Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 07-02-2002 . . . Members: Stall: MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday - .July 2, 2002 7:00 P.M. Dick frie, Robbie Smith, Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten. Lloyd Hilgart and Council Liaison Clint Herbst Jeff O'Neill, John Glomski and Steve Grittman l. Call to order. 2. Chair Frie called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM declaring a quorum. Approval of the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting held June 4, 2002 and the Special Planning Commission meeting held June 24, 2002. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROD DRAGSTEN TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 4, 2002 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. CHAIR FRIE ADVISED OF A CORREC'TION TO rrEM 9, PARAGRAP1I2 OF THE MINUTES STATING THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY THE PARKS COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL IN 1991. ROD DRAGSTEN AMENDED HIS MOTION INCLUDING THE CORRECTION. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITII TO APPROVE TIlE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON JUNE 24, 2002. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED TIlE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. Chair frie brought forward concerns regarding the present parking on School Blvd, specifically where the fields are located, stating parking should not be on the south side when fields are located on north side. This was placed as item 12A on the agenda. Chair Fric asked fl.w information on the City ordinance in regard to garage sales and the maximum numbcr per year. This was plaeed as item12B on the agenda. Clint Herbst asked for ordinance information regarding policy for tree plantings, landscaping, etc. in new dcvelopments and who is responsible for maintaining it. This was placed as item 13 on the agenda. -1- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 07/02/02 4. Citizens comments. Don Doran, 515 Maple Street, questioned information hc had received via mail regarding the former St. Henry's church. Doran stated that there were 2 lots included in this notice that were incorrect. Jeff O'Nei II advised that this was only to notify all residents within a 350 foot radius ofthc property. Chair Frie stated it would be addressed in item 7. Doran also asked about the Central Minnesota Housing Palinership project and lot sizes on Minnesota Street and 6th Street. frie stated this would be addressed in item (-) on the agenda. 5. Public Hearing - Consideration of a reClLIest fix a conditional use permit allowing accessorv space in excess of 1200 sq. n. in the R- I district. Applicant: Lynn & Christine Anderson John Glomski provided the staff report advising that the applicant's proposed accessory building, added to the existing attached garage, will equal 1324 sq. ft.. which exceeds the 1200 sq. ft. requirement and therefore the need for a Conditional Use Permit. With a Conditional Use Permit, the detached accessory structure may exceed 10% of the rear yard area and the size limitations for a detached and attached accessory structure may be incrcased up to a maximum squarc footage of 1500 sq. ft.. as long as conditions are met. Glomski advised of these conditions, along with the condition that the proposed accessory structure is used for storage of seasonal vehicles only and no parKing of vehicles in front of the accessory structure or along the rear yard, which would give thc appearance of an everyday garage and driveway. Chair Frie opened thc public hearing. Mr. Anderson addressed the Planning Commission stating that the rcason the structure is proposed ofT to the corner of their lot is that they differed on what is considered the front of the house. He also stated that originally it was suggestcd to attach it to the existing garage, but aesthetically they felt it was better where they were proposing to place it. Frie stated a concern with the applicant accessing the structure from Starling Rd where there is presently not a driveway. Anderson stated he would not be continuing this, but that due to a drainage easement in his yard water drains through the centcr of his property and therefore when it rains he cannot get access through that part of the yard. He advised that he will work on correcting this drainage issue. Again, he stated this is only temporary. Frie statcd that hc agrccd this would be an improvement to the property for storage. Chair Frie then closed the public hearing. Hilgart stated he was also in bvor. Dragsten stated that the ordinance states not to exceed 1200 sq. ft., and he felt there may be a way to cut this structure down to mcct that requirement. Anderson advised that he nceds the additional spacc for his boat as he needs 24 feet. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DICK FRIE TO APPROVE TilE CONDIl'IONAL USE -2- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 07/02/02 PERMIT ALLOWING CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN EXCESS OF 10% OF THE REAR YARD AND ALLOWING THE COMHINED DETACHED AND ATTAcIIED ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AREA TO BE GREATER THAN TI lA T OF THE PRINCIPLE USE AND IN EXCESS OF 1200 SQ. FT., WITH CONDITIONS AS FOLLOWS: I. Accessory building space is to be utilized solely for the storage ofresidcntial personal property or the occupant or the principal dwelling, and no accessory huilding space is to he utilized for commercial purposes. ) The parcel on which the accessory building is to be located is of sufficient size such that the building will not crowd the open space on the lot. 3. The accessory building will not he so large as to have an adverse affcct on the architectural character or reasonable residential use of the surrounding property. 4. The accessory buildings shall be constructed to be similar to the principal building in architectural style and building materials. 5. The proposed accessory structure shall be used for storage of seasonal vehicles (boats, campers, lawn mowers, snowmohiles, etc.) only. There shall be no vehicles parked in front of the accessory structure or along the rear yard which would give the appearance of an everyday garage and driveway. 6. Continnation that the applicant can do what is shown on the site plan via a survey or staking the plan and getting approval of the zoning official. MOTION BASED ON TilE FINDING TllA T 111E ACCESSORY STRUCTURE WILL IMPROVE "fHE APPEARANCE OF THE NEIGHHORHOOD AND WILL NOT HA Vt~ AN ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. LLOYD llILGART SECONDED Tl IE MUT'ION. THERE WAS FURTHER DISCUSSION THAT THE APPLICANT MUST ALSO MEET THE ZONING CODE REQUIREMENTS AND BUILDING STANDARDS. MOTION CARRIED 3 TO 2, WITH ROBBIE SMITH AND ROD DRAGSTEN OPPOSING. 2. Public Ilearing - Consideration of development stage planned unit development and preliminary plat approval allowing II single family residential units in the R-3 zoning district. Applicant: Central Minnesota Housing Partnership and the City of Monticello Jeff O'Neill advised that the applicant is still waiting for the final plan from the architect as they are working on including basements and still trying to stay within their budget. He added that although they are getting donations as well as relaxation of some city fees, -3- Planning Commission Minutes - 07/02/02 . they still need to stay within hudget to keep these units affordable. O'Neill stated that the plan provided addressed most of the issues listed in the staIr report and they just do not have final plans on the homes themselves. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Sheri Ilarris, CMHP, stated that they are currently working on other options due to feedback they have received regarding marketing and the desire for basements, adding that this increases the value of the homes hut it also adds to the cost to build them. Harris provided a site plan showing some units that are heing huilt in another city which would be similar and include full basements. She did state that the prices should still be similar to what they had stated previously, which is around $ll5,000 to $l20,000. She stated the actual price of the homes are running at $87,000. O'Neill asked Harris what the value of the homes actually is and she stated they would be close to $l30,000, adding that these would be higher priced homes than what they are actually putting them on the market for. . Clint Herbst asked how it is determined who gets into these homes and Harris advised that they arc open to anyone interested in purchasing them, but they must meet CMHP guidelines which targets hlmilies that do not exceed 80lYo of state wide median income, approx $50,000 for a family of four. Herbst also asked about the process and Harris explained applicants would need to fill out applications, eligibility forms, and provide lender information stating that they qualify ft)r a loan. Harris added that they have also brought in other financing tools to help. Ilerbst then asked what happens when the owners sell these properties, are they free to sell at whatever price they choose, and she stated that once they are in and qualify for the loan, they arc free to do whatever they choose, but that they still have to pay back the loans. Chair Frie asked about TIF assistance and Harris stated that the HRA has approved this. O'Neill asked about minimum income levels and if there was a range, and shc stated there is as they would have to be able to qualify for a loan. She added that there has already bcen a lot of interest. CMHP is looking at families with incomes between $26,000 and $30,000, as a typical range. Don Doran, 515 Maple Street, stated he was concerned with there only being a 9 ft. separation between the houses, and that he still hadn't heard what the dimensions of the houses would be or the size of the lots. Grittman stated there arc currently 5 lots bcing Minnesota Street that arc 66 tt wide and CMHP is proposing 9 lots, with the narrowest bcing 33 feet. There would also be two 50 ft wide lots facing 6th Street. lie also stated that the houses would be appro x 900 sq. ft. up and down. . Frie asked the other members if when they initially discussed this project, were they not supportive of basements and would they want to include this as a recommendation. The Planning Commission did not recall if there was a consensus regarding inclusion of basements, although Carlson stated this would definitely increase the values. Harris stated they arc gearing toward split entry with basements. O'Neill asked Grittman that with this type of proposed design, with setbacks and elevations, how will that effect the -4~ Planning Commission Minutes - 07/02/02 . appearance of the homes and Grittman stated it would shade those spaces between the homes, which is different from the original design. . Frie asked Herbst if the council would have a different idea regarding the design and he felt they would like the idea of basements, but added that he is not in favor of the split entry design. Robbie Smith asked ifthere were neighboring residents in the audience and if so, how they felt about the design. Rose Peters, 503 W. 6th Street, asked if these would be lower income homes with basements and could they finish off the basements if they wanted to. Grittman stated he assumed they would be unfinished at the time they arc sold and could be finished at the owners expense. Peters also asked if there was a time frame on how long they would have to live in the home before being able to sell it. Harris said the only limitations would be on gap financing and that they would need to repay the loans prior to selling the home, but there is no time limit on that. Peters also asked if the owner had to live in the home or could they rent it out and it was advised that this typically does not happen as the people have to be within a certain income level to qualify for the home in the first place. O'Neill also asked about the low ineomc comment from Mrs. Peters and fIarris stated that it's aetually median income, $8 to $lO/hour wages, and that this program is for people who can't otherwise gct into a home. This is a means to help them. Robbie Smith asked O'Neill about Sunny Fresh's increase in their contribution and O'Neill stated that Sunny Fresh is being very generous. Harris added that this is due to a need f(Jr more afjl.)l'dable housing in this community and Sunny Fresh has Inany employees that this would benefit, yet there is no special LlVorS given to them fl.)!' this contribution. Mike Cyr, MLC Building, 60 I Minnesota St, stated he had concerns about the architecture, adding that he has taken huge risks to develop property just down the street with sale prices around $170,000. Cyr said he has no objections to this project and feels it is needed, but feels it can be built architecturally better and would not want to see a projeet that would pull that area down. One concern was going from the rambler design, and also would like to see an association take care of landscaping and maintenance. Cyr fclt that because the site is so tight, the rambler design would be more attractive. Cyr also asked how they determine a builder. Ilarris advised that they were approached as a non- profit agency and this builder has a background with these projects, and is knowledgeable about al1lwdable housing. They also have several contractors who they are working with and have worked with previously, but have not committed to anyone yet. Looking to get the best work for the best pricc. Cyr had a concern with the builder that he had hcard of and if he meets the criteria. llarris assured that they would not jeopardize the quality of the homes. . Chair Frie closed the public hearing. Lloyd Hilgart asked about square footages and Grittman advised that they were initially proposed at 1,00& sq. ft. Hilgart also asked Ilarris about the wide range of income rcquirements and what is the low end. Harris stated there is no Ininimum, but with previous experience in this program, if it went down to $20,000 per houschold the applicant probably would not qualify as they would not be -5- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 07/02/02 able to fill in the gap. Hilgart stated he thought the range from $30,000 to $50,000 was quite a bit of difference, and could the units be made to differ in style and price due to this. Harris stated that would certainly be an option. She also advised that this is a first come, first serve basis and they already are taking requests with deposits. The process would then be to sign purchase agreements and obtain a letter from the lender stating they qualify. Dragsten felt there were still a lot of unanswered questions and would like to have them all resolved before moving f{)rward. Frie asked O'Neill about architectural plans that were to be provided at the llleeting, and .lefT advised that they wcre planning on this but then the request for basements came up and thus the need to redcsign. O'Neill stated they could table this item or call for a special meeting prior to a city council meeting, but he didn't know what CMIIP's time frame was f{)f this construction season. The commissioncrs were in favor of the development, but Carlson also agreed with Cyr's and Dragsten' s comments that they needed more information. Frie asked if they would be more comj{)rtable with tabling this item and Herbst stated it was up to CMHP if they could wait. Harris asked what the preference on home sty Ie is so she could proeced with final plans as they need to meet the August 1 construction start date. Linda Brown, who is working on the land surveying, asked Grittman about possibly adding one foot between each unit to make them 10ft. apart and Grittman advised that with splits it would not make a dilTerence and that they would havc to be at least 15 fL apart to get enough light between the units for landscaping. llerbst stated his concern is that this be an attractive home, but does not want basements instead of sOlllething that is attractive. Grittman stated one thing the builders could consider would be rambler fa.cades with half basements which would save on cost and give them enough space in the basement for utilities and laundry, while trimming the footprint. Issue with rambler is that the utilities would have to be on the main 1100r taking up too much living space. The commissioners discussed tabling to either July 8 or July 22 and it was their consensus that July 8th would not give them sunicient time. Herbst addcd that he would not be at the July 22"d meeting but that he was comfortable with the information he has. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMIT'II TO TABLE ANY ACTION AND CALI, FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON JULY 22,2002 AT 5:30 PM. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED 'rHE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 7. Public I fearing - Consideration of development stage planned unit development allowing a mixed residential and institutional use in the R~2 district. Request includes use of church building for church purposes and convcrsion of former parish center into combination church otlice and rental housing. Applicant: Hope Evangelical Free Church and the Church of St. Henry Jeff O'Neill provided the report and askcd Grittman about requirements for removing lot lines that may be present, and should they make that a stipulation ofthc pun. Grittman stated this could be done, but bccause this is a PUD the developmcnt project ties the lots -6- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 07/02/02 all together so they could not be sold off anyway. Chair Frie opened the public hearing and hearing no response, the public hearing was closed. Carlson asked if there was a parking issue at the parish center with their proposed use and O'Neill stated the applicant would be reinstating the garage, which is a 4 car garage, but that there may be some incidental on street parking at times, although no more than anywhere else. Dragsten questioned if eliminating lot I ines was common and Grittman stated it was. It was advised that it would only be the lot lines on the lot where the buildings are located. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DICK FRIE TO APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT ~n'AGE PUD ALLOWING A MIXED RESIDENTIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL USE IN THE R-2 DISTRICT. REQUEST INCLUDES THE CHURCH BUILDING TO BE ALLOWED FOR CIIURCI-I USES AND THE PARISII CENTER CONVERTED INTO A COMBINATION OF OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL USE. DEVELOPMENT STAGE PUD SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENT 'rllAT INTERIOR LOT LINES BE EUMINA TED. MOTION BASED ON THE FINDING THAT THE PUD IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER or THE NEIGHBORl IOOD, CONSISTENT WITH TI IE COMPREI IENSIVE PLAN AND WILL NOT RESULT IN A DEPRECIATION IN LAND VALUES. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED TIlE MOTION. THERE WAS FURTHER DISCUSSION BY FRIE AMENDING HIS MOTION TO ADD THAT LANDSCAPING BE UPDATED INCLUDING TRIMMING, WEEDING, AND REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF DEAD BRUSH AND BRANCHES. CARLSON SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. Public Hearing - Consideration of a recwest t()I" concept and development stage planned unit development allowing townhome development in the PZM zoning district. Applicant: Ocello, LI ,C, Shawn Weinand Steve Grittman provided the report adding that the developer is asking feu two accesses onto Co Rd 17 and that he needs to get proper authorization from the County to do this. He added that since the time he wrote the report the applicant has already addressed some of the concerns and has provided a revised site plan. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Shawn Weinand, applicant, stated that they reviewed the comments from staff and tried to address most of the concerns. Weinand stated he was also concerned at first with the design by MFRA, but it was stated that this was due to safety issues, and although they may look choppy, they have taken out the linear look. The circular design is to act as traffic control as well as a landmark, noting that part of what is critical to the road layout is that it is basically a flat site. Weinand advised that in speaking with staff it was advised that walkouts were preferred, -7- Plannil1g COll1ll1ission Minutes - 07/02/02 . so they sculptured the land to fit this request. He stated that they have not come up with a real solution to the circulation problem and are open to suggestions. Weinand advised that they also added trails through the project by recommendation of staff to have them within 200 ft or each unit. Along Co Ro 17 they have added 2 to 3 foot berms enabling them to meander the trail system through this with a nice look. Staff also suggested one large tot lot versus the 2 that were proposed. The applicant stated they are struggling with that because they feci that due to the size of this parcel they would like to create neighborhoods within neighborhoods. Weinand stated that they added 2 more tot lots, 4 in total, along with the hot shot basketball court, and this puts each neighborhood within 500 1'1. The builder felt that it was critical to have the ability to have smaller neighborhoods. They designed landscaping to create these neighborhoods as well. He also addressed thc issue that they need to have all porches and decks within the 30 ft. setback, but advised that they do not have porches, only balconies, and they are all within the 30 ft. setback with the exception of the 3 units in the three corners of the project. . Weinand also addressed the gas line and access issues, and advised that they have made application to the County regarding county access. Weinand also supports 2 entrances into the development, but they cannot guarantee that the county would give this to them. The county wants passing/turning lanes as well and Weinand stated they will include this. He added that they have narrowed the streets to 24 ft., but did not shorten driveways; there are currently 270 parking spaces, and they are still maintaining 50% green space. Weinand stated they do not have a lot of brick on the units as they do not have large {rotHS, and his recommendation would be to carry the brick up further into a design. He also stated they are maintenance li-ee outsides with upgraded shingles and treads on the decks. Starting price range is mid $130,000's up to $] 70,000. . Frie asked Weinand to respond to the comments rcgarding staff and Planning Commission concerns with the 11 conditions not being resolved, which he addressed. It was noted that there is a concern with phasing, as well as outdoor recreation and Frie asked if the Parks Commission had discussed this item. Weinand stated there is a phasing schedule which he provided to them, but he would rather not be held to 50 units per phase, adding that thcy are projecting 3 phases now, and could possibly end up with 4. Grittman stated this as a guideline that they go by, not to have 100 units all at once, and this has been addressed. Frie asked ahout the Parks Commission concerns, there was confusion as to whether they were private or public parks, and it was stated that they will be private. The Parks Commission has not seen the updated site plan addressing the concerns. It was advised that the Parks Commission would rather have the dollars for park dedication for development of the Klein Farms park which is about jj mile away. Frie asked ir staIr would require them to put in tot lots and the hot shot as well as park dedication. O'Neill said they will have to discuss this further with the Parks Commission as to what percentage is being accomplished with these 4 tot lots. Weinand advised that they had previously discussed the private parks and they also have land that they would like to leave as green space, as well as land on the Remmele piece that they could dedicate in lieu of cash. O'Neill stated they will bring the request to the Parks Conllnission showing land, grade, and more details so they can make an informed -8- Planning Commission Minutes - 07/02/02 . decision. O'Neill asked about this being a private project with private tot lots, and would they get credit lor this and Grittman stated some cities will credit a certain percentage, some will not, stati ng that is just one of the costs of a PUD . Weinand also added that they ran the trail system through their site so that the public has access through and he would like to negotiate the park dedication as he felt that was the direction they were heading, and he was not aware of the Parks Commission's concern. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. Smith asked if Grittman felt the issues were addressed properly and Grittman stated the biggest concern was the circulation in the central area and that although he liked the idea of a landmark and tratlic control, he had concerns with 3 intersections right in that area with driveways accessing into that space, and docs not feel that this would be the right design, although he does understand the strategy for slowing traffic. In regard to the way the streets take "sharp" turns versus curves, drivers tend to cut off turns and he is not sure they would be solving the traffic concern. They did like the way the streets are laid out as it makes for a constantly changing view. He feels there is a way to work the circulation out, while preserving unit counts. Weinand stated there is quite a bit of green space behind the units and possibly they could move them back, stating they are open to suggestions as they have no solution at this time. . Weinand stated total linished square feet would be 1,700. These are split entry, look-outs and walk-outs, one bedroom on the main floor with the ability to add 2 rnore. Grittman stated also that there needs to be trail connections on the northeast corner of the roadway to the northeast corner of the site to get the internal traffic out, but that this can be changed easily. Lloyd Hilgart asked about the central area and could they create a cul-de- sac to eliminate those problems. Weinand stated eul-de-sacs are usually not preferred, but in that area it may be feasible, but not the best for lire trucks and snow plowing. Weinand stated he would like to be grading in the next 2 to 3 weeks. Frie stated that Weinand has done an excellent job in resolving the majority of the issues and askcd if staff felt comfortable with moving forward and working with the applicant. Orittman stated he is confident that they can work out the concerns and feels they have covered most of them already. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROD DRAGSTEN TO RECOMMEND APPROV AL OF THE DEVELOPMENT STAGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONDITIONS AS FOLLOWS: 1. A detailcd landscaping plan must be submitted that includes buffer areas, berms, and more intensive landscaping in the rear areas to mitigate site lines as well as the area between the proposed development and the mobile homes to the south. 2. Modifications regarding circulation must be addressed. These modifications must include alternatives to the current plan that decrease the number of contl ict intersection areas. In addition, the applicant must pursue permission for the second acccss to Edmondson A venue from the County. A minimum of three . -9- . . 9. . Plann ing Comm ission Minutes - 07/02/02 access points are necessary for this project. ., -, . A detailed lighting plan must be submitted to public works and is subject to City staff approval. 4. The applicant must resolve casement issues and receive permission from the gas company for the second access to Edrnondson with the County. The grading, drainage, and utility plan must be approvcd by the City Engineer. 5. A modified parking plan must bc developed that includes additional guest parking areas. At least 13 additional parking stalls are necessary throughout the development. 6. The applicant must provide a revised trail plan that includes internal trails that connect to School Boulevard as well as to the southeast corner of the site at Edmondson and the UPA casement that runs to Klein Farms. The plan should be designed so that individual units would be within 200 feet of the trail. The internal trail system should provide a link between the current tails on the northeast and southeast corners of the project. 7. The applicant must redesign recreation areas away from casement areas. StatT recommends larger recreation areas in the center of the proposed development. 8. Higher design standards that include building elevations consistent with this report, must be developed and submitted. 9. A phasing plan must be developed and submitted to staff prior to development. No more than 50 units shall be constructed bcfi)[e a second access is developed within the project. 10. All buildings, porches, and decks, must be setback a minimum of 30 feet. II. rurther rccommendations by City staff LLOYD IIILGART SECONDED THE MOTION. THERE WAS FURTI IER DISCUSSION BY ROBBIE SMITH REGARDING TI IE PARKS COMMISSION'S NEED TO REVIEW FURTHER. ROD DRAGSTEN AMENDED IllS MOTION ADDING THAT THIS ALSO BE SUBJECT TO PARKS COMMISSION APPROVAL. LLOYD HILGART SECONDED THE AMENDED MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. Public llearing - Consideration ofa request fix a preliminary plat and a requcst for re-zoning from A-O to 13-3. Anplicant: Melvin Wolters and Prairie Ponds LLC, Bradley Larson -10- Planning Commission Minutes - 07/02/02 . Steve Grittman provided the report and Jeff O'Neill added information regarding a potential street connection to the Groveland residential development. O'Neill advised that Developers of the adjacent Groveland Addition have suggested modifying the Groveland plat and Prairie Ponds to allow a road connection from Grovcland to Prairic Ponds. This connection would provide a third access point to the Groveland rcsidential subdivision. O'Ncill recalled that a request for this access was denied by the Planning Commission whcn the preliminary plat was established. After taking a second look at the proposal, it has gained support at staff level because most believe that the new access will not become a primary route for access to the development. This proposal would result in a reduction in park land with the Groveland Addition which would be otTset by developer paying cash in lieu of land. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Brad Larson, applicant, asked about the stonn sewer in the area of the School Blvd. and Highway 25 intersection and if the City was proposing to shift any of the uti lities. Grittman advised that they would not be. Larson advised that they are looking at professional buildings on this site. . Frie asked who would providc thc additional road access and O'Neill stated the applicant would pay fiJr this and that they may have to revise their plans as well. He also noted that they will lose a major portion of park spacc if this happens and it also has not gone before the Parks Commission. Grittman advised that they did not anticipate that park space at that site having much activity, but wantcd to have a trail connection, as long as therc is a plan l()r making it up in park dedication. Frie asked Larson about the extension of School Blvd. and wouldn't they be better circumventing that by extending it to the west, and if this would be a positi ve f()r the Groveland development, it could be done without aflecting the appl icant' s deveJopment. . Weinand, reprcsenting the Groveland development, addressed the commission asking to explain why Groveland would like thc access to their development. I Ie stated initially they wanted this, but the city did not want to pay fiJr it, stating that now Brad Larson is willing to provide this. Weinand pointed out the Remmele property showing phase 4 of the projcct and that it could still be another 5 years bel()fe the access would be connected, but that this access could happen within a year, which would bring tratlic into Larson's project and take pressure otTofCheJsea which would be beneficial to both properties. Weinand also stated that with the park land they would be dedicating, thcy could combine with Weinand's other project providing a 5 acre piece. Another option of Weinand's would be to work out something with Larson and make this into a commerciaJlot but this would then eliminatc the connection. Larson stated this is the first time he has heard this discussion, but hc did feel comfortable sitting down with Weinand to discuss and then come back to the City. Larson stated they would Jike to move forward on this project as they have a 12,000 sq ft commercial building they would like to start for a local business that is expanding, and it was advised by Griuman that if they proceeded on the preliminary plat it would not hurt Weinand's project. -11- Planning Commission ^genda - 07/02/02 . Chair Frie then closed the puhlic hearing. Dragsten questioned straightening out lot lines on this site and questioned the angles. Larson stated this is complying with green space and parking, and he did not see an issue. Grittman stated that sometimes in residential cases lot lines can become an issue hut not usually with commercial sites. Frie asked Grittman about the Groveland Addition having a reduction in park land and was coneerned that the Parks Commission eomment on this, advising that the City has only so much need f()r dollars and the need jor parks is greater. O'Neill stated that the Parks Commission has not yet had a chance to look at this due to timing of the application being submitted and O'Neill addcd that there is a large park in the Groveland development that may be more usable. Frie advised that the Parks Commission had a concern with the Planning Commission not looking at thcir recommendations or being able to comment on these items. Carlson asked to what extent we are extending the trail system and O'Neill stated it is very significant and that it extends the full length ofa pond in the Groveland addition, as well as one that cuts through to a future side walk. Decision 1. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITII TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINAR Y PLAT WITI I STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS AS fOLLOWS: I. A detailed landscaping plan must he provided. The landscaping plan must show a buffer yard between areas adjacent to aJ I residential districts. . 2. The grading, utilities, and drainage plan are suhject to the review of the City Engincer. 3. Access offofWolters Way must fully align with the access to School Boulevard to the south. 4. A lighting plan must be provided. All proposed lighting must meet City Code guidelines. 5. Eascmcnt issues are subject to the revicw of City Staff. 6. Further recommendations by City staff. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED '1"1 IE MOTION. UNANIMOUSL Y. MOTION CARRIED Decision 2. . A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBBIE SMITH TO APPROVE RE-ZONING FROM A-O TO B-3, BASED ON THE FINDING THAT TIlE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WIlli THE COMPREIIENSIVE PLAN. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED lJNANIMOUSL Y. -12- Planning Commission Agenda - 07/02/02 10. Consideration of adoption of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. . Jeff O'Neill provided the statTreport stating that staffis seeking the Planning Commission's input rcgarding the proposed amendments, but that they do not have all the language in place at this time. It is staff's hope that this will be addressed at the August lneeting. O'Neill also provided a summary of the joint meeting held in ./une. . Frie stated that he felt thejoint mecting was constructive and highlighted some oftheir goals. He also felt the nl<~jor topic at that meeting was acquisition of industrial land and his concern is that the end result was designating a specific area for industrial land of200 acres. He is in 1~:IVor of acquiring industrial land, but does not feel that they should designate it or pinpoint anyone area. fie is in favor of staff putting together the language. Robbie Smith added that he felt from the meeting that the best place for industrial land was northwest and that would be where the city eould focus on if the interehange were to be in place. Hc is intercsted in hearing what the economics would be to pursue the interchange. It was also advised that the Chamber agreed that the northwest area was the foeus for industrial land. Thc ncgative was getting the freeway intcrchange in place and the dollars to do that. O'Neill addcd that getting utilities to this area as well would bc difficult and costly. but addcd that the city may be able to pursuc this by assessing bencfitting properties which would help to pay the utilities. Smith asked about thc city taking thc 200 acrcs south instead, stating that thcre would already be utilities in place. He also asked about south bcing a temporary solution, but still driving toward the northwest. Herbst also feels the city should acquirc industrial land and statcd that they could re-zone land at a later time if necessary. although he doesn't see wherc the city would come up with the money to purchase 200 acrcs at this time. Dragstcn also fClt an urgency for more industrial land now rather than 10 to 15 years from now. O'Neill stated thc city is creating the same amount of industrial land as they still have the Gold Nuggct piece that could be acquired Jor industrial. They also stated a concern with only one developer controlling the industrial land and O'Neill stated that this may be good in the long tcrm as larger industries with higher paying jobs would be more likely to purchase the highcr priced land. Dragsten stated they should not be looking long tcrm, but should acquirc propcrty bcf()re the land prices go up further. Grittman added that between Chadwick, Pfeffer, Gold Nuggct, and the land across Hwy 25, the city has about 300 acrcs which would support 3.2 million industrial space. He also fel t that I I wy 25 is not the right spot for industrial land and would have a negative impact on the commercial businesses there. A MUIION WAS MADE BY DICK FRIE DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE OR GRAPHICS SUPPORTING CONCEPTS AND GOALS /)ISCUSSEDA TTI IEJOINTMEETING. ROI3BIESMITI-ISECONDEDTIIE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. . -13- . . . PJanll jng COllllll issioll Agenda - 07/02/02 11. Jeff O'Neill advised that there had heen a turnover of developers who are looking at the preliminary plat that was previously approved, adding that there were some changes. The developers were not present and O'Neill stated possibly they will be available at the next meeti ng. 12A. Parkinl! on School Blvd. O'Neill stated the theory behind the parking, per John Simola, was that even though people can park on the field side and get right out of their cars, parking on the south side provided better visihility to see around the vehicles. Herhst asked about creating no parking on School Rlvd. and having people park in the parking lots. Frie stated he is concerned with the City's liability with having people parking on the south side and crossing School Blvd. 128. Garage Sales O'Neill stated thc city has sent notices to several residents, although he does not know if this particular one was noticcd, and that the ordinance states they are allowed 3 garage sales per year. Frie's concern was the geographical location, stating an examplc ofa residence on Co Rd 75 who secm to have continual garage sales and the danger of people crossing Co Rd 75 to get to the sale. Frie suggested that seasonally in the newsletter there should be a reminder of the ordinance regarding garage sales. 13. Landscapi n g/Iongevi ty Ilcrbst stated he felt developers/buildcrs necded to understand what the ordinance states in regard to trees that are being planted and not surviving, hut also not heing replaced by the developer/builder. Herbst addcd that developers should he madc aware that it is their responsibility j()r the plantings being taken care or 12. Adjourn A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROBI3IE SMITH TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 10:) 0 PM. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. ~AI.~An~~"AI_ ~(j5-;;~~~~~ -14-