Parks and Rec Commission - Regular Meeting

The meeting of the plan commission, April 29th, 2025, 6 PM, city hall, council chambers. Can I have a roll call vote, please? Burgess, do I get to count? Yes, I'm here. Hannon, here. Hughes, uh, Kubak here, principal here. And Reeves here. All right, we have six or five. We have a quorum. Okay. Are there any other general comments? Denise, I have yours, but I'm just going to have you on the hearing if that's okay. Okay. Um, can I have um entertain a motion for approval of the minutes? So, move. Okay. I'll second that motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? [Music] Passes. All right. We will open up the public hearing for the reszone request parcels number 2061277-40 and 206-1275-4 at the end of Arnold Street. Um, is the applicant here? Great. Do you wish to say anything or present anything? Can you come up to the mic, please? Um, I ran out some uh pictures just for information for your for you to look at. Uh, we've had the land for five, six years now. And so we've been doing kind of an egg rural thing on it. So we have an orchard, we have garden beds that we're building. Um, we have uh a wooded uh piece of acreage that is a DNR mapped

wetland. So, we're just kind of like letting that be wetland. And the other part has uh wetland markers. So, we're just kind of trying to get rid of the re canary grass and the buckthorn on that. And we want to grow natives. Okay. Um, I will now open the floor for any questions. Does anybody in the audience have any questions? If none then I will um ask three times for people speaking in favor of the proposal. Is there anyone that would like to speak in favor? Anyone who would like to speak in favor? And three times. Anyone who would like to speak in favor. All right. And then three times for anyone speaking against. Would anybody like to speak against? Denise. Tim, do you need a name and address or no? Um, sure. Is it I have hers on here. Um, just state your name and address, please. Denise Tony, 193 Arnold Street. Okay. All right. Good evening. My name is Denise Tony and this is Durk and Dina Verhane. We live adjacent to the requested reszoning from residential to rural residential by the petitioner. All combined, the Verhannes and I have a total of almost 65 years of owning our homes at the end of Arnold Street surrounded by fields. The petitioner has not owned her property for six years yet, and this is the second time we are appearing before the planning committee. We resent the fact that we have to defend our right again

to keep the fields that surround us. Just that, fields, no structures. The city would have to bring in a lot of industry before our end of town could be developed with the necessary utilities. We have a lot of questions. We're confused as to the real reason we are here. Are we here for a proposed orchard of which there are already 29 trees planted as her statement stated when she filed the request to reszone or are we really here for her to put up a shed as she stated to Durk with no mention of an orchard or planting native plants? Her statement to the committee of March 25th, 2025 and published in the Berlin Journal on April 3rd, 2025 stated, and I quote, "I'm just pleased to have this opportunity to combine rural residential and not be full-on egg being in the city. My husband and I do an orchard currently on the property, and we're looking forward to growing more food crops and possibly sell at the farm market. We also are very interested in restoring native plants," unquote. Does she need a permit to sell for profit? Can anybody that lives in a residential zone plant fruit trees to eventually sell the harvest? She also stated to the committee on February 25th, 2025, and it was published in the Berlin Journal on March 6, 2025. And I quote, "I would really approve of something like the rural residential zoning district being that the land could be utilized right now as more rural and then looking forward eventually becoming residential. But having it just strictly residential right now kind of straps us into a corner," unquote. What exactly does straps us into a corner mean? That she can't build a shed. There is no mention of a shed in either of her statements.

Is the current orchard with 29 trees compliant with residential zoning? If so, why change the zoning to rural residential to plant more trees and native plants? Did she have to request permission from the planning committee to plant those 29 trees? Back on August 25th, 2020, Durk and I appeared before the planning committee when she requested that the area be reszoned from residential to agricultural as she stated she wanted to build a shed to store her graphic art supplies as that is her occupation apparently. What happened to that reason to build a shed? Now she's using an orchard as an excuse to build a shed. If the petitioner would have done research prior to purchasing the property, she would have found out that those lots are not buildable without substantial costs for the water and sewer lines and of which a home would have to be built first and the water and sewer lines would have needed to be run from my north lot line at a very substantial cost. The committee denied her request. Prior to that request, the committee had just recently gone through all the properties in the city establishing the land use maps. Now, she is using the orchard as an unspoken reason to build the shed, but that wasn't mentioned in either of her statements she gave to the committee on February 25th or March 25th or on her statement of request to reszone. Why are we wasting our taxpayer dollars to go through this again? How many other properties are requesting the reszoning process? So just how much equipment and storage is needed for an orchard that hasn't matured yet as it takes 3 to 5 years for fruit trees to mature? And when this orchard becomes too much for the petitioner to harvest, is this going to become a pickic orchard which will drastically increase the

amount of traffic on our little dead-end street? People who buy homes on deadend streets value their privacy. The petitioner and her husband own two homes in the city and they live with her mother in her mother's home in the town of Burland as she told the committee back in August of 2020. So, we're wondering just how much storage do they need. Maybe a shed could be built on her mother's property or rent a storage unit of which there are plenty of within the city. And if you can buy two homes in the city, why not build a home on this property as it's zoned residential and move out of the mother's home? It is very disgusting to see a field that was once home to all kinds of wildlife become a personal dumping ground. We invite any andor all of you to see what this field has become. I have a list of non-orthchard related items stashed in the field and why we feel and see that it has become a personal dumping ground. If the realtor would have turn returned my call when the property was for sale, the field would still be a field as of Hannes and I would have purchased it and we wouldn't be going through this again. The following is the list. Old rotted windows that have been there for at least three years. old pallet, brush pile that was brought into the city from the town of Berlin in 2022, which now houses a lot of rodents and critters. Pile of broken concrete, which has been there for at least four years, tires, junk in general that you would find stashed behind an old barn out in the country. Black corrugated piping. The following three items have no uses as there is no access to water. 55gallon drum kitty pool. Three 275galon water storage tanks formally

used for egg chemicals. It would have to rain for 40 days and 40 nights plus just to fill just one of those. In closing, the Verhannes and I ask that you deny her request to reszone that property to rural residential for the unspoken reason of building a storage shed. The orchard is secondary in this instance because, as she stated, she already has 29 trees planted. It sounded to us like she is trying to mislead the planning committee with an ulterior motive. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to speak against third time is any would anybody like to speak against the proposal? If not then comm um commission do you have any discussion or Tim would you like to to go over? Sure, I can I'll try to keep this brief just because we have previously discussed this, but u the staff's opinion is that this uh request does meet the requirements of the ordinance for a uh say map amendment, zoning amendment. It is consistent with the comprehensive plan, not detrimental in to property in the uh immediate vicinity or to the community as a whole. Will not have significant adverse effect on the natural environment. uh will not have a significant adverse impact on the ability to provide services or facilities uh allows for a viable transition to planned uses and is u mean not considered to be spot zoning. Okay. Commission um again any discussion

Tim, we we've looked at other properties too that we could have this ordinance change. Correct. Yes. Yeah. The idea was for it to be a public good, I'd say, to have this as an option and something that's appropriate. I mean, like I said before, it really does fit the character of our comprehensive plan as it h is and how I imagine it would continue to be. I mean, this is a community that does value its rural character. I think that's still echoed. And as I look at this, uh, there's enough sacred for them to move the shed up. Yes. Right. Obviously, depending on the size of the shed. Yeah. I mean from the plan commission perspective and I not going to say that I can imagine what our attorney would have advised as far as this goes but I mean for long range planning the there is no adverse difference for the from residential to rural residential it allows the same potential and same character of uses down the say 20 years from now for example Oh. Um, do we have questions to the or were that already? Yeah, we already had the questions time and just I mean if council you have questions about the the shed? I Yeah, I did. Okay. I sure. Okay. So, we have a lot of stuff including machinery and, you know, uh things that we're utilizing for our gardens. And the

shed in question would be the garage part of the house plan that I have in mind for that area when we decide to build a house there. We are currently living with my mother who is 85 and we are taking care of her. That's why we are there. Are there any other questions about the shed? Because if a shed, which would have to be approved anyway, goes there, it would basically be the garage to the home that would be there in the future. I would assume that having to build a shutter storage facility would have to go through peritting different channels. It's not just grandfathered in. Yeah. Yeah. General permits. Yeah. It would have to be it's not something that can just be done just by switching to real residential. No, that's Yeah, it would go through I'd say that no matter what the zone is, the building permit process is virtually the same no matter what. Okay. Any other discussion or questions? If not, I will close the hearing and we will move on to number six, which is a decision for reszone request parcels number 206 01277 000000 and 2061275000000 for the end of Arnold Street. And the recommendation is to review and recommend to common council the reszoning of the said parcel from R1 residential to RR1 rural residential. I move to recommend to the common council the reszoning of the parcel known as 2061277-0000 and

206-1275-0000 from R1 residential to RR1 rural residential. I'll second a motion and a second. Um, do I need to roll up? Oh, yeah. Let me just do voice. Um, Carol is on. Does anybody want to make a motion to seat Carol? I don't know how seat her to seat her so she can. Yeah, I'll make a motion to seat Carol. Hold on. We have a motion in a second. Yeah, we have to finish the motion. Okay. So then let's do a roll call vote just because somebody is online. Even though she's not voting, I'd feel better about a roll call. Don't mind me. I'm just going to write a little note on here to say that this is the number. All right. Purchase. Yes. Hannon. Uh Hughes. Okay. Kubak. Yes. Uh principal. I. And Reeves. I. Okay. Okay. Motion passes to send that to common council. Now, would anybody like to make a motion to seat Carol? I'll make a motion to seek Carol Hughes. I'll second. Carol, if you can hear us, you are seated. If you want to take part in this. Okay, there. Perfect. She unmuted. I can't hear her. Okay, so we will move on to number seven, the comprehensive plan. Um the evaluation team and Tim has this one also. Okay, this is just real quick. Um we did receive just as an update to the plan commission as a whole, we have received four um I'd say qualifying proposals that we're going to be reviewing. The tenative date is uh

May 8th. So this should have no issue, I imagine, going being something we can follow up on at next month's meeting. Looking forward to it. I'm just double checking. I know everybody else commented. Trackm meets at home, but I'm okay. Do you set a time for that meeting yet or no? Uh, I'll have to double check. I think I did 6 pm, but I don't know. That's what I was thinking. I think it was six also. Yeah. Breaking. Okay. All right. And then number eight, old business to be used to request items of old business to be put on future agenda for further discussion or action. Does anybody have anything for old business? And then new business. Anything for new business? All right. And then our next meeting date is May 27th, 2025. And I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. Um, I'll second that motion and second. Okay. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? At 6:19. Oh gosh. Record. Right. Wonderful.