Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDraft Sept 20 City Council meeting minutes4646 Dakota Street SE Prior Lake, MN 55372 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES September 20, 2010 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 8:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Myser, Council members Erickson, Hed- berg, Keeney and Millar, City Manager Boyles, City Attorney Pace, Public Works Director/City Engineer Albrecht, Building and Transit Services Director Kansier, Planner Matzke and Administrative Assistant Green. PUBLIC FORUM The Public Forum is intended to afford the public an opportunity to address concerns to the City Council. It will be no longer than 30 minutes in length and each presenter will have no more than ten (10) minutes to speak. Items to be considered on the agenda may be addressed at the Public Forum unless they have been or will be the subject of a public hearing or public information hearing at the City Council, the Econom- ic Development Authority (EDA), the Planning Commission, or any other City Advisory Committee within the foreseeable future. Forum items are also restricted to City governmental topics rather than as a plat- form for private agendas. Matters that are the subject of pending litigation are not appropriate for the Public Forum. The City Council will not take formal action on Public Forum presentations. City Manager Boyles explained the concept of the Public Forum. Comments: No person stepped forward to speak. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION BY MILLAR, SECONDED BY HEDBERG TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. VOTE: Ayes by Myser, Erickson, Hedberg, Keeney and Millar. The motion carried. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES MOTION BY MILLAR, SECONDED BY ERICKSON TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 7, 2010, MEETING MINUTES AS PRESENTED. VOTE: Ayes by Myser, Erickson, Hedberg, Keeney and Millar. The motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA City Manager Boyles reviewed the items on the consent agenda. A. Consider Approval of Invoices to be Paid B. Consider Approval of August 2010 Treasurer's Report. C. Consider Approval of Building Permit Summary Report. D. Consider Approval of Animal Control Services Report. E. Consider Approval of Fire Department Report. F. Consider Approval of Resolution 10.085 Accepting a State Health Improvement Program (SHIP) Grant for CR 21 Wagon Bridge Pedestrian Safety Improvements Study and aCity-wide Trail Needs Survey. G. Consider Approval of Resolution 10-086 Electing to Continue Participation in the Local Housing Incentives Account Program under the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. Phone 952.447.9800 /Fax 952.447.4245 / www.cityofpriorlake.com Council member Erickson requested that 5C be removed from the Consent Agenda for comment. Council member Keeney requested that 5F be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECONDED BY MILLAR TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS MOD- IFIED. VOTE: Ayes by Myser, Erickson, Hedberg, Keeney and Millar. The motion carried. Erickson: Commented on item 5C stating there are 72 new housing permits compared to 31 in 2009 and extrapolated that to a growth rate of one percent. Noted that growth requires more infrastructure and in- creased expense for fire and police protection; and it also provides increased tax levy potential to help pay for those services for everyone. Believes the new growth reflects this is a good place to live. Keeney: Regarding item 5F, questioned whether the study will consider pedestrian crossing of CR 21 stat- ing that a number of people walk along the trail and cross to the fishing pier and the curve of the roadway makes it a tough crossing. Albrecht: Replied that the study will look at all modes of pedestrian, bicycle and snowmobile crossing in the Wagon Bridge area. Erickson: Queried about the passage of snowmobiles from Upper to Lower Prior Lake. Albrecht: Replied that some snowmobiles go over the bridge as the only other option is to go under the bridge where there is often open water. There is a concrete abutment beneath the. bridge that the County is considering removing rock rip rap to expose the concrete base to create a passageway for snowmobiles. Such an improvement could be relatively inexpensive and the County has indicated that if the City will in- clude the feasibility of such a plan in the study, the County might fund the improvement in conjunction with the snowmobile club. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECONDED BY ERICKSON TO APPROVE THE BUILDING PERMIT SUM- MARY REPORT AND RESOLUTION 10.085 ACCEPTING A STATE HEALTH IMPROVEMENT PRO- GRAM (SHIP) GRANT FOR CR 21 WAGON BRIDGE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS STUDY AND ACITY-WIDE TRAIL NEEDS SURVEY. VOTE: Ayes by Myser, Erickson, Hedberg, Keeney and Millar. The motion carried. PRESENTATION Domestic Violence Awareness Month Proclamation. Police Chief O'Rourke informed the Council that October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Intro- duced Community Safety Committee Members Susan Hadley and Betsy Jader. Committee members Woody Spitzmueller and Patrick Dougherty. were also in attendance. Jader told the Council about the First Annual Prior Lake Domestic Violence Awareness Walk to be held on October 2, 2010 at Lakefront Park. Recalled that the Council established community safety as an element of the 2030 Vision and Stra- tegic Plan. Hadley provided statistics about victims of domestic violence both in the County and the City. Comments: Millar: Thanked the police chief and committee members for their service. Commented that this is an is- sue that stays behind the scenes until something tragic happens. Hadley: Affirmed stating domestic violence is a problem that can happen to anyone. Stated she com- pleted adissertation on how media should be writing stories to teach people the dynamics of what is going on in those relationships. Millar: Southern Valley Alliance for Battered Women has been around for 27 years and has served nearly 1600 people from Prior Lake. 2 DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes Hedberg: Recalled when the 2030 Vision and Strategic Plan was updated to call for focus on a safe and healthy community. Shortly thereafter the City was notified that two Level III sexual offenders were going to move into the community. Those things stimulated the formation of the Community Safety Task Force which was made up of people throughout the community. Subsequently the Community Safety Advisory Committee was formed and all but one of its members was a participant in the original task force. Stated he continues to be pleasantly surprised at the contributions the Committee makes. Keeney: Commented that the statistics reflect only the people who sought help and the awareness mes- sage needs to be heard. Stated that domestic violence is much of what the police force has to respond to and it affects neighbors and people we deal with every day. Noted there are many volunteer and donation opportunities. Erickson: Stated he currently serves as liaison to the advisory committee. Has had the opportunity to see the work the committee completed to organize the Walk. Invited residents to come out and support the event. Asked if more volunteers are needed. Hadley: Replied they could use four or five persons and if anyone is interested in helping they could con- tact the Southern Valley Alliance at 952.873.4214. Myser: Stated the statistics are staggering, but speculated that it is less than it could be due to the work of the Southern Valley Alliance. Mayor Myser read the proclamation declaring October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month. PUBLIC HEARING Hearing to Consider Amendment of Resolution 00.119 the Enabling Resolution for the Economic Development Authority (EDA). City Manager Boyles commented that the City Council review of the 2030 Vision and Strategic Plan a few months ago revealed that economic development is a high priority. A key tool for economic development is the Economic Development Authority (EDA). Format and composition of the EDA has been discussed to determine the appropriate focus, expertise and balance of public vs. non-public participation for EDA mem- bers. A public hearing must be held in order to amend the enabling resolution that formed the EDA. Ex- plained that afour-fifths vote is required. MOTION BY MILLAR, SECONDED BY ERICKSON TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE: Ayes by Myser, Erickson, Hedberg, Keeney and Millar. The motion carried and the public hearing opened at 8:33 p.m. Comments: No person stepped forward to speak. MOTION BY ERICKSON, SECONDED BY MILLAR TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE: Ayes by Myser, Erickson, Hedberg, Keeney and Millar. The motion carried and the public hearing closed at 8:34 p.m. Comments: Keeney: Suggested language changes might be needed for proposed recital number six regarding com- position of members and he would not want the possibility of a majority of members who do not live in the City. Believes the definition of owning businesses within the City may need clarity. Suggested language should identify that two members shall be among residents who live in the City and one member may be a resident or a business owner in the City. Suggested striking "newly elected or appointed City Council members shall replace outgoing City Council members" as it is further outlined that an outgoing City Coun- 3 DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes cil member shall be replaced by appointment; and being seated on the EDA would not be automatic for a newly elected Council member. Pace: Recalled there was discussion about criteria and this proposal tried to incorporate business exper- tise as a criterion. Agreed the sentence could be stricken. Stated the bylaws could set out the criteria for what a qualified member should bring to the EDA. Keeney: Reiterated his feeling that he was uncomfortable about any possibility of the majority of the EDA not being residents as he believes that giving control to people who do not live here is not appropriate del- egation. of authority. Erickson: Suggested the word "owns" a business should be replaced with lives or works in Prior Lake as an appropriate person might be an officer orhigh-ranking executive for a business, but not own the busi- ness. Suggested that term limits for Council members be staggered so only one of them rotates off the EDA each year allowing time for learning and becoming an active participant. Millar: Stated the composition and criteria for membership should be discussed by the Bylaws and Com- pensation Committee and incorporated into the bylaws. Hedberg: Concurred with discussion by the Bylaws and Compensation Committee. Suggested the bylaws come back to the Council on the consent agenda. Believes membership by external members will require sustained effort and involve a long learning curve, and that membership should mirror advisory committees and be three-year terms with athree-term limit. Concurred with Council .members serving on the EDA hav- ing staggered terms. Myser: Asked why composition and criteria for members was included in the enabling resolution rather than the bylaws. Pace: Replied that the references to eligibility criteria in the Enabling Resolution was intended to forecast the vision for the EDA and indicate the kinds of qualifications desired. The enabling resolution could just state that membership includes members of the City Council and the public and the bylaws could hold the detail. Noted the bylaws are easier to amend if necessary as they are adopted by resolution and could be amended without having a public hearing. Keeney: Suggested tabling the enabling resolution until the bylaws are reviewed and bring the enabling resolution and the bylaws back to the Council at the same time. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECONDED BY HEDBERG TO TABLE THE ENABLING RESOLUTION UNTIL THE BYLAWS ARE REVIEWED, PROVIDE DIRECTION TO THE BYLAWS AND COMPENSATION COMMITTEE ABOUT INTENDED REVISIONS, AND BRING BOTH THE ENABLING RESOLUTION AND THE BYLAWS BACK TO THE COUNCIL AT THE SAME TIME. Myser: Questioned why EDA membership would be limited to only residents; proposing that an exception- al candidate who may not be a resident should be considered. Suggested leaving room for at least one member to be anon-resident. Pace: Clarified that the previous point made was that there should be no possibility that a majority of the members should be non-residents. Myser: Believes the economic development effort will be over many years and having a shorter term will work against us. Having consistency in length of term for members will be important. Council will approve the items coming from the EDA so there will be protection against concerns that efforts are not being di- rected for the City. Erickson: Clarified that Myser's suggestion meant there could be a member that neither lived nor worked in Prior Lake. Myser: Affirmed that at least one member could be anon-resident. Erickson: Reiterated his belief that membership should be open only to persons who live or work in Prior Lake. The EDA has the authority to tax the public so members should live or work in the City. 4 DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes Keeney: Qualified the requirement for a person working in the City should be a person who can represent the business in some official capacity such as an operating officer or appointed by the business to represent them. Erickson: Stated he might concur if the representation were well-defined; and the person should be physi- callyworking in the City to provide aday-to-day connection. Myser: Reminded all that even though the EDA has taxing authority, all recommendations must come to the Council for approval Millar: Understand the desire to pull in the best possible candidates, but believes it is reasonable that a member has some sort of stake in the community. Erickson offered an amendment to the motion to specify the enabling resolution and bylaws revisions should be brought to the second City Council meeting in October. Keeney and Hedberg accepted the amendment. MOTION BY KEENEY, SECONDED BY HEDBERG TO TABLE THE ENABLING RESOLUTION, DIRECT THE BYLAWS AND COMPENSATION COMMITTEE TO REVIEW THE BYLAWS CONSIDERING THE AFOREMENTIONED COMMENTS AND BRING THE ENABLING RESOLUTION AND PROPOSED BY- LAWS REVISIONS TO THE SECOND MEETING IN OCTOBER. VOTE: Ayes by Myser, Erickson, Hedberg, Keeney and Millar. The motion carried. OLD BUSINESS No old business is scheduled. NEW BUSINESS Consider Approval of Resolutions for an Amendment to a Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan and a Preliminary Plat Known as Hickory Shores. Planner Matzke informed the Council that K Hovnanian Homes applied for an amendment of the PUD and Preliminary Plat of Hickory Shores. Described the location and site characteristics of the development. Stated that a public hearing was conducted by the Planning Commission and input at the hearing included concerns expressed about whether different architectural standards might impact property values, although understanding about market changes in recent years was also expressed. Described proposed building styles and landscaping as well as setback and impervious surface requirements. Explained the conditions proposed by staff. Comments: Keeney: Added that the public hearing comments included concern that the multi-unit owners felt their res- idence would not blend in. Sought clarification of the total number of dwelling units included in the change to the PUD amendment. Matzke: Commented that the PUD is intertwined with the preliminary plat; where the plat deals with lot boundaries, number of lots, etc. and a PUD defines greater detail. This amendment changes the building styles and the setbacks from what was originally proposed. Since this is zoned as a PUD, modifications to the lot sizes and lot standards require a modification of the plat as well. Keeney: Asked if the previous PUD had requirements for housing styles other than attached vs. detached. Matzke: Responded there was no particular building style or square footages. Some residents noted clari- fications they were given in their purchase agreement documents from the developer identifying certain modifications. Those are above provisions put in place for City approval. Often those standards are estab- lished in covenants or developer purchase agreements. A PUD provides flexibility to development stan- dards, but the City should be careful of limiting a development with building styles. Keeney: Asked if all of the phases of this development are platted. 5 DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes Matzke: Replied the second and third phases are not platted, but the preliminary plat is laid out for the en- tire development. Keeney: Asked what the benefit to the City is for this PUD. Matzke: The developer gave lake frontage parkland around Rice and Crystal Lakes to the City. This was above and beyond the parkland dedication requirement. It is already integrated into the City parks system and connects to the City-wide trail system for all residents. Keeney: Addressed conditions that staff are requesting and asked if a condition could be added to work with existing homeowners in the development. Generally favors moving forward with this amendment. Erickson: Noted the development was approved in 2006 and there have been only four homes built. The project needs to move forward. Stated that K Hovnanian Homes has a reputation of finishing develop- ments in a timely fashion. Kevin Clark, vice president of land development and acquisition for K Hovnanian Homes in Minnesota, introduced himself and spoke of the company. Erickson: Commented that the previous developer had plated a buffer and queried the intent of the landscaping along Hwy 13. Clark: Replied they are not proposing anything different, but noted that the plantings put in a few years ago are much more mature. Erickson: Commented that a fishing pier was built in Crystal Lake for the FIN program which is an added amenity for the area. Will support the amendment. Believes the City should not dictate a particular style of home. Millar: Asked how much difference there is in the architectural standards from the original development. Matzke reviewed displays of proposed home styles. Clark: Stated the Woodland series is proposed for the detached townhome series which is a two-story, 1700 to 2200 square foot home with atwo-car garage. Noted the series had four different homes and three different elevations with several color palettes. Believes that will offer much diversity. Millar: Asked the timelinefor construction. Clark; Replied they would plan to have homes available for showing in the February Spring Preview to meet the spring market. Millar: Concurred with Erickson remarks. Believes moving forward would be beneficial to the City. Hedberg: Commented that Prior Lake was originally developed by local builders and it has been the past decade or so that national builders have come on the scene. Noted that during the past few years, the na- tional builders pulled back from extended phases of projects, but continued. to work through the depression. and developed existing sites. Believes the market will dictate how fast homes will be purchased, but the City can count on this developer to drive it through to a successful conclusion. Asked for clarity about de- tached townhomes vs. separate homes with their own lots and whether there will be a homeowner's asso- ciation. Matzke: Replied there is a homeowner's association in place. for the attached townhomes with a common area and street that they maintain. K Hovnanian is proposing a similar layout and modifying the homeown- ers association to incorporate the existing townhomes with the detached townhomes. The single family homes will have a homeowner association to handle some of the requirements of the development. Hedberg: Regarding the section of detached townhomes, asked if it will be association townhome ma- naged like any other townhome development. Clark: Commented that he has met with existing townhome owners and discussed association parame- ters. Because they have an existing plat and the common lot, common. drive., entry monument, plowing and irrigation; two tiers of membership are planned. This wouldallow homeowners to contribute to future re- serves for the common areas as well as acknowledge that the single family homes will be taking care of DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes their own exteriors, etc.; while the attached townhomes would need insurance and maintenance of the ex- terior. Hedberg: Believes the grounds need to be association managed because the homes will be too closely built to have each home be a separate property. Asked about the commitment for continued meetings with existing homeowners. Matzke: Replied that the Planning Commission did not add that as a condition. There was dialogue be- tween the residents and the developer that future meetings would be held. Believes residents felt encour- aged to have a point person with K Hovnanian as the bank that owns the property now does not have a contact person with whom the residents can communicate. Hedberg: Would like to give K Hovnanian the benefit of the doubt as it would be good to have a successful development in this property that has been in distress for a few years; but suggested there be a condition related to ongoing dialogue. Expressed disagreement with Erickson and Millar regarding the product. Noted that a PUD receives significant concessions around density and. layout from the city in exchange for public amenities beyond the minimums set forth in the ordinance. Believes the information provided by K Hovnanian about the products they intend to offer should be included by reference in the PUD. That would provide procedural and substantive protection to existing homeowners. Myser: Asked Clark to comment on how they acquire property and make decisions about lot size, home size and architectural style. Clark: Replied the business plan considers the market area and reviews recent comparables and the competition. Look at short sales, foreclosures, what homes are selling and for how much. Myser: Asked how they deal with architectural style in a planned development. Clark: Townhomes of the current style in Hickory Shores are not selling and a change must be made to make this a viable opportunity. They plan to build single family homes for 2300 square feet or more with a three-car garage. A variety of elevations with different architectural elements will be offered. Explained the similarities to the original developer's product. Explained they examine subdivision ordinance when going into a community to learn requirements. Myser: Asked if Clark had comments from a developer perspective about rules or regulations that are par- ticular to Prior Lake. Clark: Commented that staff served him well and his focus was particularly on Hickory Shores to learn what is already on the table in order to work with it. Stated he has no experience with bringing a new de- velopment into the community. Myser: Stated he does not support covenants regarding architectural style and while encouraging commu- nicationswith existing residents, does not think requiring such communication should be embedded in the PUD. Clark: Commented their intent is to be a good neighbor and communicate as much as needed. Erickson: Queried when the association is turned over to the homeowners. Clark: Replied that a critical mass is needed to acquire the funds to pay expenses and in the beginning the developer takes on that responsibility. Generally, when sales reach 50%, the homeowners would elect one board member; at 75°fo the homeowners would have two. board members. When nearing close-out there would be a complete turnover and, depending upon the covenant, all five board members could be elected or just three additional members. They want the existing townhome owners to have a representative on the board now, and there will be provisions made when the single family homes are built. There is some lati- tude in how to draw up a homeowners association and how to turn it over when the community is closed out. Keeney: Commented that the common area and landscaping has lacked some maintenance and asked if it will be restored to new condition. Matzke: Replied that some common areas have not been seeded yet, but have been mowed to City re- quirements and the trees have been watered. K Hovnanian will be providing security as a guarantee that the landscaping will be maintained. 7 DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes Keeney: Asked if there is a sign-off process on each unit to know the seeding and landscaping has been completed. Matzke: Replied such things have to be completed as part of the building permit. Keeney: Asked when the common lot has to be completed. Matzke: Replied much of the seeding and landscaping will be done when. units are built around that lot. Some of it will remain native grass near the storm water pond. Noted that K Hovnanian has not closed with the bank yet and the Council will have to approve transferring the development contract deed from the cur- rentproperty owner to K Hovnanian. Hedberg: Clarified his position was not to question the proposed design styles, but to incorporate the doc- uments they included as part of their application as part of the PUD. Noted the detached townhomes are described as being built using the Woodland series. If the market changes, is there anything that would keep them from changing the offering in this PUD. Matzke: Replied they would have to provide a detached housing product. The site plan showing detached homes and setbacks would be requirements, but the Woodland series would not be a requirement. Hedberg: Clarified that if they had a product that ranged from 1400 to 1900 square feet, it would be ac- ceptableunder this PUD. Matzke: Affirmed, noting that is the same as the existing PUD. Hedberg: Clarified that the product for single family homes could also be changed as long as they com- plied with the basic concept. Does not support that as believes that granting a PUD should mean the City could approve a change in design of the homes. Pace: Suggested it would be helpful to define "product." Queried whether it refers to the photographs de- picted in developer's literature or the information contained in the charts such as square footage, number of stories, number of garage stalls, etc. Hedberg: Understands that trying to set an aesthetic standard is not necessarily relevant, but sticking with a value point and size could be. Would not want a volatile market to cause a PUD. to switch to a product that is of significantly less value since the City is granting significant concessions. Keeney: Stated that eight units have been sold and representations were made to them that this would be a certain scale of community and they believe they may be injured by a change to the marketing of neigh- boring units. Not sure the City is in a position to protect them from the past, but concurred that going for- ward it should be addressed. Hedberg: Believes that if the City cannot assure community integrity in a PUD, it should not be a PUD but rather a standard development, Erickson: Expressed concern that when a product mix is inserted; such as making a home handicapped accessible and wanting fewer bedrooms so a larger bathroom might be built, the dictation of design might not be workable. Myser: Believes in the free market. If constraints are established and the economy changes, they will stop building homes. Stated he does not want to dictate what should be built believing that should be left to the market after the City has given general guidelines and requirements are being met. Hedberg: Stated that other PUDs have had to come back to the Council when they wanted to change the product; giving the Crystal Lake townhomes as an example. If operating under a strictly pure market, the standard zoning ordinance should be used. The PUD is a special vehicle where the developer gets con- cessions and the City can ask for something back; i.e. if detached homes were going to be offered on lots this size, it would be a problem. Keeney: Concurred in that in the sense a developer is using uniformity as part of their marketing and if unable to deliver it, problems occur. Concerned that residents believe they have been sold something and it was not delivered. That is one of the issues he would like solved when going forward with the PUD process. The City has a responsibility to protect buyers from the situation of their neighborhood being tak- en advantage of. Myser: Commented that is another subject and suggested it be brought forward for another discussion. 8 DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes Millar: Asked Clark about his intentions regarding the homes and products. Clark: Replied they intend to build smaller two-story, two car homes in the area for townhomes. That product is still in design. In the case of single-family homes they intend two-story, three car homes. No split entries are planned. Myser: Asked Clark if it would be considered onerous if a condition were added to the PUD regarding min- imumsquare footages and garages. Clark: Replied the ordinance in place already provides for minimums. Pace: Noted the Council can impose whatever reasonable conditions it feels appropriate in exchange for the flexibility of development standards and can require assurances that if the developer is stating it will provide "x," it cannot change to "y." Clark: Commented he believes K Hovnanian will be OK with defining it along the lines of square footage, etc. but would want the latitude to define the product line. Believes it is limiting to list a maximum footage. Stated he has shown a representation of a product line that is being proposed. Keeney: Believes the Council is discussing minimum standards, not maximums. The concern is that exist- ing homes values are not brought down by having less expensive homes built at the end to fill out the de- velopment. Myser: Believes if minimum square footage is established and the market changes, the developer would cut back somewhere else such as construction materials and he does not want to create that scenario. Suggested committee work might be a place to establish such standards. Hedberg: Noted that after the Northwood Meadows situation, staff was directed to bring PUD ordinance revisions to the Council. No report has yet been received and the Council is being asked to modify a PUD. Stated he wants the development to go forward, but wants the changes he has proposed. Statements have been made to let the market dictate, but the true market is unknown since a large percentage of sales right now are distress sales. This property is being purchased at a reduced cost and the business model is built around not only what is in the market, but also the relationship of the property cost to the price. MOTION BY ERICKSON, SECONDED BY MYSER TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HICKORY SHORES SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OUTLINED HE- REIN. Hedberg: Stated he will vote against both of the proposed motions, but wants the public and K Hovnanian to know they are a good developer and will be a positive addition to the community. Believes, however, the rules should be a little different. Millar: Clarified that Clark understands what is wanted for minimum standards and that it is agreeable to him. Clark: Replied that it would depend on how specific the conditions become. Reiterated that K Hovnanian has not closed on this property. Pace: Stated that when voting, the Council would need to apply the standard that is in the ordinance now rather than what they would like it to be at some point in the future. A legitimate basis would not be that the ordinance does not provide what is desired. Hedberg: Reiterated that his request was to include by reference the information the developer provided in their application into the PUD. MOTION BY KEENEY AND SECONDED BY MILLAR TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ADD A CONDITION TO THE PUD AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE THE PRODUCT MIX STANDARDS SUBSTANTIALLY AS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT. Mayor Myser called for a vote on the amendment. VOTE: Ayes by Keeney, Hedberg and Millar. Myser and Erickson opposed. The motion carried. 9 DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes Clark: Asked for clarification of what was voted on. Pace: The vote was on an amendment to modify the moved resolution to incorporate a condition that product representations provided to the City be included in the PUD. Hedberg: Added that the motion was for minimum standards. Myser. Sought clarification of whether minimum standards meant square footage and number of stories and garages. Matzke: Explained the chart reflects five building styles that exist today and their minimum square footag- es. Sought clarification about whether it is the chart that should be included in the condition or the render- ing of the built home. Clark: Asked if the expectation is that if a series is redesigned that it should be brought back to the Coun- cil Keeney: Responded that the amendment meant that the smallest single family home should not be less than 1990 square feet, two floors, three bedrooms, two baths and athree-car garage; and the detached townhomes would be a minimum of the smallest as depicted on the chart supplied by the developer. Stated he did not intend to dictate the maximum. Hedberg: Agreed there should be a minimum standard as a base and not constrain the diversity. Kansier: Commented that establishing a product with minimum square footage, minimum floors and mini- mum garages could be administered from a building permit perspective and permitting authority. Erickson: Believes how people choose to partition the space within the square footage should not be in- cluded in the conditions. Myser: Asked if the Council is trying to establish that the homes are not below a set price point. Keeney: Concurred with Hedberg comments that concessions have been given and assurance should be made that products will be built that are presented. Hedberg: Stated he would be satisfied with Kansier's suggestion of specifying minimums. Noted this is not a standard development and concessions have been granted to the developer giving them flexibility in densities that would not otherwise be available. Stated he is not trying to specify a price point, but rather to be able to hold them to what they say they will market. Higher profit margins will be enjoyed because they were able to purchase the property at distressed prices. Believes it is appropriate to establish certain dwel- ling unit minimums. Myser: Asked what amenities the City is receiving in exchange for the concessions granted for this devel- opment. Matzke: Replied it is park land, natural resource areas and the trail that borders the lakes and the fishing piers. There are conservation easements set up to protect natural buffers and vegetation. These areas were given above and beyond the requirements of subdivision ordinance for park land. It is property that would be difficult to acquire in today's market and economy because it is Lakeshore property. Myser: Asked if it was believed to be a fair exchange for the City. Matzke: Replied that in 2006 it was considered a very fair exchange. From staff's perspective the appli- cant is not asking for amended architectural standards as no square footage guidelines were required. Millar: Stated this would be a huge asset for the City and hopes the developer understands they are trying to protect the community. Agreed with Kansier's recommendations for minimum standards. Clark: Responded that K Hovnanian believes it has a viable opportunity for this community and hopes the direction will allow flexibility to adapt. The market has not been proven yet and that is the risk inherent. Millar: The PUD is being amended. K Hovnanian could come back and ask for another amendment if needed. Matzke: Affirmed that any developer can ask for additional amendments at any time. Added a comment that two-floor homes could include such things as split-entry, etc. and discussion about two-floor homes might want to include comments about that. Hedberg: Asked if the PUD was amended for Crystal Bay. 10 DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes Matzke: Affirmed it was amended twice. Both times no further concessions were given. Hedberg: In that case, because of the market condition changes, new developers came back with a differ- ent product that was smaller and with a different format of construction. They went through a review process and were approved. Pace: Asked who applied for the amendment to plat and plan. Matzke: Replied that K Hovnanian is the applicant. The property owner was included with the application for consent pending closing of the sale of the property. Myser: Asked why the City would ask them to come back for another amendment. Hedberg. Replied the benefit to that is that it provides a forum for the public, particularly for existing resi- dents, to voice their concerns and be listened to by the new developer. Agreed the market can change, but the City can provide a forum for the new developer to listen and pay heed to and come to an accommoda- tion with the existing residents. Erickson: Commented that the minimum standards should be just square footage and the number of sto- ries. Understands Kansier's recommendation that the detached townhomes should be a minimum of 1700 and the single family homes should be a minimum of 1900 square feet. Asked if that is what the other Council members are agreeing to. Hedberg: Stated that Kansier recommended that for administration purpose it should be square feet, two floors and the number of garage stalls. Erickson: Asked if that is what the other Council members voted on. Keeney: Stated his understanding of the vote was what the applicant represented which was two-stories, but not split-entry or modified two-story styles. Would be agreeable to not including the number of bed- roomsand bathrooms. Erickson: Questioned whether the council agreed upon what was being voted on. Hedberg: Understood Keeney's amendment to be for the top rows represented on the matrix for the de- tached townhome and single family home. ERICKSON PROPOSED AN AMENDMENT TO DESIGNATE A MINIMUM OF 1700 SQUARE FEET, TWO FLOORS, AND TWO CAR GARAGES FOR DETACHED TOWNHOMES; AND 1900 SQUARE FEET, TWO FLOORS AND THREE CAR GARAGES FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. Hedberg: Sought clarification of the status of the motion and amendments and appropriate procedures. A MOTION WAS MADE BY HEDBERG, SECONDED BY MILLAR TO RESCIND ALL MOTIONS AND AMENDMENTS ABOUT THE HICKORY SHORES PUD AT THIS MEETING THUS FAR IN ORDER TO FOLLOW PROPER PROCEDURE FORTAKING ACTION. VOTE: Ayes by Myser, Erickson, Hedberg, Keeney and Millar. The motion carried. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECONDED BY MILLAR TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 10-087 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FINAL PLAN KNOWN AS HICKORY SHORES TO INCLUDE CERTAIN MINIMUM STANDARDS OF 1700 SQUARE FEET, TWO FLOORS, AND TWO CAR GARAGES FOR DETACHED TOWNHOMES; AND 1900 SQUARE FEET, TWO FLOORS AND THREE CAR GARAGES FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. VOTE: Ayes by Myser, Erickson, Hedberg and Millar. Keeney opposed. The motion carried. MOTION BY HEDBERG, SECONDED BY MILLAR TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 10.088 APPROVING THE AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT OF HICKORY SHORES SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OUTLINED HEREIN. VOTE: Ayes by Erickson, Hedberg, Keeney and Millar. Myser opposed. The motion carried. DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes OTHER BUSINESS Community Events Hedberg: It was a great community fall fest at the high school. Erickson: The Scott County Historical Society will hold a Hangar Dance at the Flying Cloud Airport on Saturday night. Keeney: Reminded everyone of the Domestic Violence Awareness Walk on October 2 at noon at Lake- front Park. Myser: Thanked Ellen Brody for the lefse at the Alzheimer's Walk at Shepherd's of the Lake last weekend. SCALE and HIPP will hold a meet and greet in Burnsville on Tuesday. ADJOURNMENT With no further comments from Council members, a motion to adjourn was made by Erickson and seconded by Millar. With all in favor, the meeting adjourned at 11:07 p.m. Frank Boyles, City Manager Charlotte Green, Administrative Asst. 12 DRAFT 09 2010 meeting minutes