Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-02-25 MINUTESCity of Cottage Grove Planning Commission February 25, 2008 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the Planning Commission was held at City Hall, 7516 – 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota on February 25, 2008, in the Council Chambers and telecast on local Government Cable Channel 16. Call to Order Chairperson Thiede called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Ken Brittain, Tina Folch-Freiermuth, Obid Hofland, Steve Messick, Tracy Poncin, David Thiede, Chris Willhite Members Absent: Chris Reese Staff Present: John McCool, Senior Planner John M. Burbank, Senior Planner Approval of Agenda Chairperson Thiede asked if there are any changes to the agenda. Being no changes were made, Thiede announced that the agenda was approved as submitted. Open Forum Thiede asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non-agenda item. No one addressed the Commission. 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 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 Aggregate Industries Mining Permit – Planning Case No. MP08-003 Aggregate Industries has applied for their 2008 mining permit to continue their mining operations on Lower Grey Cloud Island, 11250 Grey Cloud Trail South. Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 2008 Page 2 of 8 McCool summarized the planning staff report and recommended approval subject to the con- ditions stipulated in the staff report. McCool reported that the applicant’s 2008 Operation Plan proposes the planting of 100 trees versus the 380 trees recommended by staff. Patty Christensen, representing Aggregate Industries, stated that they propose to plant 100 trees this year and will continue to maintain all the other trees that were planted in the last couple years. The primary reason less trees are proposed this year is because the area where new trees will be planted is not in the same area where the other trees were planted in previous years, thus requiring their company to have to maintain two areas. Brittain asked if anyone knew what the survivability rate was for the tree seedlings planted years before. McCool did not know the survivability rate of the tree seedlings that were planted five to ten years ago, but stated that the arborist’s 2007 report did reference the re- planting of 109 trees out of 860 trees that were planted in the last two years. Messick asked about the purpose of the tree plantings. McCool explained that tree plantings proposed in this year’s reclamation plan are along the northeast slope of the mine pit that parallels the public roadway named Grey Cloud Trail. A windrow of evergreen trees pres- ently exists between Grey Cloud Trail and the pit, which screens most of the public’s view of the mining operation. Planting additional trees along this corridor will help maintain a screen along this road as the trees grow larger. Clusters of trees and shrubs have also been planted throughout the areas where mining operations have ceased and reclaimed. It was pointed out that the property owner does have a concept plan for development, and the trees are in- tended to create a natural environment for the property’s future uses. Doug Wermerskirchen, plant manager for Aggregate Industries, reported that most of the trees removed in the past were boxelder, cottonwood, and elm species. The tree plantings proposed in the 2008 Reclamation Plan would not be planted all the way to the base of the slope along the northeast side of the pit. He explained that waste sand will continue to be deposited along the base of this slope. Wermerskirchen said they are mining deeper as compared to years ago, thus reducing the amount of surface area that is disturbed. Brittain suggested that a methodology needs to be developed in determining the tree quanti- ties that should be planted. He thought it was reasonable to consider the planting of 100 trees this year since no existing trees will be removed. The Planning Commission agreed that it is not their intent to forest the island. Hofland suggested that plantings other than trees should be considered. Folch-Freiermuth expressed concern for the aging evergreens along Grey Cloud Island and suggested that densely planted vegetation be maintained to screen the mining operations from the public’s view. Thiede opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Thiede closed the public hearing. Messick made a motion to amend Condition No. 11 to only require the planting of 100 trees for the 2008 year. Willhite seconded. The motion passed unanimously (7-to-0 vote). Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 2008 Page 3 of 8 Messick made a motion to approve Aggregate Industries’ 2008 Mining Plan and vari- ance application concerning the ordinance requirement limiting mining operations to allow the dredge to operate 24 hours per day, seven days per week, based on the findings of fact for the variance and subject to the conditions listed below: Findings of Fact: A. The city has allowed the dredge to operate 24/7 since 1995 when the dredge was first installed. B. During the 11 years the dredge has operated, only one noise complaint was re- ceived by the city. That complaint was received in 1996. The applicant was con- tacted and the problem was resolved in a timely manner. C. Residents are encouraged to immediately contact Aggregate Industries of any noise issues so that the problem can promptly be identified and mitigated in a timely manner. D. The variance relating to the hours of operation will be evaluated annually. Conditions of Approval: 1. The provisions as stipulated in Title 3, Chapter 10 of the City’s Codes (Mining, Sand, and Gravel Operation) shall be complied with, except as modified below. 2. The applicant is responsible for removing any materials that may have spilled onto any public roadway. This material shall be cleaned up immediately. 3. The outer edge of mining limits abutting public right-of-way or private property must not be closer than 100 feet to any right-of-way or property line. 4. The “future mining” designation on the 2008 Operations Plan is only an illustration of the applicant’s future desire to mine in those areas. City approval of the 2008 Operations Plan does not guarantee mining permit approval for areas shown as “future mining.” Approval of the 2008 Mining Permit does not imply approval to mine within the required 200-foot setback from the Mississippi River, within the Missis- sippi River itself, or in the vicinity of archeological sensitive areas. 5. Bituminous/asphalt materials are prohibited from being buried on the premises. Bitu- minous/asphalt, concrete, and street sweepings originating within the geographical boundaries of Cottage Grove may be temporarily stockpiled on the site for process- ing (e.g. crushing, screening, etc.) and/or reuse. 6. The applicant may operate the mining operation 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Upon notification by neighboring residents that the night-time operations (i.e. between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.) are disturbing, the applicant agrees to voluntarily cease operation during night-time hours until such time the noise source is identified and appropriate corrections are made. Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 2008 Page 4 of 8 7. All existing trees within the area shown on the 2008 Operations Plan as “Future Min- ing” must be protected from all mining operations. 8. Aggregate Industries must install erosion control devices at the base of any slope where erosion is evident. A drainage swale must be constructed at the base of any eroding slope to control run-off and divert it to a sedimentation basin before entering any natural drainage system. Erosion control measures must be implemented within a reasonable amount of time. 9. Archeological and landmark sites on Lower Grey Cloud Island must be protected and undisturbed. A buffer of at least 100 feet must be maintained between all min- ing operations and historic/landmark sites. The outer edge of the buffer area clos- est to the mining operations must be clearly marked with signage. Stripping, mining, and depositing earth materials south of the access road leading to the River Beacon Farms site is prohibited. In order to pursue mining operations south and west of the River Beacon Farms site, the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Minnesota Indian Affairs Council must review and approve the applicant’s mining plan. 10. Equipment operators and motorists should only drive on existing access routes near the River Beacon Farm site so as not to accidentally disturb or destroy burial mounds or any other archeological sites in this vicinity. 11. A minimum of 100 trees must be planted. The plant sizes will be based on the rec- ommendations of the arborist to improve their survivability. The applicant contin- ues to work with a certified arborist meeting city approval in creating a revised planting plan and to monitor the survival of all newly planted trees. The arborist must file a report with the city twice a year documenting the survivability of tree plantings and recommendations for future planting plans. 12. The applicant is responsible for obtaining all state and federal permits relating to their mining operations on Lower Grey Cloud Island. 13. The applicant’s current reclamation plan is titled “Harbor Island Concept Plan.” The City has not provided any formal review or approval of the “Harbor Island Concept Plan” and is only an illustration of a development concept that the appli- cant and landowner have considered. The City’s approval of the 2008 Operations Plan does not guarantee approval or imply future approval of the Harbor Island Concept Plan. Brittain seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (7-to-0 vote). 6.2 Lemons Accessory Structure – Case V08-004 James and Kimberly Lemons have applied for a variance to City Code Title 11-3-3C, Ac- cessory Structure Setbacks in the R-1, Rural Residential Zoning District, to allow an accessory structure to be setback 15 feet from the side property line and 15 feet from the Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 2008 Page 5 of 8 rear property line when the required minimum setbacks 20 feet from the side and 50 feet from the rear property lines. The property is located 10389 Kimberly Court South. McCool summarized the planning staff report and recommended approval based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Jim Lemons submitted a letter signed by Tamara Anderson, 10377 Kimberly Court, (neighboring property owner located north of Lemon’s property) stating that the Andersons support Lemon’s proposal and have no objections to the variance. Thiede asked how access the accessory structure will be accessed with vehicles. Lemons explained that the proposed building will be used to store their boat during the winter months. Access to the accessory building will be along the south and east sides of the house. Driving across their yard northwest and north of the house is not possible because of the drainfield and septic tanks. He stated that they do not intend to extend their existing driveway or construct another driveway to the accessory structure. Thiede opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Thiede closed the public hearing. Brittan made a motion to approve the application based on the findings of fact and subject to the conditions listed below. Hofland seconded. Findings of Fact: A. The proposed accessory structure is located in the rear portion of the property and is not closer to the front property line than the front of the house. B. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to ad- jacent properties, will not increase the congestion of the public streets, will not endanger the public’s safety, or will not diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. C. The locations of the septic tanks, drainfield, and well restrict the placement of an accessory structure in the side and rear yards of this property. Conditions of Approval: 1. The property owner must complete a building permit application and be issued a building permit before any construction begins. 2. Exterior building materials must match the siding and roof materials used on the house. 3. The existing temporary metal framed structure is removed from the property. 4. Driving over the drainfield and septic tanks with heavy equipment, passenger vehi- cles, recreation vehicles/trailers, etc. is prohibited. 5. The private use or storage of personal materials on city-owned land is prohibited. This includes play structures, fences, firewood, fire pits, compost bins, etc. Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 2008 Page 6 of 8 The motion passed unanimously (7-to-0 vote). 6.3 Mann Accessory Structures – Case CUP08-005 Tracy Mann has applied for a conditional use permit to construct two accessory struc- tures having 3,500 square feet of cumulative gross floor area and one of the proposed accessory structures having a 22-foot height. The property is located 6580 Kirkwood Avenue. Burbank summarized the planning staff report and explained the Zoning Ordinance require- ments allowing the additional square footage and additional height to accessory structures, based on the conditional use permit criteria and City approval of the conditional use permit. Burbank stated that the applicant also proposes to construct a new home on the vacant par- cel of land and the accessory structures will be constructed at the same time or shortly after the new home is built. Willhite asked if the proposed 22-foot height is allowed by the conditional use permit. Burbank stated that the additional height is allowed by the zoning ordinance and the addi- tional setbacks as proposed by the applicant. No variance is needed for setbacks. Theide asked the applicant why the accessory structure closest to the north property line needs to be 22 feet in height. Mann explained that he will store their motor home in the building. The garage doors are 14 feet high and the structure’s roof pitch will create an over- all building height of 22 feet. He stated there are a couple windrows of 40-foot tall evergreen trees between the proposed accessory building and the neighbor’s house north of their property. Mann stated that they purchased this vacant parcel from the property owner north of the site. Thiede opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Thiede closed the public hearing. Whillhite moved to approve the conditional use permit application, subject to the con- ditions below and adding a condition that neither accessory structure be used for commercial purposes. Hofland seconded. 1. The vegetative screening on the site from adjacent properties and the public right- of way must be maintained to at least 50 percent opacity at all times. 2. The minimum setback distances of the detached accessory structures must be in- creased five feet (5') for each one foot (1') of height or one hundred (100) square feet of size. 3. The maximum building height of the one detached accessory structure is 22 feet. 4. The maximum square footage for the site for the two detached accessory buildings is limited to 3,500 square feet. 5. In accordance with the ordinance criteria, a garden or tool shed of up to 160 square feet will be allowed in addition to the detached accessory structures. Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 2008 Page 7 of 8 6. If future site development renders the structure nonconforming, the building must be brought into compliance or removed as a condition of the development approval. 7. The accessory structures will only be used for personal purposes as permitted in the R-1 District. The motion passed unanimously (7-to-0 vote). 6.4 S&C Bank – Extension of Approvals S&C Bank is requesting the City’s approval to extend their conditional use permit and site plan review for the construction of a new bank building at 7199 Jorgensen Lane South. Burbank reported that the PUD amendment, conditional use permit, and site plan review ap- plications for the S & C Bank project were approved by the City in March 2007. He stated that the bank is proposing to start construction sometime this year, but not before the one- year time period elapses. Burbank explained that the City Code does permit the City Council to grant extensions since no changes were made to the approved development plan. The Planning Commission was asked to make a recommendation to the City Council concerning the applicant’s request for a one-year extension to their conditional use permit and site plan review applications. Thiede asked if anyone wanted to comment on the application. No one spoke in favor or against the request. Hofland moved to recommend to the City Council that a one-year extension to S & C Bank’s planning applications be granted. Seconded by Brittain. The motion passed unanimously 7-to0 vote). 6.5 Hope Community Church – Extension of Approvals Hope Community Church, 8300 Hyde Avenue South, is requesting an extension to their conditional use permit for their proposed expansion. McCool summarized the planning staff report and reported that Planning staff has no objec- tion to allowing a two-year extension to the conditional use permit as long as the project is consistent with the plans previously approved by the City Council and all the conditions of approval remain in effect. Folch-Freiermuth asked if it was common for projects to receive City approvals but not begin construction within one year. McCool said most projects do start construction within one year; but with this particular project, the Church had not yet reached their fundraising goal for this capital improvement and is not sure when they will being construction in the future. Thiede asked if anyone wanted to comment on the application. No one spoke in favor or against the request. Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 2008 Page 8 of 8 Poncin moved to recommend to the City Council that a two-year extension to Hope Community Church’s conditional use permit be granted. Seconded by Whillite. The motion passed unanimously (7-to-1 vote). Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of January 14, 2008 Being that there were no corrections to the January 14, 2008 minutes, they were ac- cepted as distributed. Reports 8.1 Recap of City Council Meetings McCool reviewed the items discussed by the City Council at their meetings on February 6 and 20, 2008. 8.2 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries None. 8.3 Planning Commission Requests Folch-Freiermuth asked if Erickson Marine’s pylon sign was in compliance with city ordi- nances. She explained that the existing pylon sign has multiple signs mounted to one pole. McCool explained that Erickson Marine’s pylon sign is a legal non-conforming sign because its size and pole base do not comply with current sign requirements, but it was erected be- fore amendments were made to the sign ordinance. The property owner cannot enlarge or add signage to this existing sign pylon. If the property owner wants to replace the pylon sign, then the current sign ordinance standards would apply. Whillhite asked about the status of the Culvers Restaurant project. Burbank explained that the franchisee has completed the real estate transaction with Kohl’s and plans to start con- struction this spring. Hofland stated that the 2007 City Annual Report contained a lot of information for citizens to review. He said the document’s overall appearance and contents were nicely prepared. Thiede presented Ken Brittain with a plaque thanking him for his volunteer service on the Planning Commission from February 2003 to February 2008. Adjournment Poncin made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Brittain seconded. Motion passed unani- mously (7 – 0 vote). The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.