Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-05-23 PACKET 07.City of Cottage Grove Planning Commission April 25, 2022 A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at Cottage Grove City Hall, 12800 Ravine Parkway South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota, on Monday, April 25, 2022, in the Council Chamber and telecast on Local Government Cable Channel 16. Call to Order Chair Frazier called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Ken Brittain, Jessica Fisher, Evan Frazier, Eric Knable, Emily Stephens, Jerret Wright Members Absent: Derek Rasmussen (Excused) Staff Present: Christine Costello, Community Development Director; Mike Mrosla, Senior Planner; Emily Schmitz, Senior Planner; Ryan Burfeind, Public Works Director/ City Engineer; Joe Fox, Project Engineer; Dave Thiede, City Council Liaison; Jane Kansier, Bolton & Menk, Planning Consultant. Approval of Agenda Wright made a motion to approve the agenda. Fisher seconded. The motion was approved unanimously (6-to-0 vote). Open Forum Frazier opened the open forum and asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non -agenda item. Eleanor Clancy, 8063 113th Street, stated Mayor Bailey had said that a wall will be put up at Ideal Avenue and 105th Street to block out noise. She believes all those who live out there should have been able to vote on that because there are at least 130 families in that area. She asked what noise is anticipated, noting that she thought this was supposed to be mostly warehousing with no or very - light manufacturing. She then stated they are tearing out a lot of trees, noting that the pine trees on 100th Street, which are possibly spruce, could be transplanted and put to better use than just rip- ping them out of there and chopping them up. Frazier stated that staff had been taking notes and will contact her with a response to her questions. No one else spoke. Frazier closed the open forum. Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Frazier 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 Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 2 of 18 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. Frazier stated that those wishing to speak would have a time limit of three minutes. Public Hearings and Applications 6.1 Leafline Labs Addition — Cases SP2022-036 & CUP2022-037 ISG, on behalf of Leafline Labs, has applied for a conditional use permit and site plan review for an expansion to their facility located at 8235 97th Street South. The expansion would be a total of 137,440 square feet proposed over two phases and would include expanded grow- ing facility space at their current location. Schmitz summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stip- ulated in the staff report. Frazier opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Frazier closed the public hearing. Fisher stated that odor mitigation was mentioned in the report and asked if there had been an issue with that from this particular site and if it could become more of an issue with this expan- sion. Costello replied that initially the city wanted a baseline number. She explained that Leafline Labs frequently checks their odor levels with the system contained within their building and sends that information to the city biannually, so if there is a spike in that number, that is a red flag for staff. It is important to note that the city has never received a complaint about the odor from that site. Brittain made a motion to approve the site plan review and conditional use permit, sub- ject to the stipulations in the staff report. Knable seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6-to-0 vote). 6.2 Hemingway Industrial — Cases SP2022-039 & PP2022-040 Enclave Development has applied for site plan review of a proposed warehouse and distri- bution facility located at 97th Street and Hemingway Avenue. The proposed development will consist of two buildings with a combined total square footage of 240,000. They have also applied for a preliminary plat to be called Hemingway Industrial, which will create one industrial lot. Kansier summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stip- ulated in the staff report. Frazier asked if there was any discussion between staff and the applicant about fencing to pro- vide more screening and to also ensure people were not wandering onto the site from the resi- dential area. Mrosla replied that potential additional fencing along the west property line was discussed with the applicant; at that time, the applicant thought that the vegetation on the site, with the additional proposed landscaping, would be appropriate to address the screening so perimeter fencing would not be needed. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 3 of 18 Knable asked how far back from the tree line the truck parking would be. Kansier replied from the site plan shows 100 feet, but 125 feet is required, adding that she does not know the precise distance from the existing tree line. Fisher asked if the city knew what company was going into this building and what types of products would be distributed from there. Kansier replied that no specific users have been pro- posed to staff at this point, but the uses are warehousing and office. Brian Bochman, Enclave Development, said that they do not have any specific users yet, as it is early in the process; they just want to get the project started and then work on that. He ap- preciated the commission's time and said they are looking forward to being part of the Cottage Grove community. Frazier opened the public hearing. Troy Larson, 7699 110th Street South, expressed concern about more traffic problems with all of this development. He asked what the plan was to accommodate all of the truck traffic and these vehicles, which is a concern to all of us who live there. As Ms. Clancy said earlier, we were assured and promised that the new development was going to be quiet buildings and a quiet setting and now there is concern about noise. These plans are great, but if you cannot accommodate the roadway and the structures are not there, it is square peg, round hole. He asked how people will get in and out and what measures will make this better. There was a meeting held a couple weeks ago about the 100th Street development, which is not going to start for five years, so we are kind of putting the cart before the horse. It is either commercial or residential, and he does not see how it is going to accommodate everybody. Scott Tobin, 7751 110th Street South, said with all of this development, no one seems to have a plan for what is going in the NorthPoint development and the building on Highway 61 is sitting vacant. He asked if that was a concern to the City and shouldn't the city know what is going into the community, without just building all of these facilities at will? They want to invest, but do you consider what they are going to do with this property or what businesses are going in. He has not seen any information for any of these proposals yet. Dean Cranston, 7645 110th Street South, asked if there was going to be a Planning meeting for moving businesses into these buildings. No one else spoke. Frazier closed the public hearing. Frazier stated staff would address the concerns that were raised: Burfeind stated that traffic has been looked at with all of these projects and with the City's AUAR. Things are happening in the immediate area of 100th Street and Ideal Avenue, with improvements to those roads to handle the additional traffic. Right now, Jamaica Avenue is the main way in and out, especially for the truck traffic. That was looked at in great detail, and it is worse during shift change. NorthPoint has talked about doing different shift -change schedules because they know residents don't want everyone leaving the Business Park at the same time. There will be more traffic with develop- ment, but as it is at an interchange with a U.S. Highway, we have to look at the peak hour, which shows it still works. Delays will increase, but the emphasis for the future is the 100th Street extension. While it is still a few years out, the County has funded the preliminary design and both the City and County are actively working to get grant funding. It will continue to work, and Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 4 of 18 we're going to work with the businesses on scheduling and how traffic can continue to be miti- gated. The signal at 95th Street and Jamaica Avenue is very low on capacity right now; in the future, we will also be looking at a signal at Jamaica and 100th. There's a lot of planning, things will be changing, and the city will continue to watch that. Mrosla stated that many of these projects are speculative office warehouses, which means that they're looking for tenants. He noted that Capp Industries, on West Point Douglas Road, has tenants moving in shortly and staff is reviewing those applications. He then explained that whether or not a future tenant in those buildings would need to have a public hearing depends on what the businesses are. The zoning ordinance has a long list of what uses are permitted. If the use requires a conditional use permit, it will have to go through this same planning process. As long as the use meets requirements, it would not have to go through this process. The City also makes sure that there will be no undue consequences for projects located adjacent to residential properties. Mrosla noted that this is taking place not just in Cottage Grove, but all over the metropolitan area as there is a large demand for distribution centers. Much of this has to do with the supply -chain issues we're experiencing right now; many vendors want to store more product from overseas on site and distribute to their regional customers, such as Amazon opening distribution centers in many places to be closer to their customers. Stephens stated with semis backing in, she thought for the homeowners on the west property line the fence should be reconsidered; the vegetation might provide nice screening, but would not keep children off the property. Frazier stated regarding comments that were made, and to mirror Mrosla's comments, as a Planning Commission we deal with land use only; we don't necessarily deal with what goes on inside the building. There are certain uses that are permitted and not permitted; for the most part, if a use meets the zoning criteria, as long as the building plan meets the zoning codes, we don't have any control over what happens inside the building. This is Enclave's property; they get to do with it what they want as long as it meets the code that is set by the City. If they want to construct a building and try to find a tenant, they are more than welcome to do so. We can't change the rules after they bought the property. Based on the application before us and the recommendations from staff that they have met all the zoning codes, he doesn't see any reason for the Planning Commission to be able to deny this application. Brittain made a motion to approve the preliminary plat and site plan review, subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Fisher seconded. Motion passed unani- mously (6-to-0 vote). Frazier asked staff to make sure when this goes to the City Council that is the discussion about fencing is included and whether that is something that should be looked at again. 6.3 Ravine Crossing — Cases ZA2022-034 & PP2022-035 D.R. Horton has applied for a zoning amendment to rezone the property located on the northwest corner of Keats Avenue (CR19) and 90th Street from AG-1, Agricultural Preserva- tion, to R-4, Low Density Residential; and a preliminary plat to be called Ravine Crossing that will create 80 detached single-family homes and 4 outlots. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 5 of 18 Schmitz summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stip- ulated in the staff report. Mike Suel, D.R. Horton, stated they are happy to be back in Cottage Grove with another de- velopment, as this city is attractive to a lot of buyers. Their development team is here to answer any questions. Frazier opened the public hearing. Paul Gregory, 8590 Keats Avenue South, stated that his property is one lot north of this pro- posed plat. He had questions regarding utilities, traffic, and infringement on his lot. Currently, the Jorgensen drainage sewer does an open dump on his land; it then goes down through a ravine, under Keats Avenue, and into the park. He asked if this development is going to put more water through that open dump on his land. He also inquired about the plan for gas, electric, cable, and phone and if those lines would run under his driveway. He wants lots of notice if somebody is going to dig that up because he has no other way to get out, he would have to park on Jorgensen and walk through the woods. He wants to know if there are any upgrades to utilities and sidewalk along Keats, between 90th and 85th, for which he would be assessed. He doesn't want a cost to him for no benefit for this upgrade. Gregory also asked for more infor- mation about the traffic plan, such as if 90th and Keats would be a four-way stop, roundabout, or semaphore. If there is a roundabout, how would the bike trails route through it. He noted that Keats, north and south of 90th Street, does not have a lot of room for a sidewalk or a bike path due to steep drop offs. He asked what the plan was for Keats; particularly, 90th Street and Keats Avenue. What kind of notification and indemnification does he get if somebody rips up his drive- way? He realizes all of his questions will not be answered right now, but he wanted them on the record because presumably the plat will be approved. Kelle Zitzow, 8750 Keats Avenue South, stated she has the same questions about the utilities, as her property is currently on well and septic. She wonders about their driveway being ripped up and has traffic concerns about Keats because traffic is horrible in that section already. She understands that the traffic will be coming out on 90th Street, but there will be more traffic in that area. She wants some follow up on the same questions Mr. Gregory had, just to know the impacts on their property. The dead-end road goes right into her back yard so she is concerned with what that will look like and how that end will be set up. She also wonders about the elevation of the pond in conjunction with her property. Richard Vorwerk, 8731 Jorgensen Avenue South, stated his is the second house to the east of where Joliet Avenue stubs into this property. He was at the D.R. Horton neighborhood meeting. Currently, there are some signs at that stub road, and he asked if that would stay until the blacktop is in. He expressed concern that as soon as that is taken down, vehicles are going to use that road even if it is dirt. He hopes that could be done, as staff had said. His other question is about drainage along there that is supposed to come to the south and head east to the water retention area and he wants to make sure that it flows that way. Right now, the backs of our properties butt up to the farmland; the other day, with the hard rain, there was a pool back there. He just wants to make sure that it flows that way. His main concern is leaving those barriers up where the stub road comes in; if someone comes into that property, you are lost, because it's a one way in and a one way out. He noted that there will be a straight stretch, and it will be a racetrack through there and there are lot of little kids who play out there. The new development will have sidewalks, but theirs does not, and he would hate to see somebody get hurt. Frazier Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 6 of 18 asked Vorwerk if the signage he references is similar to barrier signage on the City Hall property that reads "Future Road Extension." Vorwerk replied there were two signs. He and his wife have lived there for 26 years; when they built their house, they were told within three -to -five years there would be houses behind them, but it has been 26 years. Vorwerk stated his other concern with leaving those barricades in is he wants to make sure that concrete and other truck traffic will come in off of 90th Street; last summer we just got our new roads put in after 26 years, and he'd really hate to see them get damaged. David Olson, 8627 Jorgensen Avenue South, stated he is in the same development and has the same concerns as his neighbors. He expressed concern about drainage. He commented about the meeting that he and Mr. Vorwerk attended and is glad that the City requires those meetings. Deb with D.R. Horton did a nice job of answering our questions and made us feel comfortable that your firm will be a good neighbor while construction takes place. Schmitz and another staff person also answered our questions. If you wonder if these neighborhood meet- ings are worthwhile, he would say they are not only worthwhile, but also essential, as it allowed them to get ready to offer comments here tonight. The application says very specifically that there will be no construction traffic on Joliet Avenue, and he stated that residents would coming up here to raise issues if that happens. He stated it looks like a really nice development and hopes we are able to solve these minor problems. It would be good to have some neighbors up there. No one else spoke. Frazier closed the public hearing. Frazier asked staff to answer some of the questions that were raised. Burfeind stated there is a ravine through the property with a storm sewer pipe that comes out from the Jorgensen Avenue neighborhood. There is an easement through that ravine to allow for that drainage, but this project does not have that; all of this water is routed to the south. The pond in the northeast corner actually sits down quite a bit lower than the adjacent grade, and it would drain to the south if it got high enough during big rain events. Regarding the back yard storm sewer that was adjacent to the existing homes, that actually sits lower, the new develop- ment's back yards sit a little bit lower, and then there is a storm sewer in the plans and that will route it all to that storm pond in the northeast corner. That was discussed at the neighborhood meeting. Burfeind stated that the barricade will be kept up until the streets are paved; once they are paved, they will be opened to allow plowing in the winter, and we want connectivity. Burfeind explained that Keats Avenue South is a County Road. The City had the County add 90th and Keats to the intersection analysis they do annually to track streets to determine if they meet certain warrants to have a roundabout or traffic signal. MnDOT won't let the County put in those improvements until an intersection meets those warrants. Currently this intersection is a bit lower on the list; they typically want an all -way stop, like the one at 80th Street. They are not typical on a County Road, so we really want a signal or a roundabout when we make the next improvement. At 80th and Keats, the County is looking at a roundabout there, and also at 90th and Keats, which is in their five-year CIP. Improvements are planned along that corridor, but they are also doing a planning study for the whole corridor of Keats Avenue in the coming years as there's more development. Burfeind then explained regarding the addition of private utilities, which would be in the County right-of-way, that driveways would not be ripped up as the utility installation is done by directional drilling under driveways. If there is something unusual, they would give notice, which is part of the County permit. Burfeind stated that the dead-end road stub is meant for future planning. There is no indication currently that anyone in that area is Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 7 of 18 planning to develop, but we know that along that area, even if it is 50 years from now, they will not be able to have direct public street access. The County wants it to go through those existing properties, so even if it is never used, it is just a good planning practice. They will stop short of the property, and there will be reflective barricades put up for safety. There will not be any work on the adjacent property at all. Frazier stated Gregory had brought up assessments for sidewalks along Keats, but since that is a County Road that should be in the County plan. Burfeind confirmed that and stated the County does not do assessments; their funding mechanisms are different from the City, so that typically would not be part of a project like this. He stated all infrastructure in this development will be paid for by the developer. Brittain asked Burfeind to speak about the turn lanes on 90th Street, and if there were any changes for this new development. Burfeind stated that currently there is not a lot of traffic on 90th Street, but it will grow with this new development. They are anticipating a left -turn lane into the development, but not a right -turn lane. We know this area will change a little bit when Ravine Parkway comes through, so we do not want to do something too prematurely, as it wouldn't be needed. We are looking at and working with the applicant on the 40 MPH speed limit. Costello stated there is a road on the west side as you come into the development at Joliet off 90th Street if that would ever develop. Burfeind stated if the property owners of that property were ever to sell for development, that road would provide connectivity between the two devel- opments. Connectivity between developments benefits area residents, school buses, plow trucks, and delivery vehicles allowing them to get from neighborhood to neighborhood. Council - member Thiede asked if that would be the only access onto 90th Street from this development and any future neighborhood to the west. Burfeind replied there actually would be one more planned connection on 90th Street in the future if additional properties develop. Fisher made a motion to approve the preliminary plat amendment, subject to the stipu- lations in the staff report. Wright seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6-to-0 vote). 6.4 Preserve at Prairie Dunes — Cases ZA2022-027, PP2022-028, & CP2022-031 Summergate Development has applied for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to redesig- nate the future land use of property generally located south and west of the proposed Cottage Grove Logistics Park development and east of the Scientific Natural Area from In- dustrial to Medium Density Residential; and a zoning amendment to change the zoning from AG-2, Agricultural, to R-4, Low Density Residential, with a PUD, Planned Unit Development. Summergate also applied for a preliminary plat to be called the Preserve at Prairie Dunes that will create 161 single-family residential lots and 9 outlots. Mrosla summarized the staff report, noted the minor Comprehensive Plan Amendment needs to be reviewed and approved by the Metropolitan Council, and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Brittain asked on the trail plan if there was any thought about extending the recreation trail all the way to the proposed park along the west side of the properties; it would seem that you would not have to go anywhere near a road to get from the SNA to the park. Mrosla replied that they Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 8 of 18 had that conversation with the applicant, so he'd let the applicant address why they decided not to do that. Knable asked if the DNR had been contacted about houses backing up to the SNA. Mrosla replied that they had a preliminary meeting with the DNR, and at that time, the DNR did not want any direct connections to the SNA and wanted to see as many trees preserved along the property line as possible. The plans have been provided to the DNR, and the city has not re- ceived any additional comments. The applicant is preserving a significant number of trees adjacent to the SNA, as requested by the DNR, and on the trail corridor to act as a buffer. Stephens asked about ensuring all those trees being preserved on the west side stay alive. Mrosla responded that that they are in our easement and not located on an individual property owner's land. The majority of the ones adjacent to the SNA would be on City property and dedicated as part of the final plat process. Frazier opened the public hearing. Brian Tucker, Summergate Development, stated they are a residential land developer and have developed the Summers Landing and also Parkview Pointe projects in Cottage Grove. Their civil engineer for this project is Christian Froemke, with Westwood, who can address any de- tailed questions related to infrastructure. They have done several iterations of their design; what is proposed this evening is a result of coordination with City staff over the proposed road im- provements to provide access to this site and others in the area. They appreciate their leader- ship and help in navigating that process. The housing product will be similar to the Summers Landing project, with some villa -type homes on the north end and more traditional single-family homes to the south. He stated that they have read through the recommended conditions of approval, understand them, and have no issues with them. Regarding the trail extension along the northern lots, they looked at that from a stormwater design standpoint, and found they needed to identify some areas in rear yards for infiltration. They had to provide a facility like that along the back of these lots, and it took up a lot of the space where they otherwise might have placed a trail. Otherwise, the north side gets a little constricted just because there is a powerline easement along the east side, which kind of forces everything to the west from a layout stand- point. That was evaluated, but it was just going to be a little bit too tight to fit through there. With the trees along the west property line, typically trail construction is fairly low impact and does not impact roots like other types of construction, so they are pretty confident that those will not be hindered. Of course, they are required to put up silt fence to make sure the trees are not get impacted during grading. Frazier stated that some of the homes proposed have 50-foot-wide lots. When we previously had 50-foot lots come before us, the Commission was not excited about how small they are, but have been told there is a market for them from a sales point of view. He asked if that is what they were also finding. Tucker replied yes, and they expect a builder for this area might utilize a very similar product to what is being built in Settlers Bluff. Jean Koecher, 7521 110th Street South, stated her property is at the bottom of the point, right across the street from the development. She had asked if there would be no access in that point that comes down to 110th Street and was told not as part of this application. She stated that she had heard the roads would start being constructed in 2022 and the houses in 2023, which was confirmed for her. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 9 of 18 Troy Larson, 7699 110th Street South, stated he also lives near the southern point. He noted that the SNA is preserved land, and with this proposal it is being encroached on with a lot of property, homes, and people. He asked if that was being addressed; does the DNR have a period of time to respond, and if they do not respond, then it goes forward. Secondly, it was his understanding that that was Marathon Oil land, and there has been contamination, as well as the farmland. He wondered if anybody had addressed the nitrates and the contamination be- cause they have all been dealing with that for years and are now forced to use City water; with that being said, is that no longer a concern? Were soil samples taken? They are going to build homes, and he is concerned. Marathon Oil land is now the DNR land, and there were barrels found and oil was dumped in that area; he is just curious if those issues have been addressed. Regarding the wildlife, they are out of sorts and going crazy out there. The deer are herded up, 20 to 30 deer are running into fences; all of this construction is absolutely changing the land- scape for the wildlife. There will be another meeting for Mississippi Dunes, which will also encroach upon the wildlife. We live there, so we see it and we deal with it. Dean Cranston, 7645 110th Street South, stated he also lives near that point. He asked if there was going to be a lot of construction traffic on 110th Street. David Olson, 8627 Jorgensen Avenue South, stated that this SNA, to the west of the develop- ment, is really important to us, and we still own that. So, we are really counting on you to do your part to help keep that as pristine as possible. We had to take Marathon Oil to court to get it, we had to clean it up, and several of us volunteer to go down there and pull seeds and things like that to help preserve this very special place. The Dunes Landing was mentioned; we do not get to keep Dunes Landing, except for right along the riverfront. So, his message to them as a citizen of Cottage Grove and representative of Cottage Grove, is this is our SNA, and we want it protected. We want those trees to live, we need that buffer, so we are counting on you. Scott Meyer, 7641 113th Street South, stated it is a continuing theme, but with this development and the next agenda item tonight, another development, it conservatively will bring 1,000 vehi- cles a day, coming through either Hadley Avenue or Jamaica Avenue. Again, Jamaica has not been addressed, and we cannot ignore it. Lyle Bergman, 9908 Hamlet Court South, stated he lives in the Pine Glen Villas HOA, which they borderjust north of 100th Street. He asked what the future land use will be for where 100th Street currently is; he knows that it is slated to get torn up, but he asked if that would remain as green space or if it would be developed at some future point. Just to add to everybody else's comments, with all of the development that is currently proposed, it is starting to feel a little overwhelming with the sheer magnitude of it. If he could have any input at all on the use of Outlots A, B, and C up there, it would be to preserve some part of it to keep as green space, maybe additional park space. In his particular association, there are a lot of kids, but there is not a lot of space for them. The nearest park is still a little bit far away for them, and with the proposed park, they would still have to cross two major roads to get to it. He felt Outlot A would be a perfect spot to preserve as green space, not just for his particular neighborhood, but also for the Settlers Bluff development that is currently being constructed and even the Mississippi Dunes development. It would be a good central location for all of them. No one else spoke. Frazier closed the public hearing. Frazier asked staff to address questions and concerns expressed during the public hearing: Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 10 of 18 Burfeind addressed the questions on construction, traffic, and contamination. Regarding groundwater contamination, this property will be on City water so there is no concern with what is in the groundwater; there are definitely PFAS in this area, as everyone is well aware, but the City has treatment plants in place to remove PFAS from our wells. The construction itself also won't be getting down deep enough to be in groundwater to have any impact with it from the construction activity. Regarding construction traffic for this development, once 105th Street is complete, that will be the main way in and out; in the interim, they are working with the land- owner to the north to have an access road across the undeveloped property, next to NorthPoint, to go out to 100th Street. Larson stated that he was speaking of soil contamination, not water contamination. Burfeind stated that there have never been concerns raised with this specific property in terms of the soil. Frazier asked Larson to please not yell out from the crowd. Burfeind stated regarding the actual traffic in the area, it was previously stated that there are both indus- trial and housing there, and it should all be the same. Actually, when you have the same use for everything, that is the worst thing you can have for traffic because it is all competing at the same time. Right now, the Jamaica intersections on the south side have little residential traffic; it is the shift change, before 7.00 a.m. and around 3.00 p.m., is when the traffic can back up. For residential use, leaving town to go to work or somewhere else in town, it is usually 7.30 to 8.30 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. hour, so it is really not competing traffic; they are coming into the Business Park and residential traffic is leaving. It is a noncompeting traffic flow, which is actually better. Regarding the soil contamination, there was an environmental study done with the AUAR, and there has not been a concern raised. Certainly, it is next door, which is why the State owns that; if that were the case here, he is sure the SNA would be larger. This is really agricultural land from that time, very sandy, good soil. Mrosla stated regarding the Comprehensive Plan and future land use of the future development parcels, they are all currently guided for medium density. The outlots currently planned for this northwestern parcel are not being developed at this time but are currently guided medium den- sity and industrial. However, we see more of a medium density use on those parcels long term, but it all depends on who buys those parcels. The property owner is going to be reaching out to different users, so it could be townhouses or multifamily; it all has to fit within the density that is required, 5-to-13 units per acre. He cannot tell anyone today what it is going to be in the future, but it is guided for residential use. There is a portion that is currently guided industrial, but most industrial uses do not like non -rectangular pieces; in the future, it could be re -guided as the roadway alignment comes through. In the event an application comes forward, there will be a neighborhood meeting, Planning Commission, and City Council approval. One of those outlots could also be used for future stormwater ponding; it all depends on the proposed uses on those parcels. At this time, our 2040 Land Use Plan has it all guided as medium density. Frazier asked if the Outlots on the property, currently used as green space, would be used for stormwater ponding basins. Mrosla responded yes, noting there was discussion that if a user comes in, those sites are uniquely shaped, and there could be an opportunity to use one of the outlots entirely for stormwater ponding and also for the roadway realignment. However, that due diligence has not yet been completed. In the event development occurs, it will go through the entire process, and a neighborhood meeting will take place to ensure that everyone is informed about the proposed development or land use. Frazier asked about the DNR and their right to provide information or provide a request to the City about the application. Mrosla stated the City and the applicant both worked closely with the DNR on this application, as it is adjacent to their property; the applicant addressed many of their Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 11 of 18 mitigation concerns by retaining the tree line along the property and along the trail. They have the same 10-day protocol as most adjacent cities; however, we notified them sooner. The ap- plication was received in March, and we provided it to the DNR on March 13; we have not yet received comment from them. Generally, if they have comments, they will provide them within that period. The DNR will also be notified when this goes to the City Council. Mrosla stated regarding concerns about environmental contamination, the city is aware of what is happened in the vicinity. A Phase I Environmental Study was done and had additional soil borings above and beyond what is typical because we are aware of the surrounding conditions. The Phase I Study identified the adjacent property as having had previous issues, but none were identified on this site; otherwise, we also would not want to proceed. Mrosla stated that he read the history of the SNA and how much work had gone into preserving it; the city sees it as an asset, so we want to maintain the tree buffer that provides value to the lots. There are certainly restrictions on stormwater runoff so it won't impact adjacent property; we want to keep it as pristine as we can because it is a community asset. Brittain made a motion to approve the comprehensive plan amendment, zoning amend- ment, and preliminary plat, subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report, along with the revised conditions recommended by staff. Stephens seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6-to-0 vote). 6.5 Graymont Village — Cases ZA2022-032 & PP2022-033 US Home, LLC (Lennar) has applied for a zoning amendment to rezone property located west of Ideal Avenue and south of the planned 105th Street extension from AG-2, Agricul- tural, to R-4, Low Density Residential, with a PUD, Planned Unit Development; and a prelim- inary plat to be called Graymont Village that will consist of 207 lots for single-family homes and 6 outlots. Mrosla summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stip- ulated in the staff report. Frazier stated on the previous application, Preserve at Prairie Dunes, there was also a PUD on that property; the tradeoff was that we were getting quite an extensive trail system that was going to connect from the SNA area and go all the way up to what is going to be a City park. He asked what the PUD was offering the City as part of this application. Mrosla replied the applicant is proposing to do increased landscaping along the northern property, adjacent to the NorthPoint development. Also, for this trail connection, there is a lot of landscaping proposed as part of this project, as a return for the flexibility for the denser product on the north side. Frazier confirmed with Mrosla that the proposed landscaping is above the required landscaping that staff noted was probably too much for some of these smaller lots. Mrosla also noted there are some berms in this general area, which will assist in screening. Fisher wanted to know from the builder why the lots were getting smaller and what demand they are actually seeing for those. She also asked what the price point would be. Stephens asked to have PUD flexibility explained. Mrosla responded that a Planned Unit De- velopment is a tool used by City planners. In return for providing flexibility, the City receives Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 12 of 18 something from the developer. Some developers have a hard time meeting some codes, which were done decades before, and current building practices no longer build to those standards. A PUD allows for some flexibility there, and it is more of a give and take. A PUD is a very useful tool to provide flexibility without a variance. Stephens clarified that a PUD helps avoid multiple variances on one project to come up with a plan that works for the City and for the developer. Mrosla confirmed that, noting it is more of a negotiation tactic. With a variance, you have to have undue hardship. However, developers need to have findings that support the PUD, same as with a variance. Brittain noted years ago there were 80-foot lots; now they're getting smaller and smaller, down to 75, 50, and 45. He would have a significant concern if there was a zoning district that had 45-foot lots. There are a lot of challenges with lots that small. However, with the PUD and the flexibility that it gives the City, a development large enough to incorporate diversity from 65-foot to 45-foot lots, there is the possibility of having City oversight without having so many rules to get it accomplished. From his perspective, the PUD gives the City the ability to take a project and make sure that it is done in such a way that it benefits the community, as well as the home- owners that are going to live there. Mrosla stated that was very well said. He added that the PUD flexibility on this project was to see a denser project adjacent to NorthPoint. A planned plat with a denser product next to a more -intense use is frequently seen throughout the metro area. As you get away from the more intense use, the density decreases. We heard there was not a demand for townhouses here; so, this fits in between. It is not medium density, it is not town- houses, but it fits that niche and hits the guide that we want to see to separate the uses. Frazier added since being on the Commission, he's seen PUDs used to provide for more landscaping, as in this case, or a higher -class of materials on the building, so they're used for many different things. He asked if that was correct. Mrosla confirmed it was. Paul Tabone, of Lennar Homes, stated he would respond to the question about why the lots and the home sizes are getting smaller. There is really just one factor driving it, and that's cost. The average cost now to build or buy a home is pushing $400,000-1 he thinks it's over $400,000 nationally. Tabone stated he was here when they built Calarosa; the Liberty townhomes that are now being built in Calarosa are starting in the mid -to -high $300,000 range; starting price is about $370,000. Rather than putting in more townhomes and trying to keep with the same plan- ning pattern with a denser development, they came up with a product, which is a single-family home on a narrow/small lot. Two main benefits are 1) No HOA, which saves the buyer $200- $250 or more every month; 2) No shared wall, which gives privacy for the homeowner. Price and overall demand are what is driving this, newlyweds, young families, and first-time home - buyers are having trouble getting into a two-story, three -car garage home, with 2,800-3,500 square -feet, four beds, and two baths. Those start at $500,000-$600,000 and up. If we can come down the curve a little bit and deliver something that is still a really good value, what we are doing is saving on development costs because it is a smaller lot and land costs, which they have a little bit of control. We do not have as much control over construction cost, labor costs, material costs, and supply chain. There are many variables that go into it, but that is why they proposed this. On this project, there's demand for a single-family detached home that is more attainable; someone can move to Cottage Grove, and as they're ready to buy that bigger home on a bigger lot, they can live here and have some true lifecycle housing, without having to start off in a townhome. Frazier opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 13 of 18 Troy Larson, 7699 110th Street South, stated he lives at the bottom where there is a proposed connection. Nobody wants that road connected; it's a dead-end road, dead-end cul-de-sac, the DNR doesn't even want access to it. For all of the homeowners who live there, you are talking about first-time homebuyer homes; does that devalue our property? We don't want the traffic, it's a dead-end road; we were promised through two road projects that this road was going to be sufficient, and it wasn't going to need curb and gutter, it wasn't going to need to be widened. Now you are going to potentially connect with these two developments, over 300 homes. He realizes many will go the other way, they will go north, but anybody in this development, rather than going through residential neighborhoods to get out, they are going to take the shortcut of 110th to Ideal to Jamaica. So, our increased traffic is huge; it changes the whole landscape of the properties that we own out here. We moved out here to have property and freedom, and now we are being crowded, if you will, which he cannot control as he doesn't own the land, nobody can. But our question is if there is a way to route this differently, where it does not need to connect to 110th Street. Ultimately, as it stands now, 110th Street is not capable of that kind of traffic, so you are going to need to do something with the road. Bringing sewer here, are we going to be assessed for sewer, water, curb, and gutter? Is he going to lose property on the south side because you put the fire hydrants right up onto the north side, so the only way you can expand the road is to the south? These are valid concerns; ultimately, it affects his property value, it affects his tax base, it affects a lot of things that concern him. He hears all of these exceptions that you want to make for smaller lots for builders, and they can justify it however they want; ultimately, it is more revenue for them, they can put more homes in a tighter space. It's that simple, it's economics. Through this process everything seems to get approved, he is being frank. As homeowners, we would like a simple exception to not connect the road. We can't control it, if it all needs to go to the north, he realizes there's access, he realizes there's school buses; all of that, though, is more reason not to connect the road. Ultimately, there are 300 homes, two cars per house, deliveries, school buses, police, fire, you name it. It is going to be nothing but a wide open City street now. Change is inevitable, but we are homeowners who have been here, have been taxpayers, and were promised that this road project would not hap- pen. He said he will probably be assessed if you have to do something on the road; living there is valuable to him. He would hope we'd get some exception at some point versus it always going to the developer because they're trying to do good by creating single-family homes. That's great, but right now the economy is inflated; we all know it. What happens in five years when these single-family homes, which have no housing authority to regulate them, what happens when they start devaluing the property. What does that do to the whole neighborhood? What if the economy crashes? There are variables here that need to be considered. Connie House, 8234 110th Street South, stated regarding Jamaica Avenue, you are bringing in 1,200 cars and trucks with that southern warehouse deal. She heard rumors Andersen is think- ing of expanding. There are possibly 600 cars, another 150 from the Leafline Company tonight; there is so much more traffic, and you say that you've been to Jamaica at rush hour going home and coming in the morning. We live there, we know Jamaica cannot handle all of this traffic. How are we getting in and out? You don't live there. She has come home from work sometimes, and is backed up onto Highway 61 trying to exit to go around the roundabout; you're talking about adding almost 2,000 more cars a day. There is no way it can handle that. Scott Tobin, 7751 110th Street South, said he lives next to Troy Larson. We moved to our current home a little over two years ago; we looked at the lot and we looked at some of the zoning and thought we were safe. Shame on me. His question is what will this do to 110th Street? His house is probably one of the closest to 110th Street, as most of them have a pretty Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 14 of 18 big offset; his house is approximately 60 feet from the street. If we move gutters and sewer, etc., he is guessing his house goes away; he is just asking if the builder could possibly recon- sider a cul-de-sac on that end or something similar. We moved there for a purpose, we moved to Cottage Grove because we kind of liked the community, liked what it stood for, but in his perspective, that seemed to change since he moved here. That is disappointing, but he under- stands that's progress. He is just asking if there is anything that can be done or if there is a possibility of not doing anything with 110th Street. If there are 300-to-400 houses being built, 110th Street, which is straight as an arrow, is going to be a throughway. He moved there be- cause he has grandkids, dogs, pets; he moved there for a reason. He did not want to live on a busy street. He knows it is emotional and personal, but he is asking that the City at least con- sider that. He also asked that the City look at things and try to figure out what their identity is; do we want to be another Woodbury? Just build houses after houses without consideration. He's just asking. He thanked them for their time. Dean Cranston, 7645 110th Street South, stated regarding traffic on Jamaica Avenue, he has sat almost all the way on Highway 61 when coming home, waiting to get onto Jamaica. He has also sat almost to the stoplight at 95th Street to try to get out of there at 3.00 p.m. Everybody does not work a day job; he worked shift work for four years, though he does not do that now. He moved out to Cottage Grove because it was very low density, and he'd like to see it stay low density in the area where he's at; that's why he moved there in 1976. As far as he is concerned, traffic has gotten nuts on 100th Street and especially on Jamaica Avenue. He would like to know what the standards are for traffic on a road the size of Jamaica; he keeps hearing studies have been done that say it is fine, but he doesn't know what they're basing this against. You are not giving me any data; all you're giving me is spin. Jean Koecher, 7521 110th Street, said we live at that dead end, and have lived there for more than 33 years. She has always questioned why we had one road out; we only had Ideal Avenue, and there is 115th Street, there is 113th Street, there is 110th Street, but we've always only had one way out. So now she is really questioning how are we all going to get out? So, does 105th Street go out to Ideal and then come in and hook up to Hadley? We still will go up 110th Street with all of these people, whoever decides to come out this end, and then those people will come out 105th, and we still just have Ideal then, unless some people go out Hadley. And we know what we hear about Hadley, it is 30 MPH, there is way too much traffic because that is right through residential, so it's not a good option either. She is really concerned about all the traffic. She also asked if these houses would start being built in 2023, like the other development? Clint Larson, 7624 110th Street South, said he is with everybody else on the traffic coming down 110th Street; it was a dead end, it was nice, but he also goes back to that he bought the house knowing there might be a development behind him. With that, Amendment 2018-163 says that future subdivision of the parent parcel shall require the two -acre parcel to abandon the 110th Street access and new roadway created as part of the future adjacent land development. So, basically, he is saying that his driveway should connect to the new neighborhood. Thomas Hunter, 8235 River Acres Road South, said he would like that we at least stick to the R-4 standards, not allow them to reduce the lot sizes more. He also wonders why Cottage Grove constantly looks for the lowest common denominator on any development. If we want diversified building, why don't we go the other way? Why don't we look for the 1.5-to-2 acre lots? No one else spoke. Frazier closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 15 of 18 Burfeind stated he has spoken a lot about Jamaica tonight, but the question was asked about the specific numbers on Jamaica Avenue. Jamaica Avenue, north of 95th Street, is just under 10,000 cars a day. It is a four -lane divided section that is designed to handle up to 25,000 to 30,000 cars a day; 80th Street has 25,000 cars a day in the Hy-Vee area. Woodbury has some roads that are up to 30,000 cars a day. So, Jamaica is actually under its capacity. It is the peak traffic times with shift changes that have many cars at the same time. South of 95th Street, there are 3,200 cars a day; that is an undivided four -lane road designed for about 20,000 cars a day. We track those very closely every other year with MnDOT; for what they are designed for, it is low, and the numbers show that. Certainly, with NorthPoint and other developments, there will be change; for traffic with this application, it is not competing with that NorthPoint traffic. He provided other options including 105th Street will go from Ideal Avenue over to the roundabout, as mentioned; that was a requirement with this development. We held firm that there needed to be a second way out for this housing, which obviously comes with a cost; those were the as- sessments that were mentioned, but they are not assessments to individual property owners. The landowners who are selling these large pieces of land for development are actually paying for Hadley Avenue. It was mentioned the City is going to build it, but the landowners are actually paying for that, which is the secondary way out that will be bid in May and awarded in June. There was a lot of discussion about 110th Street at the neighborhood meeting. Some cars may go that way, but if you look at the road going north, it is a straight road and connects to 105th Street; 110th Street is a 30 MPH road, and 105th Street will have a higher speed limit. The distances are the same, if not shorter, going this way, as the developer is actually going to build from north to south to develop those traffic patterns, so, to start with, the only way out will be to 105th Street. Drivers are creatures of the shortest distance, so to go south and then go east to go back north is just simply not the shortest distance. He would be surprised if there were a large number of cars going south. However, 110th Street is built for this; the State fully paid to redo that road in 2020. It is a nine -ton new road standard, with no cost to the neighborhood because there were assessments in 2009 and 2011; the City fought the State on assessing the neighborhood for the road. There are no plans to widen that road or change that road in any way. With sewer being brought into the residential development, there are no assessments to the neighborhood; the only time single-family homes are assessed for sewer is if they actually connect, and they have to petition to connect. Cottage Grove does not have any standards that force or require a sewer connection onto existing properties. Brittain asked Burfeind about having access on 110th Street. He believed that was due to fire safety; he asked him to expand about having to have the secondary access, why it is important, and why we can't just not have it. Burfeind stated that is correct; any development with a certain number of units needs a second access point. There will be other street connections into the neighborhood to the west, but that cannot be relied on as the city does not control what happens with these development projects. Also, this provides another second connection for the existing homes to provide another way in and out of the area south of 105th Street. It is also needed for services such as school buses, mail delivery, plow trucks, and UPS, and traffic that needs to go down 110th. Frazier asked if there was a public safety reason or if it was their request to have a secondary access for police, fire, and EMS. Burfeind replied yes, it is necessary for public safety. Stephens stated with all of the traffic concerns, she asked Burfeind to comment on traffic counts; she thought county roads were done every two years, but when she hears 2,000 cars a day, she has no idea what that means. She asked if there was any way to compare if there was a traffic study done with the AUAR, what it had planned for, and how it compares with traffic today Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 16 of 18 on some of those roads. She asked if there are any tangible numbers for residents and Com- missioners to understand things. Burfeind provided comparisons with existing roads, noting that Jamaica Avenue, from 100th Street to 95th Street, is 3,200 cars a day, which is about what there is on Indian Boulevard up by Cottage Grove Middle School and on Hillside Trail; both of those roads are neighborhood collectors. He noted there is actually more traffic on those streets than on Jamaica, which is a four -lane road. When we talk about ultimate capacities of 20,000 or 30,000 cars a day, it is not saying it will get to that level fully built out. The City, through our Comprehensive Plan, will look closely at those traffic numbers over the next 20 to 30 years. The other key part, in a much -sooner timeframe, is the 100th Street connection; it is the City's and Washington County's number one transportation initiative for our area to provide a second ac- cess to Highway 61. Even though the traffic studies show that the traffic will go up and will continue to function, we want to alleviate future traffic issues. The County is spending $600,000 this year on the preliminary design and both the City and County have gone through lots of funding mechanisms this spring to bring that project to fruition. Mrosla responded to the question about why there aren't lots of one acre or more, explaining that it goes back to the guiding document, the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area as low density, which allows for two -to -four units per acre. It does not include a density lower than two units per acre in this general area; there are areas in other parts of the town that offer that density. He then stated the traffic information that Burfeind presented is available for anyone to view on MnDOT's website under traffic counts. Fisher stated she had not realized that the City lobbied so hard for the residents of 110th Street to avoid that second assessment; she commended staff on that. It was awesome that they protected our residents from having a double whammy with the assessments because nobody likes to pay those. Frazier stated it has been a long meeting tonight, nobody is going to come away happy from this meeting, and he understands that. Unfortunately, that is just how these things work. If this is the first time you have been to a Planning Commission meeting, this is not the first time that someone has walked away unhappy with how things are going to happen. There are rules and laws that the Commission has to abide by; the government is constricted by what we are allowed to tell a private landowner they are supposed to do with their property. If the property owner wants to throw up a bunch of houses and put them up for sale and they can't sell them because the economy crashes, that's their right. It's private property, just like your house is on private property; the government can't come in and tell you what to do with it unless there's a law already in place. Like the prior applications, if it meets the requirements of the City, if it meets the ordinances that are in place at the time they make the application, there is no ability for us to say we don't like it, that we don't think this should be the right result. We are a country of laws that protect private property, and as a government agency, we cannot come in and say we don't like what you're doing, so stop it. He hopes residents will continue to work with the City and provide feedback about what is going on down there if there are problems. Our staff is excellent, and they take care of issues when they arise. He hopes that is what is going to happen, but the application before us meets the requirements of our ordinances, and we should recommend that the City Council approve. Fisher made a motion to approve the zoning amendment and preliminary plat, subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Wright seconded. Motion passed unani- mously (6-to-0 vote). Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 17 of 18 Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of March 28, 2022 Knable made a motion to approve the minutes of the March 28, 2022, Planning Commis- sion meeting. Wright seconded. Motion passed unanimously (6-to-0 vote). Reports 8.1 Recap of April 2022 City Council Meetings Costello provided a summary of actions taken at the April 6 and April 20, 2022, City Council meetings. Council Member Thiede stated that Council will meet this Wednesday to continue reviewing changes to the City Code. He also noted the Council amended the chicken and duck ordinance and the food truck ordinance. He told everyone not to forget about Strawberry Fest. 8.2 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries EMCF Ordinance Requirements Costello stated that Brittain had previously asked about what is termed as electromagnetic com- munication facilities, also known as cell towers or communication towers. That section of the ordinance had not been revised in 26 years; as Council Member Thiede mentioned, she and the planners are currently going through an update process of our zoning ordinance. The current Code does not really get into a lot of depth, other than those need to be screened from the right- of-way. In conversations we have had with telecommunications companies, their equipment is getting smaller, so many of those buildings are becoming vacant, resulting in structures that are not really needed. The city has found making sure equipment is screened, well maintained, and the color matches the existing facility or the tower itself has worked to date. Brittain stated he appreciated them looking into that. He suggested if there is one control panel sitting on the side of the water tower, nobody is going to notice it, but if there are more because AT&T, Verizon, and other companies want one, that might be a bigger concern. When buildings were used, there could have been one building with a partition in it for multiple companies' equipment. He noted that at 70th Street and Hinton Avenue, there is the substation sitting there. This is a little bit out of scope for this, but there is a lot of exposed equipment. His concern is that the areas around communications infrastructure could end up with looking like that with multiple companies sharing towers. They are all going to want their own equipment and asked how that would be managed. Color coordination makes sense, but he wants us to put some forethought into how that would be organized. Costello stated staff would prefer it inside a build- ing. We have also run into situations where each company wants their own structure as they do not want to share potential secrets, which is when you see multiple buildings. As staff reviews our zoning ordinance, we are looking at what other communities are doing so we can tighten that up moving forward. 8.3 Planning Commission Requests None. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 2022 Page 18 of 18 Adjournment Wright made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Fisher seconded. Motion passed unani- mously (6-to-0 vote). The meeting was adjourned at 9:34 p.m.