HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-01-24 MINUTESCity of Cottage Grove
Joint Meeting of the Parks, Recreation, and Natural
Resources Commission and Planning Commission
January 14, 2008
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a joint meeting of the Planning Commission and Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources Commission was held at City Hall, 7516 – 80th Street South,
Cottage Grove, Minnesota on January 14, 2008, in the Council Chambers and telecast on local
Government Cable Channel 16.
Call to Order
Chairperson Davy called the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources meeting to order at
7:04 p.m. Chairperson Thiede called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
Roll Call
Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Members Present: Bob Davy, Keith
Kleinsasser, Krystal McCalvy, Paul Poncin, Bill Schumal, Ryan Simmers, Sheri Yartiz.
Absent: Ashley Thurber.
Planning Commission Members Present: Ken Brittain, Tina Folch-Freiermuth, Obid Hofland,
Steve Messick, Chris Reese, David Thiede. Absent: Chris Willhite, Tracy Poncin.
Others Present: Howard Blin, Community Development Director; Jennifer Levitt, City Engi-
neer; Zach Dockter, Ice Arena/Parks & Recreation Manager; John Burbank, Senior Planner;
John McCool, Senior Planner; Mark Grossklaus, City Council; Pat Rice, City Council; Chuck
Freiberg, RSP Consultant
Approval of Agenda
Brittain made a motion to approve the agenda. Schumal seconded. Motion approved
unanimously (12 to 0 vote).
Open Forum
Chairperson Thiede asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission and Parks,
Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission on any non-agenda item. No one ad-
dressed the Commissions.
Chair’s Explanation of the Public Hearing Process
Chairperson Thiede explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an
advisory capacity to the City Council, and that the City Council makes all final decisions. In
addition, he explained the process of conducting a public hearing and requested that any
Minutes of Joint Meeting of Parks and Planning Commissions
January 14, 2008
Page 2 of 6
person wishing to speak should come to the microphone and state their full name and ad-
dress for the public record.
Public Hearings and Application Reviews
6.1 Site Plan Review: Cottage Grove Ice Arena – Planning Case No. SP08-002
The City of Cottage Grove has applied for site plan review of a new ice arena to be con-
structed adjacent to the existing arena at 8020 – 80th Street South.
Blin requested that both Commissions provide comments on the project and that the Plan-
ning Commission make a formal recommendation to the City Council. Blin introduced the
consulting architect, Chuck Freiberg.
Freiberg reported that the existing ice arena facility currently has 1,200 seats. The new addi-
tion will have 600 additional seats with additional locker rooms, meeting rooms, restrooms,
storage areas, and larger lobby areas. The main front entrance will extend outward an addi-
tional 12 feet, thus expanding the existing front lobby area. The hallway along the south side
of the existing sheet of ice will be widened to 12 feet. A player entrance will be at the north-
east corner of the new addition at the lower level of both facilities, which allows better access
to the locker rooms and sheets of ice. The new addition’s exterior walls will be pre-cast in-
sulated panels comprised of exposed aggregate materials that match building materials in
the current ice arena. The wall panels will have a rib pattern with a contrasting band.
Freiberg explained that a one-way access road is proposed to connect the parking lot north
of the existing ice arena to 80th Street. This access drive will be 14 feet in width. With this
access to the new player entrance at the northeast corner of the new addition, the front en-
trance at the existing ice arena will be less congested with passenger vehicles and buses
dropping off and picking up players and spectators at the main entrance. Without the access
drive connection to 80th Street, a turn-around on the north side of the new addition is re-
quired and the access drive must be widened to allow for two-way traffic. This alternative en-
croaches farther into the adjoining ballfield and soccer practice field and would require
modification or relocation of those fields at an additional expense to the City. The preferred
access drive alignment is a one-way access from the parking lot north of the existing ice
arena to 80th Street. Motorists would leave the player drop-off entrance by driving to 80th
Street. Because of the existing center median in 80th Street, motorists must make a right
turn onto 80th Street. To return to the parking areas near the ice arena, motorists will have to
travel west on 80th Street and find a way to turn around to go eastbound on 80th Street.
There were no objections to curving the access drive connection onto 80th Street. This type
of design would deter motorists from turning onto the access drive from 80th Street and will
make it easier for buses to turn onto 80th Street.
Brittain and Messick expressed concerns about motorists’ ability to go eastbound on 80th
Street after dropping off players at the new player entrance and motorists safety if they made
a U-turn on an arterial roadway so they could return to the ice arena to park. Britain sug-
gested that the proposed ice arena access drive connect to Crestview Elementary School’s
parking lot or access drive. Levitt reported that those options were presented to ISD 833 offi-
Minutes of Joint Meeting of Parks and Planning Commissions
January 14, 2008
Page 3 of 6
cials, but they would not permit such a connection because they did not want additional traf-
fic through the elementary school site. School officials also objected to moving the storm-
water basin located between the ice arena and Crestview Elementary to be any closer to the
playground.
Folch suggested another entrance at the north end of the existing ice arena or a covered
walkway that would connect from the parking lot north of the existing ice arena to the main
entrance. She said there are too many vehicles traveling along the east side of the ice arena,
the main entrance is congested with spectators and players coming and going at the existing
main entry, and not enough parking for ice arena patrons. Davy said parking on the north
side of the existing ice arena is not that far to walk.
Poncin and Reese supported the idea of reversing the new access drive so that parents and
buses could exit 80th Street onto the one-way drive and to the new player drop-off entrance.
Parents can then drive directly to the parking lot. Commission members acknowledged that
this alternative would be more difficult for buses eastbound on 80th Street because they
would have to exit back onto 80th Street to turn into the one-way access drive.
Frieberg explained that pedestrians and motorists on 80th Street will not see the rooftop
mechanical units. Davy recommended that the roof-top units should be screened so that
residents on the south side of 80 Street cannot see them.
Schumal suggested that the corners of the square columns in the upper level hallway along
the south side of the ice arena be rounded if possible. Frieberg explained that these existing
columns support the roof structure and it was unlikely that they could be modified.
Folch suggested that a wall or similar barrier inside the locker room entrances be con-
structed so individuals walking in the hallways would not be able to see directly into the
locker rooms.
Kleinsasser asked how much distance there is between the right field foul line and the pro-
posed paved area of the one-way access drive. Frieberg said there is plenty of room
between the access drive and ballfield.
Thiede opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Thiede closed the public hearing.
Poncin made a motion to construct a northbound one-way access drive along the
west side of the proposed new ice arena addition that extends from 80th Street to the
parking lot north of the existing ice arena, thus resulting in a safer drop-off for players
because they can exit the right side of the bus and passenger vehicles and walk di-
rectly into the building and motorists can park without finding a way to turn-around
on 80th Street to return to the parking lots at the high school/ice arena. Reese
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by both Commission (12-to-0
vote).
Hofland made a motion to approve the site plan application for the proposed ice arena
expansion project. Britten seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by
the Planning Commission (6 to 0 vote).
Minutes of Joint Meeting of Parks and Planning Commissions
January 14, 2008
Page 4 of 6
6.2 Pinetree Valley Park Shelter Design
Provide comments on the conceptual park building design for Pine Tree Valley Park at
8431 Indian Boulevard.
Blin explained that many park shelter designs have been considered. There were questions
about costs, design, and building functions for shelters at various parks. Blin stated that any
recommendation on a building design will be considered by the City Council, which also
must consider funding available for the project.
Burbank summarized the contents of the planning staff report dated January 9, 2008. A slide
presentation showing various shelter designs was shown to both Commissions. Burbank ex-
plained that the existing warming house at Pinetree Valley park is about 1,300 square feet
and the proposed new park shelter is about 1,000 square feet. He highlighted other building
features and design details.
Burbank reported that a neighborhood meeting concerning the proposed park improvements
was conducted this evening at 6:00 p.m. One neighboring property owner attended the
meeting and expressed concerns pertaining to surface water runoff, parking along Indian
Boulevard, views into park areas from neighboring residences and street, and the location of
the new park building.
Reese asked what activities would be programmed in this proposed new building, particu-
larly during the non-ice skating season. Burbank explained that there are several recreation
programs and events that may be scheduled throughout the year. Dockter reported that park
facility rentals have increased, particularly park shelters for birthday parties and family picnic
uses.
Thiede asked about the location of the existing shelter. Burbank explained that the existing
shelter is a short distance northeast of the proposed new shelter location. The resident that
attended the neighborhood meeting asked if the new shelter could be placed directly north of
the existing hockey rink. This location would require trees to be removed, more extensive
grading, and additional costs to extend sanitary sewer, water, and electrical services.
Brittain said he understands concerns for the costs to build these shelters, but supports the
idea of quality design. He stated that city ordinances have been amended to improve design,
quality, and values for all types of buildings. Brittain believes these requirements should ap-
ply to municipal facilities since developers and builders are required to do the same.
Davy said he likes nice looking buildings and opposes the idea of different building designs
for parks in the community. He suggested that establishing a park shelter footprint standard
to provide uniformity in the community’s parks.
Burbank reported that restrooms are required for this size of park shelter. There was a ques-
tion of when the restrooms should be opened for public use. Poncin said the restrooms
should be opened sometime in the morning and closed at the end of the day Davy said the
restrooms at Kingston Park are locked most of the time. Sanitary satellite units are often
vandalized and are unattractive. If a park shelter has restrooms, they should be open during
Minutes of Joint Meeting of Parks and Planning Commissions
January 14, 2008
Page 5 of 6
the day for public use as it makes no sense to lock the restrooms just to have a satellite unit
at the same location. Members from both commissions supported unlocking the restrooms
during daylight hours.
Schumal asked why windows are provided on the street side of the proposed structure and
none on the landscaped sides. Levitt said the windows provide an interior view from the
street for security reasons. Other windows can be opened to provide some cross-ventilation
since the building is not air-conditioned.
Schumal made a motion to approve the park shelter as described in Option 4 and de-
picted in the proposed site plan layout shown in the planning staff report. Poncin
seconded the motion. Being no further discussion, the Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resource Commission unanimously approved the motion (6 to 0 vote).
6.3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Capital Improvements Plan – Case No. 08-001
The City of Cottage Grove has applied for a comprehensive plan amendment to amend
the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2008-2012.
Blin summarized the planning staff report and explained that the City updates its five-year
Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) annually. The document is a fiscal tool that plans for capital
outlay expenditures for five years and beyond. Capital expenditures programmed in the CIP
are costs greater than $15,000. Projects are typically public facilities, public buildings, infra-
structure, utilities, and parks and playgrounds. Slides showing the funding summary for the
2008-2012 CIP, 2008 projects, and annual debts service levy were displayed and briefly
described.
Thiede asked if the increases to the annual debt service levy would be noticeable for individ-
ual property owners. Blin responded that the goal is to keep it fairly constant so an individual
taxpayer does not experience big spikes.
Reese asked if the realignment of East Point Douglas Road in the vicinity of the Cottage
View site would be the developer’s responsibility. Blin thought most of the costs would be
borne by the developer, but the TH10/61 and Keats interchange would be a County and
MnDOT project. The developer would be required to pay part of the interchange costs, but
most of the money would be from County, State, and federal funds.
Thiede opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Thiede closed the public hearing.
Reese made a motion to recommend approval of the comprehensive plan amendment
to adopt the 2008-2012 Capital Improvement Plan. Brittain seconded the motion. Mo-
tion passed unanimously (6-to-0 vote).
Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of November 26, 2007
Being that there were no corrections to the November 26, 2007 minutes, they were ac-
cepted as distributed.
Minutes of Joint Meeting of Parks and Planning Commissions
January 14, 2008
Page 6 of 6
Reports
8.1 Recap of City Council Meetings
None.
8.2 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries
None.
8.3 Planning Commission Requests
None.
Adjournment
Poncin made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Reese seconded. Motion passed unani-
mously (13 – 0 vote). The meeting adjourned at 9:22 p.m.