A regular meeting/public hearing of the Planning Commission of Alexandria Township was held on the 28th day of April, 2014 at the Alexandria Township Conference Room, 610 Fillmore Street.
Roll Call: Commission members present were Shad Steinbrecher, Mary Hacker, Larry Steidl, Linda Dokken-McFann and Bill Dropik, Jr. Also present were Bonnie Fulghum, Deputy Clerk, and Ben Oleson, Township Zoning Administrator. As said members formed a quorum and the meeting was called to order by Deputy Clerk Fulghum at 6:00 p.m.
The commission welcomed Shad Steinbrecher to the planning commission. Deputy Clerk Fulghum administered the oath of office to Commissioner Steinbrecher.
Deputy Clerk Fulghum called for nominations for chairman. Dokken-McFann, seconded by Hacker, made a motion to nominate Larry Steidl as chairman. Nominations ceased and a unanimous ballot was cast for Steidl as chairman. The meeting was turned over to Chairman Steidl.
Chairman Steidl called for nominations for vice-chair. Hacker, seconded by Steidl, made a motion to nominate Dokken-McFann as vice-chair. Nominations ceased and a unanimous ballot was cast for Dokken-McFann as vice-chair.
Chairman Steidl asked for volunteers to serve on the planning and zoning subcommittee. Steidl and Dokken-McFann were designated to serve on this committee.
Agenda: Hacker, seconded by Dokken-McFann, made a motion to approve the agenda with the addition of the 4/18/2014 site visit minutes. Motion carried unanimously.
Minutes: Dropik, seconded by Hacker, made a motion to approve the minutes of the 3/24/2014 meeting as written. Motion carried. Steinbrecher abstained. Dokken-McFann, seconded by Dropik, made a motion to approve the site visit minutes of 4/18/2014 with the addition of “no public present” under each site visit. Motion carried. Steinbrecher abstained.
Chairman Steidl recessed the regular meeting to open the public hearing on Jamie Feldhake’s conditional use permit application.
Public Hearing: Mr. Feldhake’s property is located at 5314 County Road 82 SE. He is proposing to live in the existing house while a new house is built. Once the new dwelling is complete, the existing house will be removed from the property. The applicant said he has no concerns regarding the conditions for approval as outlined in the staff report.
Zoning Administrator Oleson explained the purpose of the CUP is to ensure a procedure is in place for the original dwelling to be removed once construction is complete. Normally only one dwelling is allowed per property. He also noted that the applicant is intending to split off ten acres, which will be covered by an over-the-counter metes and bounds application. Staff has recommended approval with the three conditions as outlined in the staff report.
Chairman Steidl opened the meeting to the public for comment. Seeing none, he re-convened the regular meeting at 6:14 p.m.
Commissioner Dropik asked if the 10-acre split would be off the 40-acre parcel. The applicant responded affirmatively.
Oleson reported he had received a call from MnDOT wanting to confirm the CUP was for personal rather than business use.
The applicant reported he had spoken with staff from Douglas County Soil and Water. No issues were noted.
Dokken-McFann, seconded by Hacker, made a motion to recommend approval of the Feldhake conditional use permit with three conditions as follows: 1) that the existing home be removed within thirty (30) days of the completion of the new home; 2) that the home be connected to ALASD sewer as per ALASD policy; and 3) that no additional entrances from County Road 82 be constructed, nor the existing entrance moved, without approval from the Douglas County Highway Department. Roll: Dropik, Hacker, Steinbrecher, Dokken-McFann, Steidl – yes. Opposed: none. Motion carried unanimously.
Chairman Steidl recessed the regular meeting to open the public hearing on Doug and Shirley Jacobson’s interim use permit application which had been tabled at the March 24, 2014 meeting.
Dan Paulson, 4768 Country Shores SW, Alexandria, MN, stated he is representing the applicants. He emphasized their desire is to operate a nursery and conduct retail sales of garden produce/plants on their property located at 6101 Alyssa Lane. He mentioned that at the last meeting the commissioners had expressed concern that neighbors were not made fully aware of the retail aspect of the IUP. Since that meeting, Mr. Paulson has contacted neighbors in the cul de sac, a neighbor to the north of the Jacobson property and another across Berglund Mile and encountered no opposition to the project (this does not include the Aakres, who indicated their opposition to the retail store at the last meeting). He acceded a property in the cul de sac had just been sold and that owner had not been contacted.
The latest site drawing depicts the driveway off Berglund Mile with two access points (as opposed to one access point off Alyssa Lane) (condition no. 6 in the staff report). The applicants are proposing to alter this site plan to limit the driveway access to one point off Berglund Mile (the south end) due to the following reasons: 1) a wetland exists at the north end, and 2) the approach would need to be built up considerably, creating a potential hazard for persons using the existing DATA trail.
Mr. Paulson stated they have no problem installing a holding tank for wastewater retention
(condition no. 10 in the staff report).
Zoning Administrator Oleson reported that at the last meeting concerns were raised pertaining to the retail aspect. He noted those concerns as follows: 1) opposition was expressed from the neighbor to the south, 2) the amount of traffic generated by a retail store with the only access coming off Alyssa Lane, and 3) a possible increase of up to three additional greenhouses to facilitate the retail sales. He also noted the public had not been notified about the additional greenhouses. The new site plan depicts the driveway off Berglund Mile and identifies the greenhouse placement in the northeast corner of the property. He reported Engineer Kuhn’s assessment for placement of the driveway would be straight across from the field road on the other side of Berglund Mile. Engineer Kuhn felt the projected low traffic count would not substantially impact Berglund Mile. Oleson consulted with county staff regarding the waste water issue. Ultimately if there is running water in a facility, a holding tank is needed to dispose of the waste water, as waste water is considered sewage and state rules, along with the township’s zoning ordinance, require collection and treatment of all sewage.
Mr. Paulson reported the applicants have considered other offsite areas for possible retail sales; however, nothing has yet been formalized.
Chairman Steidl opened the meeting for public comment. Deputy Clerk Fulghum read a letter from Gary and Virginia Aakre. They expressed concern regarding hours of operation, days of the week open to the public, displays/signage to be used; portable toilets and the number and location of the proposed greenhouses.
Hearing no further comments, Chairman Steidl closed the public portion of the hearing and reconvened the meeting at 6:56 p.m.
Commissioner Hacker expressed four main concerns: 1) locating a retail enterprise in a rural residential area; 2) no formal agreement with the Alexandria Opportunities Center (AOC), 3) future expansion, and 4) no owner or representative thereof living on the property.
Commissioner Dokken-McFann inquired as to the extent of involvement anticipated from the Jacobsons. Mr. Paulson explained that the Jacobsons are the actual owners of the property. Mr. Paulson and his wife are the managers overseeing daily activities. Dokken-McFann asked about long-term goals for the property. Mr. Paulson stated the Jacobsons are advanced in years and thus their long-range plans include not only having the Paulsons continue to manage the property as a nursery/retail endeavor but also to provide care for their disabled son.
Dokken-McFann indicated her concerns as follows: 1) a retail business in a residential area; 2) increased traffic on a gravel township road; 3) security issues with no one living on the premises; and 4) adequate restroom facilities. She also asked about moving sales offsite. Mr. Paulson explained that they have been in contact with a number of local businesses, but have not been able to secure a place.
Commissioner Steinbrecher asked about the parking area off Berglund Mile. If the design were changed to a one point access, what types of vehicles are anticipated to be entering and exiting; i.e. would there be trucks with trailers, etc. Since there is an orchard, would trees also be sold? Mr. Paulson stated there would be no large vehicles, only autos and minivans. Steinbrecher also asked how many employees would be onsite during the day. Mr. Paulson said typically 2 – 3 on a busy day. Steinbrecher asked where people would be directed once they enter the property. Mr. Paulson stated that customers would be allowed to wander throughout the property; however, the point of origin would be the greenhouse(s).
Commissioner Dokken-McFann asked Zoning Administrator Oleson if the driveway would be required to have two access points for safety reasons. Oleson replied that Engineer Kuhn seemed to prefer the single access. The main concern is to ensure vehicles had adequate turnaround space.
Chairman Steidl asked if a 2-year IUP would be acceptable, and Mr. Paulson replied it would not due to the investment that would be made.
Commissioner Dropik asked what days and hours of operation were anticipated. Mr. Paulson responded they would hope for a Wednesday – Saturday, with hours extending to 6 p.m. He reiterated that they are looking at two seasons; essentially an 8 or 12-week window in the spring/summer and 4 weeks in the fall.
Chairman Steidl asked Zoning Administrator Oleson if we would be setting a precedent. Oleson replied that it would depend on a number of factors, such as the parameters of a business, conditions imposed, location, etc.
Commissioner Dokken-McFann asked what Mr. Paulson envisioned for the number of years needed for the IUP. Mr. Paulson responded he felt they would need the full 5 years.
Commissioner Dropik asked Zoning Administrator Oleson what would happen to the IUP if there was a change in ownership. Oleson said there is a provision in the zoning ordinance that stipulates the permit would be canceled unless the town board chose to approve it under the new ownership.
Dokken-McFann, seconded by Hacker, made a motion to recommend denial of the interim use application submitted by the Jacobsons with the following findings of fact: 1) retail business in a residential setting; 2) no current agreement with the AOC; 3) no owner lives on the property; 4) security concerns; 5) increased traffic; and 6) precedence setting. Roll: Dropik, Hacker, Steinbrecher, Dokken-McFann, Steidl – yes. Opposed: none. Motion carried unanimously.
Zoning Administrator’s Report: Update provided.
New Business: Commencing with the May meeting, site visits will be scheduled on the second Wednesday of each month at 10:00 a.m.
Old Business: Zoning Administrator Oleson presented draft amendments to the regulations affecting accessory buildings; i.e. Section V. Performance Standards, Subsection J. Accessory Building and Section VII. Definitions. The commission had requested new or amended definitions for “story” and “sidewall height” as well as changing the language on portions of the General Provisions as follows: 1.b) “A garage not exceeding 1200 square feet shall be considered an integral part of the principal building if it is attached to the principal building by a common sidewall.” (the rest of current sentence would be eliminated); 1.f) “The roof pitch of a detached accessory building is not to exceed 6/12. For roof styles other than pitched roofs, the pitch may be steeper at points provided the highest peak of the roof does not exceed the height that the highest peak of a 6/12 gable roof would reach”; and 1.h) “No detached accessory structure shall be over one story in height. Any area within the rafters of the roof shall not be used for anything other than storage and shall not contain any windows or otherwise be designed as living space.” The definition of “Sidewall Height, Accessory Structures” to read: “The vertical distance between the lowest ground level and the point where the wall meets the roof truss.” The definition of “Story” to be added to read: “That portion of a building included between the surface of any floor and the surface of the floor next above, or if there is no floor above, then the space between such floor and the ceiling or roof above. For the purpose of height regulations a basement shall not be counted as a story.” Oleson to schedule the amendments for public hearing.
Training and discussion on the comprehensive plan was tabled until the next meeting.
Adjournment: Being no further business Steinbrecher, seconded by Dropik, made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 8:56 p.m.
Respectfully submitted…
___________________________________
Bonnie Fulghum, Deputy Clerk
Approved this ____ day of ___________, 2014
___________________________________
Larry Steidl, Chairman