Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-10-28 MINUTESCity of Cottage Grove Planning Commission October 28, 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 28th day of Octo- ber, 2002, in the Council Chambers. Call to Order Chairperson Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Myron Bailey, Timothy Booth, Robert Hudnut, Herb Japs, David Lassen, Bob Severson, Chris Willhite Members Absent: David Piggott (resigned) Staff Present: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director John McCool, Senior Planner Approval of Agenda Severson made a motion to approve the agenda. Hudnut seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Open Forum Chairperson Bailey asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non-agenda item. Mary Marty, 9905 Military Road, asked for an update on the Almar Village project, stating her opposition to the development. Bailey responded that most of the residential units are under construction or completed. Marty stated that her concern is for the commercial portion be- cause she heard that no businesses wanted to locate there and asked why that wasn't re- searched beforehand. Lindquist stated that the building permit for the mall was issued last week. Marty asked what businesses would be located in the mall. Lindquist responded she was told that there would be a dry cleaner, a Subway, and a liquor store. Marty asked about a gas station. Lindquist stated that a gas station was part of the project but that buiiding permit has not been applied for yet. Marty asked when construction would begin. Lindquist responded that site grading has started and they plan to begin construction this fail. Marty stated that area would be good location for a park if the commercial buildings weren't built. Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Chairperson Bailey explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, and the City Council makes all final decisions. In addi- Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 2 of 12 tion, 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. Public Hearings 6.1 CASE SP02-064 (continued from 8/26/02 meeting) Metropolitan Council Environmental Services has applied for a site plan review of the sanitary sewer interceptor line that is proposed to be constructed along Keats Avenue to the Waste Water Treatment Plant. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Severson asked about the size of the replacement trees. McCool stated that the applicant would respond. Hudnut stated that there was no reference to the 20-foot shift in the pipeline as a condition of approval. McCool responded that the conditions are based on the revised plans that show the additional 20 feet, but it could be added to the conditions. He explained that moving the line 20 feet would only be for the area along the Ridgewood subdivision, not along the whole corridor. Wayne Rikala, Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, stated that tree replacement would be done in accordance with the citys tree preservation ordinance, which prescribes the ratio of tree replacement. Severson stated that the concern he heard expressed in August was regarding impact on mature trees, and he asked if those would be replaced with smaller trees and if that would be satisfactory with the property own- ers. He also asked if the property owners could receive some other kind of reimbursement for the loss of a mature tree. Lindquist responded that the replacement would be based on the city ordinance, which has a sliding scale based on size. Severson stated that he also heard concerns about decreasing property values from the loss of mature trees. Lindquist responded that she does not believe anyone would see a decrease in property values caused by the pipe line construction. Hudnut asked why the warranty period was only for three years. Rikala responded that dur- ing discussions with city staff it was noted that usually any damage to root systems becomes evident within three years. Hudnut asked if the MCES arborist was comfortable with this time frame. Rikala stated that his arborist was not asked for his opinion on this but it came up in discussions with city staff. Bailey re-opened the pu6lic hearing. Glen Brown, Commander of the VFW, pointed out the location of temporary and permanent easements on the VFW property and stated that most of the trees are located between the VFW and the townhomes. He asked how many of those trees would be replaced. He also noted the VFW's septic system is located in the area. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 3 of 12 Mary Marty, 9905 Military Road, asked when the interceptor work was planned to begin. Rikala responded that work was planned to commence in the spring, but some work, such as tunneling under roadways, could start in the beginning of winter. Marty asked which roads. Rikala responded Miller Road, which is on 3M property; Highway 61; and Keats Avenue at 90th Street. Marty then asked when the project would be completed. Rikala responded July 31, 2004. Marty asked what lands would be developed when the interceptor was completed. Lindquist responded that the interceptor would provide services between County Road 19 and Kimbro Avenue, north of 65th Street to the border with Woodbury, the theater site, and the rest of the Jansen property. Marty asked if it included Judge Wozniak's property. Lindquist responded that that was included. Marty asked what was planned for that property. Lindquist stated that the city has not received any applications for that property. McCool ex- plained that the future land use map in the comprehensive plan shows the area is guided for medium density residential, which is between five to nine units per acre. Marty asked if the plan for a park was no longer planned. Lindquist explained that the city will shortly begin a comprehensive planning process for the entire area that would be opened up by the inter- ceptor and would hire a consultant to work on the project, which would include land use re- view, development, roadway alignments, sanitary sewer, and storm water. Marty asked if residents would be included in the process. Lindquist responded the public component would be an interactive process that would occur over the whole planning process. Marty asked to be included in the public input portion of the project. Marty then stated that she has information regarding open space issues and referenced in- formation she received about how those in the suburbs don't want to see all the open space gobbled up. She also referenced an article from the Star Tribune regarding an open space referendum in Dakota County. She expressed her concern about lack of space for riding animals. She then referenced an article out of the Business Journal regarding the rejection of the Lake Elmo comp plan by the Met Council. She stated that the mayors of Lake Elmo and Afton are taking an active role in listening to their citizens about open space issues and she would like to see Cottage Grove take that same conservative approach. Bailey suggested that Marty address the City Council during open forum at their next meeting. She stated that she approached the Planning Commission because they make recommendations to the Council. Lindquist explained that the Met Council put together a 2030 Blueprint, which was reviewed twice by our City Council. The City Council held a workshop last Wednesday, and submitted a formal response to the Met Council about the Blueprint. Marty asked if open space was addressed in the Blueprint. Lindquist responded that the Blueprint deals with a wide variety of issues, including housing, transportation, natural resources, and aggregate resources. She explained that the Blueprint is what all cities in the metro area are supposed to follow for comprehensive planning. Marty stated that there needs to be some recognition of the people who actually live in the community and she would like to have the opportunity to give input on future development in the area. Lindquist responded that when the process starts, there will be plenty of opportunities for public input. Marty then stated her opposition to the city developing the Almar Farms property, particularly the commercial project, espe- cially after the residents of the area objected. Lindquist explained that the property owner fa- cilitated that development by selling his property to the developer and that the city does not seek out developers. Marty stated that the reason he did so was because of the zoning change and tax increases. Lindquist disagreed with that statement. Marty stated that there needs to be better planning for the little bit of open space that is left in Cottage Grove. She asked that the Planning Commission consider this issue during their deliberations. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 4 of 12 Wilihite stated that herjob as a Planning Commission member is to uphold the current com- prehensive plan, and when process for updating the comprehensive plan begins, issues that have been brought up in the past can be considered. She also stated that the city cannot regulate when a property owner sells their property or regulate how many of certain types of businesses come into town. Marty stated that economically that does not make sense. Will- hite agreed but stated that the city has no control over that. She explained that the only way to regulate which businesses cannot come into the city is to totally eliminate a particular type of business, such as fast food or auto repair; for example, Eagan does not have any car dealerships because they do not allow that type of business in their city. Lindquist stated that the business owner makes the market decision whether to open a particular business in the city and takes the risk that the business may fail. Marty then stated that when the Almar Village project was proposed, area residents formed a committee. She stated that they sur- veyed the business owners in the city and found that none of them were in favor of a com- mercial development in that location. She stated that she does not understand why that was not taken into consideration. Bailey stated that the Planning Commission is also not very happy that the area was not kept up, but the developer is finally going to break ground. Marty stated that when the residents in the area fought the development, because they did not want a commercial area there and she asked why their input was not taken into consideration. Lindquist stated that everything submitted to the city was given to the Planning Commission and City Council. Bailey stated that that area had been guided for commercial for years before any development was pro- posed. Lassen stated that because of the Almar Village development, the city is making process improvements and ordinance changes for neighborhood commercial districts. Donald Knutson asked what the purpose of the Planning Commission was. Willhite ex- plained that the Planning Commission upholds the approved comprehensive plan and en- sures that the zoning ordinance and building regulations are adhered to. She stated that the city can regulate such issues as how buildings are built and how many parking spaces are needed, as long as the business is located in an area that is zoned for that particular busi- ness. Brown asked if the Met Council would be opposed to putting in a privacy fence when the trees are taken out between the VFW and the townhouses. He also noted that the drainfield for their septic system is located where the pipe is going through. McCool responded that the ordinance requires a tree inventory of trees that are six inches or larger for hardwoods and 12 inches or larger for soft woods. He stated that the tree inventory for the VFW site showed a total of seven soft wood trees that are larger than 12 inches and two dead trees; and while there is a significant number of trees in that area, they are smaller than the criteria estab- lished by the ordinance, so the only trees that would be replaced are the seven living trees. He also stated that the city won't require tree replacement if the property owner does not want it on their property, but any trees that are replaced are required to be maintained per- manently. McCool stated that it is his understanding that the VFW wants a combination of tree replacement and a fence. He stated that is also his understanding that the construction of the interceptor pipe would not to impact the VFW's drainfield. Brown stated that the VFW would like a privacy fence between their property and the townhomes and asked for a written response to this request. Bailey asked if the VFW had made any decisions on tree replace- ment. Brown responded no. Bailey asked Rikala about putting in a fence. Rikala responded that the Met Council determines the value of the trees on a property and offers that sum to Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 5 of 12 the property owner. He stated that the VFW could negotiate for a privacy fence instead of a certain number of trees, but he cannot commit to that tonight. Rod Gustafson, lives in the townhomes by the VFW, stated that there was so much weight given to the environmental impact on Cottage Grove Ravine Park that it was ruled out and he asked why that same consideration was not given to the impact on homeowners in the area. He asked if there was the possibility of sludge seeping out of the pipe. Lindquist re- sponded that the environmental concerns have to do with the initial installation of the pipe due to the topography of the Ravine Park and the amount of tree loss. She explained that the proposed alignment goes through fairly flat terrain with a minimal amount of grading re- quired. She stated that there are no concerns about leakage of sludge from the interceptor pipe. Gustafson asked if there were any other feasible alternate routes. He stated that at the October 10 meeting, it was noted that the pipe can't go between the Cottage View Drive-in due to fear of lawsuits. Lindquist responded that there was some talk initiaily of going through the theater site, but the concern was about severance, which is when infrastructure divides a property. Rikala stated that Lindquist was correct about the issue of severance. He stated that there would be some impact wherever an interceptor is built. He stated that the Met Council does regret whenever trees have to be removed but this interceptor pipe will serve the area for at least the next hundred years. He stated that the interceptor is a major investment in the city's infrastructure and that some damages will occur during construction, but they will comply with all city ordinances for tree replacement and re-vegetation. William Schumal, 9377 Jergen Avenue South, stated that he is a certified arborist and that he believes that three years should be ample time to notice construction damage to trees in the area; however, homeowners probably would not be able to notice when the decline starts. He commended the Met Council on the proposed changes to save more trees, par- ticularly in the Ridgewood development, such as the use of a vibratory plow for a clean cut, no grade changes because all the soil will be piled on the east side of the hole so soil will not be compacted, and no construction during the high risk season for oak wilt. He asked how these advancements would be policed and if homeowners would be assisted in witnessing any decline in their trees. Lindquist responded that a condition of approval could be added. She then explained that staff would inspect the trees several times during the three-year pe- riod, but the homeowner should also monitor the situation. Schumal asked what number the residents could call to report tree damage. McCool stated that they could call him at 651- 458-2874. Schumal then asked if staff would be monitoring the project during construction to ensure that the conditions are met. Lindquist responded yes. Schumal asked who would pick the species of tree for replacement. Lindquist stated that staff's assumption is the home- owner would probably want a replacement tree similar to what they had before. Gustafson asked if there could be some type of natural visual relief between the VFW and the townhouses. He would like to see trees or some type of berm. Lindquist stated that she would like to confer with the Met Council staff about this issue at this time and suggested that the public hearing be tabled until later this evening. Japs made a motion to continue the application for further discussion this evening. Severson seconded. Motion passed unanimously to table discussion at 8:10 p.m. Bailey re-opened the hearing at 8:15 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 6 of 12 Lindquist stated that the Met Council had modified the construction area near the VFW by doing box trenching and adding a no-disturb zone of 22.5 feet. The remaining portion of the 50-foot easement will be the portion impacted by the construction. She reported that in her discussions with Met Council staff this evening, they have agreed to build an undulating berm along the interceptor to assist in screening. Gustafson asked when that was decided. Lindquist responded that the no-build area was part of their proposal but the berm was just decided earlier this evening. Gustafson then asked where the 22.5 feet is located. Lindquist responded that it was the 22.5 feet from the shared property line between the townhomes and the VFW on the VFW property. Brown asked for this information in writing. Lindquist gave Brown a copy of the site plan. She then suggested that the Commission add this as a condition of approval, since the berm is not on the proposed plans. Councilmember Kohls asked if landscaping would be included on the berm. Lindquist re- sponded that trees cannot be planted over the pipe line. Kohls asked if the berm would be located on top of the pipe line. Lindquist stated that the berm would be installed on the pipe- line rather then the no-build area to reduce the number of trees removed. She stated that some tree mitigation would still be required. No one else spoke. Bailey c/osed the public hearing. Bailey asked Lindquist to recap the three added conditions of approval. Lindquist stated that condition #6 would require that the interceptor maintain a 20-foot no disruption area south of 90th Street on the west side of the Jensen farm, which was consistent with the plans they submitted. Condition #7 would be to have staff comply with the recommended practices for grading and pipe installation to ensure as much tree preservation as possible, including such things as the vibratory plow and no construction during the oak wilt season. Condition #8 would reference the 22.5-foot no-build area on the VFW property and the installation of an undulating berm along the pipeline. Booth asked if the prohibition of heavy equipment in the no-build area was included in condition #6. Lindquist responded that shouid be noted in both conditions #6 and #7. Hudnut made a motion to approve the application subject to the conditions listed be- low, including the three added conditions. Booth seconded. 1. The applicant prepare a tree mitigation plan that addresses all tree removal within the SWCI corridor area within the City of Cottage Grove. The amount of trees lost must be enumerated and mitigation shall occur in a manner acceptable to MCES and the City as outlined in the City's ordinance. If a property owner, where a trees have been removed, requests tree mitigation to occur on the property they must /ocate the exact tree placement to ensure the trees will not be removed in the fu- ture due to development or redevelopment of the site. 2. The applicant provide a construction plan addressing impacts to city roads, safety during construction, and re-vegetation of impacted areas for staff review and ap- proval prior fo issuance of a grading permit. 3. The applicant shall reconstruct the trail along the north side of 90th Street, be- tween Keats Avenue and Jewel Avenue. Reconstructing this trail shall be consis- tent with the City's standards and specifications. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 7 of 12 4. The applicant receives all appropriate approvals from other agencies including DNR, Watershed District, and Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of a grading permit. 5. For a period of fhree-years, MCES is responsible to replace any tree that dies as a result of the SWCI construction project along the east boundary line of Ridgewood 3rd, Ridgewood 6th, and/or Ridgewood 7th Additions. This three-year period shall begin upon the substantial completion of the SWCI pipe abutting the aforemen- tioned three residential subdivisions. If it is determined that a tree has died, after consultation 6etween the city, MCES, and the property owner, MCES will pay for the removal of the tree. Mitigation of trees lost will be based upon the tree mitiga- tion schedule found within the City ordinance. 6. A 20-foot no-disruption area shall be maintained for the installation of the intercep- tor line south of 90th Street on the wesf side of the Jensen farm. Heavy equipment and grading are prohibited in this no-disruption area. 7. Consfruction shall comply with the recommended practices for grading and pipe installafion to ensure as much tree preservation as possib/e, including use of such things as the vibratory plow, prohibiting construction during the oak wilt season, and prohibiting equipment in the no-disruption area. 8. A 22.5-foot no-disruption area shall be maintained on the VFW properfy for the in- stallafion of the interceptor line. An undulating berm along the pipeline shall be installed. Motion passed unanimously. 6.2 CASE CP02-050 The City of Cottage Grove has applied for a comprehensive plan amendment to amend the city's Capital Improvement Program (CIP). McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval. Hudnut noted that the annual debt levy was pretty serious. McCool responded that the num- bers were prepared by the city's finance director and the information has been presented to the City Council. Bailey noted that pavement management appears to be driving most of the debt. Japs asked if utilities referred to sewer and water or if it also included electricity for the pro- posed projects. McCool stated that electricity, gas, and phone are private utilities and not city-related. Japs asked why nothing was noted for the east side of Keats Avenue and if the city has planned for any kind of utility there. McCool responded that was because of the in- terceptor construction process, and as that progresses the city will start the review and plan- ning process for development the East Ravine area. He state that those capital expenditures should be listed in next year's CIP. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 8 of 12 Hudnut asked about the TIF projects. McCool stated that the large TIF district was for the Kohl's project and includes the demolition of existing businesses, construction of Hardwood Avenue, clearing of the property, site preparation for the building pad, relocation of sanitary trunk sewers, and installation of water trunk facilities. Hudnut asked about the inclusion of the construction of Hardwood. McCool responded that the grading for the roadway improve- ments for the Kohl's area and Hardwood Avenue would be part of the TIF district. Bailey opened the public hearing. Mary Marty, 9905 Military Road, stated that it is hard to speak on this topic because she is just looking at it now. Bailey explained that the City Council put together a plan for the next five years on different projects that will need to be done throughout the city, including new roads and new facilities. Marty asked if that was available to the public. Bailey stated that it is available at City Hall. Marty then asked if this was a five-year business plan. Bailey re- sponded that it is not a business plan; it is more of a budget for projects that the city has planned for that five-year period. He gave examples that in 2003, funds are budgeted for a play structure at Ideal Park, replacement of the dasher boards at the ice arena, construction of the extension of 97th Street, and the city's portion of the Hinton/Tower connection. No one else spoke. Bailey closed the public hearing. Willhite made a motion to approve fhe application. Japs seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Applications and Requests 7.1 Bus Bench in Public Right-of-Way Ordinance Lindquist explained that this item was brought to the Commission for their information and input, though it does not pertain to the zoning ordinance, but addresses issues that the Plan- ning Commission discusses such as signage, right-of-way, aesthetics, etc. She stated that currently the city's right-of-way ordinance requires permits for items placed in the right-of- way, but excepts bus benches. She explained that it was assumed that Metro Transit in- stalled the benches, but actually a private company does and they sell advertising on the benches to defray the costs. She stated that staff recommends removing the exception from the right-of-way ordinance and requiring permits for bus benches so their locations can be assessed. Lindquist then stated that the ads on the benches are considered off-premise ad- vertising, but the advertising is how the bench company pays for the benches. Booth stated that he does not like advertising on bus benches and would prefer that the city provides benches without advertising. He noted that the bench on the south side of 80th Street by the Fire Station looks nice and then stated that there should be benches along the city's trail system. Bailey stated that Lions Club donated many of the benches throughout the park system. Willhite asked how many bus benches are not located at bus stops. Lindquist stated that she would check on that. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 9 of 12 Bailey noted that the survey of other cities shows that some don't allow advertising and some don't regulate the advertising, but most cities have bus benches. Hudnut asked if the city would maintain the benches that they install. Booth stated that con- crete benches would last for years. Hudnut stated that winter plowing would be a concern. Lindquist stated that the city does plow around the bus benches outside City Hall. McCool stated that one of the bench providers says that they maintain their benches, particularly during the winter season, but he has not seen any evidence of this. Bailey stated that this could be another avenue of funding to the city. He stated that accord- ing to the survey, those cities that do allow advertising charge a fee of up to a$100 a year. Hudnut stated that does not seem like much income based on the number of benches. Booth stated that that small fee would probably be used up maintaining the benches. Hudnut asked about the possibility of individual citizens donating benches and having a plaque noting that donation. Lindquist responded that the city would accept donations. Will- hite stated that could be construed as advertising if the donor has a business. She then stated that she does not object to bus bench advertising if the benches were located at bus stops. Lassen asked if this ordinance would be specific to bus benches. Lindquist stated that the language is in two different ordinances, but the city would only be amending the right-of- way ordinance to require permits for locating bus benches in the right-of-way. She stated that one of the conditions for the permit could be not allowing bus bench advertising. Japs stated he does not object to all bench advertising as long as it looks nice and is not ob- noxious. He stated that the benches are a service to bus riders. He asked that if the city pro- hibits bench advertising and the company stops providing bus benches, would the city assume the cost of those benches. He stated that it would be appropriate to have an ordinance that gives the city more control over bus bench advertising. Hudnut asked staff to report back to the Commission with the number of bus benches and the revenue the city receives from them. Lindquist responded that the city does not currently receive any revenue from the benches. Hudnut then asked for the revenue that city could get if permitting was required. He stated that he agrees with Booth on allowing benches without advertising and suggested putting the Cottage Grove logo on the benches. Lindquist stated that staff is trying to reduce off-premise advertising. She stated that staff also had stated concerns about allowing advertising on ballfield fences as proposed by the CGAA. She then stated that staff would provide the number of bus benches in the city to the Commission at the November 25 meeting. Japs asked to receive information on the cost for benches. Lindquist responded that the costs would depend on the materials used for bench construc- tion. Booth reiterated that he would like to see more benches throughout the city, for both bus stops and along trailways, without advertising on them. Bailey stated that he would like to see a uniform design for benches without advertising. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 2002 8.1 Regular Meeting Willhite made a motion to approve the minutes from the regular meeting on Septem- ber 23, 2002. Hudnut seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 10 of 12 8.2 Workshop on Historic Preservation Program Severson made a motion to approve the minufes from the workshop on Historic Pres- ervation Program on September 23, 2002. Booth seconded. Motion passed unani- mously. Reports 9.1 Recap of October City Council Meetings Lindquist reported that at the October 2, 2002, City Council meeting, the Council received information on the Met Council Blueprint 2030 for future discussion, approved the comp plan amendment for 7750 Harkness Avenue, approved the comp plan amendment and zoning amendment for a portion of Oakwood Park, and approved all the applications for Oak Park Commons. She stated that the Council held a workshop discussion on potential expansion of the MUSA in the West Draw, which was brought about because of the many request from property owners of rural land in the area to be brought into the MUSA. She explained that this also brings up issues of appropriate zoning and ultimate land use in the West Draw area. Lindquist reported that on October 16, 2002, the Council approved the final plat for Gateway North, approved the agreement with Washington County for the CDBG program, approved a vacation of a drainage and utility easement in the Ridgewood 7th Addition, ratified the EDA's action regarding the use of eminent domain for the Gateway Development District relating to the Burnett Realty project, and denied the preliminary plat and rezoning to PUD for Timber Ridge 4th Addition but approved the comprehensive plan amendment for the northwest portion. Lindquist stated that the Council held a workshop on October 23 regarding the Met Council Blueprint 2030 and authorized sending a letter to the Met Council with city's input regarding this policy document. She stated that the Met Council hopes to have it adopted by the end of the year. She explained that the Blueprint relates to the system plans the Met Council controls. 9.2 Committee Reports Japs reported that the Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation met on October 15, 2002, and received the Old Cottage Grove Historic District Registry that was prepared by Bob Vogel, Historic Preservation Officer. He stated that Vogel advised the Committee that he was not extending his tenure as Historic Preservation Officer and will be done at the end of the year. He stated that Gary Golusky, Chair of the ACHP, also submitted his resignation. He stated that both have over 20 years of service on the ACHP. 9.3 Planning Commission Requests Bailey announced that David Piggott has resigned from the Planning Commission because he is moving out of the city. He publicly thanked Mr. Piggott for his years of service to the City of Cottage Grove. Planning Commission Minutes October 28, 2002 Page 11 of 12 Booth asked what type of roadway connection is planned between Hidden Oaks and Timber Ridge 3rd Addition. Lindquist responded that is still under consideration. She stated that Public Safety feels very strongly that there should be a road. She explained that this issue will be discussed by the Public Safety and Public Works Commissions and then by the City Council for final dispensation. She the stated that Bob Newby, who is representing the neighborhood, will ask his neighbors about a one-way emergency vehicle road. She stated that as development occurred along 70th Street, concerns have been raised about access to some of the neighborhoods, and it was felt that there should be at least a one-way road to make it less difficult to get out of the Hidden Oaks neighborhood. Hudnut asked if that was what the Planning Commission had recommended. Lindquist responded that the Planning Commission deleted the access between the two developments. Booth asked if a review of the transitions zones in the comprehensive plan would need to be done due to the construction of the interceptor line. Lindquist stated that the city committed to the Met Council that we would do an amendment in 2003 for the East Ravine area. She explained that the city sent out an RFP for the East Ravine planning project, and the Council would be interviewing three consultant teams on November 1. She stated that the final document would be the new comprehensive plan amendment for that district, and would in- clude sanitary sewer, stormwater, and water distribution plan. She also stated that the con- sultant would also do the AUAR, which is the environmental review for the entire area. She stated that the project would take about 12 to 18 months for completion and would include a large public input component. Lindquist stated she is not yet sure what role the Planning Commission will have in the process, but ultimately, the proposal would come before the Commission for public hearing and recommendation. She explained that those details would be worked out after the consultant was selected. Lindquist stated that the RFP asked for very detailed planning, particularly in Neighborhood 1, which is the area west of County Road 19, including the outdoor theater parcel. Booth asked if all those areas are already guided in the comp plan. Lindquist responded yes. Booth then asked if the consultant would look at how it is guided so the area is consistent with the comp plan. Lindquist believes so. She stated that this area is guided for low density residential, but it may not only be developed with single-family housing; there could be the possibility of patio homes, such as those proposed for Timber Ridge 4th, and twin homes, like those being built by Orrin Thompson. She explained that some Councilmembers ex- pressed interest in those types of developments and feel that the East Ravine area could ac- commodate that. She also stated that medium density zoning could be added to allow for more senior housing. She does not believe there would be much commercial development except by the theater site. Booth asked if the consultanYs report would be an amendment to the comp plan. Lindquist responded that under the current comp plan, the city is required to come forward with a large plan amendment that allows that area to be brought into the MUSA. She explained that the city is also required to do a phasing plan, which might change under the new Blueprint. Booth then asked if there would be public meetings and forums. Lindquist answered yes and that there would be probably be a work group with a Pianning Commission representative serving on it. Booth then asked if the comp plan amendment would need to be discussed at several consecutive Planning Commission meetings. Lindquist explained that the Planning Commission would hold the formal public hearing, which could take multiple meetings. Planning Commission Minutes Octotier 28, 2002 Page 12 of 12 Japs asked what phasing means. Lindquist stated that the Met Council requires a five-year phasing plan, so the city has to designate land in five-year development increments. She ex- plained that the proposed Blueprint would not require phasing, but would allow the city a certain amount of sewer capacity that the city could allocate as they see fit. Japs stated that he was concerned that the Met Council would dictate what and when the city could develop. Lindquist stated that the city's comp plan indicates that the city would be developing about 200 to 250 units a year, though the Met Council has a higher number. Japs asked how many units have been developed year. Lindquist responded about 200 units. Hudnut stated that staff should be complimented on hiring a consultant who would allow citi- zen input. Booth asked how the public would be notified. Lindquist responded that it would depend on the consultant. She stated the Council just saw the proposals last week and they have not yet discussed the process. Willhite asked about filling the two vacancies on the Planning Commission. Bailey explained that the city is currently taking applications and then there would be an interview process that would involve Councilmember Kohls, with the final decision made by the Council. Hudnut asked if notice had been placed in the Bulletin. Bailey stated yes. Japs asked about receiving a copy of the tree preservation ordinance for review. Lassen asked for an update on Almar Village. Lindquist responded that the building permit was issued for the Almar Village strip mall and the developer was hoping to get the paving completed this fall. She stated that there has been some concern that the fence around the perimeter of the site has not been started yet and that the residential areas are not fully landscaped. She explained that staff has talked to the residential contractor, M.W. Johnson, and told them that the would hold up certificates of occupancy until there is forward progress. She stated that they recently submitted an as-built grading plan that staff needs to review, and they want staff approval of the grading before they start the fence and landscaping. 9.4 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries None. Adjournment Severson made a motion to adjourn the regular meeting. Hudnut seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m.