL TO INCLUDE THESE ADDITIONAL FINDINGS: ? LACK OF INFORMATION REGARDING SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ? THE TEMPORARY ROAD CONNECTIONS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH DO NOT CONFORM TO THE CITY’S POLICIES Commissioner Lemke stated that City Ordinance allows a property owner to developer under the 4 per 40 rule. Mr. Harlicker stated that there are two other developments which were approved under this rule; Ridgewood Hills and Kingdom Estates. He stated that the rule maintains the 10 acre minimum density. Commissioner Lemke stated it is the Commission’s job to plan for the future, even though development may not occur for 50 years. MOTION CARRIED 5-1. Commissioner Lemke opposed. Mr. Schwarting stated that he worked with the City on this plan. He stated the request is in compliance with the City’s zoning and is consistent with the planning for 2008. Commissioner Offerman stated that he would like to see if the road connections to the north and south are feasible. Commissioner Westgaard stated the County gave its approval based upon the applicant showing where accesses would go. He would like to see more information how the proposed accesses would actually work with the adjacent parcels. Mr. Schwarting stated that other plats have been approved with no other planning than to plat to the property line. He did not feel the plat should be denied on the basis of information they do not have available. Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 March 14, 2006 --------------------------- Chair Anderson stated that if this plat had been reviewed through the workshop process, they may have been able to address these issues. Mr. Schwarting stated he was not aware that option was available. Mr. Harlicker stated that it normally is not necessary for a small plat such as this (5 lots) to be seen at a workshop session. 6.1. Update on 06 City Council Meeting Commissioner Scott provided an update on the February 21, 2006 City Council meeting. Commissioner Offerman expressed his concern that the City Council has already approved a resolution requesting funds for the 193 Avenue Corridor when the project has not even rd been approved. Commissioner Lemke stated that it is common in his work that funds are requested before final approval on a project in order to “get in line” for funding, and that if the project does not go forward, the funds are “given back” or used on another project. 6.2. Election of Officers MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WESTGAARD TO NOMINATE COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO SERVE AS PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR. MOTION CARRIED 6-0-1. Commissioner Lemke abstained. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN TO NOMINATE COMMISSIOENR STEVENS TO SERVE AS VICE-CHAIR. MOTION CARRIED 6-0-1. Commissioner Stevens abstained. 8. Adjournment There being no further business, CHAIR LEMKE ADJOURNED THE MEETING. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debbie Huebner Recording Secretary