Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-05-06 PACKET 04.A.II.�3EQUEST OF CIIY COUtVCIL ,4CTiORI COUNCIL AGENDA flnEETING 17EN{ # y � ' DAl'E 5/6/98 � • 1�. CG PREPP,RE� BY: Community Developrerent Kim Lindquis4 QRIGIIV,4TING DEPAF2TMENT STfLFF AUTF�OR �«.�....tr����.�...���.4R.«�.k�«.«.���..a.k...�.. • � • � � Receive and piace on file the approved minu#es ffor the Planning Commission's meetings on February 23, 1998, and fYlarch 23, 1998. : � • � • > : � � • �r i- • r � •: ■ ' . ■' � ■ ' : •' ■ ' � •' ■ ■ •; • • ,' ■ -• r� � � i� i� ■ • +� • .� i3�1� REVIEWED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ , ,' APPROVED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DENIED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • - � 1• � # s� • � • • • • -• .•� � .•� .� .. �. �, .— dCtiG� C�� 7 ��� %( �' � � ---------'�� City AdrninisYratar D�te �,����g����4«�..��A����tr�:���<�����a�g�.�.�.�d�. CC)IJRICIL ACl°BCBt� °T�6��P1: ❑ �PF'FTOV�CB [�] C9�NI�C3 [� ()l"t-IEF2 F:\GR6L1P5'�PLANN%NG\flS98\CI"IY"COUhT�,?rt FC Minu4es.da� City of Cottage Grove Planning Commission February 23, 1998 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 February 1998, in the Council Chamber. Call to Order Chairperson Auge calied the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. � Members Present: Members Absent: Staff Present: Approval of Agenda Jon Auge, Ken Boyden, Philip Foster, Abigail Grenfell, Herb Japs, Glen Kleven, Jeff Podoll, Pat Rice Glen Brown Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director John Burbank, Associate Planner Gien Kteven moved to app�ove fhe agenda as submitted. Herb Japs seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Open Forum Chairpersoe� Auge asked if a�yone w+ished to address the Planning Corimissic,r� on any non-agenda item. No one spoke. Chair's Exptanation of the Public Hearing Process Chairperson Auge 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 come to the microphone and state their full name and address for the public record. Public Hearings 6.1) CASE RS97-55 Pianning Commission Minutes Monday, February 23, 1998 Page 2 Thomas W. Newcome, 111, has appiied for a rural subdivision to create a 14.8-acre and a 25.2acre parcel from a 40-acre tract of land. The property is located at 10870 Grey Cloud Isiand Drive. John Burbank summarized the staff report and recommended approval of the proposal subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Auge opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant wished to address the Planning Commission. Thomas Newcome, III, 800 Norwest Center, St. Paul, attomey for the property owner, Betty Kartarik, offered to answer questions and stated that they have no trouble with the conditions. There were no questions for Mr. Newcome from the Commission. Harvey Stiefel, 10811 Grey Cloud Isiand Drive, asked about the accuracy of the legal description. Burbank explained that the legal description was prepared by registered land surveyors. Lindquist stated that the legal description does not inciude ail the property that Ms. Kartarik owns; there is additional property that is not a part of this action. Tom Newcome ciarified that they had done a title search and the property that is being divided is owned by Betty Kartarik. She owns other property that is not being divided at this time. Boyden asked if Stiafel's property abuts the Kartarik property that is being divided. Newcome responded that he didn't know who owns the abutting property. Auge asked if anyone e/se wished to comment. Being none, he c%sed the public hea�ing. Grenfell asked about protecting the Indian burial mounds in Parcel B. Burbank answered that the sites are protected by State and Federal regulations as well as City ordinances. The burial mounds have �een �dentified by registere� lan� �urvey ard tFre County is working with Mr. Vogel to protect the sites. Vogei stated that there are no property-specific restrictions but state faw and city code treat them as a human cemetery. Under state law, it is a felony to disturb one. Newcome stated that the County has agreed to write a letter indicating that it is their intent to preserve these Indian mounds. Grenfell would like to have a letter on file so there is no future misunderstanding. Newcome will send a letter to keep on file. Boyden asked if there were any burial mounds on Parcel A. Newcome stated that there are no mounds on Parcel A. Vogel stated that there has never been a search on that parcel but there probabiy aren't any. Japs moved to approve the applicafion with the five recommendations. 1a A park fee, in leeu of land dedicat�on, sha// be paid before final approval fs auvarded by the Cify. Thes fee sha!/ 6e 51,000 as esfablished in the City Subdivision ordinance. Planning Commission Minutes Monday, February 23, 1998 Page 3 2. The Parcel "A" sha// be combined with the "E�cception 1" lot (P/N 30.027-21-33- 0002) owned by Betty Kartarik. The parcel shall be recorded with Washington County as one t�ing parcel. 3. The applicant dedicate a right of way easement for Grey C/oud /s/and Drive Soulh and Grey Cioud Trail Soufh prior to recording of the /ot division. 4. There must be continued preservation of the lndian buria/ mounds in Parcel u� 5. Al! unpaid assessments on the property shali be paid in full or reapportioned, prior to recording of the new parce/s. Grenfeil asked if a condition shouid be attached to ensure that the applicant forwards the letter from the County. Auge answered that the request is on record and doesn't need to be a condition. Newcome would prefer that it wouid not be a condition but he ensures that it will be sent. This was accepted as part of the record. Foster seconded the motion. There was no iurfher discussion. The motion was passed unanimously. 6.2) CASE CUP98-03 Sprint Spectrum has applied for a conditional use permit ta allow the construction of a 120-foot high electromagnetic communication facility and to construct a 15-foot by 20-foot accessory building at 10475 Kimbro Avenue South. Lindquist summarized the staff report and recommended approval contingent on the ten conditions Bisted in the staff report. Auge asked if the applicant was presenf anci had any questions regarding fhe staff repor�. Michael Thompson, Properties Specialist with Sprint Spectrum dba Sprint PCS, 2900 Lone Oak Parkway, Suite 140, Eagan, MN 55121, had no serious obje�tions to the staff report. He stated, though, that they felt that a galvanized pole would be less conspicuous than a pole that was painted light blue. He also stated that a painted pole is more di�cult to maintain. Auge asked if 4here were any questions for the applicant. Boyden asked if there would be any interference with public safety communications. Thompson stated that they had completed an intermodulation study on the frequencies they use plus all known frequencies within a one-mile radius of that site and found no interference. A letter from their radio frequency engineers is on file. Sprint PCS operates on the 1.9 gigahertz range, which is far higher than any public service frequencies in use. Auge opened the pubiic hearing. Planning Commission Minutes Monday, February 23, 1998 Page 4 Colleen Miilard, 10590 Point Douglas Drive South, stated that the new pole wouid be located right behind their house and that she objects to the construction of the monopole. She thinks the pole would not fit in with the natural beauty of the area. She noted that there is other property in the area without homes in front of it. There is also commerciai areas where is could be built. She stated that a real estate agent told them it would decrease the property value of their home. Grenfell asked if there were trees, shrubs, or open spaces between the two properties. Millard answered that it is wide space. There are trees in front of the GouleYs house, but they aren't 120 feet high. Grenfell then asked if the accessory building would be visible. Millard stated that they probabiy would not be able to see it. Podoll asked if they could see the Chemolite/LS Power complex from their home. Millard answered that in the wintertime they could see the lights. Thompson stated that in other projects they cooperated with the zoning jurisdictions and the neighbors of their sites. They have conducted studies of the effect of communications towers on market values of adjacentproperties, and found no significant change. The tower they are proposing is a streamiined, seif-supporting, cylindrical steel communications tower with no truss structures and no guy lines. There are over a hundred of these towers in service throughout the metropolitan area. Their choice of sites was limited due to conditions imposed on them by the electromagnetic communications facilities ordinance. They initiaily wanted to instali a tower at the �S Power Piant. Last year the Commission and the City Council approved a site at this location. The out-of-state owners of the plant chose not to pursue a lease with them. They looked at the drive-in movie theater site and were advised by the Planning Department that due to the planned future use of the area, it probably would not be approved. Zoning for Ravine Regional Park does not allow for construction of a tower. They studied the U.S. West site at Berryland Farms and found that it was technically inadequate for tneir needs. Under the current zoning ordinance, the height of the U.S. West c,�nnot be increased ds�e to setback reGuirements. The proposed sife was the only area that they couid effectivefy use from both a technical and a zoning standpoint. Japs asked why they couldn't build at the LS Power Plant. Thompson stated that although the plant management and regional management were in favor of it, the out-of-state owners did not want to pursue a lease with Sprint. Thompson does not know the reasons. They worked for four months on this lease. Japs wanted clarification on why the Berryland site was not pursued. Thompson responded that communications competitors do co-locate when possible. They had their engineers run a prediction model and discovered that the site is at a much lower elevation than the Goulet property on Kimbro Avenue and that the height of the tower is limited to 100 feet due to set back restrictions in the EMCF ordinance. There is a generai agreement between carriers to have a vertical separation of 20 feet to prevent interference. U.S. West would be on the top, and Sprint would be at the 80-foot level, which wouid not give them the coverage necessary. The facility is aiso located southeast of its ideal location. Pianning Commission Minutes Monday, Fetxuary 23, 1998 Page 5 Japs asked if they were planning to build a separate tower or co-locate on the same tower. Thompson stated that they would co-locate if the tower were high enough. Japs asked if they could put a taUer tower within the same vicinity. Thompson answered that they couldn't because it wouldn't be in compliance with the ordinance. Japs stated that he is concerned about placing these towe�s ail over the city and that an effort should be made to consolidate them where possible. Thompson responded that they would prefer to do that because it is less expe�sive; however, it is impossibl� in thi§ particular case due to technical and zoning reasons. Japs asked staff which ordinances would be violated. Auge stated that the federal government mandated that locations for communication facilities be provided. The EMCF ordinance allows for facility locations with limitations such as tower height. Thompson stated that they would be in violation of the three-to-one setback requirement. Lindquist stated that the ordinance requires a three-to-one setback so that businesses would not come in and put in an antenna a property line. The ordinance is set up so that the City can legally allow options to businesses, but not allow it in the more populated areas of the community. LS Power is an acceptable site from a legal perspective, however, the city can't ensure that they will accept a lease agreement. It is the company's responsibility to make lease arrangements with owners of property that meet their needs. Japs wanted to know if variances could be issued due to extenuating circumstances so that the towers could be consolidated. Thompson stated that it is their policy to locate on existing structures wherever possible, but there are no sites available within that area. Auge asked about raising the height of the U.S. West tower. Thompson answered that he doesn't know what the construction status of the tower is or if it can be raised higher due to the setback requirement. Auge then asked if the could force U. S. West to share the tower. Thompson answered that they couldn't but most carriers work together if technically feasibie. �indquist stated that the site is larger than where the U.S. West pole is and asked if the setback could be changed. Thompson answered that the Berryland site is relatively small. From the survey, it appears that the pole was built up to the limit of what the ordinance allow�. Podoli asked why the drive-in site was denied when that is a commercial area and the proposed site is in a residential area. Lindquist stated that the ordinance ailows free- standing towers oniy in agricultural and industrial zoning districts. The proposed site is in an area zoned agricultural. Podoll asked what the drive-in was zoned. Burbank answered that a portion is zoned agricultural but the ordinance also states that if a property were rezoned residentiai, the tower would have to be removed. Grenfell asked how many feet short they were from the three-to-one requirement. Thompson answered that the property line would have to be shifted 60 feet. Japs asked if a variance could be issued. Thompson stated that they already have two sites in Cottage Grove, both located on water towers. Ne further stated the EMCF ordinance requires that they make provisions for at least two other carriers on a 120-foot pole. They wili accommodate that. Boyden stated that he doesn't think the Commission or the City is authorized to place burdens on private industries to accommodate other businesses. Japs Planning Commission Minutes Monday, Febniary 23, 1998 Page 6 suggested building the 120-foot tower on the Berryland site, transfer U.S. West to that tower, and remove the existing 100-foot tower. Auge asked if anyone else would like to address the Commission. Judy Hale, 10532 Point Douglas Drive, stated that there has to be another area where a tower couid be built, and that she supports co-location on existing towers. Thompson stated that the Berryland Farms site is too far south and at a lower elevation than they require from a technical standpoint. Kieven asked how U.S. West could work on the 100-foot pole. Thompson answered that it depends on where their other poles are located. Auge closed the public hearing and opened it up for discussion by the Commission. Podoll asked if there are future provisions for additional land to be made availabie for outbuildings if somebody else wants to use this tower. Thompson answered that they are leasing a 50-foot by 50-foot (2,500 square feet) parcel of land from the landowner for a 15- foot by 20-foot equipment building to house their electrical equipment. Auge suggested that this item be continued to research other location options. Japs agreed, and suggested that they look into the Berryland and drive-in locations. Rice wants to take a look at painting the poles. Kieven made a motion to continue the item for 30 days. Grenfell seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. 6.3) Case CUP97-35 and SP97-44 Due to absence of the applicant, this item will be discussed later in the meeting. 7.9) N1P9�-01 Solberg Aggregate Company has applied for their 1998 Annual Mining Permit for property lacated at the southwest corner of Harkness Avenue and 70th Street South. Burbank summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the five conditions stipulated in the staff report. Auge opened up the public hearing. Robert Solberg, 7001 - 70th Street South, Cottage Grove, stated that they wiil be developing the property and this should be the last year they appBy for a mining permit. They have taken very little material out of the gravel pit during the past several years. He agrees with the conditions listed in the staff report. He is planning a singie-family development in the future and will submit detailed pians this year for possible construction in 1999. Planning Commission Minutes Monday, February 23, 1998 Page 7 Auge asked if there were any questions for the applicant. Japs asked if their mining operations would impede the development of other approved areas. Solberg responded that they want to develop and grade in conjunction with the other developments, and the approval of the mining appiication would not be an impediment to the other developments. Grenfell asked how many truckioads per month, on average, are hauled away. Soiberg answered that last year they operated for less than 60 days, probably took out 5,000 to 6,000 yards, and didn't do any processing. Solberg stated that the operation has been trouble free the last few years. Auge closed the public hearing and opened up discussion on the appiication. Boyden made a motion to approve the application subject to the five condifions lisfed. Grenfell seconded fhe motion, 1. Confinued compliance with ordinance standards stipulated in Chapter 20, Sand and Grave/ Ordinance of the City Code. 2. The applicant shaf/ immediately remove sand or grave! that may have spilled from their trucks or equipment onto any public roadway. 3. Access connecting to 70th Street is prohibited. 4. Processing of maferia/s not excavated or mined on the site is prohibited. 5. Finished stopes of any edge contiguous to property owned by others shall nof be /ess than a ratio of four feet horizonta/ to one-foot vertical. Podoll stated that he sees nothing regarding reclamation in the staff report, which was incluci�d in I�st year's appli�tion. �oyden st2te� !hat recl�rna±i��, including plantings, have been done since the beginning of these approvals. Podoil reiterated his concern that there was nothing in this year's staff report about what they've done and questioned if there has been a problem with them complying with it. Burbank reported that it wasn't an issue during staff discussions due to the forthcoming development plans. The grading they wili be doing as part of the reGamation should fit with the City's overall comprehensive plans. Podoll stated that this request should be okay as long as there are safeguards. The motion was passed unanimously. 6.3i CUP97-35 and SP97-44 (Continued for September meeting) Leland Gohlike has appiied for Site Plan Reviernr approval and a Conditional Use Permit for Historic Properties for phased expansion of the commercial uses at the historic Cedarhurst mansion. The property is located 6940 Keats Avenue South. Pianning Commission Min�tes Monday, February 23, 1998 Page 8 �indquist summarized the staff report. She stated that it was tabied pending the receipt of the eight items listed on the first page of the staff report. The staff felt that the information was going to be ready and targeted the February Planning Commission meeting for the appiicant to meet the requirements, but have not received most of that information to date. Staff is recommending continuance of this item to the Aprii meeting. If this information were not submitted in a timely manner to be deliberated on in April, staff would recommend deniai of the request. Lindquist asked the Commission if there was additional information they would like to receive from the applicant, which would be placed on a checklist. Auge stated that this is a continued public hearing. The comments from the hearing in September are still part of the record. Auge opened the meeting up for public input. Boyden asked if liquor laws were different for historic locations. Lindquist answered that there was no difference. The appiicant, Lee Gohlike, Stiliwater Township, stated that the biggest challenge in the application was trying to put into perspective the way the property was run over the past 15 years. In evaluating the weddings held over the past summer, he doesn't believe the number or scale will increase much. The full-service restaurant wiU be scaled back to accommodate speciai event dining opportunities. He plans to add weekday conferences to the property's current usage, which could bring up to 80 people to the area; and add a 3,300 square foot addition adjacent to the existing ballroom. He reported that the previous property owners had the sound levels evaluated by the Cottage Grove Police Department, and no nuisance leveis were reached. He would be wiiling to add more vegetation as screening if there was a problem. Auge reiterated that the Commission is looking for spec�c information on the site pian review and conditional use permit so they can make a recommendation. Rice asked if there was language in the Historic Preservation Ordinance that states that the owner wiil reside in the residence. Lindquist answered that stipulation is due to the home or.cupation permit, w�ich is what the current catering �er�it �s under. Grenfeli stated that at the September meeting she asked that Washington County do a tra�c survey to determine if the County roads needed to have turn lanes added or to become four-way roads. She asked if this study could be done, if it wasn't. She then asked Gohlike why the information had not been provided yet. Gohlike responded that most of the data has been compiled and that the architect brought some of it to the meeting. Developing a project like this takes time and may need adjustments based on input from others. He stated that one of his other projects took two years to come to complete. Paul Kotnour, 9770 Military Road, commented that because the application has been pending for more than five months and the requested information has not been received, that the application should be denied until it is in order and then reapplied for. Amy Kaiser, 9880 Military Road, asked if the catering is being through a home occupation permit. Lindquist answered that it was. She then asked why the catering is still continuing Planning Commission Minutes Monday, Febniary 23, 1998 Page 9 if Gohlike does not live at Cedarhurst. She was also concemed about the property being rented. She asked Vogel if the property would retain its historical designation if the addition, at its proposed size, were built. She also thinks that the application shouid be denied. Lindquist answered that renters are aliowed in single-family homes. Staff considered that due to the pending application to bring the site into compliance, that no action would be taken to revoke the home occupation permit. It would be revoked as an action if approval is granted or denied. Vogel stated that one of the performance standards in the historic properties conditional use permit is that the property has to be in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation Projects. Neither he nor the Historic Preservation Commission has granted approval for any additions to the property. They have engaged the State Historic Preservation Office and their architect. As a condition of local invoivement in this project, they must receive written comments from the state before they go torward with the actual design of the additions. Additions to historic properties are allowed based on their size and shape. They are concerned with the current proposal but have withheid their final decision until they get an opinion from the state. Kleven wanted Garification from Vogel that the project needs to be approved by the Historic Preservation Commission before the Planning Commission can consider it. Vogel explained that the Pianning Commission reviews the conditional use permit and the Historic Preservation Commission approves the buiiding permits. They overlap in this case due to concern about design characteristics. He would prefer that there only be one process for reviewing this project and that it go through the Planning Commission rather than going back and forth. The Historic Preservation Commission has the expertise to provide the Planning Commission with the technical information on how it meets city code. Kleven requested that the Historic Preservation Commission have their opinion available to the Planning Commission prior to consideration in April. Vogel stated that they are waiting for the final set of pians and the written comments from the state so they can make their recoromendation to the Planning Commission. Ardelie P3e�ct��w, 71 �3 Joliet Avenue, ststed tha4 th�y �isved Qcs C�ttage urove for i4s rurai atmosphere and feels that the Cedarhurst expansion would have an adverse impact on the residential character of the area due to tra�c and noise. She stated that Cedarhurst was a country home and ail the phases that wiil be added do not fit into an historical site. Mary Ann Marty, 9905 Military Road, agrees with Kotnour's recommendation for denial. She stated that the noise generated would be an annoyance. She is also concerned about attendees at the conference center bothering the livestock in the area. She stated that Gohlike's other two establishments are not by any homes. Auge confinued the public hearing and opened up discussion with the POanning Com►nesseon. Auge explained that the recommendation before them by staff is to continue this application until the April meeting with the presentation of the ten items necessary from the applicant, the recommendation ftom the Historic Presenration Commission, and the traffic study on the county roads. Boyden asked if legally a specific date could be set for receipt of these Planning Commission Minutes Monday, February 23, 1998 Page 10 items. Lindquist stated that there is a letter on file from the applicant giving an uniimited extension and that her reason for having a deadline was because the neighbors are being strung along and staff's need to set a schedule. She stated that if the conditions were not met prior to the April meeting, the recommendation wouid be for denial. Kleven asked if it was possible that the item would be heard at the March meeting. Lindquist explained that information should be in approximately 30 days in advance though there is more flexibility with this appiication as notice has already been published. This item will not be discussed at the March 23 meeting. Podoll moved to continue th)s item to the Aprfl 27 meeting and K/even seconded the motion. The motion passed 8 to 1, wifh Grenfell voting nay. 8) APPROVAL OF P1�INNING COMMISSION MINUTES FOR JANUARY 26, 1998 Auge moved and Kleven seconded for approval. Motion carried unanimously. 9) REPORTS 9.1) Recap of February City Councii Meetings Lindquist reported that at their February 4 meeting, the City Council approved the conditional use permit for the commercial antenna at City Hali and the lease agreement with U.S. West. They also adopted the Historic Property Conditionai Use Permit ordinance, the final plat approval for Pine Forest 3rd Addition, and a design agreement for the Hinton Avenue/Tower Drive connection. Washington County and Woodbury aiso need to sign this agreement because it is by all three agencies. During the workshop session after the meeting, a presentation was given on the Surtace Water Management Plan, which is still being reviewed by staff and Councilmembers for revisions. It wouid then be sent to the appropriate agencies for review prior to adoption by the City Council. At the �ebruary 18 meeting, the Council approved the Applebee's conditional use permit and tF�e tfaucii Famiiy Farms preiiminary plat. 9.2) Committee Reports The Historic Preservation Committee met on February 10. They reviewed their budget, dealt with the Cedarhurst conditional use permit, discussed the farm heritage education interpretation activity, and taiked about the Historic Preservation Week, which will be May 10 to 16 with the historic home site tour on May 17. They also identified some significant findings of historic homes within the area. 9.3) PLANNING COMMBSSIO(d REQUESTS Auge reminded the Commission that a workshop session is scheduled for Monday, March 9, at 7:00 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes Monday, February 23, 1998 Page 11 8.4) RESPONSE TO PLANNING COMMISSSION INQUIRIES None. � •. • Japs moved for adjoumment, seconded by Auge. Motion was passed unanimously. The meeting was adjoumed at 8:55 p.m. City of Cottage Grove Planning Commission March 23, 1998 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 March, t998, in the Council Chamber. Call to Order Vice Chairperson Podoll called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Ken Boyden, Glen Brow�, Philip Foster, Herb Japs, Glen Kleven, Jeff Podoll, Pat Rice Members Absent: Jon Auge Staff Present: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director John McCool, Senior Planner John Burbank, Associate Planner Ben Martig, Planning Intern Approval of Agenda Podoll announced that the Nextel Communications application (Case CUP98-06) would be postponed until the Apri127, 1998, meeting. Pat Rice moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Glen Kleven seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Open Forum Vice Chairperson Podoli asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non-agenda item. No one spoke. Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Vice Chairperson Podoli 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 deci- sians. In addition, he explained the process of conducting a public hearing and requested 4hat any person wishing to speak should come to the microphone and state their full name and address for the public record. Planning Commission Minutes Monday, March 23, 1998 Page 2 Public Hearings 6.1 CUP98-03 Sprint Spectrum has applied for a conditionai use permit to allow the construction of a 120-foot high electromagnetic cammunication facility and to construct a 15-foot by 20-foot accessory building at 10475 Kimbro Avenue South. This is a continued public hearing from the February 23, 1998, meeting. McCool summarized the staff report. The written staff report had recommended denial of the application. However, staff would like to amend their recommendation and have the Planning Commission table the application until the next meeting to allow the City to obtain a consultant on radio frequencies to evaluate the information provided by Sprint. Podo// stafed that this a confinued public hearing. The comments fiom the hearing in February are sti!l part of fhe record. Podoll opened the public meeting. Gary �"'�, attomey with Faegre & Benson, 90 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, spoke on behalf of Sprint PCS. He introduced others who were in attendance on behalf of S rint PCS: Alex <� ""�' �'�, a radio fre uenc en ineer for S rint; Phil McMullen consuitant P �a�f:� q Y 9 P , with Sprint PCS for the metro area; Mike Thompson, property specialist with Sprint PCS; and Evan Rice, also with Faegre & Benson. Gandrud provided background on Sprint PCS since they entered the Twin Cities market. He stated that Sprint has 164 sites currently on line; 50 percent are towers and 50 percent are on existing buildings; and 25 are co-location towers. Sprint serves Cottage Grove resi- dents and those who travel through the city. He stated the Sprint chooses sites to provide a strong signal to their customers. He stated that they are not trying to avoid co-location and they would use the Berryland site if it provided a strong enough signal. He further stated that Sprint promotes and endorses co-location. Currentiy, they co-locate with U.S. West on 12 sites. He noted that staff recommended approval of the Goulet site in the February 18 staff report on this appiication. Gandrud stated that after the lease denial with LS Power, Sprint evaluated 12 sites for an alternative site. He stated that U.S. West wili accept a co-location on their 100-foot tower but they won't re-engineer the tower. Sprint could be on the tower at 85 feet to allow separation of signal. Co-locating at 85 feet does not provide for adequate coverage. Gandrud stated that staff changed their recommendation based on four items listed in the March 23 staff report. The first issue is that the app{icant has the ability to co-locate the antenna on the monopole located at 10900 Point Douglas Road. Gandrud responded that Sprint would not be able to provide adequate coverage from that location. Two, co-location at this site could work if an additional site was located on an NSP transmission tower to the north and east, a mile away. There are several problems with that. The City's ordinance does not require it. Section 13 on Page 4 states that "all commercial EMCFs shall not be approved unless the City Councit finds that the equipment cannot be accommodated on an Planning Commission Minutes Monday, March 23, 1998 Page 3 existing approved tower, building, or structure between one mile of the search radius." The NSP line is more than a mile from their searoh ring. The ordinance aiso states that co- location is al(owed if there is an existing structure. Staff finding #2 states that the City's EMCF regulations and requirements clearly state that the use of existing approved structures for siting new antennas should be considered to reduce the number of towers needed to serve the community. Gandrud stated that they in- vestigated 12 sites in Cottage Grove. As Mr. Thompson detailed in the attachment to his letter, all of the sites provide either inadequate coverage or are not available. The drive-in theater site met their criteria but not the City's ordinance. The Berryland site does not allow Sprint to compiete its communication system. The third staff finding is that the NSP electric utility poles north of the Goulet and Berryland sites should be considered as future appiicant sites for EMCFs. Gandrud stated that antennas can�ot be built on wooden towers. If they utilize the metal towers, they would have to construct roads and take agricuitural iands. Those towers wou{d not provide the coverage the Berryland site does, which does not give them adequate coverage. The NSP towers are over a mile outside the search area and are contrary to the city ordinance. Staff finding #4 states the information provided by the applicant does not prove that co- locating their antennas on the Berryland monopole sites will have a severe impact on their radio frequency coverage in Cottage Grove. The ink blot maps submitted by Mr. Thompson showed that the location at the Berryland site will leave significant barriers so it would be impossibie to receive a Sprint PCS signal within any building. Gandrud noted that staff agreed in their February staff report that the Goulet site would work. Mike Thompson, Sprint PCS, outlined how they choose a site: 1) the site must be able to be leased; 2) the site must compiy with the City's zoning ordinance; 3) the RF ability must meet customer service standards to provide in-buiiding coverage; and 4) the tower must be able to be constructed at a reasonable cost. Thompson showed a map of the 12 candidate sifes that 4hey Pesearched and described 4he histr�ry fe�r each site. Affer 4he cc�ns4ruc4i�n engineer, property specialist, and radio frequency engineer finished their research, it was determined that the Goulet property was the best site ca�didate. They did extensive re- search on the Berryland site and talked with U.S. West about co�location. U.S. West told them that the foundation would not support a tower over 100 feet tall and they would not be willing fo re-engineer the tower to add additional height as it would delay their schedule. They looked at a tower on Burlington Northern property, with whom they have a master lease agreement, but it was too far southwest of the search ring. They also sent a written proposal to 3M for both a monopole site and a water tower site, but 3M told them that it would not fit with the future plans for their property. Thompson showed pictures of the Miliard property taken from the proposed tower site, which showed the existing windbreak that would screen the site from the road; and pictures of what the Millards would see from their property, which includes farm equipment and buildings on the Goulet property that would obstruct the skyline view. Thompson also showed pictures from the Hale property which showed differing elevations and heavy Planning Commission Minutes Monday, March 23, 1998 Page 4 vegetation. Thompson reiterated that Sprint has done everything they couid to comply with the community's ordinance, including a detailed tecn�ical analysis of the most likely site candidates. Jerry Goulet, 10475 Kimbro Avenue, stated that he has lived in the rural area for 15 years and has been a Cottage Grove resident for 35 years. His farm is zoned agricultural and the long-range pian shows that it wiil stay that way. He stated that this is a better way to eam additional income than starting a livestock operation. He asked the Commission to approve the application. Alex Detrick, Sprint Radio Frequency Engineer, 511 - 11th Street SE, Minneapolis, stated that utilizing the Berryland site would not meet SprinYs coverage needs. He showed coverage maps illustrating the areas covered utilizing the Goulet property and co-locating on the U.S. West tower at Berryland. He stated with co-location there should be a 20-foot separation between antennas, so SprinYs antenna would be at 80 feet. The example he showed was at 90 feet, which stiii showed a deficiency i� coverage area. Japs stated that he realizes cost is a factor in providing this service. He asked if there was a specific reason why LS Power would not aliow a tower buiit on their site. Thompson answered that it was never fully explained to Sprint. Negotiations were broken off abruptly and a member of the management company was terminated. They explored re-opening negotiations, but haven't been successful. He believes it was due to long de- lays in the plant activation process. Japs asked how much it would cost to put up the proposed pole on the Goulet property. Thompson responded that it depends on foundation size, access, design, land improve- ments, and other variabies. They have not yet done any site designs. He gave an estimate of at least $100,000 per site for overall construction costs for a new pole. Japs then asked what the cost would be to put one on the Berryland site and one on the NSP tawer. T�amason explained ��at that wauld not solve fha coverage problerris be�use the problem areas are to the west and not to the north. Podoll ctosed the public hearing. Rice asked about why they could not locate in Ravine Park. Lindquist answered that free- standing monopoles are not permitted in parks. Freestanding poles are only permitted in the agricultural and industrial zoning districts. Japs asked if it was possible to locate a tower at the intersection of Highway 61 and County Road 19. McCool answered that there is property available but it is not zoned properly. The area to the south of Highway 61 is zoned industriai and the area to the northwest is agriculturai but the area to the northeast of Highway 61 is primarily residential. Brown stated that he lives about three-quarters of a mile north of the proposed site and he personally has no objection to the Goulet site. Lindquist reiterated the staff recommenda- Planning Commission Minutes Monday, March 23, 1998 Page 5 tion that they would support SprinYs application as long as staff was comfortable that co- location was not a viable option. Staff is recommending a continuation so that the City can hire a consultant to assess the information that Sprint has provided. Their previous review wauid stand if the consultant agrees with Sprint. Kleven stated he wants to see a review by an independent source. He suggested that the City require communications companies to share towers. He also asked what the FCC and state laws require. Ne requested that the city attorney attend the next Planning Commis- sion. Kleven then asked if towers are required to be built to a standard that would aliow other entities to utilize them. Thompson answered that poles must accommodate other carriers. K/even moved to continue the application to the April 27, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting. Japs seconded the motion. Japs asked why another pole could not be built on the Berryland property. Lindquist stated that the ordinance has a separation requirement. Kleven stated that he doesn't want our ordinance to be a hindrance, but he wants to know what the City's options and constraints are. Lindquist answered that under federal law the City has to provide reasonable opportunities and options for telecommunications com- panies to function. The mofion to table the applicafion until the April 27 Planning Commission meeting passed 5 fot with Brown voting nay. 6.2 CUP98-05 The Department of Military Affairs, Cottage Grove National Guard Armory, at 8180 Belden �ouleerard, has applied for a conditional use permit to increase the indoor community use ofi their facility for banquets, c3ances, receptions, and community recreation services. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval of the application, which is an amendment to the existing conditional use permit. Sgt. Fred Simon, National Guard Training and Community Center, explained that the appii- cation is for the "Guard Our Youth" program, a part of the Govemor's anti-crime legislation, which commenced in July 1997 and wili end in June 1999. They would like to open the Armory to the youth in the community at no cost to the youth. The National Guard is re- imbursed $6.50 per hour for use of facility for upkeep and maintenance. The purpose is to get kids off the street. The facility wil� host an open gym and other supervised activities during the day. There is a youth coordinator, Colleen Sampson, at the facility. The Nationai Guard is trying to get out af the rental business. Simon expects that use of the facility for banquets, dances, and receptions will go down. Two weekends a month, the facility is used by the fivo units of the National Guard housed in the facility and they have Pianning Commission Minutes Monday, March 23, 1998 Page 6 the first priority. The use of the Cottage Grove facility is consistent with the use of other National Guard facilities in the Twin Cities area. Podoll asked if the applicant had any concerns about the conditions in the staff report. Simon answered that they had no problem. Boyden asked if there would be live music or deejays at the dances. Simon stated that he assumes it would be a deejay. Boyden then asked what the applicant considered as the community, if it would be just Cottage Grove or would St. Paul Park, Newport, and other cities be included. He is concerned about noise, traffic, parking, supervision, and other potential problems. Simon stated that it would probably just be the Cottage Grove area. McCool stated that he thought it would include those who attend schooi in District 833, which inGudes Newport, St. Paul Park, Woodbury, and Cottage Grove. Boyden suggested that school ID be required at the dances. It was stated that the organizations that host the dances would regulate the attendance. Japs stated that a youth group sponsored by an organization that involved school district students with whom he worked used the facility, and the organization controlled the atten- dance.so that the National Guard was not involved. He stated that the facility worked out very nicely and was a benefit to the students of the community because the rentai rate was very affordable and aliowed them to have a program at a reduced rate. it is also an advantage to keep our youth in our community. He sees this proposal as a benefit to the youth in South Washington County because it is a safe environment. Ne has heard no negative comments from the neighbors about noise problems. Podoll opened up the public hearing. Gary Bloedel, Special Projects O�cer for the Department of Military Affairs and State Director of the Guard Our Youth program, supports the program. He stated that Colieen Sampson has been hired as the program coordinator. She works with the City Recreation Dep��t�ner�f. Bloedel stated t sat �r,�hile ti�ey have staff Gualife� tc do ycuth programming, they also seek out other quality youth programs. The facility has gym space, classrooms, and a kitchen that the City couid use free of charge. He noted that facilities in the 16 areas participating in the Guard Our Youth program are well used. This is an opportunity to open up the facility for community youth to use. He envisions dances for kids up to age 14 or 15. PodoOl asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak for or against this proposal. Being none, he closed the public hearing. Kleven made a mofion to approve the application subject to the four conditions /lsfed. Fosterseconded the mofion. 1. The conditions stipulated in Reso/uteon No. 83-36 shall continue to be complied with. A. The parking shall be expanded to provide parking space for a minimum of 100 vehicles, witF► a maximum size of 155 vehicles, wifhin one year af ►ssuance of Pianning Commission Minutes Monday, March 23, 1998 Page 7 the condifional use permit. Detailed p/ans meeting a/l ordinance requirements for the parking lot design shali be submitted fo the Pianning Department prior to obtaining a building permit for the parking /ot expansion. B. Screening sha/! be provided for the propased parking area along Grenadler Avenue South and Scott Boulevard wifhin one year of issuance of the conditional use permit. C. An intrusion a/arm connecfed direct/y fo the Cottage Grove Police Department Communication Center sbal! be installed D. Use of the building shail be limited to Washington County otfices, use for community acfivities, and National Guard activities. lt is acknowledged that at this time, the Nafional Guard wiil use the building for medical and miJitary police activifies. Utilizafion for other activities by fhe Nationa/ Guard shat! a/so be permitted except that utilization which would resulf in a significantty higher votume of traffic, a substantia! increase in storage or use of heavy military equipment and/or equipment on the site by the Nafional Guard shai! require an amendment of the conditional use permit. 2. Sponsors/coordinators of any program, event and/or activity conducted on the premises must properly monitor the inside and outside of the building during said event. 3. Serving food and/or beverages shall compty with City, Counfy and State health requirements and permitfing processes. 4. The sponsor/coordinator of any dance open to the public shat/ submit a minimum of two weeks prior to the event a written notice to the Director of Public Safety. This notice shall contaire tdee nartte(s), phane nurraber(s), e�timate ot th� anticipated number of participants, date and tlme the event Is proposed to be held. The motion was passed unanimously. 6.3 CASE CUP98-06 Nextel West Corporation, dba Nextel Communications, has appiied for a conditional use permit for the co-location of a wireless antenna on the water tower at 6700 Inwood Avenue South. Pado/0 explained that the applicant was postponing this item. Bayden made a motion to contiaue this application to fhe April 27 meeting. Brown seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Minutes Monday, March 23, 1 S98 Page 8 6.4 CASE TA98-10 The City of Cottage Grove has filed an application for Subdivision and Zoning Text Amendments to amend the Subdivision Ordinance, Section 23-36, relating to erosion control during construction and to amend the Zoning Ordinance, Section 28-47, relating to drainage. Martig summarized the staff �eport and recommended approval as detailed in the staff report. He stated that structural setbacks from steep siopes was not covered by the staff report and if approved, will be added prior to the City Council meeting. Currently, in the Mississippi Critical Area there is a 100.foot setback requirement from the bluffs. Staff is recommending that a steep slope wouid be defined as 18 percent or greater with a sefback of 30 feet. Podoll opened the public hearing. No one spoke. The public hearing was closed. Japs made a motion to approve the te�rt amendments with language for sfeep s/opes. Rice seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 7. Appiications and Requests None. 8. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of February 23, 1998 Podol! moved and Japs seconded for approvaG Motion canied unanimously. 9.1 Recap of March City Council Meetings lindquist reported that at the March 4 meeting, the Gity Council accepted receipt of the CityVision Task Force Report. The Task Force will be holding a workshop for the Council sb tf�e P��e� n�sr�'f o�er� wi�i�iy ai�4Pibu4ed. The Cot�ncil slso discussed 4�'ie iviik� Ry�jh project, which the Planning Commission discussed at the February 9 workshop. Rygh will try to meet more of the ordinance criteria in certain areas and staff wiil investigate some particular aspects of his requests, such as the change in right-of-way to allow for more tree preservation. At the March 18 meeting, the Council approved the mining permit and the rural subdivision for the Kartarik property. 9.2 Committee Reports Lindquist stated a Planning Commission workshop is scheduled for Monday, April 13, to discuss the transportation components of the Comprehensive Plan. Pianning Commission Minutes Monday, March 23, 1998 Page 9 9.3 Non-Agenda Items `►� 9.4 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries None. 9.5 Annual Organizational Meeting and Election of O�cers Boyden moved to nominafe Auge to serve as Chair of the P/anning Commission. Kieven seconded. Podo/t asked if there were any other nominations. There were none. Boyden moved to nominate Podoll as Vice Chair. Kleven seconded. Podoll asked if there were any other nominafions. There were none. Brown nominated Kleven for Secretary. Rice seconded. Podo!l asked if there were any ofher nominations. There were none. Nominafions were c%sed. The motions passed unanimously. 10. Adjournment Kleven moved for adjournment. Brown seconded. The mofion passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05. F:IGROUPSIPLANN�NG1f996VAINUTESUAar 23 Minutes.doc