HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-04-27 PACKET 07.City of Cottage Grove
Planning Commission
March 23, 2020
A meeting of the Planning Commission was held virtually at Cottage Grove City Hall, 12800 Ravine
Parkway South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, on Monday, March 23, 2020, in the Council Chamber
and telecast on Local Government Cable Channel 16.
Call to Order
Chair Khambata called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Members Present: Sarah Bigham, Ken Brittain, Evan Frazier, Tony Khambata, Eric Knable,
Derek Rasmussen, Jerritt Wright
Members Absent: None
Staff Present: Ben Boike, Community Development Director
John M. Burbank, Senior Planner
Emily Schmitz, Senior Planner
Ryan Burfeind, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Steve Dennis, Council Member
Approval of Agenda
Boike stated that staff would like to add item 6.5, continuation of Planning Case V2020-014, which
is variance request, to the April 27, 2020, Planning Commission meeting.
The Planning Commission unanimously approved (7 -to -0 vote) the amended agenda.
Open Forum
Khambata opened the open forum. Khambata asked if anyone wished to address the Planning
Commission on any non -agenda item. No one addressed the Commission. Khambata closed the
open forum.
Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process
Khambata explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory
capacity to the City Council, and that the City Council makes all final decisions. In addition, he
explained the process of conducting a public hearing and requested that any person wishing to
speak should go to the microphone and state their full name and address for the public record.
Public Hearings and Applications
6.1 Galloway Accessory Structure — Case CUP2020-018
Planning Commission Minutes
March 23, 2020
Page 2 of 6
Dennis and Maryann Galloway have applied for a conditional use permit to allow construc-
tion of a 3,000 square foot accessory structure to replace a deteriorating legal noncon-
forming structure at 10670 Lehigh Road South.
Schmitz summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stip-
ulated in the staff report.
Khambata opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Khambata closed the public
hearing.
Brittain made a motion to approve the conditional use permit subject to the conditions
in the staff report. Bigham seconded. Motion passed unanimously (7 -to -0 vote).
6.2 AT&T Antennas on 92nd Street Water Tower — Case CUP2020-019
SAC Wireless, LLC, on behalf of AT&T Mobility, has applied for an amendment to their con-
ditional use permit to add and replace antennas, radios, and power plant cabinet on the
92nd Street Water Tower, located at 7130 92nd Street South
Schmitz summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stip-
ulated in the staff report.
Khambata opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Khambata closed the public
hearing.
Rasmussen asked if most of the construction will be on top of the water tower with new cabling
running down to the ground, but it appears that there will be no additional structures con-
structed. Schmitz responded that they are not proposing any additional structures on the site.
Wright made a motion to approve the conditional use permit subject to the conditions
in the staff report. Knable seconded.
Motion passed unanimously (7 -to -0 vote).
6.3 Langdon Hills — Cases ZA2020-020 & PP2020-021
Distinctive Design Build, LLC has applied for a zoning amendment to rezone approximately
25 acres of land located at 7388 65th Street South from R-1, Rural Residential, to R-3, Single
Family Residential, with a Planned Unit Development (PUD); and a preliminary plat to be
called Langdon Hills that proposes the development of 51 lots for detached single-family
homes, which includes the existing house, and 3 outlots.
Schmitz summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stip-
ulated in the staff report.
Khambata asked if the developer would finance the relocation of the neighbor's driveway.
Schmitz responded no, as it would not be part of this development.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 23, 2020
Page 3 of 6
Brittain asked where the drive access would be in the ghost plat to the east of the property.
Schmitz responded that those potential lots would access off Street B on the ghost plat. Brittain
asked about a temporary cul-de-sac being constructed. Schmitz pointed out the temporary cul-
de-sac that will be at the end of 63rd Street. She explained that it will be required to be a
temporary cul-de-sac until such time 63rd Street continues. Brittain then asked who would be
responsible for snow removal from the sidewalk at the entrance off 65th Street adjacent to the
outlots deeded to the City since no HOA is proposed for this development. Burfeind responded
that currently the City does the snow removal from sidewalks; however, there is a condition
included that homeowners would do it in case the policy is changed in the future. If the policy
did change, the City would still be responsible for that portion of sidewalk, because we would
be plowing the adjacent trail as well.
John Anderson, Distinctive Design Build, Lakeville, stated that they will be developing this pro-
ject in one phase starting this summer. He explained that they will save the tree line along the
east property line with the Silverwood development, some trees in Outlots A and B, and some
of the trees in the rear of the lots. He noted they are planning a mix of housing styles including
ramblers, two -stories, and possibly some split entries. They are a custom home builder and
some of their guidelines for architecture were included in the staff report. Anderson stated that
they have worked with the seller to retain their existing homestead on a three -acre parcel. Their
original submittal included 52 lots but that was revamped down to 50 lots. He then stated that
they spoke with the property owner to the east about how the roadway would join his property,
grade issues, and tree planting.
Khambata stated that the Commission received an email from the property owner to the east
adjacent to Street B with various concerns about the development, including screening.
Anderson responded that originally there were discussions about putting in screening as the
road comes off 65th Street in Outlot D and along the edge of his property, such as additional
pine trees. There are trees along Outlot C northwest of his existing shed, which are going to
remain, but some of the trees along the very western side of his house would be removed. A
lot of those trees are on the developer's property, and more trees could be added after con-
struction. There was also a discussion about a possibility of a fence.
Rasmussen noted that Street B appears to veer off and then hug the neighboring property line
and that there is a drainage area on Outlot B and asked if those eight or nine lots could be
shifted a minimal distance to the west to give the other property owner a little more of a buffer.
Anderson stated that is a possibility, noting that Pioneer Engineering, who did their plans, ex-
plored that option but there is an issue with the sizing of the pond. If the lots are moved west,
all the ponds would have to move to the west as well. There is also a fairly steep slope coming
up that pond location into the existing residential homestead as well as a tree line along the
northern basin that they are trying to save. Another reason why the development would be right
along the property line was to give that property access for future development as the street
access and utility services would be already be there. He then noted that even though the staff
report states that Outlots C and D would be deeded to the City, they would like to deed those
to that property owner for additional access, so if he did decide to sell, he could use those
outlots for future development land to square off those lots.
Wright noted that there seems to be some misunderstanding about property lines and asked if
the property has been surveyed and staked. Anderson responded that they had an Alta Survey
done, which showed that the driveway encroaches across their property as does the overhead
Planning Commission Minutes
March 23, 2020
Page 4 of 6
power line that services the neighbor's house and there are also quite a few trees along the
west side of the driveway that are also on their property. He stated that after the neighborhood
meeting on March 11 he talked with the neighbor about that, and while he doesn't know the
background, the neighbor mentioned that sometime in the past the line was shifted, which could
have been when Silverwood was developed. Anderson stated that they can work with him to
possibly redo the driveway, put in new ones off Street B, help with undergrounding the electric
lines to get rid of the overhead, and get everything stubbed in for any possible future develop-
ment.
Khambata opened the public hearing.
There is a question about if the width of the streets would match the streets in the Silverwood
or Eastbrooke developments. Burfeind responded that it would match the 28 -foot wide streets
in the Eastbrooke development, which are the City standard street width. The streets are
slightly wider in the Silverwood development, so they will be tapered down over a 50 -foot dis-
tance into the proposed development. Khambata asked what the former standard street width
was. Burfeind responded that the streets are 32 feet wide in Silverwood. He noted that there
was a similar situation with the Hamlet Heights development.
There was a question regarding when the modification will be made to 65th Street. Burfeind
responded that in terms of this development, they will be required to install right and left turn
lanes into the development; these turn lanes must meet County standards. They would also
provide a left turn lane into the school, which currently does not have one, to replace the bypass
lane. Washington County is currently reviewing their plans. He stated that there are currently
no plans for other improvements or widening to 65th Street. Khambata asked when in the de-
velopment process the turn lanes would be added. Burfeind responded during the street and
utility portion of the project, so likely later this summer.
No one else spoke. Khambata closed the public hearing.
Khambata made a motion to approve the zoning amendment and preliminary plat for
Langdon Hills subject to the conditions in the staff report. Brittain seconded. Motion
passed unanimously (7 -to -0 vote).
6.4 Northwick Park — Cases ZA2020-022 & PP2020-023
D.R. Horton, Inc. — Minnesota has applied for a zoning amendment to rezone 27.6 acres of
property located at 9260 Military Road and the vacant parcel to the east from AG -1, Agricul-
tural Preservation, to R-3, Single Family Residential, with a PUD, Planned Unit Develop-
ment; and a preliminary plat to be called Northwick Park that would develop 71 lots for
detached single-family homes and 3 outlots.
Burbank summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions
stipulated in the staff report.
Mike Suel and Deb Ridgeway from DR Horton and Fran Hagen from Westwood stated that
they would answer any questions.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 23, 2020
Page 5 of 6
Rasmussen asked if they reviewed the additional trail referenced in the staff report, which to
him makes sense, and if they will add it to this project. Suel responded they reviewed it today
with their engineer who believes it can be done. After seeing the big picture, they also agree
that it makes sense and is a good addition to the development.
Khambata opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Khambata closed the public
hearing.
Frazier made a motion to approve the zoning amendment and preliminary plat for North-
wick Park, subject to the conditions in the staff report. Rasmussen seconded. Motion
passed unanimously (7 -to -0 vote).
6.5 Hoelscher Accessory Structure — Planning Case V2020-014
Mark and Kate Hoelscher have applied for a variance to allow a 40 -foot by 60 -foot accessory
structure to be constructed in front of the principal structure at 7903 113th Street South.
Boike stated that this application is being continued to the April 27, 2020, Planning Commission
meeting and asked for a formal vote on the continuation.
Khambata made a motion to continue Planning Case V2020-014 to the April 27, 2020,
Planning Commission meeting. Rasmussen seconded. Motion passed unanimously (7 -
to -0 vote).
Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of February 24, 2020
Wright made a motion to approve the minutes of the February 24, 2020, Planning Com-
mission meeting. Bigham seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6 -to -0 vote with one
abstention by Brittain).
Reports
8.1 Recap of March 2020 City Council Meetings
Boike welcomed Brittain to the Planning Commission, whose appointment was approved by
the City Council on March 4. He then provided a summary of actions taken at the City Council
meetings on March 4 and 18, 2020.
8.2 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries
None
8.3 Planning Commission Requests
Brittain asked if staff could put together guidelines regarding meeting laws and chat rules when
utilizing technology for virtual meetings.
Wright asked if there is any way to improve the audio from City Hall.
Planning Commission Minutes
March 23, 2020
Page 6 of 6
Annual Organizational Meeting
9.1 Adopt 2020 Planning Commission Rules
Khambata asked if there were any proposed changes to the 2020 Planning Commission Rules.
There were none.
Frazier made a motion to adopt the 2020 Planning Commission Rules. Wright seconded.
Motion passed unanimously (7 -to -0 vote).
9.2 Election of Officers
Khambata asked if there were any nominations for Vice Chair. Frazier nominated himself for
Vice Chair. Khambata seconded. Khambata asked if there were any other nominations. There
were none. Wright made a motion to elect Frazier as Vice Chair. Rasmussen seconded. Motion
passed on a 7 -to -0 vote.
Khambata asked if there were any nominations for Secretary. Rasmussen nominated himself
for Secretary. Frazier seconded the nomination. Khambata asked if there were any other nom-
inations. There were none. Motion passed on a 7 -to -0 vote.
Adjournment
Bigham made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Knable seconded. Motion passed unan-
imously (7 -to -0 vote). The meeting was adjourned at 8:14 p.m.