Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 01-05-1999 . . . .?," MINUTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 5, 1999 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten, Dick Frie, Roy Popilek and Robbie Smith. Also Present: Council Liaison Clint Herbst, Mayor Roger Belsaas Staff Present: Steve Grittman and Jeff O'Neill Absent: None 1. Chair Frie called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and declared a quorum present. 2. Consideration of approval of minutes of the regular meeting held December 1. 1998. Rod Dragsten asked for clarification on the vacation of Hart Boulevard and was informed that nothing west of Hart Boulevard is being vacated at this time. ROY POPILEK MOVED AND RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 1, 1998 REGULAR MEETING AS PRESENTED. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda Chair Frie asked that an update on the joint meeting ofthe MOAA, the City and the township be added as item #6b. 4. Citizen Comments There were no citizen comments. 5. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for a Commercial Preliminary Plat for "River View Square" within the PZM Zoning district. Applicant: Richard E. Williamson. Steve Grittman presented the staff report explaining that the applicant had previously come before the Planning Commission regarding an amendment to the zoning ordinance to allow restaurants in a PZM zone. The City approved the ordinance amendment. The applicffilt is now proposing to develop the site which is located at the northeast quadrant of County Road 39 and County Road 75 and is requesting approval of the preliminary plat. The preliminary plat consists of four lots, all in excess of 2 acres and all meeti ng the requirements for the PZM Zoning District. Steve Grittman pointed out the private drive -1~ . Planning Commission Minutes - 1/5/99 hom County Road 75 between Lots 2 and 3. It was noted that the staff has made an attempt to limit access from County Road 75. However, the county had approved the driveway access and it does meet all county requirements. Other items covered in the stafT report included sidewalks/pathways, easements ffild future development. The staff feels that there may be some future PUDdevelopment. In a PZM Zoning District commercial uses are allowed under a conditional use permit. The staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat with the conditions noted in Exhibit Z. Roy Popilek asked about the width of the easement and was informed that it was 40 feet. Questions were also raised about the access from County Road 75 and what MnDot and county plans are for improvements to County Road 75. . Chair Frie then opened the public hearing. Dan GassIer, representing A Glorious Church spoke asking about the drainage, screening and landscaping plans. He noted that the church is in discussion with the City regarding a drainage easement on the church property. He questioned whether the easement size imposed on this development would apply to the easement that the church is negotiating with the City. He was concerned that the church not be tied to the same easement requirements as that of the proposed plat. The staff indicated that each property is suppose to provide the means to handle the runofT from their property and that development on one property cmmot increase the flows to adjaccnt properties. It was pointed out that A Glorious Church would havc further opportunity to discuss drainage concerns at the timc the individual lots in the plat would develop. Marty Campion, Otto & Associates, spoke for the developcr, stating that they were in concurrence with the report of Mr. Grittman except for the issue of the private drive. The dcveloper felt that this was very important to the plat and should not be removed. Don Lundquist, a neighboring property owncr asked what kind of commercial uses are allowed in the PZM zoning district. The staff went through some of the allowable uses. Mr. Lundquist was informed that a fast food restaurant would not be allowable in a PZM Zoning District. However, sit-down restaurants would be an allowable use in this district. Chair Frie elosed the public hearing. . Richard Carlson stated that the proposed median appeared to end at the mid-point of the private driveway. Marty Campion responded that this had been discussed with the county and the county was proposing to extend the median further to the east. Marty Campion stated that while the county had given approval to the driveway location, the developer still needed to get the necessary permits from the county for the work. The Planning Commission also asked about the width of the private driveway and whether that was adequate for the traffic it would be handling. The width of the driveway is 30 -2- . Planning Commission Minutes - 1/5/99 feet curb to curb. However it is an access driveway and would not have any parking so the 30 feet should be adequate. Chair Prie addressed Mr. Williamson on the issue of the sidewalk and pedestrian underpass on County Road 75 and if the developer was receptive to that. Mr. Williamson indicated that he was not aware of the pedestrian underpass and questioned whether the developer's participation would be in the form of granting an casement or whether he would be expected to participate in the cost of the construction of the underpass. . Chair Prie asked what the development plans were at this time for the lots. The devcloper indicated that a convenience store is being proposed for Lot 2, Block 1 but there wcre no firms plans for thc other lots. The lots were being designed in such a fashion as to make them amenable to a number of uses. This again raised the issue ofwhcther 30 feet was adequate width especially for any traetor trailer combinations. Steve Grittman responded that thc width would be adequate but the turning radius would need to be reviewed. John Ryan with the development group stated that they were flexible on the driveway width and would comply with the city engineer's recommendation on this item. There was some discussion on the traffic patterns and if there would be any problem with cut through traffic to ffilY residential development that may occur. Richard Williamson stated that the traffic along thc private driveway would flow to all parcels in the plat. It was suggested that cross easements be put in place for the lots. Don Lundquist asked if any considcration had been given to making the private drive one way. Richard Willianlson stated that thcy had lookcd at that but felt the traffic pattern would be bettcr with two way traffic. ROBBIE SMITH MOVED AND ROD DRAGS TEN SECONDED THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR RIVER VIEW SQUARE BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE DESIGN IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND ZONING REGULATIONS AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS NOTED BELOW: 1. INCLUSION OF A PATHWAY EASEMENT WITHIN THE DRAINAGE EASEMENT IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE PLAT. 2. INCLUSION OF A SIDEWALK OR PA THW A Y ALONG THE COUNTY HIGHWAY 39 FRONTAGE BETWEEN HART BOULEVARD AND COUNTY HIGHWAY 75. 3. CITY ENGINEER APPROVAL OF 'fHE GRADING AND UTILITY PLANS. 4. THE WIDTH OF THE PRIVATE DRIVE TO BE DETERMINED IN COOPERATION WITH THE CITY ENGINEER. . -3- . Plmming Commission Minutes - 1/5/99 5. A CROSS EASEMENT AGREEMENT IS IN PLACE FOR LOT 1, BLOCK 2 TO HAVE ACCESS RIGHTS THROUGH THE PRIVATE DRIVE. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Public Hearing - Consideration of a request for a Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit for a Development Stage PUD approval within the Monticello Orderly Annexation Area. Applicant: Gold Nugget Development Inc. Steve Grittman presented the staff report on the proposed 220 acre development lying between T.R. 25 and County Road 117. It was noted that the property is contiguous to the City and lies in the area covered in the orderly annexation agreement. It is an area of contention in that the City believes it use should be low density residential while the MOAA Board believes the property should be designated for industrial use. There werc a number of changes from what was shown in the concept plan. It was noted that the ponding area is greater than what was shown in the concept plan. The increase in ponding area reduced the number of lots by 30. An EA W (Environmental Assessment Worksheet) was done and it was determined that no EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) would be required. It was pointed out that there is a five acre parcel in the development that is proposed for commercial use. . Steve Grittman addressed the concern about the street layout especially the length of the strcets. The connection to T.H. 25 from the plat which was shown in the concept plan has been eliminated from the preliminary plat. The City would prefer to see the connection remain in the plat providing it is approved by MnDot. Steve Grittman noted that the Publie Works Director mld City Engineer cxpressed concerns about the street design. There are 22 acres of park designated which meets the 10% land dedication requirement. The 22 acres does not include any of the ponding area and it was the recommendation of the Public Works Director that internal ponds be privately owned. Chair Frie questioned whether Planning Commission consideration of this plat was premature. The MOAA Board is in a stalemate on their land use plan and since this is ml area of contention, perhaps the Planning Commission should table action on the plat until direction is given by the MOAA Board. It was suggested that by approving the preliminary plat it may Jorce the MOAA Board to make a decision. . Rod Dragsten asked about Item #9 on Exhibit Z which dealt with access to Outlot C. This access would be for maintenance purposes and would not be an access intended for public use. Chair Frie noted that in a nWl1ber ofponding areas the lots lines meet at the pond and in those instances who is responsible for the maintenance of the ponding area. Roy Popilek asked about the impact the commercial property would have on the -4- . Planning Commission Minutes - 1/5/99 infrastructure. Stevc Grittman indicated that the commcrcial flows from the fivc acre parcel would not significantly impact the scwcr/water system. Robbie Smith wondercd what would happen to the property ifit received Planning Commission and City Council approval but was turned down by the MOAA Board. Jeff O'Neill responded that the land would remain in limbo. There was a lengthy discussion on whether the matter should come before the Planning Commission since the MOAA has not resolved the issue of a land use plan for the orderly annexation area. Would approving the preliminary plat for residential use make the MOAA Board more rigid in their position that the property should be designated for industrial use. Mayor Belsaas stated that Planning Commission approval of the preliminary plat may give the developer false hope. Steve Grittman argued that the Planning Commission needs to carry out the planning end of the work and not worry about whether other entities give approval. The Planning Commission should address any concerns about the preliminary plat and not anticipate or allow what happens later by another authority to guide their planning. Chair Frie stated the Planning Commission had three options: 1) approve the preliminary plat; 2) deny the preliminary plat or 3) table the preliminary plat and he felt that there was legitimate reason for tabling the plat. He emphasized that the Planning Commission has not done their planning based on expectations of what the council would or would not approve. . Chair Frie then opened the public hearing. Horst Graser from Gold Nugget spoke regarding the land use issue. While he is aware that the MOAA may not approve the project they are proceeding based on the assumption that this project meets the City's land use plan. Chair Frie indicated that it is the position of the MOAA Board that until there is an approved land use plan they will not approve any annexation. Richard Carlson suggested that perhaps there should have been a moratorium until such time as a land use plan was in place. There was lengthy discussion on the position of the MOAA Board and whether any action taken by the Planning Commission would impede progress on a land use plan. While staff suggested that the Planning Commission should follow the smne procedures that they followed on all other properties in the orderly annexation area, the Planning Commission noted that this was the only property that had come bcfore the Planning Commission where there was a question on what the use should be. . Horst Graser gave a presentation on the proposed development. He covered what attempts they would make to attract upscale housing. He stated that there will be covenants for the development and the covenants will set forth requirements for roof pitch, elevation, color and materials. He also noted that white vinyl posts will be placed at the rear of the lots abutting the park so that there is a clear delineation between park land and the lot. Horst Graser stated that the major change to the concept plan was a result of the ponding requirements. Since they are restricted to 2.5 ccfs of flow they had -5- . Planning Commission Minutes - 1/5/99 to increase the ponding area which resulted in a loss of approximately 30 lots. Of the 545 units there are 196 townhomes and 42 detached townhomes which is the same as the shown in the concept plan. . In reviewing the conditions for preliminary plat approval, Mr. Graser commented on Item #4 which required street connections to the northwest and southwest portions of the plat. The developer was not adverse to the additional connections as long as it did not compromise the integrity of the plat. On the proposed access to T.H. 25 (Item #6) Mr. Graser stated the access was removed from the preliminary plat because MnDot did not recommend an additional access. As to Item #7, considcration of a frontage road connection, Mr. Graser stated that feasibility and cost need to be considered and he wanted further direction from the City staff on this item. He was most concerned about the additional trail/pathway requirements outlined in Items #13, #14 and #15. These items would add approximately 4,000 feet of trail and since this would be outside the perimeter of the development it should not be made a condition of his plat approval. He felt that this was more a regional trail and that the connections should be the responsibility of the state, county or city but not thc developer. As it is the developer would be spending approximately $20,000 for construction of trails/pathways within the development. Steve Grittman responded that he did not consider the additional pathway requirements as being a regional system rather it would allow the ready access for the residents in the northeast and northwest portions of the proposed development. Chair Frie closed the public hearing. The Planning Commission questioned the developer on various aspects ofthe development including lot size, information on the type of housing that would be going into the development and what amenities the developer would be providing that would bring in upper scale housing. Richard Carlson stated that the holding ponds do not have an aesthetic value unless they retain water on a permanent basis. Horst Graser indicated that the holding ponds would probably be dry a portion of the time but that those lots abutting the ponds and park areas would command a higher price because many buyers desire space and separation from adjacent properties. Richard Carlson asked whether the entire 220 acres was proposed for a PUD or only the townhomes. Mr. Graser responded that the PUD was for thc entire 220 acres. The proposcd entry monuments were also brought up with questions about the design of the monuments and who is responsible for maintenance. Steve Grittman stated that the staff had discussed this item and would set up a policy dealing with dcsign and maintenance concerns but that has not yet been done. The Park Board has reviewed the proposed park area for this development. The developer stated that he did not want to see anything other than passive play areas for the park land since he felt that it would take away from thc upscale housing. . -6- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 1/5/99 CHAIR FRlE MOVED AND ROY POPILEK SECONDED THE MOTION TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PUD UNTIL THE FEBRUARY MEETING BASED ON THE OUT COME OF n~lE JOINT MEETING WITH THE MOAA BOARD TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE INPUT AND DIRECTION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON THIS ITEM. Motion carried unanimously. 6b. Update on ioint meeting with MOAA Board 1effO'Neill summarized what had let up to the proposal for ajoint meeting with the City Council, township and MOAA Board. The MOAA Board had requested that the City take out the Southwest Plan as part of the Orderly Annexation Agreement. Should the MOAA come to an agreement on a land use plan, the City would then have to pass zoning amendments to reflect the changes. Dick Fric announced that he would be resigning from the MOAA Board after the Wednesday, January 6, 1999 meeting. Chair Frie stated that he felt it very important for the Planning Commission to be kept informed of what took place at the MOAA meetings. ROD DRAGSTEN MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 9:45 P.M. AND RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. Motion passed lmanimously. () G...LuY, ,-}'-\ ' A D<'S~. Q ~ Recording Secretary (.J -7-