Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-03-25 MINUTESCity of Cottage Grove Planning Commission March 25, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Planning Commission was duly held at City Hall, 7516 — 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota on the 25th day of March, 2002, in the Council Chambers. Call to Order Chairperson Willhite called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Myron Bailey, Timothy Booth, Herb Japs, David Lassen, David Piggott, Bob Severson, Eileen Weber, Chris Willhite Members Absent: Robert Hudnut (excused) Staff Present: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director John McCooi, Senior Planner Approval of Agenda Japs moved to approve the agenda. Booth seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Open Forum Chairperson Willhite asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non-agenda item. No one spoke. Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Chairperson Willhite explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, and the City Council makes all finai decisions. In addi- tion, she explained the process of conducting a public hearing and requested that any per- son wishing to speak should come to the microphone and state their full name and address for the public record. Public Hearings 6.1 CASE ICUP02-021 3M Company has applied for an interim conditional use permit to aliow continued use of an open field for flying radio-controlled model airplanes at 6221 Keats Avenue South. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 2 of 18 McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Japs asked if there have been any problems over the past five years. McCool responded that there have been no reported problems. Willhite opened fhe public hearing. No one spoke. Willhite c/osed the public hearing. Japs made a motion to approve the application subject to the condifions listed below. Bailey seconded. The 3M Remote Contro/ Model Airplane Club must obtain an outdoor events permit as required in Title 5-5-3, Outdoor Events and Dances, of the City Code prior to their annual public air show event. 2. The inferim conditiona/ use permlt shall expire December 31, 2006. 3. All mode/ aircraft to be flown shall be equipped with mufflers. 4. Parking along Keats Avenue (County Road 19) is prohibited. Motion passed unanimously. 6.2 CASE PP02-031 Newland Communities Midwest, LLC has applied for a preliminary plat with variances for a proposed residential subdivision, Highiand Hills, which would consist of 184 lots for single family homes. This subdivision would be located on the northwest corner of 65th Street and Hadley Avenue. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in this staff report. Piggott asked about the city's obligation regarding snow plowing the rural lots. Lindquist re- sponded that the city would plow the cul de sac and the two private drives would be covered by a maintenance agreement with the homeowners association, reviewed by the city. Piggott then asked what the city's policy is regarding adding new well and septic lots within the city limits. Lindquist responded that the City does not have a policy to not allow rural lots. She stated that during the rezoning process, it was noted that a portion of this parcel could not be served by gravity sewer and that rural lots would be proposed for a portion of any develop- ment on this site. Bailey asked if Highland Hills Boulevard would future. Lindquist responded that there would nc Pine Summit subdivision. Bailey asked if there hook up on the other side of 65th Street in the �t be a direct access across 65th Street to the would be another access to 65th Street from Pine Summit. Lindquist stated that the only access directly onto 65th Street from the Pine Summit project is Meadowgrass Avenue, which runs under the power lines. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 3 of 18 Booth asked what the roadway would look like, based on condition #22 requiring the appli- cant to obtain a County access permit and meet all applicable conditions including provision of a turn lane and a bypass lane. He stated that he is concerned about the offset roads, Hinton Avenue, Meadowgrass Avenue, and Highland Hills Boulevard, and how traffic would move on and off 65th Street. Lindquist responded that there are good sight distances where the access is proposed. She explained that there would be a right-turn lane into the project and a bypass lane on the south side to allow traffic to bypass vehicles turning left from 65th Street. She stated that the sight distances would not be good if Homestead Circle was ex- tended to 65th Street. Wilihite asked what would be to the east and west of the property. Lindquist responded that to the west there is an access on the far south end of this project to allow for future devel- opment, and just to the west of the northern section, near the Summit at Highlands, is a DNR wetiand. Weber stated that the West Draw Task Force Report indicated the wooded area at Hadley and 65th Street should be left in its current state and no development would occur in that area. Lindquist responded that the West Draw Task Force land use recommendation was to develop that area as rural residential, and this proposal is consistent with that recommenda- tion. Weber asked what would happen with that wooded area. Lindquist stated that it would be part of the rural residential lots. Weber asked if the trees there would be preserved. Lindquist responded that the applicant submitted a tree preservation pian and a grading pian, which show that they are maintaining the bulk of the trees. She stated that the rural residential development would have to comply with ordinance criteria, and the entire project does comply with the ordinance criteria for tree removal under the plan that was submitted to the City. Booth stated that condition #16 addresses that issue by requiring individualized tree preservation plans be submitted with the building permit applications for the nine rural lots and that no more than 20 percent of the trees on any of those lots can be removed to fa- cilitate development. Lassen asked if there would be some replanting due to the spacing. Lindquist responded that there will be a coniferous area in the northwest a�d the applicant is going to transplant those trees. Weber asked if this proposal meets all the mitigation measures in the Alternative Urban Area Review (AUAR) that was adopted when the MUSA line was extended. Lindquist responded that the AUAR was a study that estimated development on the site, and the proposal is con- sistent with that. She stated that the AUAR evaluated development in the entire West Draw within all the MUSA expansion and the city adopted ordinances that wouid ensure mitigative measures, such as the tree preservation ordinance. She believes that every project recom- mended for approval would be consistent with the AUAR. Booth asked if the location of Meadowgrass Avenue was permanent. Lindquist responded that it is and the final plats for Pine Summit 3rd and 4th Additions, which brings the develop- ment to 65th Street, are on the next Council agenda. Lindquist referenced the location map and pointed out that Meadowgrass Avenue is wholly within the overhead power line ease- ment. Lassen asked if the access to the proposed Highland Hills would not be feasible on the other side of 65th Street. Lindquist stated that it is not an issue of feasibility; the devel- oper does not want to have the entrance to this subdivision under a power line. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 4 of 18 Steve Juetten, Newiand Communities, stated that they do not have any concerns about the conditions of approval. He referenced the marketing brochure and explained that the prop- erty would be divided into distinct neighborhoods surrounded by a central park, which is lo- cated so that most traffic into the subdivision would go past the park. He stated one of the negatives on this property is the power lines and they designed the project to minimize the effects of that power line, which is why they pulled the access as far west as possible. He stated that they are using the power line easement for ponding, a trail system, and land- scaping. He then stated that they are willing to put in the expanded trail for emergency vehi- cle access and will work with staff to figure out the appropriate design. He stated that they are planning to incorporate entryway features such as monument signs and a landscaped island at the main entrance along 65th Street. Juetten explained that there will be five separate neighborhoods in the subdivision. He stated that Highland Hills consists of 56 lots ranging in price from $275,000 to $375,000. The Summit neighborhood consists of 72 lots ranging in price from $300,000 to $400,000. The Homestead consists of 37 single-family lots. The Pointe consists of 11 lots starting at $375,000 and up. The Preserve consists of nine rural lots valued at $375,000 and up. He stated that they will be controliing the architecture by working with the builders upfront to establish the housing styles and the exterior and interior amenities. There will be two or three different builders for each neighborhood. He stated that they would like to begin grading the Highland Hills and the Summit areas eariy this summer and the Homestead and the Pointe properties by the fall of this year. He stated that they still need to investigate the lots in the Preserve area to identify where the houses can be set, but hope to have that finished by the end of the year. Willhite opened the public hearing. Dee Lindblom, 9514 — 78th Street South, expressed her concern about the price range of the homes and asked what the city is doing to ensure the availability of affordable housing as weil as the higher-end housing. Lindquist responded that one of the City Council's goals is to provide move-up, higher-end housing in the community and the West Draw was one of the areas targeted because of its natural amenities. She stated that due to the topography and the wooded areas that need to be preserved, the cost of development is higher in the West Draw. She explained that the Cottage Grove is generaily considered affordable because of the existing housing stock and that compared to other communities, the city is fairly high on the affordabi!ity index. Lindquist stated that the Council is also looking at senior housing projects, including affordable senior housing. Lindblom stated that she understands that while there is a need for senior housing, what about young families. Lindquist responded that shifting seniors out of the existing housing stock opens up affordable housing for younger families. Lindblom asked what is considered affordable. Lindquist responded that the Met Council considers $140,000 to $150,000 as affordabie housing and large areas of the com- munity have housing stock in that price range. Lindblom then asked if the city foresees any new developments being proposed that would be expected to include affordabie housing. Lindquist stated none at this time. Piggott stated that he is currentiy a commissioner on the Washington County Housing and Redevelopment Authority and reported that the three most affordable communities in Wash- ington County, according to the County Assessor's report, are Cottage Grove, Newport, and Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 page 5 of 18 St. Paul Park. From an HRA perspective, the highest vacancies for affordable housing are in Cottage Grove right now. The current average price of a home in Cottage Grove is $179,000, which may sound high but in Lake Elmo it is $359,000. Cottage Grove is, by defi- nition, already affordable within this County and is more affordable than any community in Dakota County. There still is affordable housing available, which as defined for first-time homeowners amounts to $135,000. He stated that it is difficult to build new homes that are affordable because lots generally cost at least $70,000 and he does not foresee that a de- veloper could build new homes for less than $170,000. Piggott then pointed out that the role of the Planning Commission is only to analyze whether or not the proposal is in compliance with the city's ordinances and does not make policy decisions, which is the role of the City Council. Lindquist stated that there has been an increase in townhome construction in the last few years and that is a type of housing option that would be more affordable than the single-family home with a lot. Lindblom asked where citizens should go to request policy development. Lindquist re- sponded that the City Council makes policy decisions. She explained that development of affordable housing projects usually requires some kind of city subsidy or financial commit- ment from either the city or the HRA. Lindblom stated that she has heard that Woodbury is considering an inclusionary zoning policy and asked if Cottage Grove was considering working with the developers using density bonuses or some other type of incentive to de- velop affordable housing. Weber stated that the Planning Commission is where the comprehensive plan germinates, and that it is not completely correct to say that the Planning Commission is only an advisory body that does not deal with policy issues. She stated that this particular proposal is an area of the city that was always targeted as upscale housing. She believes Lindblom's concerns are valid and that there is nothing wrong with bringing them before the Planning Commis- sion. However, it may be more effective bringing those concerns to the individual Council- members. Lindblom stated that it was her understanding that this was the starting point and that it would be too late if the concerns were brought to the Council after the Planning Com- mission reviewed the proposal. Willhite explained that Planning Commission makes recom- mendations, but the final decision is made by the City Council. She stated that the Planning Commission reviews proposals to ensure that they comply with the comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance. Lindquist stated that there are several organizations talking about affordable housing and the city is talking about senior housing. She stated that whether the Planning Commission starts working on those kinds of issues or the inclusionary zoning, some of those recommendations may come back from the Council to look at from a general policy standpoint. She explained that it is difficult to try to start negotiating those issues when a project comes in to the city; that is something that needs to be transmitted to the developer early in the process. Lind- blom asked when a citizen group would start working with a developer so that they would propose adding affordable housing. Lindquist responded that, for example, she started meeting with Newland Communities about six months ago. She stated if those issues would need to be introduced that far ahead because the developers need to figure out financially how they are going to address them as part of their proposal. Lindblom stated that there are many citizens who are concerned about affordable housing and asked the city to keep that in mind as they review proposed developments. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 6 of 18 No one e/se spoke. Willhite closed the pu6lic hearing. Piggott made a motion to approve the application subject to the conditions listed be- low. Japs seconded. Japs stated that he was concerned about the emergency entrance into the housing area. He stated that when he served on the Public Safety Commission, they were always concerned emergency vehicle access. He stated that citizens also brought the concern about vehicles speeding through neighborhoods to the Public Safety Commission. He believes that with the current layout of the proposal, that should not be a probiem. He stated adding another en- trance could allow loop-through driving, and he feels having a single access is an advantage. He stated that the Commission has discussed emergency accesses in the past and one of the proposals was to have a trailway that could be used as an access for emergency vehi- cles. He stated that the trailway could have some type of gate that could be raised and low- ered using a remote control devise. He suggested having a dedicated right-of-way, that could allow a second access in the future if needed. 1. The developer shall enter into a subdivision agreemenf with the City of Cottage Grove for the installation of and payment for all public impiovements in the subdi- vision, pursuant to Title 10 of the City Code. 2. The applicant receive appropriate building permits from the City, and permits or approvals from other regulatory agencies including, but not limited to the South Washington Watershed District, Washington County, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 3. The revised grading and utility plan must be su6mitted to the City for staff review and approval prioi to the submfssion of the final plat plan applications to the City. All emergency overflow swales must be identified on the grading and erosion con- trol plan. 4. The applicant submit a final construction management plan that includes erosion control measures, project phasing for grading work, areas designated for preser- vation, a crushed-rock construction entrance, and construction-related vehicle parking for staff review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. 5. A pre-construction meeting with City staff and ihe contractor shall be held before site work begins. The contractor shall provide the City with a project schedule for the various phases of construction. 6. Erosion control devices shall be installed prior to commencement of any grading activity. Erosion contro/ shall be performed in accordance with the recommended practices of the "Minnesota Construction Sife Erosion and Sediment Control Plan- ning Handbook" and the conditions stipulated in Title 10-5-8, Erosion Contro/ During Construction, of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 7 of 18 7. The applicant shall work with the City fo determine the appropriate location and species for p/antings in the right-of-way, along 65th Street, and within landscaped islands. A revised /andscaping plan must be submitted to the City foi staff review and approval prior to the submission of the final plat plan applications to the City. 8. A letter of credit in the amount of 150 percent of the landscaping estimate, street sweeping, paving and curbing, and irrigation systems should be submitted to and approved by the City. Upon completion of the landscaping improvements, the owner shall, in writing, inform the City that said improvements have been com- pleted. The City shall retain the �nancial guarantee covering the landscape im- provements for a period of one year from the date of notice, to ensure survival of the plants. No building permit shall be issued until the required financial guarantee has been received and accepted by the City. 9. The frontage on Lot 27, B/ock 10 must be expanded to meet the requirement for a 60-foot width at right-of-way for cul-de-sac lots. 10. The taper within Highland Hills Boulevard shall occur south of Lot 3, Block 3 to reduce conflict points belween vehicles traveling on the road and vehicles exiting the driveways. 11. The developer shall install and pay for stop signs. 12. The private driveways that extend north and south from the public cu/-de-sac off Hadley Avenue for the nine rural lots must be a minimum of 20 feet in width. The developer must provide an adequate turn-around for emergency vehicles at the end of both of the private drives. 13.An emergency access drive shall be constructed in width and weight to serve all emergency vehicles. An impediment for routine traffic, such as knock-down/ lock- able bollards, oi somefhing similar in design and intent subject fo staff review and approval, will be installed. lf problems arise, a future roadway would then be in- stalled. 14. The applicant submit for staff review and approval homeowners covenants that ad- dress the following: a. All landscaped is/ands within the roadway system will be owned and main- tained by the Homeowners Association. b. Properties along 65th Sbeet are restricted fo fences with a consistent design, to be determined by the developer, and any fence placement must be behind the interior toe of the berm. c. Monument signs shall be maintained by the property owners association. 15. The covenant conditions are also considered conditions of approval by the City. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 8 of 18 16.An individualized tree preservation plan shall be submitted with the building permit application foi the nine rural /ots. No more than 20 percent of the trees on any of these lots can be removed to facilitate house development. 17. The applicant determine the final stormwater ponding requirements for staff review and approval, prior to City Council review. 18. The applicant work with the City to determine the most appropriate improvements and /ocation for the improvements for the proposed neigbborhood park. The appli- cant wil! install all improvements and dedicate the land for a neighboihood park of 6.63 acres to fhe city to fulfill the park dedication requirements. The cost for im- provements to the park must exceed the ordinance-required park dedication fee. The applicant is required to submit the final construction costs for all improve- ments. 19. The developer shall install all sidewalks. The sidewa/ks located along Highland Hills Lane, Homesfead Trail, and Summit Curve shal! be six feet in width. 20. The developer shall install project trails. Trails shall be /ocated along 65th Street, along the north property line (in the east), and through the Xcel Energy power line easement. There are a/so trail connections to the west; to allow a link to the DNR designated wetland, and two trail connections to 65th Street fiom the power line easement and from Homestead Circle. If possib/e, the trail should be extended to provide a circulation route for walkers. 21. The applicant will dedicate outlots A through E and pu6lic drainage and utility easements to the City. The plat should be revised to create out/ots for the land- scape islands. 22. The applicant must obtain a County access permit and meet all applicable condi- tions, including the provision of a turn-lane and by-pass lane. 23. The applicant must obtain permission from the Xcel Energy to allow plantings and ponding within their overhead power line easement and from Minnesota Pipeline Company to permit the installation of the two private drives. The permission must be in writing and reviewed by staff prior to final plat approval. 24. Lots abutting Hadley Avenue and 65th Street are restricted from obtaining direct access onto those streets. 25. The two designated wet/ands must be preserved and an average 50 foot buffer 6e maintained around the wetlands. 26. The applicant pay area charges of s864,678.22. Motion passed on an 8-to-1 vote (Weber). Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 9 of 18 6.3 CASES ZA02-023 and PP02-024 Landform has applied for a zoning amendment to change the zoning from B-2, Retail Business, to PUD, Planned Unit Development, and a preliminary plat, Carly's Addition, to create two commercial lots. This plat would be located southwest of the new Walgreen's, 7135 East Point Dougias Road. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. She explained that the master plan conditions for the project become part of the PUD so that they are consistent. She stated that staff is recommending a change on the site plan for one of the conditions for the project and that would affect the PUD ordinance. She explained that staff, after consultation with the traffic consultant, is rec- ommending modifying condition #9, regarding the common access parking prohibition that was initially proposed, to allow employee-only parking north of the common area. Severson asked if the only change to 18 conditions of approval would be substitute wording for condition #9. Lindquist agreed. Janele Taveggia, Landform, stated that she would answer any questions regarding the pro- ject from the Commission. Willhite opened tlie public hearing. No one spoke. Willhite c/osed the pu6lic hearing. Severson made a motion to approve the applications subject to the conditions listed below, wifh the change to condition #9. Booth seconded. 1. The recommendations and conditions of identified for Cases SP02-026 and SP02- 028 shall be applicable. 2. The appficants shall enter into developers agreements with the City for the pro- posed development reviewed under Cases SP02-026 and SP02-028. 3. A drive-through restaurant is prohibited in the retail center. 4. Additional restaurant/cafe space above 4,280 square feet or 93 seats shall require the completion of a traffic/parking study. 5. The site p/an shal/ be modified to reflect the additional required sidewa/ks, parking, parking drive aisles, landscaping islands, and other performance standards identi- �ed in the staff reports for Cases SP02-026 and SP02-028. 6. Black vinyl-clad galvanized fencing or its equivalent is required for all fencing associated with the developments. 7. All applicable permits (i.e., building, electrical, grading, mechanical) and a commer- cia/ plan review packet shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the City prior to the commencement of any construction activities. Detailed construction plans shal! 6e reviewed and approved by the Building O�cial and Fire Marshall. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 10 of 18 8. Final exterior construction materials and colors shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Said materials shall be similar in design, color and texture fo the adjacent Walgreen's buitding. 9. Employee parking shall be located on the north end along the common access road. Signs shall be appropriately installed. 10. Al1 curbing for the project shall be 6618. 11. The applicant shall provide the City with an as-built survey of all private utilities. 12. The applicants shall be responsible for the p/acement of a stop sign af the parking lot entrances and the 80th Street access point. 13. The stockpiling of snow shall be prohibited in the surface water ponding area. 14. The applicants shall pay an offsite surface water management mitigation payment to the City in the amount of $13,328.70. Said cost shall be proportionately related to the amounts of impervious surface on the individual sites. 15. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a comprehen- sive sign package to the City for review and approval. Said plan shall include the provision of a cross property multi-tenant monument sign on the final sign design which is consistent with the previous submittal to the City. 16. Prior to the issuance of a 6uilding permit, the applicant shall submit a comprehen- sive lighting package consistent with the city redevelopment plan to the City for review and approvaL All outdoor lighting shall be directed downward and away from residential property and pu6lic streets, and shall not exceed one foot candle at the property lines. 17. The landscaping plan shall 6e revised to address meet the items identified in the staff report. Said plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 18.A bona �de cost estimate of the landscaping improvements shall be su6mitted in conjunction with a/etter of credit appioved by the City in the amount of 150 per- cent of such estimate. Upon completion of the landscaping requirements, the ap- plicant shall in writing inform the City that said improvements have been completed. The City sha/l retain the financial guarantee for a period of one year from the date of notice to insure the survival of the plantings. No building permit shall be issued until the required financial guarantee has been received and ac- cepted by the City. Motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 11 of 18 6.4 CASE SP02-028 H.J. Development, L.L.P. has applied for a site plan review with variance and master de- velopment plan for a proposed retail development of an 11,500 square foot single-story multi-tenant retail center to be located on Lot 1, Block 1 of Carly's 2nd Addition. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. She stated that staff is recommending that condition #4 be changed to allow parking along the common access road with the northern stalls designated for employee parking. She stated 'Yor staff review and approval prior to issuance of a build- ing permiY' should be added at the end of condition #4. Severson asked for clarification about condition #3, specifically if a restaurant was proposed that would seat over 93 people, what would happen after a traffic study has been done. Lindquist responded that the city would request a traffic and parking study. If it was found that given the tenant mix, the traffic consultant felt comfortable that there would not be a de- mand exceeding the parking stalls, the use would be allowed. Severson asked what would happen if there were some conflict with the tra�c study. Lindquist responded that the city does have the ability to administratively approve site plans or the applicant could pursue the formal process where the application would be brought to the Planning Commission and City Council. Severson noted that with the proposed layout, no way new parking stalls could be added. Lassen asked if there would be any type of planter boxes, landscaping, benches, or other types of amenities. Lindquist responded that they are required by ordinance to have founda- tion plantings. Booth asked how the Walgreen's drive-through ties into the traffic flow coming from East Point Douglas Road. Lindquist responded that the drive-through goes all the way around Walgreen's. Booth stated that it appears that vehicles would head south through the drive- through, which brings them right into the main entrance traffic. He stated he was concerned about traffic conflicts in that area. Lindquist responded that a stop sign is required at the end of the drive-through. She believes there could be some conflicts, but they would be primarily for the retail center. Lassen asked about the landscaping of the triangular section and stated that it could pose a visual problem at that stop sign. Booth stated that the way the development is laid out combined with the drive-through exit could cause traffic conflicts and suggested that signage be placed to direct traffic. Severson asked if someone who went through the Walgreen's drive-through wanted to go to the retaii center, would they have to drive around Walgreen's to get there. Lindquist re- sponded that vehicles could turn right and access the back parking lot. Severson stated that he is concerned that the plan looks too compact and that there seems to be too many tight turns. Lassen suggested that the exit for the drive-through should be closed by the stop sign so traffic is forced to go back around. He stated that from the drive-through into the retail area would be almost a U-turn. Lindquist responded that vehicles could just drive into the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 12 of 18 back aisle of the parking lot, which is almost a 90-degree angle. Severson stated that the traffic flow seems awkward and should be looked at more closely. Wilihite does not believe that traffic in and out of the bank would be that bad. Bailey stated that bank customers won't have access to the rest of the retail unless they go out to that main road. Severson agreed with Lassen about the closing the exit from the drive-through by the stop sign so tra�c would have to go around Walgreen's or out to the exit but not through that congested corner. Piggott stated that the Commission was discussing the retail plan and not the Walgreen's plan. Severson agreed but stated that the access is shared with Walgreen's. Piggott pointed out that there was no one from Walgreen's present at the meeting to give input. Lindquist stated that the Waigreen's site plan has been approved. Willhite suggested that the traffic is- sues could be reviewed on an annual basis, and stated that she did not support blocking the exit because then there would be only way in or out. Booth asked if there were legitimate safety problems, what the next step would be with the Walgreen's project. Lindquist stated that that would be addressed at a later time. Japs asked if the Cottage Grove Retail Center would have one sign and Walgreen's would have another. Lindquist responded that was correct. Japs asked where the signs would be located. Lindquist stated that the Walgreen's sign has been installed at the intersection of 80th Street and East Point Douglas Road and the other sign wouid be located by the en- trance to the retail center. Bailey suggested incorporating the Valvoline sign into the sign for the retail center. Steve Dowdy, Pope Associates Architects, stated that the staff report noted that one of their drive aisles was not 24 feet wide, but he pointed out that the plan showed two dimensions that add up to 24 feet. He asked if the applicant or Valvoline would be responsible for in- stailing the stop signs at the access from the Valvoline site to 80th Street. Lindquist re- sponded that the developers of the new project are responsible for the stop signs. Dowdy asked if the stop sign locations would be onto 80th Street and from the parking areas onto the common access road. Lindquist stated that was correct. Dowdy then asked for ciarifica- tion of sidewaik locations and if sidewalks would need to be added to the center island of the parking area. Lindquist responded affirmatively. Dowdy explained that they are planning to install modular roof top units that are three feet by four feet and four to five tons painted to match the roof color and requested that those units be allowed rather than building a screen. Lindquist responded that staff would like to see where they would be located. Dowdy stated that the locations would be noted on the plans they will submit for their building permit. He then asked if they could use exterior materials that are complementary, utilizing similar tex- ture and color, as the Walgreen's building but that does not match exactly. Lindquist re- sponded that staff would need to see what they are proposing. Dowdy stated that they brought samples of the exterior materials with them. He suggested that they bring samples of the Walgreen's materials and their proposed materials to the City Council meeting. The Planning Commission concurred. Gary Janisch, H.J. Development, passed out photographs of a project that they recently completed in Elk River that has the same exterior materials they are planning to use for this project. He stated that the proposed materials would be complementary with the Walgreen's exterior. He then displayed a revised drawing of the sign and noted that it would be similar to the Walgreen's sign. He stated that their proposed sign would be 20 feet high. He stated that Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 13 of 18 in response to the suggestion of incorporating the Valvoline sign into their sign that they probably could not do so. He stated that Valvoline currently has their own sign and if they were incorporated into the retail center sign, they would have to be third from the top. There are already commitments to having the bank sign and a national chain coffee shop sign in the top two positions. He stated that he would ask Valvoline to consider the suggestion, but he does not think that they would agree. Willhite opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Willhite closed the public hearing. Bailey moved to approve the application subject to the conditions listed be/ow, with the amendment to condition #8. Piggott seconded. Booth reiterated his concern that the traffic patterns by the Walgreen's drive-through could become chaotic. Wilihite stated that there could be traffic problems, but the Commission is not discussing the Walgreen's project. Booth stated that the two projects share a common access, so they are related. Lindquist responded that this discussion should have occurred with the Walgreen's application. She stated that staff could discuss the issue with Wal- green's if directed by the Planning Commission and City Council. Booth stated that he would like to pursue this issue for the reasons he stated. Willhite stated again that there could be too many problems if there was only one way in and one way out of the Walgreen's site. She stated that future traffic problems are currentiy unknown and without any numbers on that, she does not want to recommend closing the access. Lassen stated that he believes there would be traffic problems at that intersection. Japs stated that he shares the concerns about the traffic issue, but the Commission is not discussing the Waigreen's site. He suggested that a request for further investigation into this matter could be made later in the meeting. Booth asked if this issue is germane to the discussion. Lindquist stated that if the Commis- sion feels strongly, staff will pursue a discussion with Walgreen's. Severson stated that this issue could be discussed later in the meeting and that the Commission should continue dis- cussion of the current proposal. A vote was called. 1. The applicant sha!l enter into a developers agreement with the City for the pro- posed development of a 12,706 square foot mulfi-tenant retail burlding and its associated infrastructure. 2. A drive-through restaurant is prohibited. 3. Additional restauranUcaf� space above 4,280 square feet or 93 seats shall require the completion of a tra�c study. 4. The site plan shall be modi�ed to reflect the additiona/ required sidewalks, parking, parking drive is/es, landscaping islands, and other performance standards identi- fied in the staff report for 5. Black vinyl-clad galvanized fencing or its equivalent is required for all fencing associated with the retail development. 6. All applicable permits (i.e., building, elecbical, grading, mechanical) and a commer- cial plan review packet shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 14 of 18 prior to the commencement of any construction activities. Detailed construction plans shal/ be reviewed and approved by the Building O�cial and Fire Marshall. 7. Final exterior construction materials and colors shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 8. Employee parking shall be located on the north end along the common access road. Signs shall be appropriately installed. 9. All curbing for the project shall be 6618. 10. The applicant shall provide the City with an as-built survey of alI private utilities. 11, The applicant shall be responsible for the placement of a stop sign at the parking /ot entrances and the 80th Street access point. 12. The stockpiling of snow shall be prohibited in the surface water ponding area. 13. The applicant shall pay an offsite surface water management mitigation payment to the City in the amount of 513,328.70. 14. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a comprehen- sive sign package to the City for review and approval. Said plan shall include the provision of a cross property multi-tenant monument sign on the final sign design which is consistent with the previous submittal to the City. 15. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a comprehen- sive lighting package consistent with the city redevelopment plan to the City for review and approval. All outdoor lighting shall be directed downward and away from residential property and public streets, and shall not exceed one footcandle at the property lines. 16. The landscaping plan shall be revised to address meet the items identified in the staff report. Said plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 17.A bona �de cost estimate of the landscaping improvements shafl be submitted in conjunction with a letter of credit approved by the City in the amount of 150 per- cent of such estimate. Upon completion of the landscaping requirements, the applicant shall in writing inform the Ciry thaf said improvements have been com- pleted. The City shall retain the financial guarantee for a period of one yeai from the date of notice to insure the survival of the plantings. No building permit shall be issued until the required financ3a/ guarantee has been received and accepted by the City. Motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 16 of 18 exists on the property. The landowner, with the City's permission, may remove the covenant if the EMCF is removed or otherwise brought into compliance with City ordinances. 3. The applicant must complete a building permit application for the monopole and the City must issue the permit before any construction can begin. 4. No advertising shall be displayed on or a�xed to the monopole. 5. The monopole shall 6e painted light blue and maintained in an appropriate condi- tion (e.g. paint chipping or pealing). Motion passed unanimously. Applications and Requests None. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of February 25, 2002 Severson made a motion to approve the minutes from the February 25, 2002, Planning Commission meeting. Bailey seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Reports 9.1 Recap of March City Council Meetings Lindquist stated that at the March 6, 2002, City Council meeting, the Council approved the Mike Rygh project on a 4-to-1 vote, consistent with the Planning Commission recommenda- tions. They also approved the variance request from Target regarding parking and land- scaping changes, and they did not require the letter of credit for the landscaping. Lindquist reported that on March 20, the City Councii approved the two conditional use per- mits to locate antennas on two of the city's water towers, which were applied for by AT&T Wireless; they accepted the final pylon sign design for Grove Plaza and approved the final plat for Grove Plaza; and they approved the variance for the garage addition on Hidden Val- ley Court. Severson asked for the Council's rationale on that approval. Lindquist responded that the setback variance was minor, the addition had architectural implications, and the ori- entation of the home on the lot. Severson then asked if the addition would result in a three or four-car garage. Lindquist responded that it would be a three-car garage with storage space that would not be converted to living space and the property owner would be relocating the driveway away from the front. Severson asked if the City Council's action overrides the homeowners association decision. Lindquist responded that the city does not uphold home- owners association rules, so the city wouid issue a building permit based on the Council's action. She explained that the if the property owners proceeded without the approval of the association, it would be up to the association to take action against them. Lindquist also re- ported that the City Council approved ali the recommended ordinance amendments made by Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 17 of 18 the Nuisance Ordinance Work Group. She stated that the Council also did not support a permitting process for recreational fires. She explained that there were some wordage changes clarifying grilling on decks at multi-family units. She stated that the other ordinances were approved as recommended by the Planning Commission. Lindquist stated that the Council also recommended approval of a park and ride site east of the Rodeo to be located on a tax-forFeited property the city is hoping to obtain. She stated that the County is also looking at that site to relocate their service center. She stated the city is continuing to work with MnDOT, the Met Council, and Metro Transit on this issue. 9.2 Committee Reports None 9.3 Planning Commission Requests Severson expressed his concern that when projects are proposed on a piecemeal basis, the Commission does not get a feel for how the tra�c would flow. He agrees with the comments made by Booth that traffic flows in some areas of the city are awkward. He believes this is a process issue and there should be the option to review an area if there are traffic issues or potential problems during review of a proposal. Booth agreed with Severson's comments and requested that the city look at the traffic flow issues on the old Rose of Sharon site and try to work with Walgreen's on that issue. Japs agreed that the process needs to be looked at so that when adjacent sections of a parcel are developed at different times, the Commis- sion wouid not have an opportunity to re-look at what has already been approved. Bailey suggested adding that as a condition of approval in the future. Lindquist stated that there were plans that had other options and modifications were made to the drive lanes. She stated that she believes Walgreen's needs that lane for their service because the service is on the south side, which is why it cannot be fully closed. Willhite reiterated that she would prefer that the drive not be closed unless it becomes really congested. She believes that having only one way in and out could also cause problems. Severson asked for an update on extending the frontage road in front of the Majestic through the 3M property to Highway 61. Wiilhite stated that 3M does not want the road to be ex- tended. Severson stated that he would like the city to pursue that option. Japs stated that this issue would need to be looked at again if a rail station was located in the Langdon area. Booth requested that the city require intersections to align across roadways for proposed developments. Lindquist responded that the city normally requires intersections to align; however, if they are spaced enough apart and follow certain guidelines, then that is equally acceptable. She stated that the alignment for the Highland Hilis development, the reason the road was not required to align with Meadowgrass Avenue was so that the road functions as a collector for the immediate neighborhood but it would not become a throughway. Booth stated that there would be over 180 units in that project and he was concerned that tra�c could stack up in the mornings, but if the road intersected with Meadowgrass, a stop light could be added. Japs asked if there would be other sections developed in the Pine Summit development. Lindquist responded that the property east of Meadowgrass Avenue is not included in the fi- Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 25, 2002 Page 18 of 18 nal plats for the 3rd and 4th Additions. Japs asked if the remaining areas to be developed were included in what was originally approved. Lindquist responded that was correct and stated that the property south of 70th Street is also part of that project. He asked if the road, when it crosses 70th Street, would still be called Meadowgrass. Lindquist stated that she received a request from the City Council to have a joint workshop to discuss the Council goals, roles and responsibilities, and other ideas from the Commission. She stated that the workshop would probably be held either before or after a Councii meet- ing, which are held on the first and third Wednesdays of each month. She asked the Com- mission about their availability within the next month or two. It was the consensus of the Commission that May 1 would be the best date for a joint workshop. Lindquist stated that she will send confirmation to the Commission when the workshop is finalized. 9.4 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries None. 9.5 Annual Organizational Meeting and Election of Officers Lindquist noted that the rules need to be approved twice. Severson made a motion to accept the 2002 Planning Commission Rules. Bailey sec- onded. Motion passed unanimously. Willhite stated that the rules would be voted on again at the Aprii 22 meeting. Wilihite asked if there were any nominations for Chair. Booth nominated Bailey as Chair. Willhite seconded. Willhite asked if there were any other nominations. There were none. Motion passed unanimously. Willhite asked if there were any nominations for Vice Chair. Bailey nominated Willhite for Vice Chair. Severson seconded. Willhite asked if there were any other nominations. There were none. Motion passed unanimously. Willhite asked if there were any nominations for Secretary. Severson nominated Booth. Bailey seconded. Willhite asked if there were any other nominations. There were none. Motion passed unanimously. Adjournment Bailey made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Booth seconded. Motion passed unanimously.