|
TOWN OF ROCHESTER Link to Town Board Meetings
|
|
Link to Town Board Meetings |
February 2, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION 6:30 P.M. The meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. with Ken Dahlstrom, Brian Wanasek, Bob Willard, Chris Johnson, and Karyn Borucki present.
Betty Novy, Secretary, was also present.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Bob moved, 2nd by Brian to approve minutes of the January 5, 2004 meeting with the following corrections:
The motion under “Land Division creating two parcels out of one: 420 S. English Settlement Drive; Owner: Michael Martin (Parcel #014-03-13-019-000: 13.68 acres” was corrected to read:
Willard moved, 2nd by Wanasek to make a recommendation to the Town Board to approve the Martin CSM contingent on the following items: 1) on the topographical map, the wetlands must be marked; 2) contours must be labeled with elevations on the CSM; 3) building envelopes must be marked on the CSM; and 4) Racine County Public Works Department must approve driveway access. Motion carried.
A sentence under “Gravel Pit Permit Fee Investigation” was corrected to read:
Dahlstrom suggested the plan commission look into
whether the Town could charge operational fees.
Motion carried.
Pre-Application Conference for subdivision creating sixteen parcels out of two: Rowntree
Road; Owners: Joseph & Ione Kojis Trust/ Agent: Steve Kempken Parcel #014-03-19-13-012-000: 52.09 acres)
Steve Knurr and Steve Kempken addressed the Commission. Steve Kempken clarified the proposal is to create a road and split two parcels into 15 new parcels. He indicated the conceptual plan submitted tonight already needs to be changed based on discovery of a 60-foot easement for a natural gas pipeline that runs through the property. Steve presented a list of information for developers working along the pipeline stating these restrictions will require a change in lot layout.
Bob Willard indicated the Land Use Plan lists the area proposed for development as prime agricultural or national farmland. He indicated its best use would be to continue farming. In regards to compatibility with surrounding land uses, Bob indicated the area is now all agricultural with most parcels being 40 acres or larger in size. This development could be the start of the area becoming more residential. Bob indicated a conservation subdivision would be the best type of development; this would allow up to 20 lots with the 1:4 acre density bonus allowed for conservation design and preserve open space for continued farming.
Chris Birkett’s family, 28122 Rowntree Road, owns 120 acres abutting the east side of the proposed development. He notes a good amount of their land is in the 100-year floodplain. The land is low on that side. A culvert comes under the road in that area and empties into an 18” drain tile running from Rowntree Road to Eagle Creek right through this property. Paul Beere indicated soil conservation maps show only a foot and a half of fall between Rowntree Road and CTH A. Chris stated his greatest concern about the proposed development is drainage; whatever is approved must be designed so that no additional water drains towards their farm. Bob Hegemann, 28421 Rowntree Road, was also present. His property abuts the proposed development to the west. He explained flooding often occurs around his driveway; he is also concerned about drainage.
Steve Kempken indicated a back parcel in the proposed land division is land locked. The proposed road would solve this problem. He also indicated the Smiths’ (an existing residence within the plat) are willing to give up their strip of land accessing Rowntree Road if they gain necessary frontage on a new road. The proposed road, as drawn, is approximately 3,400 feet in length and ends in a cul-de-sac. Information from Racine County zoning was referred to Steve. Racine County indicated the 3,400-foot length was excessive and that a permanent cul-de-sac of this length is inefficient. A recommendation was made that any roads platted should allow for future access to abutting lands so that they could someday go through. An ultimate connection to CTH “A” was suggested for consideration.
Crucial issues identified for further consideration of the land division were:
1.) Septic: Soils are going to be a strong determinant of what development is allowed on the parcel; there are known problems with the soil types and saturation levels. It was noted the ability to install conventional septic systems is unlikely. Chris Johnson recommended one of the first steps taken be to have soil testing done on the property. This will be crucial in determining where homesites can be located. The development may require use of a modified communal mound system based on where soils are found that can support a system. Cluster development would be best should this prove to be the case. There was question on who would pay costs of upkeep on such a system. This could be addressed in neighborhood association or deeded property restrictions.
2.) Drainage: A topographical layout showing where the drain tile goes through this property is crucial to any future development proposals. Chris Birkett indicated this development may present an opportunity to fix some drainage issues for the area; in the past there was some discussion about installing more tile. However, Chris indicated he would not contribute any monetary funds to fix drainage for the benefit of development. Steve Kempken stated he understood that. Chris Birkett will work with Steve on identifying drainage issues.
3.) Gas pipeline: The natural gas pipeline easement must be located on any future proposals and worked around to develop a lot configuration where infrastructure can reasonably be placed and that would offer desirable views for the lots.
4.) Preservation of agricultural land. Direction was given to preserve as much farmland as possible. The proposed split into straight five-acre lots is not preferable. The key to developing these parcels is use of cluster design. This would allow density of up to 20 lots and preserve open space to continue farming. The minimum size of each lot according to zoning was stated as one-acre; frontage requirements were thought to be 150 feet. When questioned on how open space would be handled, open space management tools were stated as a homeowner association or conservation easement that would put the land under public or private ownership but have it deed restricted to farming. The land could not be further divided. It was noted it is not necessary to create 20 lots; but that this would be the maximum number allowed under cluster design.
Steve questioned whether he could pursue the five-acre lot design. Bob indicated the layout currently presented would most likely need to be reduced to twelve lots or less when incorporating limitations imposed by the gas pipeline, drain tile and soil conditions. Preservation of farmland will be much closer to stated objectives of the Land Use Plan for that area. Whatever configuration is presented, it is recommended plans attempt to preserve as much agriculture as possible.
5.) Road: There was some discussion on a restriction on road length that can terminate in a cul-de-sac. An opinion was stated that this length is 800 feet. However, Schneider Lane and Seidel Drive were cited as examples of roads terminating in a cul-de-sac in the Town that are longer than 800 feet. This will have to be researched. An easement or actual road must somehow be configured to the parcel’s end but it was noted the west side is low and road extension may not be feasible in that area. As to future connection with CTH A, Ken stated there are significant environmental lands between the proposed development and CTH A. A straight line to achieve connection would most likely not materialize.
6.) School Districts: Bob noted the proposed development exists in two school districts. School district lines should be noted on future submission of the proposed development and care taken so that lot lines are drawn so that no one lot traverses both districts.
Steve was instructed to incorporate these considerations into any future proposals brought back to the Plan Commission.
Application for Variance: to allow an existing accessory structure on a parcel without a primary structure: 28505 Washington Avenue; Owner: Jay Hoppe (Parcel #014-03-19-01-009-060)
It was noted this variance would correct a non-conforming structure issue previously discussed with the Commission (December 2003) as requirement to a proposed land division. Prior existence of a barn and well across the street from the primary dwelling on this parcel created a non-conforming structure. Racine County requires the variance be granted before the land can be divided. Brian moved, 2nd by Karyn to recommend the Town Board approve the variance. Motion carried.
Discussion/ Revision to CSM Application Instructions and Policy Statements
Application instructions were gone over and several revisions agreed upon. Consensus of the group was to distribute revised instruction documents to those interested in dividing land by the CSM process.
Certificate of Education in Planning and Zoning Course
A Certificate course in Planning and Zoning offered by UW-Extension offices was discussed. It is a self-study course and enrollment costs $150.00. Ken indicated it would be a benefit for all plan commission members to enroll. Consensus of the Commission was to have Ken Dahlstrom take the course and share pertinent information with the group.
Bob moved, 2nd by Chris to adjourn at 8:12 p.m. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Novy Planning Secretary
|