Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-09-18 Council Minutes CITY OF CORCORAN SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 18, 2003 H:\City Hall Information\CITY GOVERNMENT\Council, Commissions & Committees\Council Information\Council Minutes\Previous Years\2003 - Need to PDF\09.18.03 Special Council Minutes.doc 1 The City Council met in special session on September 18, 2003 at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were Councilors Bucher, Gageby, Lymangood and Thomas; Planning Commissioner Ebert, and staff members Administrator Vergin, Planners Lindahl and Jansson, and Engineer Vander Top. Excused absent were Councilor Guenthner and Commissioner Kluck. Acting Mayor Gageby called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. MOTION by Bucher, seconded by Thomas to approve the agenda with the addition of Appointment from Planning Commission to replace Commissioner Hanson, and Validation of Process. Voting Aye: Bucher, Gageby, Lymangood and Thomas. (Motion Carried) MOTION by Thomas, seconded by Bucher to approve the August 21, 2003 minutes as presented. Voting Aye: Bucher, Gageby, Lymangood and Thomas. (Motion Carried) Public Forum – No one addressed the Council. Acting Mayor Gageby questioned if the Planning Commission had appointed a replacement for resigned Commissioner Hanson to serve on this working group. Commissioner Ebert stated that they had not, but would address it at their next meeting. Section 1060, Performance Standards Planner Lindahl summarized the Performance Standards, noting that there were three key areas where changes had been made. Lighting was more restrictive; Parking included conditions for shared parking and reduction in stalls with council discretion; and Landscaping was modified to allow more flexibility. Lindahl also noted some issues raised by council members prior to the meeting. Outside Storage item G will be deleted as it is repetitive. Storage of refuse and garbage is not intended to eliminate the option of composting. Building Standards will be modified to be reflective of the City’s current ordinance. Lighting – council agreed to allow one foot-candle, rather than 1/2. Parking – council agreed to retain the requirement that if an existing business expands its structure by 10% or more then the entire parking lot shall be upgraded to meet the current provisions. For calculating parking spaces agreed to use the standard of 18 inches of seating for stadium, arenas, churches and other places where bench and pew type seating is provided. Requested that conditions be included to allow for compact parking spaces. Landscaping – Agreed that no more than 33% of the required number of trees shall be of one species. That irrigation shall be required on all new multi-family and nonresidential development, where municipal water is available. Addressed the reduction in front setbacks up to 40%, a 100 foot setback could become a 60 foot setback if landscaping is intensified. Staff was directed to increase those requirements. Subdivision 12 under General Performance Standards will be deleted. Called To Order Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance Agenda Approval 8/21/03 Minutes Approved Public Forum Replacement to Group Performance Standards CITY OF CORCORAN SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 18, 2003 H:\City Hall Information\CITY GOVERNMENT\Council, Commissions & Committees\Council Information\Council Minutes\Previous Years\2003 - Need to PDF\09.18.03 Special Council Minutes.doc 2 Public Comments: Mike Brady questioned the landscaping requirements for clarification. Section 1070, Administration, Permits and Procedures Planner Lindahl summarized the section pertaining to Administration, Permits and Procedures. This section has been expanded to include Interim Use Permits, Administrative Permits and addresses the Development Rights Program. One key element that has been added is the requirement of electronic files, which has been strongly advocated for by the Planning Commission. After some discussion it was recommended that a decision regarding electronic files be laid over to allow staff and the planning commission to further address this matter. Development Rights Maps – agreed that the map shall be revised as necessary to reflect the number of remaining rights on a property. Agreed that Site Plan modifications involving 10% or less could be approved administratively. Public Comment: Bill Halverstadt – commented that he would like the city to be more liberal, rather then high tech, to let the “small guy” do things. Section 1080, Enforcement Provisions There were no recommended changes or comments on this section. Area Plans and Guidelines Design Guidelines: The design guidelines are advisory only in an effort to preserve the unique rural character of Corcoran, establish a consistent, high quality baseline design standard for all districts, maintain a high quality, harmonious visual environment and communicate the community’s expectations for new development in Corcoran. No changes were made. Section 1050, Downtown Overlay District: This applies to the downtown area east of County Road 116. It consists of approximately 80 acres. Addressed Subdivision 4, a, b and c, regarding prohibited uses. It was agreed that these three items should be deleted so as to allow such uses with drive-throughs, auto- dominated uses or similar, and single use one story commercial developments over 30,000 square feet. Public Comment: Mr. Wickham – Commented favorably on the transportation planning. Dorothy Theis – Wants City to be sure that they retain enough right-of-way for the expansion of County Road 116. Concerned that the City may be “dreaming too high in the sky”. Engineer Vander Top responded that the City will require enough easements in the event that County Road 116 would become a four lane. It is the City’s Public Comments Administration, Permits and Procedures Public Comments Enforcement Area Plans & Guidelines Downtown Overlay Public Comment CITY OF CORCORAN SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 18, 2003 H:\City Hall Information\CITY GOVERNMENT\Council, Commissions & Committees\Council Information\Council Minutes\Previous Years\2003 - Need to PDF\09.18.03 Special Council Minutes.doc 3 responsibility to make sure that development happens the way the City wants it to happen. Rural Residential Standards At the last meeting it was discussed that rather than having a minimum lot size, the City should require a minimum buildable space. Staff re-looked at this and has some concerns, and therefore at this time staff is recommending that the City set the minimum lot size for the Rural Residential district at 2.5 acres, with a minimum contiguous upland area of 1.5 acres. In the Agriculture district a larger lot size of 10 acre minimum, with the 1.5 acre minimum upland area. It was also pointed out that the draft ordinance will not allow landowners to create outlots or lots without building rights. Recommendation accepted, no changes made. Public Comment: Bill Halverstadt – the 2.5 acre minimum is too much if alternate systems are available. Need to preserve farm land. Would like to see the 2 acre minimum retained. Questioned if the City would allow bonus rights with clustering using a common septic system. Councilor Thomas responded to Mr. Halverstadt, indicating that the City is looking at an Open Space Preservation Platting process which may address this, but the city is still undecided. Some of the changes being made in the ordinance are reflective of coming compliant with State and other governing bodies, such as tighter controls on wetlands. Infrastructure Engineer Vander Top provided an overview of the maps that have been prepared for each of the Districts, which will be displayed at the open house. They have created two maps; the first is Buildable Area that identifies where the wetlands, floodplains, buffers, and natural resource areas are located. The second map is the Sanitary Sewer map which utilizes the information from Buildable Area map, identifying the areas to be serviced and where those pipes are proposed to be built. This is a concept plan which allows for further planning to estimate the number of units that could be created and the costs associated with providing services to those units. This will tell the city if it is feasible. Planner Lindahl noted that this will help to validate, and determine if in fact 20,000 square foot lots will pay for themselves. Engineer Vander Top briefly addressed the timing of the SE and NE interceptors. Based on assumptions it appears that the construction planning will be done in 2004 with construction beginning in 2005. Suggested that the city invite the appropriate individuals involved in this process to a meeting so that everyone is kept informed. Public Comment: Mike Brady – Questioned the likelihood of the construction for both interceptors. Engineer Vander Top responded that the SE it is more likely to occur within the time frame previously addressed, still unsure as to the timing of NE interceptor. Rural Residential Standards Public Comments Infrastructure Public Comments CITY OF CORCORAN SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 18, 2003 H:\City Hall Information\CITY GOVERNMENT\Council, Commissions & Committees\Council Information\Council Minutes\Previous Years\2003 - Need to PDF\09.18.03 Special Council Minutes.doc 4 Other Business The newsletter for the Open House on September 23 was sent out on September 11. Articles will appear in the Crow River News. Addressed the schedule of the upcoming meetings. It was agreed that the November 20 special meeting will be rescheduled to December 18. Councilor Bucher addressed validation. Will the concepts become reality and are they the right thing for the community? How is this validated? Engineer Vander Top addressed this concern. The downtown area is most likely premature at this time. So the question becomes does the city lower their standards to get what they can, rather then what they want. The infrastructure will be validated through this process. It will determine if what we build will pay for itself, as we do not want to mortgage the city to build infrastructure that will not be supported. Development needs to support the costs of the infrastructure. This is a question that the city council will continue to struggle with and make decisions on as development applications come in. The ongoing question will be “is this what Corcoran wants?” If it won’t pay for itself then we need to wait. It is hard to predict development. Transportation drives development. If the City had an I94 or 610 within its boundaries these questions wouldn’t be a concern. Planner Lindahl suggested that the city consider doing RFP’s to seek developers for the downtown area if development is not proposed in the manner or time desired by the City. The city will be reviewing the ordinances on an annual basis and the Comp Plan is required to be revisited in 2008. The area plans are concept plans that will help build the framework of Corcoran’s future. Assessment of meeting – Bill Halverstadt thanked the group for being open. The group thanked staff. MOTION by Thomas, seconded by Lymangood to adjourn, 9:20 p.m. Voting Aye: Bucher, Gageby, Lymangood and Thomas. (Motion Carried) _____________________________ Susan Vergin, City Administrator Other Business Public Notification Meeting Scheduled Validation Process Assessment of Meeting Adjournment