MINUTES CITY OF LINDSTRÖM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WEDNESDAY, JULY 7, 2015 7:00 P.M. City Hall Chambers 13292 Sylvan Ave., Lindstrom, MN CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE: Vice Chair Erlandson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. CALL OF ROLL: Members Present: Members Absent: Others Present: Commissioners Joe Rogers, Dave Waldoch, Mike Fricke, Orris Erlandson Chair Mike Klun; Commissioners Kevin Backer, Greg Donovan City Administrator John Olinger, Deputy Clerk Kathy George, Council Liaisons Curt Flug & Bill Schlumbohm, Gary Gerke, Jay Michels, Steve Volkman, Tom Leritz, Sue Jungbauer, Lonnie Strand, Lou Sibik, Jodie & Don McClure, Tom & Jan Evensen CONSIDERATION OF AGENDA: Motion by Rogers, second by Waldoch, to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried 4-0. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES: Motion by Fricke, second by Rogers, to approve the June 3, 2015 minutes as presented. Motion carried 4-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PRESENTATIONS: 1. Public Hearing Request for Variance 12518 Mentzer Trail. Thomas Leritz is requesting a variance to City Ordinance 154.265(B) to expand an existing nonconforming structure by constructing an addition for a bathroom and one bedroom. The existing structure is located within the 50 setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark of South Lindstrom Lake (City Ordinance 154.219(B)(1). 154.265 (B) Any structure or use lawfully existing upon the effective date of this chapter shall not be enlarged, but may be continued at the size and in the manner of Page 1 of 7
operation existing upon the date, except as hereinafter specified or subsequently amended. The Public Hearing notice was published in the June 25 th and July 2 nd editions of the Chisago County Press, and it was mailed to all property owners located within 350 of the subject property. Craig Wills of the DNR reviewed the request and submitted no comment. The City received two letters in support of the request; one from Carole and Brian Evensen at 12510 Mentzer Trail, and one from Richard and Shannon Schirber at 12662 Mentzer Trail. Administrator Olinger explained that when considering a request for variance the City Code states the following: (A) The Planning Commission shall act as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and shall have the following powers: (2) To hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration. Undue hardship as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in M.S. 216C.06, Subd. 2, as it may be amended from time to time, when in harmony with the ordinance. The Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person s land is located. The Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The Council may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect adjacent properties. (B) In considering all requests for a variance or appeal, the Planning Commission acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and the Council acting upon decisions of the Planning Commission, shall make a finding of fact so appropriate that the proposed action will not: (1) Impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property; (2) Unreasonably increase the congestion in the public right-of-way; (3) Increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety; Page 2 of 7
(4) Unreasonably diminish or impair established property values within the neighborhood; (5) Cause an unreasonable strain upon existing municipal facilities and services; or (6) Be contrary in any way to the spirit and intent of this chapter. (C) The Planning Commission acting as the Board of Appeals, or the Council upon decisions of the Planning Commission, may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under this chapter for property in the zone where the affected person s land is located. A variance may be granted only when there exists a non-economic hardship in the reasonable use of a specific parcel of property. A non- economic hardship shall exist when by some reason of: (1) Narrowness, shallowness or shape of a specific parcel of property or a lot existing and of record upon the effective date of this chapter; or (2) Exceptional topographic or water conditions of a specific parcel of land or lot the strict application of the provisions of this chapter would result in exceptional difficulties in developing the property in a legally permissible manner. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals, or the Council acting upon decisions from the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, may impose conditions in granting the variance to insure compliance and to protect adjacent properties. Olinger stated that in this case, the structure exists as a one-room cabin with no bathroom facilities and no bedroom. Mr. Leritz wishes to expand the structure to add a bathroom and a separate bedroom. The current structure encroaches into the 50 setback from the Ordinary High Water mark. The property slopes on the south end from an elevation of 920 to 908 down to the house/cabin. Mr. Leritz will also be hooking onto the City s sewer and water system. The property was annexed into the City in 2008. Olinger proposed the following findings of fact: the action will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, will not unreasonably increase the congestion in the public right-of-way, will not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety, will not unreasonably diminish or impair established property values, will not cause strain upon existing municipal facilities, and is not contrary in any way to the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Regarding the hardship, Olinger stated that a reasonable use for the property would be as single family residential. Without a bathroom the facility is not reasonably usable and causes a public health risk. A separate bedroom is a reasonable use within a single family structure. Mr. Leritz bought an existing seasonal cabin that was annexed into the City and the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. Olinger stated that staff supports a variance for the addition of a bathroom and separate bedroom that does not surpass the existing structure setback from the lake. Page 3 of 7
Commissioner Fricke asked about the height of the addition. Mr. Leritz stated that it depends on how the roof lines up. Lou Sibik, president of the Lake Park Villas Association, stated that the Association is supportive of the variance and of removing the outhouse on the property. With no further comments offered from the audience, Vice Chair Erlandson closed the Public Hearing. Commissioner Rogers stated that granting the variance is a win/win, and agreed that a bathroom is a necessity. Commissioner Fricke stated that without a bathroom, the cabin/house is uninhabitable. Commissioner Waldoch questioned the size of the structure. Even with the addition of a bedroom and bathroom, the structure will still be less than the minimum size required. Administrator Olinger confirmed that this is an existing non-conforming structure. Mr. Leritz is not changing that aspect of the building. He further stated that the project will be well within the 25% maximum impervious surface coverage allowed. Waldoch pointed out that if a new garage is built, the garage cannot be more than 75% of the size of the cabin/house. Mr. Leritz stated that he is aware of that and has been revising his plans. Waldoch then stated that he would like to add two findings to the findings of fact proposed by Olinger. City Ordinance requires a minimum of one bedroom for singlefamily residential property, and the use of an outhouse is not authorized, concurring that the property is uninhabitable. Motion by Waldoch, second by Fricke, to recommend approval of the Variance Request of Mr. Leritz to build an addition of one bedroom and one bathroom, not to exceed the setback of the current structure, incorporating the findings of facts as discussed. Motion passed 4-0. The City Council will consider the recommendation at the July 16 th Council Meeting. Commissioner Erlandson clarified that Mr. Leritz will be paying the assessments for sewer and water services. 2. Lonnie Strand Morningside Court. Lonnie Strand owns property at 29365 Morningside Court. Morningside Court is a gravel road off of Olinda Trail. In 2006, the City planned a street and stormwater improvement project. However, due to half of the affected property being located in Chisago Lake Township, the City did not proceed with the project and planned to revisit the plan in seven years. At the seven year mark, the City was in the middle of the Highway 8 project and redirected its street maintenance money. The Morningside Court stormwater project was reconsidered this year; however, due to lack of resources, and the requirement to address stormwater on Minnesota Avenue, the project was again put on hold. The issue of the Township property still has not been addressed as well. Ms. Strand stated that this is the third time she has come to the City on this issue. She has owned her property for 19 years. The stormwater runoff is not being controlled. Looking at the current 5-year Capital Improvement Plan, she noted that the project has now been pushed out to 2018. The plans include curb, gutter, and paved street. Ms. Page 4 of 7
BUSINESS: Strand is the lowest point on the road. She stated that 111,000 square feet of her yard is unusable because it is under water. Administrator Olinger explained what is happening with the stormwater in that area. The elevations do not allow for ponding, water just pools, there are no ditches. He explained that the City has been discussing ways to try and work with the Township on annexations for properties that are accessed by City streets, have sewer and water available, and do not receive any services from the Township. Olinger stated that the Public Works Committee considered a smaller project to try and address the stormwater issue; however, the cost would be about $20,000 and it would not be a permanent solution. A portion of the project that is proposed for 2018 can be assessed to the property owners; however, at this point, 50% of the property area involved is in the Township. The City cannot assess Township properties. Motion by Rogers, Second by Waldoch, to recommend the City Council move forward with this project for 2016 construction, and further to move forward with annexation of the property that is located in the Township but entirely surrounded by the City. Motion passed 4-0. Strand was encouraged to attend the July 16 th City Council Meeting as well. 1. MIDS Ordinance In April, the Commission left off on the review of the draft MIDS Ordinance with section 151.045. Commission Members expressed a desire to hold a meeting with only the MIDS Ordinance on the Agenda, and to finish it up. Motion by Rogers, second by Waldoch, to limit the Agenda for the August 4 th Planning Commission meeting to the MIDS Ordinance, unless something comes up that has to be addressed. Motion passed 4-0. 2. 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan Administrator Olinger reported that the Public Works Commission has completed their review of City streets. He presented the final 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan for consideration, as follows: 2016 Reconstruct Newell from Broadway to Olinda. Estimated cost is $82,000. Olinger stated that this project may not be needed. 2016 Pave, curb, gutter, stormwater for Morningside Court from Olinda to 29365 Morningside Court. Estimated cost is $276,300. This was planned for 2018; however, the Planning Commission agreed tonight to recommend that it be moved up to 2016. A portion of this project can be assessed to property owners. The property that is still in the Township will need to be annexed. Page 5 of 7
2017 New Police facility. Estimated cost is $2,000,000. Olinger stated that this is very preliminary and the Police Commission will be working on plans. They are considering existing buildings as well as new construction. Much work and discussion will need to take place before moving forward. 2017 288 th from Olinda Trail to Lakeside Trail. Estimated cost is $1,229,332 and includes widening the roadbed, adding sidewalk, curb, and extending the gravity sewer. Olinger stated that this is a top priority due to safety concerns. 2018 Reconstructing Maple Street from 1 st Avenue North to end and 3 rd to CSAH 20. Estimated cost is $300,000. A portion of the project can be assessed to property owners. 2018 Reconstruct Olinda Trail from Highway 8 to 3 rd, adding curb, gutter & sidewalk. Estimated cost is $330,000. Olinger stated that this is a safety concern as well. Past that point, he stated, options need to be discussed because the street is too narrow and there is no room to widen it. Perhaps a one-way will be considered. 2019 Lehigh/306 th /Lincoln Avenue sewer/water/road project. Estimated cost is $600,000. Olinger stated that this is a safety concern with the gravel road being narrow and winding, there is no sewer and water, fire trucks can t get back there, and there is no exit route. 2019 Renovate/expand Fire Hall. Estimated cost is $2,000,000. The project will allow fire trucks to pull through, rather than backing in and out off of Highway 8. 2019 Reconstruct 295 th from Neal to Olinda Trail, adding curb, gutter and sidewalk. Estimated cost is $553,193. Olinger stated that the roadbed is in bad shape. Motion by Rogers, second by Waldoch, to approve the proposed 5-year Capital Improvement Plan and forward it to the City Council for their approval. Motion passed 4-0. 3. Mother-in-Law Apartments At the June meeting, Commission Members reviewed the County s policy regarding Mother-in-Law Apartments and asked staff to prepare a draft policy. Commission Members reviewed the draft prepared by staff. Motion by Waldoch, second by Fricke, to recommend adoption of the Mother-in-Law Apartments Policy by the City Council. Motion passed 4-0. 4. Swimming Pool Ordinance Review and Discussion Staff has been reviewing the current Swimming Pool Ordinance and has determined that the Ordinance needs to be updated. The current ordinance makes reference to Appendix G of the International Residential Codes; however, that Appendix has been rescinded. Staff recommends incorporating the barrier requirements that were in the Appendix into the City s ordinance. Commission members discussed requiring opaque fence material and requiring fences to be non-climbable. There was also discussion about the height of fencing and placing fencing on top of above-ground Page 6 of 7
pools. Consensus of the Commission Members was to put this item on the September Planning Commission Agenda for review and discussion, with setting a public hearing date after that time. MISC. DISCUSSION Administrator Olinger asked if Commission Members were available to help out in the Karl Oskar Days information booth. He also shared a survey that will be handed out at the booth. The survey asks participants to rate the City on areas that we believe make us a Great Place. ADJOURNMENT: Motion to adjourn by Rogers, second by Waldoch. Motion carried 4-0. Time 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Deputy Clerk Kathy George Page 7 of 7