Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-12-23 MINUTESCity of Cottage Grove Planning Commission December 23, 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 23rd day of De- cember, 2002, in the Councii Chambers. Call to Order Chairperson Bailey called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Myron Bailey, Timothy Booth, Herb Japs, Bob Severson, Chris Willhite Members Absent: Robert Hudnut (unexcused), David Lassen (unexcused) Staff Present: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director John McCool, Senior Planner Approval of Agenda Severson made a motion to approve the agenda. Booth seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Open Forum Chairperson Bailey asked if anyone wished to address the Pianning Commission on any non-agenda item. No one spoke. 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- 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 Cases ZA02-081 and PP02-082 Pulte Homes of Minnesota applied for a zoning amendment to change the zoning from AG-2, Agriculture, to R-2.5, Residential, and a preliminary plat for Timber Ridge 4th Addi- Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 2 of 19 tion, which would consist of 61 single family homes located at the northwest corner of 70th Street and Harkness Avenue. Lindquist summarized the staff report. She stated that Katharine Widin, a tree specialist from Plant Health Associates, has agreed to work as the arborist for Timber Ridge 4th. A copy of her tree preservation recommendations for the Timber Ridge project was distributed to each Planning Commission member. Lindquist recommended approval of the applications subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Japs asked about the violations of the tree preservation ordinance by Pulte Homes at Timber Ridge 3rd. Lindquist responded that Pulte was allowed to brush along the tree removal line so they could stake the grading boundary line and install fencing. She explained that they removed trees inside the brush line without fully installing the fence, and there was some tree removal in the area proposed for a roadway connection between the Timber Ridge 3rd and Hidden Oaks neighborhoods. Grading the area between the two neighborhoods was not supposed to be done until the Council made a determination on what type of connection would occur. She stated that those trees were shown as being removed on the tree preser- vation plan, but they were removed before the Council had made a final directive. She stated that there was also lax enforcement, such as allowing heavy equipment to run over tree roots. Japs asked if the grading activities were more destructive. Lindquist responded that all fenc- ing was installed prior to grading. Japs expressed concerns that more trees had been re- moved based on the height of the stacked logs. Lindquist responded that staff viewed the site and noted that the grading boundary line was consistent with the approved tree preser- vation plan. She does not believe any more trees were removed than what the plan showed, with the exception of the connection area between Hidden Oaks and Timber Ridge 3rd. Japs stated that one of the neighbors in the area reported that a logging truck knocked down part of the fence. Lindquist stated that her understanding from the Police Chief is that the logging truck went through the Hidden Oaks neighborhood and removed the barrier so they could drive to Timber Ridge. They did not move the barrier far enough out of the way and ran over a portion of it. Japs stated that he is concerned that even though Pulte was not responsible in their activities at Timber Ridge 3rd, the city is recommending that they be allowed to build in another area where there is a very impressive stand of trees. He asked if there could be a financial penalty for removing any tree in Timber Ridge 4th Addition that is supposed to be preserved. He does not believe that requiring replacement of large trees with small trees is incentive enough to prevent illegal tree removal. Lindquist stated that city ordinance already has the penalties in place, but do not include monetary penalties. Japs then asked where the proposed retaining walls would be located and noted that staff previously had concerns about the height of some of the walls. Lindquist stated that there are retaining walls in several areas of the project, including one in the northeast corner by Hardwood Avenue/68th Street, which would reduce the amount of grading and tree removal on the site. She stated that the city does not want retaining walls on city property. She ex- plained that retaining walls over four feet high are required to be approved by a structural engineer and that information is then reviewed by the City's Building Inspector. Japs asked if the walls would be installed as planned or could they change the plans to make them not so high and remove more trees. Lindquist stated that the developer has to abide by the ap- Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 3 of 19 proved tree preservation plan. Japs asked where the walls would be located if they cannot be on city property. Lindquist referred to Exhibit F of the previous submittal, which shows the location of the walls and explained that the city does not want them in the right-of-way because they could get in the way of utility easements and snow storage. Japs reiterated his concerns about extending Timber Ridge Lane north to 65th Street, which he believes would be a convenient short cut through this proposed upscale neighborhood. He noted that the Highland Hills neighborhood only has one access, while this proposal has several accesses. He also stated that other neighborhoods have had problems with motor- ists taking short cuts through them, including the Highlands neighborhood on Ideal Avenue. He understands that the Public Safety and Public Works Commissions are in favor of the northern access. Lindquist responded that staff is supportive of the connection for the benefit of the rural properties to the north, of which some of the property owners have expressed interest in developing in the future. She stated that whether those parcels develop as rural residential or urban residential, the city and county do not want individual curb cuts onto 65th Street due to the amount of traffic, speed limits, and restricted views. Japs asked if there are any development plans proposed for the properties to the north. Lindquist responded that there has been interest from some of the rural residential property owners in the West Draw to access city sanitary sewer and water, and staff will begin discussions with those residents in January. Japs asked if the road is being proposed as a stub only. Lindquist said that was correct. Booth asked if there are limits to access to 65th Street from the northern parcel and if the road has to align with Hadley Avenue. Lindquist responded that the preference is to aligned roadways because that is safest. If roads do not align, there has to be certain distance sepa- rating them. She explained that 65th Street is a county road although the County has not taken active interest in access control on 65th Street, because they want to give jurisdiction back to the City. She stated that there are some poor sight distance issues in this particular area because of the hills. Booth agreed that a four-way intersection is usually the safest, but that might not be the best option for this area. Lindquist stated that at this time, the discus- sion is only about the road stub. Booth stated that the best option may be to divert traffic from Hadley Avenue either to Meadowgrass Avenue or Hinton Avenue by not having the proposed road intersect with Hadley. Bailey stated that the topography in the area limits where the road could be located. Japs asked what the West Draw Task Force recommendation was for the area north of the proposed development. Lindquist responded that the area was designated as rural residen- tial, and the Task Force did not lay out local roads. Brent Hislop, Pulte Homes of Minnesota, clarified that after all the clearing was done for Timber Ridge 3rd Addition, their surveyor went through the entire site and compared the re- moved trees with the approved tree preservation plan. He stated that the area for the road connection was cleared due to a misunderstanding on their part, but the tree removal on the balance of the site was done in accordance with the tree preservation plan, plus they saved 7 to 10 trees that had been proposed to be removed. He stated that they would abide by staff's recommendation regarding retaining walls over four feet in height. Hislop stated that the road alignment/connection would be decided by the city in the future, but the stub allows at least the potential for future connection to 65th Street. Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 4 of 19 Japs expressed concern for topsoil removal around tree roots, which could result in the death of many of the trees. He asked how the developer plans to avoid compacting the soil around the base of the trees identified for preservation. Hislop stated that he does not be- lieve a lot of soil was removed, but there may have been some compaction. He stated that in the future they would keep the machines outside the drip line wherever possible and that they have hired an arborist for Timber Ridge 4th Addition to get specific recommendations. Bailey opened the public hearing. Ron Riemann, 6120 Hadley Avenue South, stated that he served on the West Draw Task Force and the road issue was very important to them because prior to any plans for devel- opment in the West Draw there had been proposals for an arterial or collector road extending south from Hadley. He stated that the Task Force agreed that there would be no link from 65th Street to 70th Street at Hadley. He stated that while the proposed road is not intended to be an arterial road, that is the way it would probably be used. He suggested closing off the road stub and allow access to 65th Street for any property owners who choose to develop. He stated that a road connection would frustrate the intent of the West Draw Task Force. Hislop stated that he understands that traffic may divert down that road from 65th Street to 70th Street, however, the stub provides no access at this time. If the area to the north does develop, the stub could be a potential access or a cul-de-sac. Bill Amundson, 6055 Hadley Avenue South, stated that he asked Mark Tinucci if he wanted a road connection through his property. Tinucci stated that he did. Amundson then thanked the city for putting the traffic triangle on Hadley Avenue, and noted that since its installation, there has been only one minor accident. He stated that traffic has increased on Hadley since the reconstruction began on Highway 61, and he is concerned that accidents could increase due to these greater traffic volumes. He then stated he does not see the need for another through road when there is already one at Hinton Avenue, especially during the next four to five years until Highway 61 is completed. He asked if Hadley Avenue would be upgraded and what the time tables are for the reconstruction of Hinton Avenue and development of Timber Ridge 4th. Lindquist responded that the construction bid for the Hinton/Tower project will be let this spring, and work would commence shortly thereafter. She explained that the proposal before the Commission is just for the southern portion of the site and all that is being planned at this time is the stub road. She stated that there are no development proposals for the property to the north, so there is no timetable for a road connection. There are no plans for upgrading Hadley Avenue at this time. Bailey asked if anyone e/se would like to speak. No one else spoke. Bailey closed the public hearing. Willhite made a motion to approve the rezoning and preliminary plat applications subjecf to the conditions listed in the staff report. Japs seconded. Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 5 of 19 Japs stated that he would like to modify the condition regarding grading. He stated that one of the problems in Timber Ridge 3rd was illegal grading by scraping and exposing tree roots. He suggested adding a condition that there would be a$1,000 penalty for each illegal grad- ing infraction. Illegal grading is defined as any grading that is not permitted or allowed, such as within the drip line or by any trees identified for preservation. A tree specialist identified by the city will report to the City Council four times during the grading and construction phase. Willhite accepted the addendum to the motion. Japs then stated that he would like to add another condition to leave the Timber Ridge Lane as undesignated land rather than as a road stub. He asked if Willhite would accept that as part of the motion. Willhite answered no. Lindquist stated that she has concerns about the conditions required by Japs. She stated tree preservation plans typically try to save as many trees as possible, which means that the developers take risks in certain cases, and this could result in grading within the drip line. She stated that typically the developers fence out to the drip line and do their brushing, tree removal, and stump removal. During grading, the fence may need to be moved. She stated none of the developers would be able to accommodate not allowing grading within the drip line. Japs stated that he would like to send the condition to the City Council as worded and let the City Council decide the issue. He stated that he addressed the issue under grading because of the concerns that the City Attorney has regarding tree preservation and he wants to ensure that the same problems that occurred with Timber Ridge 3rd do not happen again by imposing restrictions and penalties. Lindquist stated that what he has suggested is not technically feasible under the plans that have been submitted. Severson asked if there was a second on the motion. Bailey responded that there was an amendment to the motion and was accepted by Willhite. Lindquist reiterated that it is not feasible to restrict all grading within the drip line. She noted that the primary issue with Tim- ber Ridge 3rd was the brushing activity, stump removal, and amount of construction activity that crossed over existing root systems, and noted that the fencing should have been up, but grading does occur on the edges of the tree preservation line. Willhite asked what could be done to avoid what happened at Timber Ridge 3rd and if it was the staff's responsibility to ensure the fence is installed or is it the developer's responsibility to do what they say they would do. Lindquist responded that staff will do a better job of monitoring, and hiring an ar- borist is a step in the right direction. Willhite stated that she knows that other developers did not follow the guidelines set by the city and she wants to ensure compliance. She suggested that this issue be addressed in the tree preservation ordinance. Lindquist stated that grading and equipment is a fairly common occurrence at all developments and there does need to be better monitoring and enforcement. Willhite stated that something needs to be added to the ordinance regarding this. Lindquist stated that the ordinance does not allow those practices, but the concern by Japs is that the penalties are not severe enough. She stated that there would be a workshop at the February Planning Commission meeting to discuss the tree preservation ordinance. Hislop stated that he understands the intent and that he feels the developer and the city share a common goal, becasue the more trees on a lot, the more valuable it is. He explain- ing that not allowing grading within the drip line is extremely difficult. He stated that they will communicate better with staff and that they have hired an arborist to work on this project. Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 6 of 19 Japs stated that he does not believe this is impossible because Mike Rygh is able to pre- serve trees near houses. Hislop stated even though a tree survives close to a house does not mean there was no grading done next to that tree. Bailey stated that he agrees and that if the city were to require this at all developments, Rygh would not be able preserve trees near houses, because grading had to have occurred in the drip line. Booth stated that the City Attorney has already given a recommendation that it is not appro- priate to do what Japs is suggesting, and that the city needs to amend the tree preservation ordinance. He believes that if penalties are added in the grading language of the conditions, the attorney would have the same opinion. He stated that he shares Japs' concerns, but the place to have penaities is the tree preservation ordinance. Severson stated that he does not support the addendum to condition #3. He asked if we vote this down based on that condition, how can it be brought back up again. Willhite stated that she shares Japs' concerns but she does not feel that the addendum to the condition is the way to do it. Japs stated that what he is hearing is that it is easier to do nothing now than attempt to do something. Severson stated that that is not necessarily true. He thinks that there could possibly be more oversight by city staff and the developer. He stated that he does not want to hold up the proposed development because of the proposed addendum. Willhite pulled fhe addendum from the motion. Japs withdrew his second. Severson seconded the motion for approval, subject to the 15 conditions listed below. 1. The developer shall enter info a subdivision agreement with the City of Cottage Grove for the installation of and payment for all public improvements 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 fo the South Washington Wafershed District, DNR, and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 3. The revised grading and utility plan must be submitted to the City Staff and Minne- sota DNR for review and approval prior to the submission of the final plat plan ap- plications to the City. All emergency overflow swales must be identified on the grading and erosion control plan. Drainage calculations must be submitted prior to City Council review of the preliminary plat. 4. The applicant submit a final construction management plan that includes erosion contro/ measures, project phasing for grading work, areas designated for preser- vation, a crushed-rock construcfion 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 the contractor shall be held before site work begins. The contractor shall provide the City with a project schedule for the various phases of construction. Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 7 of 19 6. Erosion control devices shall be installed prior to commencement of any grading activity. Erosion control shall be performed in accordance with the recommended practices of the "Minnesota Construction Site Erosion and Sediment Control Plan- ning Handbook" and the conditions stipulated in Title 10-5-8, Erosion Control During Construction, of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. 7. The developer shall insfall and pay for required stop signs. 8. The developer shall pay area charges af the rate applicable at the time of re- cording. The current calculation amounfs to $354,342.08. 9. The developer shall pay park dedication fees at fhe rate applicable at the time of re- cording. The currenf calculation amounts to $61,000.00 10.Outlots A, B, C and D shall be conveyed to the City of Cottage Grove. No credit will be granted to the developer for calculated area charges or park fees. 11. The developer shall install sidewalks six feet in width along all public streets as identified in the staff report, and eight-foot bituminous pathways as determined on the final grading plan. Damage to sidewalks during the home construction process shall be the responsibility of the developer. The applicant will pay 50 percent of the cost for development of nature trails through the project including on publicly dedicated land. 12. The applicant hire an arborist to assist with all facets of tree preservation on the site. The arborist will supervise installation and maintenance of tree preservation fencing and the tree and brush removal process. Mitigative measures to aid in preservation of trees slated to remain will occur based upon the recommendations of the arborist. Should trees designated for preservation be removed, the applicant will replace the trees in accordance wifh the ordinance criteria. Trees designated for preservation which are found to be harmed, diseased, or dying, or are not suited for location into fhe project may be removed based upon the recommenda- tion of the arborist in agreement with the City and the applicant. Trees removed will be replaced as required by ordinance. 13. The applicant shall obtain a demolifion permit prior to the removal of any of the ex- isting buildings on the site. 14. The applicant submit appropriate engineering information for retaining walls. Any fencing or retaining walls must be decorative and subject to staff review and ap- proval. 15. The applicant construct the gazebo consistent with city design and structural stan- dards. Its location and the tot lot location will be mutually agreed upon between the applicant and the city. Motion passed on a 4-to-1 vote (Japs). Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 8 of 19 6.2 Case RS02-087 Alvin and Marlys Goebel have applied for a simple lot division to divide a 39.14-acre par- cel of land into two parcels of 14 acres and 25.14 acres. The property is located on the north side of 70th Street between Jamaica Avenue and Keats Avenue. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Alvin Goebel stated that the 39-acre parcel has been farmed for the past 52 years and will be farmed next year. He explained that the main purpose for dividing the parcel is for estate planning. Bailey opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Bailey c/osed the public hearing. Severson made a motion to approve the lot split application subject to the conditions listed be/ow. Japs seconded. 1. The applicant dedicate 75 feet to the County for right-of-way purposes 2. The applicant prepare and record a restrictive covenant over the property detailing that one single-family unit will be permitted on one of the parcels. The applicant shall choose which parcel would have the ability to develop one dwelling unit. 3. The applicant prepare and record a restrictive covenant recognizing that both cre- ated parcels will have one shared access onto 70th Street, subjecf to approval by the City and County. The entire parent parcel is limited to only one access to 70th Street. 4. The applicant shall pay stormwater area charges of $1,142.89 per created lot. Motion passed unanimously. 6.3 Cases V02-089 and SP02-093 3M Company has applied for site plan approval for the critical area with consideration of an exception to Title 9-1-1, Exterior Facing Material, for construction of a 16,864 square foot pre-engineered metal panel building to house 26 process treatment carbon filtration tank units. The new building will be located on the interior of the 3M Cottage Grove Cen- ter, 10746 Innovation Road. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Pat McGrann, 3M Facilities Engineering, introduced Dean Johnson, from TKDA who is the architect for this project. McGrann stated that the proposed building would enclose additional wastewater treatment process units that the MPCA has asked 3M to install. He explained the Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 9 of 19 function of the carbon filtration tank system. He stated that the structure would not be visible from neighboring properties due to elevations, tree lines, and other sight line restrictions. McGrann reported that the structure would be located 165 feet from the top of the bluff line. He expiained that because the site is a heavy industrial area, landscaping would not be nec- essary and would probably not survive. He suggested that instead of landscaping around the new building that they install the plantings along the intersection of Miller Road and the 3M main entrance, which would continue their previously outlined master plan for site landscap- ing. He stated that their landscape plan will be submitted with their building permit appli- cation. Bailey opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Bailey closed the public hearing. Booth made a motion to approve the applications subject to the conditions listed be- low. Willhite seconded. 1. The applicant submit a final landscape plan, detailing planting locations, size, and species prior to issuance of a building permit for the building. 2. The applicant submit an application and receive a building permit for the building. Motion passed unanimously. 6.4 Case SP02-088 3M Company has applied for a site plan review of the their water main repair project. The project includes replacement of 12,100 lineal feet of concrete water main that runs through the Ravine Park to the Mississippi River, which is in the critical area, and the construction of a 10-foot wide bituminous pathway along the new waterline routing. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Willhite asked when construction would begin. Lindquist responded that it would begin in early spring of 2003. Pat McGrann, 3M Company, stated that they would commence construction on March 1, 2003, and plan to be finished by June 15, 2003. He stated that half the project would occur on 3M property and the other half within the Ravine Park. He explained that the water line was originally constructed in the late 1960's, with the majority being ductile pipe except for the section from 90th Street to where it ties to the 3M site, which is concrete. He stated that they are replacing that section, which is at the end of its life span, with ductile. McGrann then stated that the majority of the pipe to be replaced is within the existing 30-foot right-of-way, which has already been cleared, and that they will be acquiring a new easement from the County for certain sections because the old line went around the west side of the ravine lake but with the lake's increased size, they are no longer able to do that. He explained that the pipe easement would skirt the edge of their road and require some tree removal adjacent to the road, which would mostly be buckthorn and prickly ash. He then stated that they negoti- ated with the county that the trail would extend up to 85th Street to compensate for additional Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 10 of 19 easements. He stated that the trail is designed with slopes that are 5 degrees or less so it is handicapped accessible along the entire 9,000 foot length. Japs asked if they are removing the oid pipe. McGrann stated that only sections of the old pipe where it ties into the new pipe would be removed; the existing pipe wili be filled with concrete slurry along its entire length so that it does not become a corridor for any ground water migration or possible contamination from other sources. Bailey opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Bailey closed the public hearing. Severson made a motion to approve the application subject to the conditions listed be/ow. Japs seconded. 1. The applicant submit a tree inventory plan overlaid with the final pipeline and trail locations and grading areas prior to issuance of a grading permit. After construc- tion is complete, the applicant must notify the city of the amount of trees removed due to the approved work. If removal does not comply with the ordinance criteria, the applicant must mitigate based upon the city ordinance criteria. 2. The applicant obtain a grading permit from the city. 3. The applicant have a signed agreement with the Counfy prior to commencement of work. 4. The applicant receive approvals from any applicable agencies including but not limited to the SWWD, DNR, PCA, and others. Motion passed unanimously. 6.5 Case CUP02-090 Kerry J. Severson has applied for a conditional use permit to allow a horse boarding facility at 11050 Manning Avenue. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Kerry Severson, 11050 Manning Avenue South, stated that 36 stalls shown on the barn plan includes a shower stall and tack rooms, so the maximum number of horses would probably be 32. He stated as far as pasturing, all the horses would not be out all the time; they get turned out during the day for a short period of time. He explained that the arena is for owners to exercise their horses inside. Bailey opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Bailey closed fhe public hearing. Willhite moved to approve the application for a conditional use permit subject to the conditions listed below. Japs seconded. Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 11 of 19 The facility plans shall be modified to reflect the requested changes identified in the staff report prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. All applicable permits (i.e., building, electrical, grading, mechanical) and a commer- cial plan review packet shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the City prior to commencement of any construction activities. Detailed construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official and Fire Marshall. 3. Final exterior construction materials and colors shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 4. There shall be only one access drive located on Manning Avenue. 5. The applicant shall be responsible for the placement of a stop sign at the intersec- tion with Manning Avenue and any improvements required by MNDOT as a condi- tion of receiving an access permit. The costs associated with the installation of any turn lanes, by pass lanes or acceleration lanes required by MNDOT shall the responsibility of the applicant. 6. A feedlot permit shall be obfained if required from the Minnesota pollution control agency prior to the issuance of a building permit. Any MPCA standards relative to commercial horse stables shall be complied with. 7. Feed storage on the site shall be properly stored in a manner fhaf does not pro- mote rodent problems 8. If the property is ever subdivided or rezoned to a non agricultural zoning classi- fication, the use shall be discontinued, and the building sizes shall be reduced to be in compliance with the accessory structure standards applicable at the time of the change of status of the property. 9. The applicant shall provide the City with an as-built survey of the facility. 10. The designated vehicle/trailer parking area on the site shall be screened with land- scaping. The landscaping plan shall be submitted that addresses the items identi- fied in the staff report. Said plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of a building permit. A bona fide cost estimate of the landscaping improvements shall be submitted in conjunction with a letter of credit approved by the Cify in the amount of 150 percenf of such estimate. Upon comple- tion of the landscaping requirements, the applicant shall in writing inform the City fhat said improvements have been completed. The City shall 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 guar- antee has been received and accepted by the City. 11.A surface water management pond shall be created on the site to manage the sur- face water quality and quantity changes created by the additional hard surface Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 12 of 19 areas on the site. The pond design shall meet current city development standards, and shall be approved by the City Engineer. 12. The signage on the site shall be limited to a monument sign that shall not exceed 32 square feet. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign package to the City for review and approval. 13. Parking provided on the site will be two auto and one trailer parking space for each client or tenant of the business. The site will have at a minimum six public parking spaces at all times. The designated parking area and drive aisle shall be installed as a dry dustless surface. 14.A11 outdoor lighting shall be directed downward and away from residential property and public streets, and shall not exceed .5 footcandle at the property lines. 15. No horses shall be ridden on the adjacent public roadway at any time, nor on the adjoining properties without written permission. 16.If excessive odors, rodent infestations, traffic accidents or other operational issues are brought to the attention of the city, will be cause for City Council review and modification of the conditions for operafion of the conditional use permit This re- view may result in amendment or revocation of the conditional use permit. Motion passed unanimously. 6.6 Cases ZA02-072 and PP02-073 (continued from 9/23/02 meeting) Cheetah Properties, LLC has applied for a zoning amendment to change the zoning from AG-1, Agricultural Preserve, to R-2.5, Residential, and PUD, Planned Unit Development, and a preliminary plat for a subdivision to be called Mississippi Dunes Estates, which would consist of 178 single-family homes and 139 townhomes. This proposed subdivi- sion would be located on the west side of Hadley Avenue between 95th Street and 100th Street. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended tabling the applications to continue work on the design for the north side of 95th Street, the amount of inedium density being provided for the project as a whole, and more information on a tot lot and open space within the medium density area. Japs stated that the senior housing component was one of the key attractions when this project was initially conceived and asked why it was removed. McCool responded that there were questions as to whether that area was the appropriate location for high-rise senior housing, because of transportation issues and the developmenYs distance from commercial areas, and though the southeast corner of Hadley Avenue and 100th Street is designated for neighborhood commercial, it is outside the city's urban services area and is not programmed to be developed for a long time. Japs asked who made the decision to switch from senior housing to townhomes. McCool responded that the developer re-evaluated the market for Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 13 of 19 the property. Lindquist stated that residents in the area expressed concern at the last public hearing about a three-story building. Booth asked what the city's position was on extending 100th Street all the way west to the cliff line to ailow access to the southern property. McCooi stated that the property on the south side could access the proposed collector, and he envisions that the collector roadway could be extended to the south or southwest, but that staff does not envision 100th Street extending all the way to Grey Cloud Trail. Booth asked if 95th Street was envisioned to ex- tend to Grey Cloud Trail. McCool responded yes. Booth asked if 100th Street would be split. McCool responded that has been discussed. John Tschida, Cheetah Properties, 11220 Kingsborough Trail, stated that he has been seil- ing homes in Cottage Grove for over 13 years and his company recently completed the Kingsborough Woods development and aiso built in Sandy Hills, which is what they envision for the proposed new development. He reported that they are a local company and invited two other local builders, JHL Construction and Custom One Homes by Mike Rygh, to join Kingsborough Homes in the single-family portion. He also stated that there would be a homeowners association to maintain the common property. Tschida then stated that staff expressed concern about the size of the townhome portion of the project that is being sold to Manley Brothers Construction. He explained that the comprehensive plan shows about 17 acres for multi-family housing in that area and the proposal is for 29 acres, which also in- cludes a fair amount of open space. He stated that the density for the proposed project is 18 percent lower than would be allowed if they put the maximum number of units on 17 acres. He then stated that the grading and rear lot line issues would be addressed by the repre- sentative from Pioneer Engineering. Japs asked about the price ranges for the homes. Tschida reported that the homes in the southwest portion of the development would range from $375,000 to more than $500,000, and the other single family homes would range from $300,000 to $400,000, similar to the homes in the Kingsborough Woods development. Steve Haglind, Manley Brothers Construction, 549 — 77th Street, Eagan, explained that after talking with staff and members of the City Council, they came to the conclusion that a senior housing complex would not be the best use for the property. He also explained that the rea- sons they are proposing townhomes on 29 acres rather than 17 acres are that the area would be less dense, there would be more open space, and they could have buildings with fewer units, which creates a more upscale development. Japs asked about the price ranges for the townhomes. Haglind responded that the detached housing units and duplexes would range from $225,000 to $250,000 and the six-plex and eight-plex units would be in the range of $179,000 to $189,000. Japs asked about the playground in the multi-family area. Haglind stated that they are work- ing with staff and their engineering team to find the best location for the playground, and they are planning to keep it away from high traffic areas. Japs asked what is at the base of the steep drop-off on the southwest corner. Haglind answered that it goes down into Bailey Nurseries and is wooded with a lot of brush. Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 14 of 19 Bailey opened the public hearing. Floyd Ott, 11865 West Point Douglas Road, commended the Commission for the work they have done the city. He noted the developers and builders have worked on Sandy Hills, Pres- tige Estates, and Hidden Valley, and that they are local companies. He feels that this project would serve the city well. He stated that he agrees with the use of a PUD for the townhome portion of the project. He then stated that he believes the city should be able to make excep- tions, if necessary, for local companies as has been done for others. Yvonne Bergman, 9908 Hamlet Court South, stated that she is representing the Pine Glen Villas Townhome Association, which is directiy across the street from the proposed devel- opment. She stated that she testified in September and voiced strong concerns about a three-story building and other issues, but after viewing the new proposal, she believes that the association would withdraw their objections to development. She stated that she would be pleased to live next to this development as it is laid out now. No one else spoke. Bailey closed the public hearing. Lindquist stated that the main issue staff has with the proposal is the amount of land dedi- cated to the townhome project versus what is shown in the comprehensive plan. She ex- plained that the comp plan dedicated about 17 acres for multi-family, but the 29 acres proposed is more than envisioned in the plan. She stated that staff met with the developer last week and discussed issues such as fencing, landscaping, grading, and swales in the backyards, and believes the plans can be adjusted to meet those concerns; however, staff and the Planning Commission have been in the position where a lot of the details need to be cleaned up later and there have been a lot of questions about those types of things later on. She stated that staff has been getting feedback that the loose ends need to be tied up sooner. Lindquist explained that that the two issues staff is looking for direction from the Commission are how the Commission feels about the size of the multi-family portion of the development and the level detail for landscaping, berming, fencing, and other items the de- veloper is committed to do but has not detailed in any plans yet. Booth asked what the deadline for the review process is. Lindquist responded that the de- veloper gave the city an extension to the end of March 2003. Booth stated that he has the utmost faith in the judgment of city staff and he is sure that the developers want to get these issues tied up so there are no concerns. Booth made motion to table the applications to the January 27, 2003, meeting. Severson seconded. Severson stated that he is more concerned about the details of the plan rather than the 17 acres versus 29 acres for the townhome portion. Willhite agreed with Severson. She stated that she was disappointed that there was nothing specifically designated for seniors, because she knows first hand how difficult it is to find senior housing in the area. Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 15 of 19 Bailey stated that he wants more specifics on the playground and open space. Haglind stated that they are working with on the number of units, which seemed to be the staff's big- gest concern. He explained that they reduced the amount of density and spread out the pro- posed units. He asked if the Planning Commission had concerns about the density, and noted that they redesigned their plans utilizing the testimony they heard at the September Planning Commission meeting. He also explained that they have proposed some one-level townhomes with basements that could be utilized for senior living. Haglind asked that the Planning Commission approve the plans with added conditions addressing the details and concerns expressed by staff, such as berming, landscaping, tot lot, etc. Bailey stated that the consensus of the Planning Commission is that they are not concerned by the density; however, the Commission wants to see more details because the project is a PUD. He stated that he would be very interested in seeing the plans for berming and land- scaping along Hadley Avenue and 95th Street. Booth stated that he also does not have a problem with the density, but he is concerned about the lack of details because it is a PUD and there have been problems with other de- velopments in the past. Tschida asked if there was a way to approve the layout and table for details. Bailey re- sponded there was not. Motion to table passed unanimously. 6.7 Case SP02-092 Manley Brothers Construction, Inc. has applied for site plan approval of a townhome de- velopment that would consist of 139 units. This development would be located in the proposed Mississippi Dunes Estates subdivision, on the northwest corner of Hadley Avenue and 100th Street. Bailey opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Bailey closed the public hearing. Severson made a motion to table the application. Booth seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 6.8 Cases SP02-085 and CUP02-086 Wells Fargo Bank, NA has applied for a site plan review of a 7,200 square foot single- story building and a conditional use permit to allow a drive-through bank, to be located at 8770 East Point Douglas Road South. McCool summarized the staff report. He stated that the bank's representative has informed him that the bank is planning to add approximately 1,000 square feet to the building area on the north side of the proposed structure, so the building location would shift further south on the property. The additional square footage would house storage and safe deposit boxes. He explained that even with this addition, they still exceed the minimum off-street parking ordi- Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 16 of 19 nance requirements. McCool recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Severson stated that he has concerns about traffic flow along East Point Douglas Road, between Cub Foods and Menards. He asked about the access to the property. McCool re- sponded that there would be two access drives both allowing left and right turns. Severson asked about the access on the vacant parcel next to Menards. McCool stated that there would be a shared access with the bank and one additional access at the southeast corner of that site. Bailey recalled that there would be a parking lot connection between the vacant lot and Menards. McCool responded that is true but each lot would still have access to East Point Douglas Road. Severson reiterated his concern about traffic flow and stated that while he does not know how to improve this, he wants to ensure that the city looks harder at how roads and access points are laid out in the future. Willhite asked what was the size of the lot between Menards and the Wells Fargo lot. McCool responded approximately 1.5 acres. Bailey asked about signage. McCool responded that they are proposing a 24-foot high pylon sign on the northwest corner of the property. Severson asked about the time frame for the project. Tim Knutson, HTG Architects, representing Wells Fargo, responded that they would like to start construction at the end of January or early February with completion by eariy or mid- summer. Willhite asked if this building would be in addition to their current building. Knutson stated that they are relocating to this new facility, which will be larger. Bailey asked if Wells Fargo owns their current building. Knutson responded that he did not know but they typically own most of their buildings. Bailey then asked if the pylon sign would similar in nature to signs for the neighboring busi- nesses. McCool displayed a rendering of the proposed sign, noting that it would be 24 feet high with a 6-foot high by 10-foot wide canister on top of the 17-foot high pylon structure. Severson asked if there would be any signage on the building. McCool responded that there would be a wail-mounted sign on the front of the building. Japs asked about the exterior materials. McCool responded that they are brick masonry, IFIS, and pre-finished metal fascia accents. Bailey stated that he is not comfortable with a pylon sign in a PUD, and noted that other communities are moving away from pylon signs to signage with bricking. Severson asked if the purpose of the sign is to allow visibility from Highway 61, and stated that he agrees with Bailey on the sign issue. Wilihite stated that because this property is along a highway, the bank needs to have visibility. Bailey stated that the city has the opportunity with a PUD to make sure the area is aesthetically pleasing. He suggested signage similar to what was in- Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 17 of 19 stalled by Walgreen's, but utilizing the same materials that the bank would be constructed of. He stated that he would like to add this as an additional condition of approval. Japs asked if there are any other pylon signs in that PUD. Bailey stated that the other signs are monument signs. Japs stated that requiring a monument sign would be consistent with the other sign- age in the area. Willhite stated that she does not want to restrict signage on the vacant par- cel to only a monument sign in case there is a use such as a restaurant that needs to be visible from the highway. Bailey stated that when something is proposed for that parcel, a determination would be made at that time. Severson asked what the height of the parapet above the entrance would be. McCool re- sponded 23 feet. Lindquist stated that the coloring and the band are consistent and the en- trance is a separate feature. Severson noted that the pylon sign would be a foot higher than the building. Knutson stated that they have an array of monument signs that they could be used, and he believes that Wells Fargo may be agreeable to a monument sign. Severson stated that he does not want a pylon sign higher than the bank building. Bailey opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Bailey closed the public hearing. Bailey made a mofion to approve the applications subject to the conditions lisfed be- low and added condition #13 relative to monument signs. Japs seconded. 1. The sife plan shall be modified to reflect the requested changes identified in the staff report, such as the internal circulation, use of proof of parking, and inclusion of pedestrian links prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. Black vinyl-clad galvanized fencing or its equivalent is required for any fencing associated with the site development. 3. All applicable permits (i.e., building, electrical, grading, mechanical) and a commer- cial plan review packet shall be completed, submitfed, and approved by the City prior to commencement of any construction acfivities. Detailed construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official and Fire Marshall. 4. Final exterior construction materials and co/ors shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 5. All curbing for the project shall be B618. 6. The applicanf shall provide the City with an as-built survey of all private utilities. 7. The applicant shall be responsible for the placement of a stop sign at the parking lot entrances. 8. The stockpiling of snow shall be prohibited in the surface water ponding area. Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 18 of 19 9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a comprehen- sive sign package to the City for review and approval. 10. 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. 11. The landscaping plan shall be revised to address fhe items identified in the staff report. Said plan sha// be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of a building permit. 12.A bona fide cost estimate of the landscaping improvements shall 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 ap- plicant shall in writing inform the City that said improvements have been com- pleted. The City shall 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 accepted by the City. 13. Signage shall consist of a monument sign constructed of materials that are consis- tent with monument signs and complementary exterior materials to the principal structures within the Pine Grove of Cottage Grove PUD. If the monument sign is to be lighted, it shall be internally lit. Shrubs shall be planted around the base of the monument sign. Mofion passed unanimously. Applications and Requests None. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of November 25, 2002 Japs made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 25, 2002, meeting. Bailey seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Reports 9.1 Recap of December City Council Meetings Lindquist reported that at the December 4, 2002, City Council meeting, the Council approved the conditional use permit for the women's fitness center at Gateway Center; approved the appointment of Nancy Hanzlik as the on-staff city engineer, who will start on January 6; and approved the extension of the moratorium for an additional 18 months. Planning Commission Minutes December 23, 2002 Page 19 of 19 Lindquist stated at the December 18 meeting, the Council approved the final plat for Pine Arbor 1st Addition, which is the townhome development by Orrin Thompson at 70th Street and Hinton Avenue; approved the contract with Hoisington Koegler for the East Ravine pre- design planning project; and approved the liquor license for Dennis Brothers Liquors, which will be locating in Almar Village. She stated that Doc Bohlman from Tollefson Development gave an update on other tenants in the retail center, which include a dry cleaner, a video store, Subway, a family-style buffet restaurant, and possibly a hair cutting business. She stated that Tollefson has also signed a deal with a company for the gas station/convenience store. Bailey asked if the restaurant would be located in the mall or on a separate pad. Lindquist responded in the mall. 9.2 Committee Reports Japs reported that the Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation did not hold a meeting in December. 9.3 Planning Commission Requests Willhite requested that the Commission review the tree preservation ordinance. Bailey stated that after the November meeting, the Commission began discussions in a workshop session and as soon as the neighborhood commercial ordinance is finished, the tree preservation ordinance would be reviewed. Booth noted that the decks in the townhome portion of the Almar Village development look too close together and asked about the setback requirements. Japs asked if that was PUD. Bailey stated yes. Lindquist responded that the R-4 zoning district allows both single-family and multiple-family homes, and the zoning ordinance does not differentiate setbacks be- tween single-family and multi-family. She stated that one of the reasons staff likes to use PUD zoning for multi-family developments. She suggested that a medium density residential district could be created that would address those issues. 9.4 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries Bailey acknowledged receipt of the letter sent to Mary Marty in response to her comments at the November Planning Commission meeting. Adjournment Severson moved to adjourn the meeting. Willhite seconded. Motion passed unani- mously. The meeting adjourned at 10:12 p.m.