Meeting Minutes New Prague Planning Commission Special Meeting Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing Wednesday, January 5, 2005

Transcription

1 Meeting Minutes New Prague Planning Commission Special Meeting Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing Wednesday, 1. Call Meeting to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. with the following members present: Kay Wilcox, Bob Gilman, Jim Kratochvil, Pat Remfert and Grant Gengel. City Staff Present: Renee Christianson - City Planner and Ken Ondich City Planner. 2. Comprehensive Plan Overview by Joanne Foust, Municipal Development Group, Inc. Joanne Foust, City Comprehensive Planning Consultant, presented a power point presentation for the audience and Planning Commission that provided an overview of the New Prague Comprehensive Plan. The ten chapters of the comprehensive plan include: Planning Framework, Demographics Trends & Assumptions, Natural Resources, Land Use, Housing, Transportation, Parks & Recreation, Community Facilities & Public Services, Public Utilities, and finally Implementation. 3. Comprehensive Land Use Plan Public Hearing 6:30 PM. Commissioner Grant Gengel gave an overview of the public hearing process and rules for providing public comment and officially opened the public hearing for comment at 6:58 P.M. Brian Trnka, Geiger Land Development, complimented the Planning Commission and staff for getting the comprehensive plan to its current stage in eight months. Mr. Trnka brought up previous discussion at the December 22 nd Planning Commission regarding the commercial area along Highway 19 on the west side of town. He stated that he agreed with Joanne Foust s memo to the Commission regarding the commercial land in town and why an additional 70 acres along Highway 19 west is not needed, stating that 145 commercial acres are identified as needed to the year 2030 while the current plan shows 313 acres of commercial, which is double the need to 2030, stating that the current land use plan shows appropriate acres to the year He then commented that the school is possibly proposed along Highway 19 and commented that the Commission felt this would be a traffic generator. He pointed out that in Ms. Foust s memo that schools are not a large traffic generator based on the traffic engineer s statements with a peak in the morning of about 20 minutes. He stated that commercial development is dictated by traffic and that the east side of town along Highway 19 has three times the traffic that the west side of town on Highway 19 will have. He stated that it is clear that traffic in New Prague is to the north, south, and east. He further stated that he believes the needs of New Prague are met by the current proposed land use plan. He stated that within the last week they have had meetings concerning the location of the school and indicated that maps had been given to the Planning Commission showing a possible location of the school, roads, and pond for the area. The second point Mr. Trnka made was to request that the land use boundary on the NE side of town be Page 1 of 10

2 extended ½ mile east of 89 and ¼ mile north of 270 th Street, stating that natural features are in those areas that could be natural growth boundaries rather than roads. He then stated that on the northwest side of town he would like to see the land use plan boundary go west to Raven Stream rather than Naylor Avenue since it is just ¼ mile farther and that both areas can be serviced by sanitary sewer. Commissioner Gengel stated that he does not want to add more commercial land than the market will absorb, but that there is question on where exactly to put it. He stated that the location of the school will be followed quickly by the location of many homes which would need some commercial. He then commented that he felt the commission was comfortable with including the southern land west of Naylor in the land use boundary and asked the commission if they agreed. Commissioner Wilcox stated that they offered to consider it if they could get some feedlot restrictions so there isn t a conflict of uses out in the area. Commissioner Gengel stated that the northeast portion of town was just too far out possibly. He then stated that the designation of 70 acres was based on uncertainty of the location of the school and roads in the area because they needed to preserve their options until they had more certainty in the location of the school and roads and doesn t see a need to change that thinking at this time. Tom Kreykes, Scott County Principal Planner, congratulated the Commission on their efforts and stated that he had comments to provided that were coordinated by the Scott County Planning Department with other departments and were based on adopted County plans and policies. He stated that in general the plan is consistent with County policies and noted that there are some suggestions they would like to make to make it more in line with County policies. He first commented on the natural resources chapter of the plan he suggested that protection of natural resources be noted using the DNR biological surveys and ecological maps. He also suggested adding language for preserving wild life and pre-settlement landscapes. He noted the excellent mapping within the plan and that the County likes to look at this type of information as potential development constraints in context with vacant agricultural land around the city. He noted that Scott County is aware that new wetland mapping is available from the Scott County Soil and Water Conservation District and recommended incorporating that into the plan. He commented on chapter 5, page 1 is about existing land uses in the city and noted that he did not have a map of this in the copy he hand and felt that it would be a helpful map to have to identify nonconforming uses in the city. He noted in chapter 5, page 8 that the projected densities for the RL and RM residential districts have 2.2 and 2.3 units per acre for projected densities and that the table leaves the impression that the two districts will be developed with similar densities, which the rest of the plan does not indicate this. He noted that on chapter 5, page 10 the County supports the city infill and redevelopment plans. He noted on chapter 5, page 14 regarding the public land use policies that the County supports intergovernmental coordination to share public facilities and use together. He also noted on the same page regarding parks and recreation that the County supports helping to plan for parks and trails. He noted on chapter 5, page 15 for the future land use calculations that the copy he had did not have results of those calculations and that the County would like to look at those and that his copy of the plan was dated for October. He commented that the County supports Orderly Annexation Agreements and that the County would help to assist in that effort. He noted that the future land use map to 2030 has the growth boundary within the County Urban Expansion Area and he supports the way the maps are drawn Page 2 of 10

3 within that district. He commented that the Commercial Development along Highway 19 should be consolidated into nodes rather than strip development, also noting that County Road 15 could be considered for nodal commercial development. He commented that the transportation plan shows a road network that the County was pleased to see in the plan and support. He noted that the County recommends that the 270 th Street corridor be identified as a major collector and not arterial as shown on the plan, further noting that it does not continue west of 21 on the plan. He stated that in speaking with staff that this was not continued because of possible natural resources constraints, but suggested that it was an important connection to make. He noted that Columbus Avenue near it s intersection with County Road 2 be changed from a Major Collector to a Minor Collector as this would provide a north and south connection. He also noted that there is a major north and south collector west of 21 and north of 19 that is projected to have 9,800 cars and suggested that it be changed to a major collector instead of a minor collector. He noted that an explanation of the difference between major and minor collectors should be included in the transportation plan. He suggested adding a congested road segment map to show where congested road segments might be. He recommended working with Scott County to identify funding mechanisms for funding collector roads within town. He noted that turnbacks should be shown on a map. He noted that the anticipated traffic on Highway 19 should be studied together and recommended that this be addressed more in the Comprehensive Plan. He noted in the parks, trails, and recreation section of the plan that it is unclear whether the plan supports the use of parks for the purpose of preservation of unique or sensitive natural resources, noting that this is a County policy. He noted that the wellhead protection plan of the County be referenced in the comprehensive plan. He finally noted that in chapter 10, page 8 there is reference to a premature subdivision ordinance suggestion and noted that the County supports this plan as well as infill development. Commissioner Gengel asked Mr. Kreykes to define commercial nodes. Mr. Kreykes stated that commercial nodes would be identifying locations at intersections to be developed as commercial centers, rather than having linear commercial development with many access points. He stated that this might be a good idea for development along 15 or 19 for access management issues. Mr. Gengel asked if the County has a traffic plan. Mr. Kreykes stated that the County plan is very compatible with the City Plan aside from the few differences he noted earlier. Palmer Welcome, 601 Columbus Avenue S, stated that he would think the city would want commercial uses near the new elementary school on west 19 on both sides of the road for the future. He also stated that the city should do it now as you can t do it later if there are houses there. Mr. Remfert stated that he is talking about the 70 acres along Highway 19. Ed Nytes, th St W, stated that he lives outside the land use plan growth boundary and that he raises livestock and asked for the Commissions thoughts on conditions to livestock facilities. Page 3 of 10

4 Planner Christianson stated that this topic came up at the December 22 nd, 2004 meeting regarding the city growth near feedlots and that some commissioners were concerned. She stated that since the last meeting a feedlot owner provided a right to farm ordinance example to the city. She further stated that the city could also have setbacks or buffer requirements from developments to feedlots and that the Planning Commission is interested in researching this topic further. Commissioner Gengel stated that he wants to respect the rights of farmers since they were there first and that developers should inform residents of the feedlots when selling lots and finally that the city could enact a right to farm ordinance to limit peoples nuisance complaints. Ben Bartusek, 305 Sunrise Avenue, stated that he used to live in Rice County and that they had feedlot wars in that county and that there is a state law stating that you can t build a residence within 1,000 of a registered feedlot. Sue Meyer,, stated that she had submitted a letter to Renee Christianson this afternoon and also a brochure and disclosure statement from the State Department of Agriculture, similar to what Wabasha County has in place. She stated that there is LeSueur County Zoning as industrial south of 13/19 that is not shown on the city land use plan. She also stated that the Naylor/Raven Stream commercial area is close to her feedlot and that having commercial land use next to a feed lot would be a bad idea. Michele Delbow, Naylor Avenue, stated that she lives right where a road is shown to go through her property and that she is currently zoned as agricultural and that she does not farm. She stated that this plan will force her to become residential and she doesn t want this because she wants to keep her freedom and five acres. She stated that her neighbors, Lester and Lucille Ruehling have sold their land for development and that she was never asked how she felt about it. She stated that she would like to keep her distance between neighbors. She stated that she is not interested in selling and that she likes being just outside city limits and that she would like to grow old at her property and hand it down to her children some day. Commissioner Gengel asked why she feels she would be forced to go residential. Ms. Delbow stated that because of the sale of the Ruehling property and will be developed within 5 years. She stated that she is concerned with being surrounded by residential uses and the roads going through her property. She stated that she has been at her property 15 to 16 years. Commissioner Gengel stated that the sale or development of her land would be with her approval. Ms. Delbow stated that cities have ways to force people out based, such as with taxing changes. Commissioner Gengel stated that choosing to live close to city limits has its consequences and stated that they would like to hear from others in the area. Dave Meyer, speaking on behalf of his mother living at the corner of Naylor and Highway 19, stated that he is concerned about tax increase of her land and livestock restrictions on her property. Page 4 of 10

5 Commissioner Gengel stated that annexation is the trigger to include land within the city, further stating that this is not something that will be forced onto the residents and will be driven by development and the sale of land to developers. Lowell Tangen, Naylor Avenue, stated that this is a loosing situation for the township because the plan shows roads that the township will need to put in and pay for with little benefit to the townships. He stated that he was concerned by Wilcox s statement about feedlot restrictions and that they should be development restrictions. Commissioner Wilcox stated that her comment was a misnomer and that the farmers were there long before the development. Mr. Tangen stated that the feedlot rules must be spelled out clearly. Commissioner Wilcox asked Mr. Tangen when the last time was that Helena Township built a road for the City of New Prague. She further stated that the developers would pay for the roads and be development driven. John Ruehling, Naylor Avenue, stated he has concerns with the residential growth into rural agricultural land. He stated his farm site is used to raised livestock and dairy and that his land is used to farm corn, soybeans an alfalfa. He stated that his land is in the metropolitan agricultural preserve and he agrees to keep it in agricultural usage. He is concerned that they do their work 24 hours a day, whatever it takes to get the work done. He stated that they are on tractors many hours a day, including using semi traffic for hauling grains and felt this would be a problem with more residential traffic. He stated that his farm site is 250 feet from the Ruehling Property that was sold to Geiger. He asked that the city keep the maximum setback from feedlots to developments and also asked that some sort of disclosure be given when lots are sold and continues to be given when sold later that a feedlot is in operation in close proximity and to know and accept that the feedlot is there. He noted that many of these farms have been in operation for generations and that he hopes his will operate for many more. He stated that he does not like to see residential development use of productive farming to produce food for all of us and asked that the farm land is used wisely; adding that if you take care of the land it will take care of you. He asked that his land stay out of the urban expansion district as it is currently shown. Commissioner Gengel asked if there is a way to put a notice on a deed for the sale of a property near a feedlot. A developer in the audience stated that covenants can be recorded. Doug Pint, Avenue and DRP Associates, stated that they have seen covenants recorded with the county with such a notification and that it works with developments he has done in that people are at least notified that a feedlot exists. He further stated that there is industrial property shown just south of 29 on the land use plan and he asked if it is industrial up to the railroad tracks or if it extends east of the railroad tracks. Planner Christianson stated that she believes the railroad tracks are the boundary. Page 5 of 10

6 Mr. Pint stated that the industrial land should be all the way east to the creek; otherwise residential would not be very desirable next to the industrial land and railroad. He stated that he does own the land in question. Mike Weinandt, Ruth Ann Lane, stated that he lives in Section 1 of Lanesburg Township. He stated that the farmers may have to give themselves a manure easement on their property before they sell in order to have the easement so they can keep operating. He stated that the traffic east on Highway 19 looks like christmas tree lights in the winter right now and that the 28,000 cars projected will be worse. He asked if there was a way to bypass down to 29 to reduce the traffic. Commissioner Gengel stated that Highway 19 is a tough problem. He stated that the state and county will be involved as well. He stated that bypass will loose traffic to the downtown area and that the downtown core should be preserved. He stated that Shakopee was bypassed and they lost their downtown identity. He stated that the traffic problem will make the city and businesses loose dollars. Commissioner Remfert stated that at 12,000 cars on Highway 19 people will start using other routes because of the congestion. Randy Kubes, Shakopee, stated that Highway 19 and 21 are the only two highways in New Prague. He stated that most towns do not have two highways such as New Prague and that these roads are important for commercial and industrial development and that the future should be considered. He stated that at 6,000 population most businesses are owner occupied, that at 8,000 people there are absentee owners of businesses, and at 10,000 its different commercial owners still. He stated that there will be a point in time that 12,000 cars travel on Highway 19 west and that it will need commercial. He stated that New Prague is the Edina of the south and is a hub for the area and that the roads in the area are going to further assist this. He stated that Highway 169 is programmed to not have any traffic lights in 15 years and feels that people will use County Road 11 to head north to Jordan to get onto Highway 169 and also noted that County Road 2 will see increased use. He stated that New Prague will be a commuter town to both the north and to the south. He stated that Highway 19 through town may have to be restricted to no more than 9,000 lb vehicles through downtown. He stated that now would be the time to review the non-conforming use section of the ordinance and to possibly allow these non-conforming homes to add additions or decks or remodel. He also brought up the possibility of having two hour parking only on Main Street downtown to alleviate this problem. He stated that it would help stores to develop other parking areas and that a parking lot development fund program could be implemented, possibly using federal money as well. Terry Maas, Aberdeen Avenue, stated that he is a Helena Township Supervisor and stated that people can t be forced to be annexed into the city. He stated that the township does not build roads for developments and that Naylor will need to be watched for increased traffic. He stated that the township will work with the city to get an annexation agreement in place. Marv Deutsch, st Avenue, stated that it would be a problem not to have major roadways with commercial zoning. He stated that it is easy to zone it commercial and then to Page 6 of 10

7 later downzone it to residential, but that it is harder to go from residential homes back to commercial. Commissioner Gengel stated that at the last meeting the general consensus was to add commercial from the city limits along Highway 19 to Naylor with a limited depth to avoid big box retailers like Target. Dennis Dvorak, st Avenue, asked where Target would be anticipated to go. Commissioner Gengel stated that the east side would be the more nodal commercial area and that the city is trying to keep commercial contained rather than spread out. He stated that separate commercial areas would compete with one another and require people to drive more. Mr. Dvorak stated that no matter what is done at the edge of the city, it still has a rotten core with the creamery site downtown being an eye sore. Commissioner Gengel stated that the creamery is designated as a redevelopment site in the plan. Planner Christianson stated that the creamery block is currently zoned as industrial for the entire block from Second Street to Main Street. She stated the plan shows the south ½ as an extension of the downtown core and the north ½ as medium density residential. Chad Surprenant, President of I&S Engineers & Architects, Inc., commented on the commercial area on west Highway 19 and stated that nodal and consolidating commercial are really saying the same thing. He gave some anecdotal information about Madison Avenue in Mankato being poor planning as knee jerk strip type development with the City of Mankato now trying to address the sign issues and parking lot issues along Madison Avenue. He stated that nodal commercial development places such development at arterial and other major roads, which allowing residential development along the arterials in between. He stated that nodal developments every mile are within pedestrian walking distances and provide better access management and would reduce pressure from developers to have access on to major roads in many places. He stated that the nodal neighborhood development would likely be what the city is looking for. Commissioner Gengel asked Mr. Surprenant where he would put a big box retailer. Mr. Surprenant stated that he would probably put it on east 19 and possibly on 21 north if not for the site constraints. He stated that the Redwing intersection with 19 or the newly planned Alton Avenue intersection may be a good place for a commercial node. He stated that West 19 perhaps could be a smaller 10 acre node for neighborhood commercial, noting that 70 acres of commercial land in this area would be a lot of commercial land. Commissioner Kratochvil asked what the population of Mankato was when big box retailers show up. Mr. Surprenant stated that Mankato was roughly 30,000 and North Mankato was 10,000. He stated that New Prague is different than Mankato because of the great growth pressures here. He stated that the geographic center of the city in 1981 was literally at the front step of city hall. He Page 7 of 10

8 stated that this has now shifted ¼ mile north east because of the development pull towards the Twin Cities. He stated that Mankato does not have any type of gravity pulling its development in one direction as it is more of a regional center. He stated that New Prague is a bedroom community and most population goes northeast out of town and that s where the commercial will be. He stated that come commercial development will be supported on west 19, but it will be on a smaller basis because big boxes will not locate there. Mr. Surprenant stated that a big box will probably locate in New Prague when the population is around 15,000 to 20,000. Commissioner Wilcox stated that Northfield is a good example as they have a population of about 18,000 people and have a Target and a Cub Foods. Randy Kubes stated that the location of County Road 37 being moved east is why the center of the city moved east ¼ mile from where it used to be. He stated that when the sewer pipe comes to the west side of town there will be hundreds of acres developed for housing once that happens and that the area will need commercial land available. He stated that he doesn t see big retail in New Prague unless it occurs outside the current growth boundary on a 40 to 80 acre site. He then stated that the area along Highway 19 should be preserved for commercial as it will soon have sewer and water and lots of residential development around the school. Joe Geiger, Alton Avenue, stated that if New Prague won t have a big box retailer why have 300 acres of commercial land. He stated that he does see a big box retailer on east Highway 19 not on west Highway 19. He stated that if Randy Kubes or Marv Deutsch owned the land along west Highway 19 they would not be suggesting commercial zoning. He finally stated that he does not think that Redwing Avenue along east Highway 19 being developed is not too far off. Mr. Pint stated that he just doesn t see commercial development on the west side of Highway 19, further noting that a gas station or similar use might work there. Chris Meyer, st Avenue, stated that he just built his house this summer on the SE corner of Highway 19 and 171 st Street. He stated that he would like to be left out of the plan as commercial and would like to remain residential. Planner Christianson stated that Naylor Avenue is identified as a major collector for the City. Mr. Meyer stated that the 70 acres of commercial development would not be attractive to see as you drive into town from the west. Mr. Dvorak stated that people come to New Prague for the quality of life and visual amenities and not for the commercial uses. He stated that the City should not let big business and money ruin this way of life. He stated that he would like to see a broadening of commercial uses in New Prague especially for the benefit of older residents. Dr. Frankie Poplau, New Prague Area School District Superintendent, stated that the school has an interest in Highway 19 west because the school will likely be located there. She stated that consideration should be given for a different kind of node on this side of town along Highway 19 which could contain an elementary school, church, or park. She stated that this would be a nice Page 8 of 10

9 introduction into the community from the west. She stated that the school finds it beneficial to have close access to Highway 19, but not direct access as that could be dangerous. Commissioner Gengel asked for final public input at 8:50 PM. Hearing no further public comment he asked for discussion among the commissioners. He stated that with all the comments received tonight he is not comfortable recommending plan adoption to the City Council tonight. Commissioner Wilcox asked staff what can legally be done to continue the public hearing. Planning Christianson stated that they would leave the public hearing open and continue it later. Commissioner Gengel stated that he would like to have a workshop to discuss the comments received tonight. Commissioner Wilcox stated that the public hearing could be continued at the March Meeting. Dr. Poplau asked what the ramifications are if the hearing is further delayed. She stated that the school has a rock solid start date deadline to have the new school open by September 1, Planner Christianson stated that delaying the Comprehensive Plan adoption would delay the school land from being annexed into the city. She stated that city staff would need three weeks to a month to incorporate the comments received into the plan revisions. Commissioner Remfert asked Dr. Poplau when they need to start construction on the school. Dr. Poplau stated that they would like to be in the ground by the month of May to be on tract and during June at the very latest. She further asked if there is any way for the city to consider their needs concurrent with the comprehensive plan adoption. Planning Christianson stated that she has reservations about the school being in the ground by May even if the plan were to be recommended for adoption tonight. Jerry Bohnsack, City Administrator, stated that either the old plan could be amended or the new plan could be adopted and that either route to consider the school would take about the same time to complete. Commissioner Gengel stated that he would like to leave it to staff to get plans updated. Dr. Poplau stated that to lose an entire year of the use of a new building would be a burden to the school system. She asked for consideration of the schools needs without compromising the cities needs. Commissioner Remfert asked if the Commission could come back in a week if possible to speed up the process. Commissioner Gengel stated that the ball rests with city staff to set up a work session. Page 9 of 10

10 Planner Christianson stated that she was thrilled to see everyone at the public hearing and would like to mail notices to all meeting attendants about the plan adoption. 4. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kenneth D. Ondich City Planner Page 10 of 10