HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-03-08 Minutes r
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the city of Centerville held a public hearing on
March 8, 1990 at City Hall. The purpose was to hear all persons
present regarding the possibility of rezoning the property
described as follows:
"The southeast 1/4 of the southeast 1/4 of section 14 31 22
subject to easement to rural coop power 6/24/63 except part
taken by County of Anoka per lis pendens"
and lying north of the Hardwood Pond Estates development, east of
the Centerville Heights development, west of 20th Avenue North,
and presently in the MUSA. The proposed rezoning will be from
Rural Residential (R -1), to High Density Single Family
Residential (R -2A), with the north 350 feet zoned Single Family
Residential Sewered (R -2).
Chairman Tourville called the hearing to order at 7:05 p.m.
Present: Drilling, Welk, Vermeulen, liaison Haberman. Absent:
Wilharber.
Chairman Tourville summarized the proposed rezoning to the
Commission members and people in the audience. No members of the
audience made any comments on the proposed rezoning.
Liaison Haberman questioned as to whether or not the northerly
portion of the proposed development met the requirements of low
density as outlined in Centerville's Comprehensive Plan. Liaison
Haberman also expressed that maybe the rezoning of this proposed
development should be put on hold until the March 19, 1990 Public
Hearing pending the creation of an R -5 Single Family Estate
District. Liaison Haberman expressed that in his opinion to
satisfy the Comprehensive Plan, this northerly portion should be
rezoned to the R -5.
Chairman Tourville questioned Liaison Haberman as to where in the
Comprehensive Plan does it say this northerly portion is to be
zoned low density Liaison Haberman stated that the Land Use Map
of the Comprehensive Plan suggests this.
Tamara Miltz- Miller, Clerk /Administrator, was also present. Ms.
Miltz- Miller expressed to the Commission members that in her
opinion not all of the City Council members are in the same
opinion as Liaison Haberman. Some of the City Council members
may feel that R -2 zoning would be appropriate for this northerly
piece. The Comprehensive Plan would like to see the graduation
up to larger lots. Ms. Miltz- Miller was also in the opinion that
the R -2 zoning may be consistent with what may happen to the west
of the proposed R -2 zoning.
Liaison Haberman still did not feel that this R -2 zoning meets
with the Comprehensive Plan.
Motion by Vermeulen, second by Welk to adjourn the Public
Hearing, motion carried unanimously. Hearing adjourned 7:20 p.m.
L
P &Z Meeting Minutes
March 8, 1990
Page Two
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the City of Centerville held their regular meeting
on March 8, 1990 at City Hall. Chairman Tourville called the
meeting to order at 7:21 p.m. Present: Drilling, Welk,
Vermeulen, Liaison Haberman. Absent: Wilharber.
Motion by Welk, second by Drilling to accept the meeting minutes
of the February 6, 1990 meeting, motion carried unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS:
STORM DRAINAGE MASTER PLAN
Brian Miller, City Engineer, presented the Commission with a
letter dated March 8, 1990 regarding the Centerville's Storm
Drainage Master Plan. Mr. Miller also presented the Commission
with a letter dated February 13, 1990 regarding Regional
Detention. This letter is addressed to the Centerville City
Council.
Mr. Miller expressed that, in his opinion, it would be more cost
effective and less loss of land would occur if the City would
require a larger basin, rather than each development having their
on basins. The City would have to find an equitable way to
compensate land owners who would be affected by this larger
basin.
Mr. Miller stated that the Northeast Basin section of the Storm
Drainage Master Plan is complete. The Northeast Basin received
priority, because of the proposed development in this part of the
City.
The Master Plan should be complete and presented to the City
Council at their March 28th meeting. This plan would help assure
what channels and storm sewers are needed as to not create
flooding downstream.
Chairman Tourville asked what the disposition would be of these
temporary holding ponds, and would easements be required.
Mr. Miller stated that they would act as temporary retention
basins releasing water at a slower rate, and would also trap
sand, silt and sediments. Mr. Miller felt they might have to be
cleaned out every 3 -5 years. There would also be a need for a
temporary easement along or off the main channel. This would
mean excavating two lots temporarily and putting in a detention
basin. When the time came that the temporary basin was no longer
needed, the basin could be filled and the lot sold.
J
P &Z Meeting Minutes
March B, 1990
Page Three
Chairman Tourville asked if the cost of building and maintaining
these ponds are to be assessed to the property owners.
Liaison Haberman expressed that cleaning of these ponds requires
the use of a back hoe and dump trucks, which wrecks landscaping
and creates problems (citing Shad Avenue as an example).
Chairman Tourville questioned if Lino Lakes is to share in the
cost of the basins.
Mr. Miller explained that Lino Lakes can not increase flowage at
a rate higher than what was historically flowed through. A copy
of this report has been submitted to Rice Creek Watershed to
consider entering into a co- operative agreement between the two
cities.
Chairman Tourville expressed that there are some benefits to
having a Storm Master Drainage Plan.
Chairman Tourville stated that the land owners who would receive
the pond must be compensated. He also questioned the performance
of the existing ponds.
Liaison Haberman noted that a lot of natural trees would be able
to be retained if a pond was left dry.
Chairman Tourville noted that an island in the middle of a pond
could help.
Gerald Rehbein, 6266 Otter Lake Road, noted that lots are worth
more with a pond, and that everybody likes to have water in their
backyard.
Chairman Tourville noted that lots with a holding pond could be
more saleable for a developer.
A copy of the March 8, 1990 and February 13, 1990 Maier, Stewart
& Associates letters are on file with the Clerk /Administrator.
FLOODPLAIN REDUCTION STUDY
Brian Miller, City Engineer, was present. Mr. Miller explained
to the commission that the study took into consideration
hydraulics, (the study of how water gets down creek), and
hydrology, (the study of rainfall, climate and how much rainfall
it causes.) The previous report by the Army Corp of Engineers
and the DNR contained poor records, and did not include a map.
Mr. Miller also questioned if Centerville was part of this study,
noting that Hugo was the main study. Rice Creek Water Shed's
P &Z Meeting Minutes
March 8, 1990
Page Four
new hydrologic study did not agree with a lot of things found in
the old study. The goal is to remove 125 acres from the
floodplain.
Chairman Tourville asked about the possibility of creating man-
made lakes to reduce the floodplain.
John Stewart, City Engineer, was also present. Mr. Stewart
explained that Centerville is at the end of the drainage basin.
There are not enough resources in Centerville to change flow
hydrography. Centerville is at the mercy as to what happens
upstream.
Brain Miller left the meeting at 8:03 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS:
PROPOSED CENTERHILL DEVELOPMENT - FEASIBILITY STUDY
John Stewart, City Engineer, was present. Mr. Stewart walked the
Commission Members through the feasibility study for the proposed
Centerhill development.
Commission Member Welk noted that the date of the report was
incorrect.
John Stewart presented the Grading Plan for the Centerhill
development to the Commission members. Mr. Stewart noted that
Maier, Stewart & Associates became involved because of the Master
Drainage Plan. RCWS requires a basin to hold water from a one
year storm. They would build temporary a basin to handle a one
year storm. The rate of discharge can not be greater than before
development. You have to have the capacity through out the whole
system to hold the rain from a one- hundred year storm.
PROPOSED CENTERHILL DEVELOPMENT - PRELIMINARY PLAT
Gerald Rehbein, 6266 Dtter Lake Road, developer was present. Mr.
Rehbein expressed that in his opinion the density meets the
requirements of the Comprehensive Plan.
Commission Member Welk noted that no matter what, it is very
important to adhere to the Comprehensive Plan.
Liaison Haberman questioned if there had been a density study on
the north half of this proposed development.
John Stewart noted that this had not been done.
J
! Iirr
P &Z Meeting Minutes
March 8, 1990
Page Five
Commission Member Drilling thought that this was what had already
been discussed, and could see no problem with plat.
Mr. Rehbein stated that the average lot size is about 14,200
square feet, with an average of 2.38 lots over 40.1 acres.
Chairman Tourville noted that the temporary holding ponds on the
plat did not appear to take away a lot of buildable land.
Mr. Stewart noted that the holding ponds have a lot of surface
area, with a four to one slope. Some of the houses are on the
contour line, Maier, Stewart & Associates tried to work the ponds
around the building pads.
Chairman Tourville noted that in the view of the developers
liking ponds, and that the Planning and Zoning Commission likes
ponds, why not dig the ponds deeper to make them permanent
holding ponds.
Liaison Haberman expressed that they may be desirable now, but
will they still be desirable in fifteen years.
Mr. Stewart noted that the City has been very lucky as far as
maintenance of these ponds and ditches. Someone else has always
cleaned our ditches.
Chairman Tourville noted that maintenance would be low in future
years, and that the future of these ponds has to be addressed.
The park in the Centerville Heights addition is a disappointment,
the holding pond takes up most of the park land by the water
tower. Chairman Tourville also felt that non - sewered land in the
northern sector for parks would be a good idea.
Tamara Miltz- Miller, Clerk /Administrator, and Gerald Rehbein both
commented that they were under the impression that the Park and
Recreation Committee would take the money from the proposed
Center Hill development and improve the existing parks and
consider buying land in the northern sector of the city.
Chairman Tourville questioned as to if anyone had approached
owners of land in the northern sector for the purchasing of park
land.
Motion by Drilling, second by Welk to recommend to the City
Council approval of the Preliminary Plat for Center Hill, motion
carried unanimously.
P &Z Meeting Minutes
March 8, 1990
Page Six
PROPOSED CENTERVILLE DEVELOPMENT - REZONING REQUEST
Motion by Drilling, second by Welk to recommend to the City
Council the rezoning the of the property described as follows:
"The southeast 1/4 of southeast 1/4 of section 14 31 22
subject to easement to rural coop power 6/24/63 except part
taken by County of Anoka per lis pendens"
and lying north of the Hardwood Pond Estates development, east of
Centerville Heights development, west of 20th Avenue, and
presently in the MUSA. The recommended rezoning will be from
rural residential (R -1), to High Density Single Family
Residential (R-2A), with the north 350 feet zoned Single Family
Residential Sewered (R -2), motion carried unanimously.
The Planning and Zoning Commission also noted receipt of the
Feasibility Study for the proposed Centerhill development from
Maier, Stewart and Associates.
POSSIBILITY OF AMENDING ORDINANCE #4, ARTICLE 4 - NON- CONFORMING
USES AND STRUCTURES
Tamara Miltz- Miller, Clerk /Administrator was present. Ms. Miltz
Miller expressed that the most common problem a rises from a non-
conforming use. She also expressed concern with section 45.04
AMORTIZATION PERIOD FOR BUILDINGS.
Chairman Tourville stated that he did not like the way the
Ordinance is presently written, and suggested that staff ask
other communities on how they deal with a non - conforming use.
Commission member Welk felt that this gives them more control
over certain situations. Commission Member Welk also felt that
the Commission should start with those specific areas that are
creating problems.
Ms. Miltz- Miller stated that her intentions were to look over the
Ordinance for discrepancies, have the Commission review and give
direction. Then City staff could draft a new Ordinance for the
Commission to review.
Commission member Welk expressed that setting goals of six months
to one year to get everything cleaned up would be appropriate.
Motion by Tourville, second by Drilling to direct City staff to
review Ordinance #4, Article 4, for problem areas for the
Planning and Zoning Commission to review each month, motion
carried unanimously.
r
P &Z Meeting Minutes
March 8, 1990
Page Seven
POSSIBILITY OF AMENDING ORDINANCE #8, SECTIONS 43, 44 AND 45
Motion by Tourville, second by Vermeulen to direct City staff to
incorporated John Stewart's, City Engineer, comments into
Ordinance #8, Sections 43, 44, and 45 for the Planning and Zoning
Commission to review at their next regular meeting, motion
carried unanimously.
Motion by Drilling, second by Welk to adjourn their meeting,
motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned 9:43 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
5 11 1 ,1 1 . 1 ?
Sanna E. Buckbee
Assistant City Clerk