Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-05-05 PACKET 04.A.i.REQUEST OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL AGENDA MEETING ITEM # DATE 5/5/10 PREPARED BY Community Development Howard Blin ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT STAFF AUTHOR COUNCIL ACTION REQUEST Receive and place on file the approved minutes for the Planning Commission's meeting on March 22, 2010. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Receive and place on file the approved Planning Commission minutes for the meeting on March 22, 2010. BUDGET IMPLICATION $N /A $N /A N/A BUDGETED AMOUNT ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ❑ MEMO /LETTER: ❑ RESOLUTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ® OTHER: Planning Commission minutes from meeting on March 22, 2010 ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS City Ad inistrator D to COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: [APPROVED DENIED ❑ OTHER DATE REVIEWED APPROVED DENIED ® PLANNING 4/26/10 ❑ ® ❑ ❑ PUBLIC SAFETY ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ PUBLIC WORKS ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ PARKS AND RECREATION ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ HUMAN SERVICES /RIGHTS ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ECONOMIC DEV. AUTHORITY ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ❑ MEMO /LETTER: ❑ RESOLUTION: ❑ ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATION: ❑ LEGAL RECOMMENDATION: ® OTHER: Planning Commission minutes from meeting on March 22, 2010 ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS City Ad inistrator D to COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: [APPROVED DENIED ❑ OTHER March 22, 2 010 A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at Cottage Grove City Hall, 7516 — 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, on March 22, 2010, in the Council Chambers and telecast on Local Government Cable Channel 16. Call to Order Chair Messick called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 0 Members Present: Michael Linse, Steve Messick, Brian Pearson, Tracy Poncin, Ryan Rambacher, Jim Rostad, Chris Willhite Council Liaison: Councilmember Justin Olson Staff Present: Howard Blin, Community Development Director John McCool. Senior Planner Approval of Agenda Rambacher made a motion to approve the agenda. Linse seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved (7 -to -0 vote). Open Forum Messick 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 Messick explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory ca- pacity 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 address for the public record. � a pplied The City of Cottage Grove has , o rdinance all ow graphics on dynamic sig McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval. Blin explained this amendment request originated with Linn Companies; a year ago when they came in with the Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2010 Page 2 of 5 reconstruction of the BP station, which they intend to do this year, they asked for electronic readerboard signs and the city amended the ordinance. They have since built a station in Woodbury where they allow images and they asked if Cottage Grove would also allow that. Rostad asked if readerboard signs are prohibited on polyn signs if the height of the readerboard is five feet off the ground. McCool responded readerboards are only allowed on monument signs, which have a maximum height of 21 feet. The actual readerboard has a height limitation of 15 feet so there could be six feet of additional sign above the readerboard that would be allowed. Rambacher asked if the Public Safety Commission had any feedback on this proposed ordinance. McCool responded that staff had talked with them and they did not see any issues with the signage, primarily because there would no flashing or scrolling on the signs. The current ordinance also allows limiting the light intensity of the signs. Messick opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Messick closed the public hearing. Rambacher asked about the frequency of changing the images. McCool responded once every four hours. Rostad asked if 24 square feet is a standard size. McCool responded that 24 square feet is common. rinse asked if the ordinance addresses maintenance of signs. McCool responded yes. Rambacher made a motion to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance amendment. Rostad seconded. Motion passed unanimously (7 -to -0 vote). 6.2 2010 Planning Commission Rules Blin explained that typically the March meeting is the organizational meeting where the Commission amends or adopts the rules but also elects the Chair, Vice Chair, and Recording Secretary. He stated that we have been doing it wrong for many years in that the city's code requires that the Council appoint the Planning Commission Chair. The Commission elects the Vice Chair and Secretary. We have postponed the organizational business part of the agenda until the next meeting when there should be a full commission and the City Council appointment of the Chair. To reflect that in the rules, we need to amend the rules to take out election by the Commission to conform to the city code. Blin stated that the rules require two readings so if the Commission wants to consider the amendment tonight, the rules could be adopted next month. Messick had a question on page 1, section C, paragraph 2, the commission serves as the board of appeals and adjustments. McCool stated that the Planning Commission has served as that board for two appeals in 20 years. Messick asked if there were any questions on the proposed amendment or any additional amendments to the rules. There were no questions. Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2010 Page 3 of 5 Reports 8.1 Update on Trunk Highway 61 Project Blin reported that Highway 61 would be reconstructed for its entire length through the city. This project will cause a lot of congestion throughout the summer months. It was originally projected for 2014 but due to stimulus money has been moved up to this year. He explained that the project involves white topping, which is an eight to ten inch concrete overlay over the existing roadway. It will extend from 70th Street in the north, where the previous improvements ended, through the U.S. 10 intersection. The reason for getting this done this year is to get ahead of the Hastings bridge project, which starts next year. The project also includes ramp closures. Public Safety and Engineering staff are working on improving traffic controls at intersections. As part of this project, Mn /DOT is looking at improving safety on the southern portion of the project area by restricting access to the highway. During this project there will be a few changes including adding turn lanes one is on northbound Highway 61 there will be a right turn lane just south of Berryland and another at the New Life Evangelical Church and a third right turn lane into 61 Marine and Sports. Regarding the access closures, originally there were three planned, the first was a small median opening just south of Kimbro Avenue and that will be closed; a second proposed down by church just south of the golf course and that will be left open; and a third one will be closed by Erickson Marine. The Council reviewed these proposals for median crossings and determined that the second location should remain open. He explained that the area just north of Highway 95 /Manning Avenue and the proposal is to close the access point, reconstruct the frontage road in front of the businesses, and extend it to the south and tie it into Trunk Highway 95 so that access to all these businesses will be at a signalized intersection. He stated that this is a city project constructed with state funds. The repaving of Highway 61 will be finished this year and the frontage road portion will be done in 2011 in conjunction with the pavement management project for the Pine Coulee area. Rostad asked how far north of that point is the church. Blin responded about a half mile. He stated that eventually the frontage road would be extended through that area. What we propose is access at Innovation Road and at Highway 95 /Manning Avenue, and an intermediate access point that would connect to an arterial street that would someday stretch to the north, so three access points would be all there would be in that stretch and then a frontage road system would funnel traffic to those properties. Rambacher asked how traffic issues would be mitigated at intersections such as Hinton and 70th due to increased traffic. Blin responded that there have been discussions about having CSOs direct traffic because with a four -way stop sign is an inefficient way to move a lot of traffic through an intersection. There was also discussion about temporary traffic signals. Messick asked about the two traffic signals on Highway 61 heading to Hastings. Blin responded that they are at Highway 95 and at Highway 10 but someday he could see those being grade separated. Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2010 Page 4 of 5 8.2 Update on Community Center Task Force Blin provided an update on the work to date of the Community Center Task Force, including feasibility of a center, locations, amenities, and partnerships with other organizations. At future meetings, the Task Force will discuss costs and public support of a community center. Rambacher asked if the 35 acres in the ravine area is city -owned land. Blin responded that the land is part of the Ravine Park, which is technically owned by Washington County, but all the funding for this land acquisition was provided by the Metropolitan Council, so they would have to sign off on any projects. The city has reached an agreement with the Met Council that for every acre that is developed, the city will replace it with land acquired through park dedication and deed it to the County for park expansion. Rambacher stated that when you look at feasibility and who is going to pay for what is that a parcel we would be willing to say we own this land, you develop it. Blin stated that for example if we partnered with the YMCA, one of things they look for is land. Willhite asked about the plan for County Road 19. Blin responded that County Road 19 would ultimately become a four -lane county roadway. Willhite expressed concern about access to that site by kids if there is a four -lane highway. Blin stated that would be a barrier but the roadway could be designed in a fashion that would allow for that, such as a pedestrian underpass. Rostad asked with the staging of the comprehensive plan, does the center of population move south or move north first. Blin responded that it goes north and then south and east. Messick stated that he appreciates the work of the Task Force to see if this is feasible and looking at options because maybe there are some financially viable options. His only suggestion on a site is that he would not like to see it on a site that could be used for commercial development and eat up an area that we could get tax revenue from. Blin explained that one of the advantages of considering the County property site is that we're not taking more land as tax - exempt land. The purpose of studying the idea of a community center, whether it's a public or private facility, that it is an amenity feature for residents and future residents in the community. The City currently has a quality park and trail systems, but it's been said that the City lacks a quality aquatic and fitness facilities that people really value. Messick stated that new businesses and industries do consider community amenities when locating in a community. 8.3 Update on Commercial Development Areas Blin presented information on the commercial development areas in the city. He stated that the City Council had conducted a retreat in January of this year and information about the city's commercial areas was presented to them. A slide show highlighting the Gateway North, Norris Market Place, Home Depot, West Point Douglas area, Langdon Village, and Cottage View commercial areas was presented to the Commission. Messick asked if a light manufacturing or assembly line type of industrial user could occupy the Home Depot site as long as the business did not create noise or odor. Blin reported that the current B -2 District would not permit those types of uses and is encouraged to be located Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2010 Page 5 of 5 within the industrial business park. There was some discussion of a mixed -use that includes a residential element above a commercial space might be a better land use. Blin reported that retail development along the West Point Douglas corridor has almost been non - existent because access is limited to the interchanges at 80` Street and Jamaica Avenue. Office, showroom, or light industrial type of businesses might be better along this corridor. In the future, a new zoning classification or some type of a highway oriented business overlay district with higher standards might be discussed for this area. The Cottage View area was described as another retail area that some commercial developers had expressed some interests in the past five years. Site visibility from a county road and state road systems is excellent. The City is interested in a comprehensive development plan for the entire area. Individual developments on smaller tracts of land that are not part of an overall comprehensive development plan would probably not be supported. Blin explained the Langdon Village site is currently part of a study by the Washington County Red Rock Authority because the future commuter rail corridor abuts this site. The area is likely to be redeveloped in the future and might include property currently occupied by the Public Works Department. The Cedarhurst area was described as a neighborhood commercial development that might have a major grocery retailer surrounded by medium and high density residential land uses. If a major big -box retailer wanted to locate at this site, the City Council has expressed some interest in discussing the project with the proposer, but there would not be any guarantee that the City would support such a project at this time. Blin then displayed a copy of the Upper Ravine area of the East Ravine Master plan and explained that developers have described the residential market being smaller houses and smaller lots that result in lower house values. Blin reported that the City Council might consider some flexibility on lot sizes, but not at this time on amenity features or design standards proposed in the East Ravine Master Plan. 8A Recap of March City Council Meetings Blin updated the Commission on the City Council meetings held on March 3 and 17, 2010. 8.5 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries None 8.6 Planning Commission Requests None Adjournment