Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-11-06 P & Z (2) CITY OF CENTERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 6, 2001 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held their regularly scheduled meeting on November 6, 2001, at 6:30 p. m. PRESENT: John McLean Ray DeVine Brian Hanson Tom Wilharber David Kilian ABSENT: Rob Sheppard, Barry Brainard COUNCIL: Linda Broussard Vickers STAFF: City Administrator Kim Moore-Sykes I. CALL TO ORDER 1.Roll Call The meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. II. PUBLIC HEARING(S) nd 1.Eagle Pass 2 Addition Chairperson Hanson opened the public hearing at 6:35 p.m. Mr. Quigley representing Gor-Em pointed out the changes made to the plan since the last time he was before the Commission. He then explained that the plan was revised to include twinhomes as is consistent with the current development. Commissioner Devine asked Mr. Quigley to comment on the extension of Ojibway Drive. Mr. Quigley indicated that the Association is allowed to expand under its bylaws. Chairperson Hanson asked if number two was a separate association. Mr. Quigley indicated it would be part of the single-family association. Commissioner Kilian asked if the Association had approved the expansion to allow for the new homes. Mr. Quigley indicated that the Association did not have the option of denying the homes entrance into its Association as the bylaws were originally written to Page 1 of 24 allow for a specific number of homes and the addition of these homes would not exceed the maximum. Commissioner Kilian asked whether the home on Lot 2 would front on Dupre Road or Meadow Lane. Mr. Quigley indicated it could front on either one based on the wishes of the City. Commissioner Kilian commented that it might be best to have the home front on Meadow Lane. Mr. Quigley indicated that Lot 2 was a corner lot and indicated that City Ordinance would govern the building on it. Commissioner Wilharber asked if there would be a trail located between buildings one, two, three, and four in Section One. Mr. Quigley indicated he had not included a trail on his plan and said the area Commissioner Wilharber had asked about was an easement for water line. Mr. Quigley indicated that the area is owned by the Association and any trail access would need to be negotiated with the Association. Ms. Peterson of 7065 Dupre Road indicated they had petitioned the City to take over Ojibway Drive and had not received a response. She then commented that she would like to see as many trees kept as possible. She also asked if there would be a center aisle in the turn around. Mr. Quigley indicated there would not be a center aisle in the turn around. Ms. Peterson of 7065 Dupre Road indicated the initial problem with the previous plan was that they were designed to be single detached homes that did not fit into the Association. She indicated that the newly proposed units would be larger and the assessments would need to be different which the Association is working on. She then commented that the Association is required to accept the new homes into the Association because they are twin homes. Mr. Jerry Albrecht of 7071 Dupre Road asked what tonnage the roadway would be built to. Mr. Quigley indicated the road would be built to 5-ton standards. He then indicated that as he and Mr. Albrecht had discussed previously the road will be built to City standards as determined by the City Engineer. Mr. Albrecht commented that every time he has asked the tonnage question he has received a different answer. Mr. Quigley indicated the City designs the roads and his company would install them. Mr. Albrecht asked if Mr. Quigley was willing to guarantee, in writing, that Gor-Em and Swift will repair any damage done by construction vehicles for a period of one year after the construction is completed. Mr. Quigley agreed to provide a written agreement that Gor-Em and Swift would pay to repair the road if any damage is done up to one year after the construction is completed. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated the City would get a guarantee on the road written into the developer’s agreement since the City would have no other way to control it and the City is not responsible to repair it. Page 2 of 24 Mr. Bill Ingison, Jr., of 1762 Ojibway Drive suggested adding a trail from Chauncy Barrett Gardens trough the property so the elderly residents would have a safe place to walk rather than walking out on Centerville Road. Mr. Quigley indicated he had no problem making the trail connection if the City and the Association could agree upon the specifics. Mr. Brian Carlson of 1771 Meadow Lane pointed out that a line of trees was missing on the map provided and asked if those were to be removed. Mr. Quigley indicated the trees would remain but were not shown on this drawing. Mr. Albrecht asked if any of the good trees would be used behind the existing units. Mr. Quigley indicated that any trees that were suitable for transplanting would be transplanted in the area. Mr. Jim Juhl of 1825 Voyageur Court asked that Unit 5 of the detached homes be screened from the existing unit next to it due to the close proximity. Mr. Juhl thanked Mr. Quigley for pressuring Swift to complete some of the unfinished items in the development such as the sidewalks and the tennis courts. He then indicated that some of the residents on Dupre Road are interested in paying to have some of the trees moved rather than seeing them harvested. Mr. Juhl asked when Mr. Quigley intended to start moving dirt. Mr. Quigley indicated that moving dirt is weather dependent but said he might try to do some things this fall to give the property a drainage pattern before spring. Mr. Quigley drew in the requested screen on his drawing of the development. Motion by Commissioner Wilharber, seconded by Commissioner DeVine to close the public hearing. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Hanson closed the public hearing at 6:50 p.m. Chairperson Hanson opened the public hearing for Ordinance #4 Amendments at 6:50 p.m. Commissioner Wilharber suggested the Commission make its decision concerning Eagle nd Pass 2 Addition (Preliminary Plat) at this point in the meeting rather than making residents wait through the entire meeting. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Kilian to table the Ordinance #4 public hearing to later in the meeting. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner DeVine asked Council Liaison Broussard Vickers how to make sure that the roadway guarantee is put into the developer’s agreement. Page 3 of 24 Mr. Quigley indicated he had written a letter, signed it and sent it to the Association last summer concerning the roadway guarantee. Mr. Albrecht indicated that the copy received by the Association was not signed. Mr. Quigley indicated he must have received a copy of the fax that was sent and then said he could provide a signed copy of the letter. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that while the City was without an administrator only those things that were of a pressing nature were dealt with. She then indicated that the City Attorney has advised against the City taking over the roadway and said that, in her opinion, it does not appear that the City is interested in taking over the roadway. She further indicated that the City is waiting to hear from the police and fire departments concerning the roadway before holding an in depth discussion on the matter. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that Council would attempt to address all the concerns of the residents in the developer’s agreement. Commissioner Kilian indicated that the new homeowners are going to be part of the Association that would have to repair the roadway and, therefore, it is in everyone’s best interest to be careful with the road. Mr. Peterson asked why the City Attorney did not want to take over the road. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that the road is narrower than public streets, the future costs to maintain the road, and it would be setting a precedent for taking over private roads. She then indicated that the matter has not been thoroughly discussed by Council but will be in the near future. Mr. Peterson questioned why, if the City designed the road, it did not want to take it over. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that the road’s design and construction were determined by the City Engineer but the private street is narrower than public streets. Ms. Peterson of 7065 Dupre Road asked if residents would get a real estate tax break because they are not provided with City services to maintain the roadway. Commissioner DeVine recommended sending another letter to Council asking them to take a look at the matter. Mr. Jim Halstrom of 6960 Dupre Road indicated there are other private roads in the development, not just Ojibway. He then expressed frustration with Council as they have written several letters and have not received an acknowledgement of receipt of those letters. He further indicated that, as a part of the developer’s agreement on the new development he would like to see streetlights added to the existing development as there are not enough and it is a dangerous situation. Tracy Halstrom of 6960 Dupre Road indicated they have asked questions and have not had responses. She then indicated that she feels the new homeowners will want answers to the same questions as no information was given to her by the realtor or the builder Page 4 of 24 concerning the private roads and what it would cost them. Ms. Halstrom then asked if the City needs permission to repair City sewer and water along the private roads. Commissioner DeVine indicated that there is a utility easement that grants the City permission to maintain its sewer and water lines. Ms. Halstrom asked for something in writing on the utility easement. She then asked who replaces burned out light bulbs in the streetlights. nd Chairperson Hanson asked if her questions were related to Eagle Pass 2 Addition. Ms. Halstrom indicated she felt the questions should be answered for the new homeowners. She then said she did not think her questions would be for the developer’s agreement but said she would like answers. Commissioner Kilian indicated that, if Ms. Halstrom does not receive a response from the City, all the Commissioner’s telephone numbers are available and asked her to call one of them to let them know she has not received the information requested. Ms. Halstrom indicated that most of the questions were addressed to Jim March prior to his resignation. Chairperson Hanson indicated that the City has a new City Administrator and suggested Ms. Halstrom contact Ms. Moore-Sykes. Chairperson Hanson asked Mr. Quigley to speak with the Association concerning a trailway through the outlot to connect with Chauncy Barrett Gardens. Mr. Quigley agreed to look into it. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Wilharber to nd recommend to Council approval of the Preliminary Plat for Eagle Pass 2 Addition with the Association’s requested issues added concerning trees, trailway through the outlot, concerns with screening, and a written guarantee for Ojibway Drive. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. 2.Ordinance #4 Amendments Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Kilian to reopen the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Hanson indicated that a special work session was held three weeks ago to discuss Ordinance #4 amendments. Tracy Tratar of 1710 Peltier Lake Drive indicated he was surprised that his issue was not included in this public hearing as he has been to the last two meetings asking the Commission to consider his situation. Page 5 of 24 Chairperson Hanson indicated the Commission determined that Mr. Tratar’s issue was a special circumstance more appropriately handled by variance than a change to the Ordinance. Mr. Tratar indicated that he was at the meeting for his personal situation but commented that not changing the ordinance would put a lot of residents out of compliance with City Code. Mr. Jeremy Bates of 1977 South Robin Lane indicated he thought the Commission had discussed changing the sideyard setback for corner lots from 35 feet to 20 feet. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers questioned whether the Commission’s intent was to allow a 20-foot setback for principal structures on corner lots. Chairperson Hanson indicated the table with the list of amendments to Ordinance #4 was not in packets and said he was unsure of what, if any, change the Commission had agreed to make. Commissioner DeVine indicated it was his recollection that the Commission had decided not to allow principal structures with a 20-foot setback because a new developer could come in and do that and the City does not want that to happen. Chairperson Hanson indicated that the Commission would be continuing this public hearing to the Council meeting for further discussion and clarification. Chairperson Hanson told Staff clarification was needed as to whether the Planning Commission had made a change to corner lot setbacks for principal structures before the matter is heard by the City Council. Mr. Tratar indicated that he feels the setback restrictions on corner lots are excessive. Commissioner McLean indicated that the City is concerned that a new developer could come in and put new houses 20 feet from the lot line. Commissioner DeVine showed Mr. Tratar a diagram as to what could happen with a new development if the Ordinance was changed to a 20-foot setback. Commissioner Wilharber indicated that it was his recollection that the Commission decided not to change the ordinance to make sure new developments could not take advantage of a 20-foot setback. He further indicated that Mr. Tratar’s situation is rare enough that it would warrant a variance. Mrs. Camp-Barron of 7121 Centerville Road asked if there was a videotape of the work session meeting where Ordinance #4 was discussed. Chairperson Hanson indicated that there are minutes available for the meeting. Page 6 of 24 Mrs. Camp-Barron asked if the minutes were available at City Hall. The Commission indicated that they were and said the date of the meeting was October 9, 2001. Ms. Kathy Tratar of 1710 Peltier Lake Drive indicated they could build a detached garage at 20 feet. Commissioner DeVine explained that the difference is a new builder could not come in and build a detached garage as it has to be attached according to Ordinance. He then indicated that, if the Commission changed the setback to 20 feet the developer could come in and use the 20-foot setback for the entire subdivision. Mr. Tratar indicated that the Commission’s decision did not make sense as the development would look the same. Commissioner Wilharber indicated that Mr. Tratar had offered to bring in measurements of surrounding properties and then asked if he had done so. Mr. Tratar indicated he was not able to come to the work session as they were out of town. He then indicated he was not sure the Commission wanted him to do the research he offered to do. Commissioner Wilharber commented he had thought Mr. Tratar would be bringing in information on other lots. He then indicated that the Commission is trying to help Mr. Tratar out but said future subdivisions could be compromised if the setback is changed. He further indicated that he feels a variance would be appropriate in the Tratars’ situation. Mr. Tratar indicated he still disagreed that a 20-foot setback would be undesirable in a new subdivision. He then noted that he is not allowed to build on 68% of his corner lot. Commissioner DeVine indicated that, in order to determine whether Mr. Tratar’s claim that not being allowed to build on 68% of his lot is excessive, a person would need to gather information from other situations and determine the area of buildable land based on the setbacks and lot sizes. Chairperson Hanson indicated that the Commission had addressed this matter and apologized for not being able to provide an answer at this meeting due to lack of information. Ms. Shelly Olson of Chetak, Wisconsin asked if dog kennels were added to the Ordinance. Chairperson Hanson indicated that the Commission approved language allowing dog kennels in industrial zoning with a special use permit. Mr. Bart Rehbein of 1659 Lakeland Circle indicated that a resident had asked the Commission to look at parking of boats and RV’s in driveways and then asked if the Page 7 of 24 Commission had made any changes to that part of the Ordinance. Chairperson Hanson indicated that no changes were made to that part of the Ordinance. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that a resident had thought there was something wrong with the language of the Ordinance concerning parking in driveways but the Commission had determined that the way the Ordinance is written is what the Commission intended to allow. Chairperson Hanson indicated the Commission clarified the wording of the sentence but said the meaning is the same. Mrs. Camp-Barron of 7121 Centerville Road asked what page of Ordinance #4 covered parking in the driveway. Commissioner Wilharber indicated parking in the driveway was covered on Page 53 of the new Ordinance and Page 48 of the old Ordinance. Chairperson Hanson indicated that the Commission had changed the Ordinance to allow residents in the R-4 district of Royal Meadows who do not already have a garage to build an accessory structure of a maximum of 440 square feet. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated the word “minimum” was used where the word “maximum” should have been in the Ordinance concerning the 200 square feet allowed if a resident currently has a garage. Mr. Lloyd Drilling of 7185 Mound Trail asked why the Commission decided to allow dog kennels in industrial and not commercial. Commissioner Kilian indicated that commercial zoning is closer to residential and the Commission felt it would be better to have dog kennels further from the residential zoning to buffer residents from the noise. Mr. Richard Thompson of 1657 Peltier Lake Drive asked for an explanation of the wording on the notice he received. Chairperson Hanson explained that the notice had a list of things to be discussed at the public hearings at this meeting. Commissioner DeVine explained that the Ordinance requires that a minimum setback of 75 feet be maintained from the lake. Mr. Al LaMotte of 1643 Heritage clarified that nothing was being changed on the lakeshores. Commissioner DeVine clarified that the City had an issue when one developer built a house closer to the lake than the rest of the houses in the development and this addition to the Ordinance would keep the houses in line. Page 8 of 24 Mr. Steve Marcello of 1649 Peltier Lake Drive indicated that Rice Creek has required a minimum setback of 75 feet for a number of years. He then asked why the 75 feet has not been part of Centerville’s Ordinance until now. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that the City had not yet adopted the shoreline standards but said that the City could not be less restrictive than the state requirements, meaning that Rice Creek’s requirements would be the standard. Mrs. Camp-Barron asked if the public hearing was being continued to the Council meeting due to a lack of information. Chairperson Hanson indicated that the meetings are always continued to Council as the Commission merely makes a recommendation to Council and Council makes the final determination. Mrs. Camp-Barron asked if the document needed to discuss Mr. Tratar’s request would be provided to Council. Chairperson Hanson indicated that the document would be sent along with the Commission’s recommendation to Council. Mrs. Bates asked the date of the next Council meeting. Chairperson Hanson indicated the next Council meeting would be held on November 14, 2001. Commissioner Kilian indicated the agenda would be available the Friday before the meeting. Motion by Commissioner Kilian, seconded by Commissioner Wilharber to continue the public hearing to November 14, 2001 at the Council meeting. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. 3.Zoning Map Modifications Chairperson Hanson opened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m. Chairperson Hanson indicated that Staff had recommended that the conservation district be removed from the map. Commissioner Wilharber indicated that the conservation district was not included in the Comprehensive Plan or in Ordinance #4. Mr. Steve Marcello of 1649 Peltier Lake Drive asked why the conservation district across from Peltier Lake was being removed. Commissioner DeVine indicated that a conservation district is not addressed in the Ordinance or in the Comprehensive Plan. Page 9 of 24 Mr. Marcello expressed concern for changing the conservation district as he feels the area should remain in a conservation district. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that the Comprehensive Plan and the Ordinance do not infer any special circumstances for the conservation district. Mr. Lloyd Drilling of 7185 Mound Trail cautioned against removing the conservation district designation because someone could go back to old aerial photographs of the area and determine that it is not a natural wetland and it could be filled in. Mr. Richard Thompson of 1657 Peltier Lake Drive indicated the City of Centerville runs across part of Peltier and Centerville lakes and asked what the lake is zoned. Chairperson Hanson indicated the DNR controls all the water in the state. He further indicated that all water is publicly owned. Mr. Al LaMotte commented that removing the conservation district leaves the possibility that someone could put something in there. Ms. Joan Sturgeon of 7257 Centerville Road indicated she did not want the City to take away the conservation district as she enjoys the wetland and the wildlife it brings to her backyard. Commissioner DeVine indicated the Commission did not intend to impact any of the things mentioned by Ms. Sturgeon with its proposed changes. He then commented that the land is under water and not buildable. Commissioner DeVine commented that Mr. Marcello and Mr. Drilling had raised a valid concern regarding elimination of the conservation district that should be considered before proceeding. Mr. Ted Irkenback of 7377 Peltier Circle expressed concern that removing the conservation district and replacing it with R-1 zoning would mean that someone could build too close to the creek. Chairperson Hanson indicated that Rice Creek Watershed District would govern building in the floodway. Mr. Irkenback of 7377 Peltier Circle indicated he is concerned for the impact the change would have on wildlife and concerned that the change would allow encroachment into the creek area by developers. Commissioner Wilharber indicated the whole area is in the flood plain which is controlled by the Army Corp of Engineers, the Department of Natural Resources, and Rice Creek Watershed District. He further commented that anything existing in the flood plain, if destroyed, cannot be rebuilt. Page 10 of 24 Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated the area is not just a flood plain but a floodway and that carries even more stringent restrictions than a flood plain. Mr. Irkenback asked the Commission to look into the matter before changing the zoning. Commissioner Wilharber indicated he would like to ask Mr. Palzer the reason for the change. Mr. Don Simonson of 7263 Centerville Road indicated that he is concerned that if someone had aerial photographs they could determine the land was dry at one point and determine it is not a natural wetland and the City would lose control of the property. He further commented that someone could mitigate two to one and fill in the wetland. Mr. Marcello of 1649 Peltier Lake Drive suggested the City may need to amend Ordinance #4 to include the conservation district. Chairperson Hanson indicated that all public input would be considered before any changes would be made. He then reviewed the other changes to the zoning map for those in attendance. Commissioner McLean commented that he had thought this was a paperwork issue but said there have been some good points raised that he feels need to be investigated before the zoning is changed. Mr. Richard Thompson of 1657 Peltier Lake Drive indicated that when he built his house in the mid-1970’s the bucket used to dig out the area was left on his property. Mr. Norm Friteche of 1637 Peltier Lake Drive indicated that the area was dug out to provide more buildable property. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Kilian to continue the public hearing to the November 14, 2001 Council Meeting. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. III. APPEARANCES nd 1.Mr. Mike Quigley – Gor-Em (Eagle Pass 2 Addition) This matter was heard under public hearings. 2. Mr. Lloyd Drilling – Comprehensive Sign Plan (Uptown Center) Mr. Lloyd Drilling of 7185 Mound Trail asked the Commission if he needed to submit a comprehensive sign plan as he was informed by City Staff that he needed to do so. Page 11 of 24 Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that the Ordinance went into effect on May 1, 2001 and the permit was pulled on May 2, 2001. Mr. Drilling indicated he had no problem providing a comprehensive sign plan and then asked if a tenant, such as Hair Update, wanted to differ from the comprehensive sign plan would they be required to ask for a variance. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated a variance would not be necessary provided that the sign meets all the requirements of the sign code. Commissioner DeVine asked how much square footage of signage was being used. Mr. Drilling indicated that he was using a small portion of what the sign ordinance allows. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers reminded Mr. Drilling to make sure he does not allow one tenant a disproportionate amount of signage and end up with not enough for the last tenant. It was determined that Mr. Drilling did not need to submit a comprehensive sign plan due to the fact that the ordinance indicates that the comprehensive sign plan is part of the site review process and Mr. Drilling had completed the site review process prior to the May 1, 2001 effective date of the Ordinance change. Mr. Drilling asked if he needed a sign permit. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers recommended that Mr. Drilling check with Mr. Palzer to determine whether or not he needed a sign permit. Commissioner DeVine asked City Administrator Moore-Sykes to create a binder with the latest Ordinances because the Commission should have the Ordinance in front of it when discussing possible changes. He then commented that the letter he received from Ms. Bender contained incorrect information and said that anyone at City Hall quoting Ordinances should know what they are talking about. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers suggested that only Mr. Palzer and Ms. Moore-Sykes should be quoting Ordinances. 3. Mr. Brent Coatney – Mueller Pipeliners (Terminal Transport Building); Site Plan Mr. Brent Coatney, the President of Terminal Transport indicated that he is downsizing his business due to economic constraints and would like to sublease his facility in Centerville to Mueller Pipeliners. He then indicated that Mueller Pipeliners is a similar type of industry and should be a good business for Centerville. Jeff Nordness of 25582 East Comfort Drive, Chisago City, representing Mueller Pipeliners presented a grading plan and described for the Commission what Mueller Pipeliners wished to do. He then indicated that the one change in the plan is that Mueller Page 12 of 24 Pipeliners would like to use an aggregate base on the extended parking lot area rather than asphalt because track vehicles are very hard on the asphalt. Mr. Nordness explained that the company is involved in almost every community right now and is working with light rail transit and is working on the extension of Centerville Road utilities. He noted they are a very good community player and explained that representatives of the company helped clean up Siren, Wisconsin after the tornado this summer and also helped clean up after the flooding in south St. Paul. He further indicated that the company would bring commerce to Centerville as its fuel bill last year was $127,000. Commissioner Wilharber asked how the track vehicles would be brought into the building for maintenance. The Vice President of the company explained that they would be brought into the building on trailers. Mr. Nordness indicated there would not be any gasoline tanks on site and said the vehicles would go to the station and fuel up there. He then handed out pictures of the equipment and site. Commissioner Kilian read a portion of Ordinance #4 indicating that this type of usage is allowed. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers asked why Mr. Palzer had told them to come to the Planning Commission. Mr. Nordness indicated he was not sure. Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that Mr. Palzer had expressed concern for the outside storage and the request to use an aggregate base rather than asphalt. The Vice President of the company indicated that 90% of his equipment is out at the job site from spring through late fall and then comes in to be maintained during the slower winter months. Commissioner Wilharber asked how many vehicles would be stored at the facility during the winter. The Vice President of the Company indicated that approximately 100 vehicles would be stored on site during the winter. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers asked if the proposal met the 10% green space requirement. Mr. Nordness indicated that the plan is exactly what was approved in 1998. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers suggested Mr. Nordness make sure that the 10% greenspace as required by the new ordinance is met. Commissioner Wilharber asked if Mr. Nordness intended to provide screening to the south and east. Mr. Nordness indicated that there is a line of trees and some pine trees that were planted as a screen. Mr. Nordness indicated it was their intention not to take out any of the trees. Page 13 of 24 Commissioner Wilharber asked if Rice Creek had given its approval. Commissioner Wilharber commented that he comes from a military background and said they used concrete to move track vehicles back and forth. He also commented that he is concerned with fluids leaking from the vehicles. Mr. Nordness indicated that they would be using trailers to protect Mr. Coatney’s blacktop. The Vice President of the company indicated that the company’s fleet of vehicles is rotated every three years to keep them new. Chairperson Hanson indicated that he is concerned that with the aggregate base parking lot, hydraulic spills or gas spills could get into the ground water and the residents in the area all have private wells. The Vice President of the Company indicated that what is stored out back will mostly be trailers and compressor generators that are small. Chairperson Hanson expressed concern for security with the small pieces of equipment because the site is not fenced in. The Vice President of the company indicated that he has surveillance cameras that he intends to install. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers asked if the City Engineer had commented on the plans. Mr. Nordness indicated the City Engineer had not yet commented on the plans. Chairperson Hanson commented that Centerville does not have a filling station that sells diesel if that is the type of fuel used by the vehicles. The Vice President of the company indicated that the vehicles use regular unleaded gasoline. The Vice President of the Company indicated that Mueller Pipeliners sends promotional information all around the country that would say “Mueller Pipeliners of Centerville”. Mr. Nordness indicated that the safety programs to be held at the facility would bring 350 employees in for training. Mr. Nordness indicated that Mueller Pipeliners is considered one of the top 8 specialty contractors in the country. Commissioner DeVine expressed concern with allowing the aggregate parking lot and asked if there was a way to require a review of the parking every year. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers asked whether Rice Creek was aware of the aggregate base and not asphalt when it approved the plan as it is not specified on the letter from Rice Creek. Page 14 of 24 Mr. Nordness indicated he would get a clarification on the aggregate approval from Rice Creek. Commissioner Kilian read the permit that indicated that a pond is required. Mr. Brent Coatney indicated there is a pretty extensive pond in back. Commissioner Wilharber commented that Mr. Rehbein has had some problems with Rice Creek Watershed on various occasions. He then asked if the pond was there and dug. Mr. Coatney indicated that it was. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that the permit says that if the pond is not done it will need to be done. Chairperson Hanson asked how many people would be on site on a day-to-day basis. The Vice President of the company indicated that there would be approximately 12 people on site daily. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Kilian to recommend to Council approval of this site plan provided that the applicant provide proof of the 10% greenspace and information on the pond. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers suggested getting a letter from Rice Creek stating that the pond is in place and talking to the City Engineer to address concerns before the City Council meeting. IV. OLD BUSINESS 1.Ordinance #4 Amendments This matter was continued to the Council meeting on November 14, 2001. 2.Zoning Map Modifications Chairperson Hanson indicated that, based on resident input, more research was needed into the ramifications of eliminating the conservation district. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers suggested asking Mr. Palzer to provide information as to why he recommended eliminating the conservation district prior to the next Council meeting. She then commented that, if it is determined that the conservation district should remain, Ordinance #4 would need to be amended to allow for controls in that district. Page 15 of 24 Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner McLean to continue the public hearing to the November 14, 2001 City Council meeting. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting was recessed at 8:05 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:15 p.m. 3.Comprehensive Sign Plan – Uptown Center This matter was handled under appearances. 4.Sign Variance – Hair Update & Day Spa After discussion with Mr. Drilling concerning the Comprehensive Sign Plan for Uptown Center it was determined that no variance was needed for Hair Update & Day Spa. V. NEW BUSINESS nd 1. Mr. Mike Quigley – Gor-Em (Eagle Pass 2 Addition) This matter was heard earlier in the meeting. 2. KCI – Site Plan and Comprehensive Sign Plan (Lot 4, Block 1, Royal Industrial Park) KCI addressed the Commission and discussed the office/warehouse lease type of building they are proposing to construct in the industrial park. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers asked if KCI’s architect had copies of the City’s Ordinances when it did the plans. KCI indicated that their architect had a copy of the City’s Ordinances. th Chairperson Hanson asked if there would be berming on 20 Avenue. KCI indicated they had not planned to do so. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that berming is not required by the Ordinance. Chairperson Hanson asked if the plan meets the 10% greenspace requirement. Commissioner Wilharber indicated that Mr. Palzer would determine whether the plan meets the greenspace requirement. He then asked for the estimated tax value of the building. KCI indicated that they estimated the building to be valued between $50,000 and $65,000. Page 16 of 24 Motion by Commissioner Wilharber, seconded by Commissioner DeVine to recommend to Council approval of the site plan for KCI for Lot 4, Block 1, Royal Meadows Industrial Park. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that the City Engineer and the Fire Marshall would need to approve the site plan. 3. Coatney Enterprises – Mueller Pipeliners (Terminal Transport Building) – Site Plan This matter was handled earlier in the meeting. nd 4. Grassen Companies – Street Lights (Eagle Pass 2 Addition) Bert Casper of 6979 Eagle Trail told the Commission that Eagle Pass is a very unusual neighborhood due to the way the streets are built with curves. He then commented that the developer wanted the development that way because it is cheaper to construct the roads that way and there is more land available to sell and build homes on. Mr. Casper indicated that, at the time, he thought there was a benefit to the homeowners too because it is an attractive neighborhood and it is nice that no windows are directly across from your window. He then indicated that after having lived there for a while he has determined that it is not a safe place and it is not safe because it has inadequate lighting. Mr. Casper pointed out that the single-family homes have 7 street lights over the course of 4/10ths of a mile and his side of the development has 8 street lights over twice as much roadway. Mr. Casper explained that if a person is driving west on Eagle Trail and kids are riding bikes south on Eagle Trail they are on the same road but cannot see each other. He then commented that it is a very dangerous situation because kids, especially traveling in groups, are very inattentive to traffic. Mr. Casper told the Commission the development is dangerous because the corners are not lit. He then indicated that he thinks the newness of the development allowed the developer to slide as few lights as possible past the City and NSP and save themselves some money. Mr. Casper indicated that some of the corners are 120 degree bends and said that more lighting is needed in the development. He then asked the Commission to drive over to the development sometime after dark to see what he is talking about. Tracy Halstrom of 6960 Dupre Road drew a diagram of the development on the white board to illustrate the way the road curves and how headlights do not shine on the roadway. She indicated there is a petition signed by every member of the Association Page 17 of 24 asking for street lights. She then indicated that Centerville was on the Home and Garden Channel because of this coved development. Ms. Halstrom indicated that the single family homes have a light in every peak of the curves and the twinhome side of the development does not. She then indicated that there have been several near misses with dogs, kids, and strollers due to the limited visibility. Ms. Halstrom indicated that one night she almost hit some debris that some kids had drug out into the street. Ms. Halstrom asked the Commission to recommend more street lights in the development before someone gets hurt. She then indicated that the intersection where kids get to the park is on the twinhome side of the development and needs to be better lit. Commissioner DeVine indicated that Council was aware of the petition for streetlights and commented that he did not feel it would help to have the Planning Commission recommend approval. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that the street lights in the development were brought up a year ago and at that time it was Christmas and Council determined that there were too many Christmas lights to be able to adequately judge if the development was dark. She then said that now that this new development is coming in the matter has been brought to the forefront again. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that it may be possible to ask Gor-Em to install more lights as part of the developer’s agreement for this development but she said she is not sure Council is willing to do that as additional street lights cost the City money in continued maintenance costs and with the recent information that street lights cost the City $40,000 per year Council may be reluctant to install more. She also commented that other residents could argue that their street is dark and unsafe and ask the City for street lights. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that Council needed to consider all the pros and cons of requiring additional streetlights in the development before making a determination. Ms. Halstrom asked the Commission to explain the inequity of the single family homes having more lights than the twinhomes. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated she was not sure why there were more lights in the single family homes but speculated that it may be because the road is more curved in that part of the development. She then commented that the City Engineer had approved the design and Council had relied on the expert opinions it had at the time. She further commented that there are several issues to be discussed by Council concerning the Page 18 of 24 new development and said that she is not in favor, personally, of adding any more private roads to the development. Commissioner McLean indicated he drives on Dupre Road and it is darker than other streets. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers commented that it is dark in a lot of areas in the City. Commissioner McLean questioned whether there is a third-party safety survey that could be done to determine whether the lighting is inadequate. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers commented that Council may not be willing to order a study that the City would have to pay for due to budget constraints. Commissioner McLean commented that not looking into the safety of the development to determine if it is inadequately lit could open up the City to liability if a child were to be hit and that liability could far outweigh the cost to add a few street lights. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers commented that drivers are not supposed to overdrive their headlights and commented that she felt someone would be hard pressed to prove that the City is liable for an accident due to inadequate lighting. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner McLean to recommend that Council carefully consider the lighting in Eagle Pass. Commissioner Wilharber indicated he was on the Council at the time Eagle Pass was brought in and it was a PUD which was something very different. He then commented that Council spent a lot of time discussing the aspects of the development and finally approved the development based on the City Engineer’s recommendation. Commissioner Wilharber suggested the residents petition the City for streetlights and have the City assess the cost back to the homeowners for the cost of those streetlights. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers commented that adding more street lights adds to the City’s ongoing streetlight expenses. She then commented that there are other streets that are just as dark in Centerville and said that light pollution is also a consideration in this matter. Chairperson Hanson clarified that the motion is to recommend Council look at the situation to determine whether it is dangerous and not to recommend that Council approve additional streetlights. Commissioner DeVine indicated he did not think anybody would be able to determine whether it is dangerous or not and said his motion was to ask Council to carefully consider the lighting and make a decision. Page 19 of 24 Ms. Halstrom said it was a shame that the City is concerned about Rice Creek Watershed District and OSHA requirements but is not concerned for citizen safety. Chairperson Hanson indicated that he took offense to Ms. Halstrom’s comment and said it is not fair to generalize in that manner. He then clarified that the Commission has said that the matter warrants some investigation and discussion to determine if there is a need for lights. Chairperson Hanson indicated that there are other streets in the City that are dark and that have safety issues. He then commented that he is employed as a health and safety manager and spends his days ensuring people’s safety and to make the statement that the Commission does not care about the citizens of Centerville is wrong. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that the Association has been waiting a long time to have its lighting issues discussed. Ms. Halstrom asked whether it would be possible to install stop signs at the crosswalk where residents cross to the park. Commissioner Wilharber told her the Association can petition the City for a stop sign and the City will look at it. He then said he agreed with the comments of Chairperson Hanson and commented that the City is always looking for volunteers and he has served the City in various capacities for 28 years and things can be done if residents want them. He further commented that a stop sign may be good for the safety of the neighborhood. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that Council usually follows the recommendation of the police department when it pertains to stop signs. She then commented that the police department has indicated that a stop sign may not add much safety to an intersection because it gives residents a false sense of safety because they think cars will stop and they do not always do so. Commissioner McLean commented that the four main intersections should be looked at it. Commissioner Kilian thought the idea of the curved roadway was to slow people down. Commissioner Wilharber indicated the City Council could lower the speed limit if it chose to do so. Commissioner Kilian commented that it would be difficult to exceed 30 m.p.h. on the curved road. VOTE: Ayes – 4, Nays – 1 (Wilharber). Motion carried . Page 20 of 24 VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated that Mr. Michaels had sent in a letter asking that he be allowed to either leave his storage shed in its existing location even though City Staff has said it must be moved because it is too close to the house, or to have an extension to spring to move the shed because new grass has been planted and he does not want to disturb it. Commissioner Wilharber asked how close the shed was to the house. Commissioner Kilian indicated it must be 6 feet or less away from the house if the inspector cited it. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that Staff had told Mr. Michaels that he did not need a permit based on the size of the shed. She then indicated that the shed had fallen down and was rebuilt. She further indicated that Staff did not have information as to the close proximity of the shed to the house when the resident called to ask if he needed a permit and determined he did not need one based on the size of the shed. Commissioner Wilharber commented that the addition to Ordinance #4 to require a nominal fee for a permit for this type of matter would eliminate this type of problem in the future. Commissioner DeVine indicated he felt the Commission should allow him time to spring to move the shed. He then commented that there is another resident in the City that received a letter from the City telling him his shed needed to be moved within 30 days. He further commented that the shed has been there since the resident bought the home and nobody complained. He did say, however, that the resident had pulled a permit to add onto the house and the changes to Ordinance #4 gives the building official the authority to cite for other violations. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated the City was trying to improve the ordinance going forward by making changes. She then commented that the situation, as described, may be stretching the intent of the Ordinance. Commissioner DeVine said he thinks it is weird that the building permit generated the letter for the shed. He then commented that he thinks a witch hunt is going on in the City because letters were sent to a lot of people wasting a lot of taxpayer money when the letters were not correct. He further commented that he had received a letter indicating his signs were illegal and they are not. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that the City had been running without a chief for too long and said that now that there is a City Administrator things should get back to normal. She then commented that Council had directed the building official to take a look around when at a resident’s home for any obvious violations that could cause a safety issue. Page 21 of 24 Commissioner DeVine commented that he was told that the building official just signed the letters and did not generate the complaint. Commissioner Wilharber commented that someone had to tell someone else to produce the letters. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated he should be required to move the shed but should be given an extension of time to do so. She then indicated that for every time the City does not hold firm to the Ordinance it will have to be defended again and again. Commissioner Wilharber indicated he did not think everything was black and white. Commissioner Kilian indicated he is tired of hearing “why should I have to if he does not have to.” Commissioner DeVine indicated the Committee needed to look for a new member. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers asked if the Committee is allowed, in its bylaws, to remove someone for failure to attend meetings. Chairperson Hanson indicated that Mr. Michaels would need to come before Planning and Zoning to request a variance to leave the shed in its current location. Commissioner DeVine questioned how the City could make Mr. Michaels tear down his shed knowing he had received information from City Hall concerning the requirements for the shed. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that Staff had given him correct information based on the fact that the size of the shed did not require a permit and Staff was not aware of the location of the shed. Commissioner Wilharber asked if the City was going to apply its witch hunt to all properties in the City. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that anyone who gets a letter will assume they are part of a witch hunt. Commissioner Wilharber indicated he is curious as to how many other properties are out of compliance with City Code. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated there may be a lot of them. Commissioner Wilharber commented that those other properties have not asked for a building permit. Page 22 of 24 Council Liaison Broussard Vickers indicated that it is an efficient use of Staff time to have staff look around when out at a property for violations rather than make a specific trip. Commissioner Wilharber suggested the City should ask him to come in and ask him if he wants to pay $175.00 for the variance knowing he may not get it or if he just wants an extension to move the shed. Motion by Commissioner Wilharber, seconded by Commissioner Kilian to ask Mr. Bill Michaels to come in and explain to the Planning Commission whether he wants a variance to leave the shed in its current location or an extension of time to spring to move the shed and to ask him how close the shed is to his home and when he called in concerning rebuilding the shed. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Hanson indicated that Barry Brainard had sent a letter to the Planning Commission resigning his position due to family obligations. Commissioner Wilharber thanked Mr. Brainard for his years of service to the City. Commissioner McLean indicated that Mr. Brainard brought a nice perspective to the Commission. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers asked City Administrator Moore-Sykes to research whether the Planning Committee is allowed, by its bylaws, to remove a member for failure to attend meetings. She also asked City Administrator Moore-Sykes to put in a notice of vacancy. VII. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1.October 2, 2001 Meeting Minutes Commissioner Wilharber requested the following changes: On Page 2 correct the spelling of “Letendre” and “Stella”. On Page 5 correct the spelling of the names. Commissioner McLean requested the following change: On Page 13 insert the word “Commissioner” before his name. Motion by Commissioner DeVine, seconded by Commissioner Wilharber to approve the October 2, 2001 Meeting Minutes as amended. All in favor. Motion carried. Commissioner Kilian abstained from voting as he was not in attendance at that meeting. Council Liaison Broussard Vickers asked if the Commission was comfortable with having a list of the Ordinance #4 changes being made up to send to Council. Page 23 of 24 Chairperson Hanson indicated he would like the list e-mailed to him along with the minutes taken by Mr. Palzer at the work session to make sure that the discussion from that meeting matches the list. He then asked that any comments of Committee members be e-mailed to him for consideration. City Administrator Moore-Sykes indicated she would e-mail the information to the Committee and asked that Committee Members e-mail any comments to her to forward to all Committee Members. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Kilian, seconded by Commissioner DeVine to adjourn the November 6, 2001 Planning Commission Meeting at 9:50 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Page 24 of 24