SAUK RAPIDS PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Meeting
Monday, April 6, 2015
MINUTES
Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance. Commissioner Wilcox called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm and read the agenda statement.
Members present: David Rixe, Curt Gullickson, Tim Wilcox, Art Buhs, Tom Kosloske, Kevin Renslow.
Members absent: Kevin Hines
Also present: Todd Schultz, Community Development Director; Kelly Travis, Recording Secretary
Approval of Agenda. Commissioner Buhs made a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Commissioner Rixe seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Approval of Minutes. Commissioner Kosloske made a motion to approve the March 2, 2015 minutes as presented. Commissioner Buhs seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
Visitors. None.
New Business.
6A.William Sartell Vacation Request
Mr. Schultz read his staff report stating that the applicant is a homeowner on an existing lot and also owns another lot behind his primary. The lot without the home is landlocked and cannot be accessed except from the applicant’s driveway. The applicant would like to add onto his existing garage that is on his primary lot but the addition will go onto the landlocked parcel and cross the drainage and utility easement. Therefore the applicant is requesting to vacate that easement to allow his construction to move ahead. According to the utility companies, there are no utilities in the easement that would be vacated.
The City Council may vacate an easement only upon a finding that the vacation is “in the interest of the public” meaning the public must benefit, in some manner, from the vacation. Staff has no concerns with the request and only asks that the applicant follow the current grading plan.
One other note, the two parcels are not from the same plat; therefore, they cannot be combined. We will need a deed restriction placed on the two parcels that would require the two parcels to forever be attached unless released by the City at some point. This would also allow for the setbacks to be treated in a more fair way on the parcel.
Mr. Buhs made a motion to recommend the approval of the easement vacation on the condition that the applicant pay for any expenses relating to the deed restriction document and the recording at Benton County. Mr. Gullickson seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
6B.Residential Property Maintenance Ordinance
Mr. Schultz read his staff report stating that concerns conveyed to staff regarding poorly maintained buildings and properties has been on the rise over the past several years. Councilors have expressed concerns as well as residents; therefore, staff has been researching our options in addressing the concerns. One thing is clear, our current ordinance does not address many of the existing issues in a meaningful way so in order to tackle the problem we will need new ordinance language. Legal found an existing ordinance in Golden Valley that we used as a foundation for our new code. I presented a rough draft to the Planning Commission last month to get some feedback. I have made some changes to the code based on that feedback.
The code is doing two things. It is requiring the buildings be maintained to a minimum standard relating to siding, shingles, paint, etc. It also is regulating vehicles in yards. It is regulating things that we haven’t regulated before; therefore, it will ruffle some feathers so please read it carefully and try to apply it to some properties that you are aware of in town.
The code will be enforced using the City’s Administrative Penalties code which allow staff to write tickets to anyone that fails to address ordinance violations after a reasonable notice by the City. If the ticket is not paid, it can be added to the taxes. In talking to Golden Valley their process has had issues, but it has generally worked well for them.
You'll notice I define the front of the house and the back of the house. Our ordinance states the front of the house on a corner lot is on the narrowest part of the lot. That could potentially create issues.
Mr. Kosloskequestioned Subdivision 5,Minimum Exterior Standards, the percentages.
Mr. Schultz stated, that is incorrect and this has been fixed in his version.
Mr. Kosloskeasked about P, Outdoor Wood Storage.#1. “Except for firewood and construction materials necessary for on-site work. . .”Would that limit someone that would have a wood shop in his garage and build cabinets or something where he would have wood laying around?
Mr. Schultz said, yes, that would. If someone was doing that for commercial, that's against our ordinance. If someone was doing that for their own personal use, they could not do that unless the wood was stored in their garage.
Mr. Kosloske asked, sell fire wood?
Mr. Schultz stated, we don't want you to have a year round garage sale for wood.
Mr. Kosloske asked, so if you cut wood down, you can't sell it?
Mr. Schultz said, this is referencing storing wood. So you would be fine. But you can't have wood there for a perpetual basis and have a sign there wood for sale for an extended period of time.
Mr. Wilcoxasked, what is the ok amount of wood to be stored?
Mr. Schultzsaid, it's subjective, if someone has a for sale sign on it perpetually and it comes to our attention. We don't have problems with fire wood in town now.
Mr. Buhs said, the word phrase importing wood for resale. If someone is importing wood is what we are talking about isn't it?
Mr. Schultzsaid, yes, but storage also. If someone cut down a tree, you can't store for a long period of time.
Mr. Rixe said, on Q you say pontoon.
Mr. Schultz said, I changed the language and said vehicles as described above.
Mr. Rixe said, the County Fair exemption. Does the car show ever draw that much attention that that would be an issue?
Mr. Schultzsaid, that's a good question, I don't know. We could add a sentence that says any other events would need council approval.
Mr. Renslow said, I live by the fair grounds and I can tell you that the people that rent out space for the fair do for the car show also. You may just want to include it.
Mr. Renslow said, on Q, Vehicles and Trailers, parked in the side yard as long as they are 5 feet, my garage is 4 feet to the property line so I would be parking on the property line.
Mr. Schultz said, you are correct. I'm not sure that that 5 foot setback is going to work. I think that may have to come out.
Mr. Kosloske asked, the front of the house, how do you determine that?
Mr. Schultz said, let's visually talk about that and showed a property on the screen to explain. What the ordinance says is that the front of the lot will be the portion of the lot that is the most narrow on a public street. The reason that is is because the front yard set back is 25 feet and the back has to be one quarter of the lot, if we did it that way it would be too narrow. I could go back and reword this and create language to specifically address corner lots and say any portion of the home on a public street could be considered the front.
Mr. Kosloske asked, so in the picture he would park anywhere in the front there?
Mr. Schultzsaid, yes, do you want me to rewrite that before the council meeting or I can bring it back to the planning commission.
Mr. Gullickson asked, is there some way we can consider the front of the house the front of your house. The postal service has you address the front of your house. Would it not be advantageous for us to consider that the front of the house?
Mr. Schultz said, I'm not sure it would fix the problem. If that's what we go to, as long as that's where their driveway was, that would work.
Mr. Kosloske asked, what if on the side you change that for the corner lot?
Mr. Schultzsaid, we basically allow 1 driveway per house. Mr. Schultz showed some examples on the screen to better explain the current ordinance and the language of the new ordinance.
Mr. Kosloskesaid, the corner lot has to be defined better than what it currently is.
Mr. Renslow said, some people would have a garage on that side. So we need to come up with some wording. They would have a house that faces one way and a garage that faces another way.
Mr. Schulz said, that's a good way to look at that, say on corner lots you may have a second driveway.
Mr. Buhs asked, would you add that it would need to be an egress to the garage?
Mr. Schultzsaid, we could. I want your feedback.
Mr. Renslow said, I have a guy next to me that works on cars, but he's got 7 cars on his property.
Mr. Schultzsaid, there is a property I went by and I wasn’t sure how it would apply.
Mr. Renslow said, there's people though, that's their hobby, tearing part cars. And for some people that's an eye sore.
Mr. Buhs asked, would it be appropriate to look at some of these addresses? 935 3rdAve. North, SaukRapids.
Mr. Schultz pulled this address up and stated, the way I have the new language says that you can't have junk in your yard even if it's fenced.
Mr. Gullickson asked, why do vehicles have to be currently licensed?
Mr. Schultz said, we don't want junk. Is it a hobby vehicle? Is it a repairable? In what instances wouldn’t it be licensed? Something you’retrying to repair or something you don't drive often?
Mr.Gullicksonsaid, you're already requiring them to be drivable.
Mr. Rixeasked, is there some kind of language you can come up with that they have to be moved in a certain amount of time?
Mr. Schultzsaid, police can monitor if it's been moved if it's on the street. They can put a chalk mark on there. If it's in the back yard, you couldn't do that.
Mr. Kosloske asked, what if the guy’s hobby is racing a car out at Golden Spike?
Mr.Schultzsaid, he'd have to keep it in the garage.
Mr. Kosloske said, so he can't keep it in the back and cover it up?
Mr.Schultzsaid, not the way it's currentlywritten. He'd have to keep it in his garage.
Mr. Renslow said, I think this is going to be a problem. Some people have hobbies, we don't want to take away from them.
Mr.Schultzsaid, yes, this will be.
Mr. Rixeasked, could it be addressed with a rodent issue? Rats, mice.
Mr. Schulz said, we talked about that at staff level but we weren't sure how to monitor that so we took it out. I'm not sure how you would deal with that.
Mr. Gullickson said, the currently licensed thing, the only way the people will know is if they go on the property and look and get the vin #. I really have a problem with that. We don't want junk vehicles that makes sense. But currently licensed I don’t think.
Mr.Schultzsaid, OK.
Mr. Renslow asked, to get a permit to work on the car, would that cost anything?
Mr.Schultzsaid, I don't know. Everything on that back page, that's all current language.
Mr. Buhs said, what would be best for the city would be some language to pull these vehicles inside. I believe it's about what the majority might want and really that's my opinion, we should move forward on some of that. We can't worry too much about the special interest, small minoritygroups.
Mr. Schultz said, the currently licensed, that is existing language.
Mr. Gullickson said, I'm thinking of what Art just said. Building a cement slab on a property to get the property up, keep rodents out, but there's nothing in there that I can see.
Mr. Wilcox said, you can only have so much impervious surface.
Mr. Schultz said, currently that is not something that the city monitors.
Mr.Schultzsaid, a majority of the questions/concerns relates to cars as we've discussed it. Do you want to talk that through a little bit and see if we can find some consensus on cars and yards.
Mr. Buhs asked, is that a good place for a subcommittee to work on?
Mr. Schultz said, it could be. I will say, no matter how well you think it through there will be things that we don't think of or that don't apply how you meant it to, so we will need to revisit this a few times. We have so many different examples of things in Sauk Rapids with the old part of town and new part of town, we'll create issues for people we don't want to create, but we'll have to find them out after the fact and address them.
Mr. Gullickson said, one thing I don't see is a penalty section.
Mr.Schultzsaid, what we would do is adopt an administrative citation process. When I bring this to the council, I would bring fees. The first step, someone is found to be in violation, they get a letter from me or police and get a time frame to respond. If they don't respond, they get a second letter. If they don’t response or are not doing anything, they would get a citation. If they don't pay the fine, it would double. If they don't pay, it would go to court and could then be added to their taxes. They have the option to appeal and go to the City Council if they want.
Mr. Wilcoxsaid, so this thing could drag on?
Mr. Schultz said, it could. In GoldenValley they say it usually doesn't go that far. Most people take care of it. But each year there are a few that are issues. Golden Valley said courts tend to be lenient, they might give the person a year to come into compliance.
Mr. Wilcox said, can you lien a property so if he decides to sell it?
Mr.Schultzsaid, the fines get added to the taxes so will get paid one way or the other.
Mr.Wilcoxsaid, going back to the person whose hobby is fixing vehicles, could you put a number limit on it?
Mr. Schultz said, you could.
Mr. Kosloske said, let's talk about a backyard mechanicwho works out of his garage on the side. Is that ok?
Mr.Schultzsaid, if you are a mechanic doing work for other people, that's an ordinance violation. But if they are doing it for themselves, we won’t hear about it.
Mr. Kosloske said, so if someone changes oil for others that's not legal to do in your garage?
Mr. Schultz said, no, the way our ordinance reads, there is very little you can do in your garage that you can charge money for.
Mr. Kosloske said, I think the way it's written, I think it needs to be spelled out good enough so that everyone can understand it. If you don’t understand it now, how will people understand it?
Mr. Schultz said, I understand it. Legally it needs to be written a certain way, but we can create cheat cheats to go off of for people to understand. We need clarification on vehicles, operable, not operable, etc.
Mr. Kosloskesaid, I think with the ideas that we gave you we should have this go back and have it reworked so that the average person and we can all understand it.
Mr. Buhs said, I would agree with that.
Mr. Schultz said, do we want to create a planning commission committee to work on this? It's the land use committee that's been working on this.
Mr. Renslow said, if we start limiting the number of vehicles that could be an issue. Afamily of 4 could have 4 cars with kids and stuff. So I think we have to put some thought into that.
Mr. Buhs said, I would suggest Mr. Schultz check some of these issues with GoldenValley or others.
Mr. Schultz said, who will be on the committee?
Mr. Buhs said, I’ll volunteer.
Mr. Kosloskesaid, I’ll volunteer.
Mr. Gullicksonalso volunteered.
Mr.Buhs made a motion to appoint three members to a committee to help build this ordinance. Mr.Renslow seconded. Motion carried unanimously.
6C.Rock Creek Coffee Review
Mr. Schultz read his staff report stating that last year the applicant proposed to open a coffee shop at 214 2nd Ave. North with a drive thru window. Drive thru windows require Conditional Use Permits in the downtown.
In the approval conditions last year, there was a one year review placed on the permit. After reviewing the conditions from last year and in watching how the drive thru window has operated at this point, staff has no concerns to be addressed and are requesting no action be taken.
Mr. Rixe said, if this gets approved tonight then there are no more reviews?
Mr.Schultzsaid, correct.
Mr. Buhs abstained from discussion on this topic.
The consensusis there are no issues or concerns.
Old Business.
Mr.Schultzsaid, the apartment project , the neighbors did come out in droves and were very much against the apartment at that property. They voiced concern for the original intent for Creekside and how that would affect the neighborhood, so I guess we'll see what happens a week from night at a public hearing. Their point of view, they would rather keep the commercial use. In terms of economic, there isn’t enough traffic out there to get what they are looking for. The folks that attended the meeting were very much against it.
Pizza Hut building has been sold to a guy that owns a pizza place called John Doughs. He is looking at options.
For the Legion, nothing definitive, I know there are some people looking at it. They haven’t really actively put it on the market, but they do have 3 parties that are interested. I think if they got serious it wouldn’t take them very long to sell it.