PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES OF MEETING AUGUST 6, 2007
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman called the meeting to order at
7:00 p.m.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Don Bergwall, Alan Seymour, Ken Kraus, Pat
Soller. Pete Griffin and John Cunningham
excused. Roger Yoder absent
OTHERS PRESENT:
Greg DeLong, Brian Palmer, Jason Francis,
David Gilman, Martha Marsh, Tammy Penhorwood- Secretary
APPROVAL OF
MINUTES:
Joint Planning
Commission/ City Council Meeting – June 21, 2007- Mr. Bergwall stated on page
7, paragraph starts with Mr. Bergwall, the word mention should be
mentioned. Mr. Bergwall made a motion to
approve the minutes as amended. Voice
vote was unanimous.
Planning Commission
Meeting- July 2, 2007- Mr. Bergwall stated on page 6, third paragraph from
bottom it states “That if” and it should be “That is”. He stated on page 7 Mrs. Penhorwood inserted
a comment regarding our discussion and my comments during our discussion on
Scott Farms Section 4. I made comments
that Scott Farms did not meet the current lot requirements, however, I had
forgot that what is in our code book is incorrect and Scott Farms, what they
have proposed, is at the current zoning standards. Mr. Bergwall made a motion to approve the minutes
as amended. Voice vote was unanimous.
ADMINISTRATION
COMMENTS:
Mr. DeLong stated he was asked to give an update on the To Do List
items. On the code revision items, Mrs.
Penhorwood is still working on the conversion.
I started to work on the sign ordinance and looking at deficiencies. Both of these items are receiving limited
working time because of the other work load.
Mr. DeLong stated on the visioning, it was brought up several times
during the joint meeting with City Council and I still don’t think we have a
clear cut answer on what our vision is for the City. There was a group formulated from that
meeting, but that group has not met. He
stated the group was to meet and go over the short and long term goals of the
comp plan, the group has not met, but I have taken the liberty to work on it
myself. I am trying to get something
into draft form that is deliverable to you and City Council. He stated he has met with Mr. Phillips to go
over where we are at this point.
Mr. Seymour asked to further discuss this at the end of the meeting under
discussion items.
Mr. DeLong stated in regards to the Chapter
1111, Mobile Homes, I thought we resolved that one based on the fact that
Mr. Seymour stated that is a good step forward. He asked when
Mr. DeLong stated on managing HOA’s, Mr. Bergwall put together
some draft legislation. About a week or
two weeks ago, Mrs. Kathy House sat down with Mr. Aslaner
and gave him the language to review.
Where he is in the process, I am not sure.
Mr. Seymour stated he asked Mr. Bergwall to
later update us on his side of this.
Mr. Bergwall stated he gave the information to
Mr. Aslaner months ago.
CITIZEN COMMENTS:
Mrs. Martha Marsh stated she has two properties on the corner of E. 8th
and S. Plum. She stated she put them up
for sale and in doing so found out that they were zoned residential. I was under the impression that they were
commercial. She asked when the
properties were changed from commercial to residential.
Mr. Kraus stated his best guess would be 1977. Mrs. Marsh stated she was to a meeting once
before and at that time it was commercial.
Now I have it up for sale and it has been up for sale for two years and
no one wants to buy it because no one wants to build a house. I am asking if you can change it to
commercial.
Mr. Seymour asked if she had prospects to purchase the property if it was
zoned commercial. Mrs. Marsh stated the
realtor stated he has had calls for commercial use.
Mr. Seymour stated tonight is not the night to take action on this
item. He stated she would have to file
for a request to change the zoning to commercial. It is a timely process. All of the neighbors would have to be
notified.
Mrs.
Marsh asked if the building where the old
Mrs. Marsh stated when she had the newspaper agency, it was out of a
garage on the property and I thought it was commercial at the time.
Mr. Kraus stated it is his best recollection that it was changed to
residential zoning in 1977. The
newspaper business and
Mrs. Marsh asked does this mean that you will take care of it. Mr. Seymour stated you will have to request a
zoning change. Mrs. Marsh stated then
this is going to cost me. Mr. Seymour
stated as the rules require.
Mr. Kraus asked Mrs. Marsh if they have looked at the possibility of
putting in twin singles. Mrs. Marsh
stated she is leaving that up to the realtor.
He has been trying to sell it for two years. Mr. Kraus stated with the current market,
that doesn’t surprise me. You are
probably a victim of the market.
Mr. Seymour stated her next step would be to talk to the ladies upstairs
and walk through the steps for filing for a zoning change.
Mr. Kraus stated if rezoning is what you want to do, we will need to know
what zoning district you want to change it to, formal application needs to be
made and know that it will take four to six months. Even at that point there is no guarantee that
it will get rezoned.
Mr. Seymour stated first you need to understand all of the possibilities
within the current zoning district. Mrs.
Marsh stated her realtor has gone through all of that.
Mr. Bergwall stated there is a lot across the
street zoned R-2 but behind that it is zoned BR and on the other side of 8th
it is B-1. The question from a
commission standpoint is the fact that this issue has been
brought up to us and are there other lots in this area that it would be
in the overall best interest to have them zoned that way. Even though they may have residences in them
now, would it be an advantage to change it?
Mr. Seymour stated she should do a couple of things. One, clearly understand what R-2 has to offer
and see if there are any provisions that will lend itself to the property. If it is clearly determined between you and
your realtor that commercial is the only option in marketing it, then you will
need to go through the understanding the process of rezoning it and then make
the decision on whether or not you want to follow through with it.
OLD BUSINESS:
Approval of Final Plat- Scott Farms Section 4 Phase 2 Part A- filed by MI Homes- tabled from July 2, 2007
Mr. Francis stated
when he was here last month we discussed the changes that needed to me made to
the preliminary plat. It was approved
subject to certain conditions. Looking
at the preliminary plat it closely reflects what was agreed upon. It still doesn’t show the fence. Our commitment is still to do the fence. The final plat reflects everything. It shows the additional easements on the
lots.
Mr. Palmer
stated he doesn’t have any engineering comments. It looks like they got the minimum width of
the path to 20’. They also made the rest
of the path taper.
Mr. Francis
stated he is not sure we are looking at the same thing. The 20’ that is marked on there is
dimensioning from the corner of 6358 and 6359 to the edge of the easement. They did increase the taper, but the
narrowest point is still at 14’.
Mr. DeLong
stated administration is happier with the design they have came back with.
Mr. Soller asked Mr. Francis to explain how it now changes the
grade from the back of the lots to the retention pond. Mr. Francis stated they did pull the contours
back so they are completely within the reserve.
We will also regrade the lower part of the
detention basin to dry it up.
Mr. Kraus stated
to clarify, the fence you mentioned will be on lots 6355 thru 6359 and part of
6354. Mr. Francis stated it will stop at
6357 and 6366. The purpose was to make
sure the people understand that this is not part of their lot.
Mr. Francis
stated the preliminary plat does not reflect all of the conditions that were
agreed upon with the approval. I think
it needs to be redone to reflect that.
We will get the changes added and get a copy to you for signature so we
can have a clean copy of what is expected with the fence and the walkway.
Mr. Soller asked, that is going to be
a walkway through there. Mr. Francis
stated yes it will be some type of hard surface. We talked about it throughout the last
meeting but it was not made a condition of our approval. I have mixed feelings about it. We have a hard time selling lots with walkways
behind them.
Mr. Kraus stated
he would rather see the fence continue to the overflow point and not have the
walkway. Mr. Soller
stated he agreed. Mr. Kraus stated when
the next section come for platting it will have the same fencing on that side.
Mr. Francis
stated he agrees, he’d rather extend the fence than put in the path.
Mr. Seymour
stated it is probably redundant but, will your spillway have the appropriate
rip-rap material to prevent erosion. Mr.
Lee came in and talked to us about erosion and it is a concern of his.
Mr. Francis
stated yes, our offer is out there and will continue to be out there to walk
the alignment with Mr. Lee and clean up the ditch downstream through his
property. Stabilize portions of the
channel through his property. Mr.
Seymour asked to the satisfaction of Mr. Lee.
Mr. Francis stated absolutely. He
stated that has been the case the whole time.
Mr. Kraus made a
motion to approve the Final Plat for Scott Farms Section 4 Phase 2 Part A as
filed with the exception of the proposed walk in Reserve G be
dropped but the proposed fence be extended to the southern most boundary of the
subdivision. The developer should be
made aware that when Part B comes in for final platting, the fence should be
mirrored on the other side.
Mr. Soller Yes Mr. Kraus Yes Mr. Seymour Yes Mr. Bergwall Yes
NEW BUSINESS:
Recommendation to City Council – Portable Storage Container Regulations
Mr. DeLong stated
we went to City Council with the proposed and some of the Council members had a
concern with requiring a permit and charging a fee. Members of POD were also at the meeting a
stated some concerns. At the City
Council meeting they decided to create a subcommittee which consisted of
myself, Dave Gilman from POD, Councilman Marshall and Councilman Fogt. What we
propose to do is to remove language that requires any type of zoning
permit. This was requested partly
because if someone new was moving to town how would they know they were
required to get a zoning permit. Another
issue was we removed any language requiring a fee be paid for a zoning
permit. We did add the language allowing
the containers to be on the property for a maximum of 28 days per calendar
year. Councilman Gore stated he would
like to see penalties applied to the vendors, so we added that language as
well.
Mr. DeLong stated
what the Commission has in front of them is language for both sections 1123.01,
Definitions and 1139.05, Temporary Storage Containers.
Mr. Kraus stated the new legislation under
(b) (1) has been revised slightly. Mr.
DeLong stated yes.
Mr.
DeLong stated POD’s has
been very cooperative during this process.
Since the council meeting they do notify me when a unit is being
placed.
Mr. Dave Gilman, POD’s
Inc. stated he would like to thank the town for working with them and giving
them the opportunity to have input in the revision. Mr. DeLong has been
very responsive and very kind to work with.
We think the revisions that were presented are acceptable. We do have a system built in to give notice
to the planning office, that should there be a problem, there is a two way line
of communication and that we can try to resolve it without having to use a lot
of city staff time to correct a problem.
We will put this to the test and see if it continues to work, but if we
have any problems you will hear from us and see if it is something we can work
out.
Mr. Seymour stated it was surprising but yet
good that you came forward so we can better understand your business.
Mr. DeLong stated
once this is finally approved we will do what Mr. Bergwall
suggested at the last meeting and do a press release and notify the
public.
Mr. Kraus stated in the last paragraph of Mr.
DeLong’s memo, it states he is comfortable with the
proposed language, it is a fair consensus for all parties involved and still
gives the City a strong enforcement mechanism in controlling the units. That
says it all.
Mr. Seymour asked for it to be clarified on
1139.05, we reference residential. It
does not address commercial or industrial.
Mr. DeLong stated when we addressed this the
last time the commission felt it was something that did not need to be addressed
at this time.
Mr. Kraus made a motion to recommend to City
Council approval of section 1123.01, Definitions, which included 132 (a)
Portable Storage Container definition.
Mr. Kraus Yes Mr. Seymour Yes Mr. Bergwall Yes Mr.
Soller Yes
Mr. Kraus made a motion to recommend to City
Council approval of section 1139.05, Temporary Buildings as presented.
Mr. Seymour Yes Mr. Bergwall Yes Mr.
Soller Yes Mr. Kraus Yes
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Mr. Seymour stated he would like to talk more about HOA’s. Mr. Bergwall stated the information has been forwarded and it
is my understanding is that it is in Mr. Aslaner’s court now. He stated what he would like to suggest,
because I think it will just lay if we don’t do something, is make it an agenda
item for the next meeting. Someone
should get word to Mr. Aslaner that this is going to
be an agenda item as proposed. We as a
group have not discussed what we should do about it. I have a degree of frustration about it
because to me it seems pretty straight forward and not too imposing to the
developer regarding their deed restrictions and such. All we are saying is if you are going to have
common areas and going to have an HOA responsible for them, we want to know
that they meet and who the contacts are.
Then we also have recourse to say if you don’t take care of your areas
we are going to put you on notice and if you don’t respond to the notice then
we are going to bill all of the property owners in the HOA for getting the
problems resolved. Some of this has to
be taken care of in a timely manner.
Mr. Kraus stated
he would suggest that before we put it on our next agenda we should schedule a
special meeting and have a discussion on this at that meeting before the
regular meeting. It could still be on
the regular meeting agenda. I agree that
we need to take steps to move it forward.
Mr. Soller stated he is in favor in refreshing everyone’s
familiarity with what is proposed. It
would be prudent to have it at a special meeting so the members that are not
here tonight have the opportunity to review it one time before it goes on the
agenda.
Mr. Seymour
stated he agrees with all of that. We
need to refresh ourselves as to the details of the legislation. The way to keep this going is to put in front
of Council. In order to do that it would
need to be a voting item. Maybe when it
goes to Council, they would say it needs to go to committee. But at least it is in action.
Mr. Seymour
stated from City Administration, you can see where our thoughts are on this, it
would put additional burden on your work load, because you would have to
address this.
Mr. DeLong stated he echoes Mr. Bergwall
on getting things approved and moving it forward and sometimes our hands are
tied on getting things done. The
administration is looking at it legally as to are
there things in the language that we can or can’t do.
Mr. Kraus stated
he is going to guess that the City has to be careful on the charge back
language to the homeowners, because of due process, so that is probably where
any changes would be in the end.
Mr. Kraus stated
he doesn’t have a problem with it being on the regular meeting agenda, but I
think we need to discuss it at a special meeting ahead of time.
Mr. Seymour
stated he would like it to be put on the next meetings agenda. Also, do we want to meet at a special meeting
to discuss this?
Discussion held
and special meeting will be held on August 20th at 6:30 pm. The agenda will consist of HOA’s and Chapter 1135 review.
INDIVIDUAL
COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS:
Alan Seymour- He
stated Mrs. Patterson passed on the BZA agenda for the August 13th
meeting. Walgreens is asking for a
variance for 3 additional signs beyond the 6 that are permitted.
Pat Soller- He stated a comment came out his HOA meeting was
regarding speeding in the subdivisions.
The thing I’d like to point out is
Ken Kraus- He
asked in Chapter 1111 is there a reason we can’t put a height limit in
there. Mr. DeLong
stated the only thing we can control is the perimeter of the whole lot. There is no zoning enforcement within. He stated the only other thing is Mrs. Penhorwood passed out a Land Heritage Trust letter and it
is looking for a couple members of planning commission to attend. With my agricultural interest I would be interested
in attending. Mr. Seymour stated he
would be interested as well if time permitted.
Mrs. Penhorwood stated in the letter it states
that the tour is to conclude at 7:30 pm and just a reminder it will be a Design
Review meeting night.
Don Bergwall- He
stated in reviewing the minutes of the joint meeting, in the area of visioning,
I saw that this came up several times but got brushed off from the idea of what
do we want to be or what is our vision for the city. If nothing comes about, if we can do
something from the planning side, land use, to say this is what we are
proposing. Mr. DeLong
stated he hates prolonging things but this may be something to wait with the
new administration coming in, it may become a forerunner of an event that we
may actually get moving quicker. I hate
to ride it out to the end of the year and then nothing happen, but we are going
to have new council members on board and a new mayor on board and their
platforms from what I’ve been hearing a lot is long range planning for the
city.
Mr. Seymour stated with wheels in motion, and a
team in three in place, we can take the steps to identify what still needs to
be done. I would really like this to
move forward prior to the new administration.
Mr. Kraus stated even if the process only goes
so far as to identify as to the strength and weakness is going to be a step
toward what we want and what we want to be.
Mr. DeLong stated we
need to be pushing for the committee to get moving too.
Mr. Seymour stated what do we
need to do to move it to the next step.
He stated he knows Mr. DeLong has already
taken some of the initiative, but a meeting needs to be called.
Mr. Bergwall stated
in regards to the OPC state planning conference, is anyone planning on
attending. Mr. DeLong
stated he would be going.
ADJOURNMENT:
Meeting was adjourned at 8:15 pm.