Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0723012. 3. 4. e e Ao Co REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, JULY 23, 2001 Fire Station - City Council Chambers 6:30 p.m. Call Meeting to Order: Roll Call: Approval of Minutes: Public Hearings: Case File #01-017 - (continued) Mark Crouse is requesting variances for impervious surface and the ordinary high water mark for the construction of a deck on the property located at 15507 Calmut Avenue. Old Business: New Business: Case File #01-055 Eagle Creek Development is requesting a vacation to a drainage and utility easement located over the former Holly court right-of-way located on Lot 2, Block 1, Creekside Estates. Case File #01-038 Charles Boissiere is requesting a vacation of 30 feet of the Ashland Road (Eau Claire Trail) right-of-way adjacent to the east side of Lot 4, Grainwood. (4120 Eau Claire Trail) Case Files #01-062 & 01-063 Merlyn Olson Development is requesting review of a concept plan for a townhouse development to be known as Eaglewood East consisting of 5 acres to be developed with 35 units, common open space and private streets to authorize the acceptance of an application for a Preliminary Planned Unit Development of less than 10 acres. This property is located south of County Road 21, north of Colorado Street, east of West Avenue and west of Duluth Avenue. D. Downtown Zoning discussion. Announcements and Correspondence: Adjournment: L:\O 1 files\01 plancomm\01 pcagenda~.GO7230 I.DOC 16200 Ea§le Creek Ave. S.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, JULY 23, 2001 1. Call to Order: Chairman Vonhof called the July 23,2001, Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Criego, Lemke, Stamson and Vonhof, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2. Roll Call: Atwood Present Criego Present Lemke Present Stamson Present Vonhof Present 3. Approval of Minutes: The Minutes from the July 9, 2001, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. Commissioner Vonhofread the Public Heating Statement and opened the meeting. 4. Public Hearings: A. Case File #01-017 - (continued) Mark Crouse is requesting variances for impervious surface and the ordinary high water mark for the construction of a deck on the property located at 15507 Calmut Avenue. Zoning Administrator Steve Horsman presented the Planning Report dated July 23,2001, on file in the office of the Planning Department. On July 3, 2001, the Planning Department received a request from the applicant to continue the public hearing for the impervious surface variance request from the scheduled date of July 9, to July 23,2001. The applicant submitted the postponement request due to the lack of time needed to provide the additional information. Since the time of the report, new information has come to light with the applicant acquiring partial railroad right-of-way, which could be used as area for the impervious surface calculations. The staff still recommended the Planning Commission deny the applicant's suggested proposal of 45% impervious surface area as the applicant did not meet the hardship L:\O1 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminuteshMN072301 .doc 1 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2001 criteria, and require the property to meet an impervious surface area the Planning Commission deems appropriate under the circumstances. Stamson: Questioned staff on doing research on the earlier variance stating specifically that the impervious surface could not exceed 30%. What would happen if the Commission granted a larger variance? Horsman and Kansier explained they were different issues. The previous variances were for building and front yard setbacks. Comments from the public: Applicant Mark Crouse, 15507 Calmut Avenue NE, explained he met with Ron Swanson from Valley Survey, developer Dean Morlock of the original Windsong Association and realtor Bud Waund regarding this matter. With the new information of the additional land, new calculations will have to be done. An attorney or title company will have to confirm title to the property. Crouse is going to do more research on the ownership of the property. Vonhof stated the Commission would like to continue the matter until all facts were presented. Crouse went on to explain the Windsong development is willing to consider selling the property directly across the street from his property, which would help with his impervious surface issue. Vonhof pointed out neighboring properties have had similar impervious surface issues. Criego felt the percentage ofacquired property would still be above the impervious surface regulation. It would still be a serious problem. Horsman stated a title opinion and a revised survey would clarify the ownership of the property. Stamson questioned if the additional property would include the street as impervious surface. Kansier said the City has not had any or many situations like this. Vonhof said the neighboring property did not include the street in the calculations. Because this property was a vacated railroad right-of-way, there were other problems. Criego questioned if the impervious surface was added to the home after the variances were granted and without a permit. Crouse said they were. He added the driveway in 1996 or 1997, which went over the 30%. The lakeside slab was added afterward. Crouse also stated he was not aware a permit was needed. The contractor said he did not need any permits. Crouse said he filed an appeal on the deck decision. Lemke questioned Crouse on how much time he would need to continue the matter. Crouse said he would check with his mortgage company to get a legal opinion. Lemke L:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminutesWIN072301 .doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2001 questioned the timeline in obtaining the property from Windsong. Crouse said he would push for that. Kansier pointed out Windsong is a Planned Unit Development and transferring property will cause a number of other issues. In terms of this particular site without the additional property, the next planning commission meeting is August 13,2001. Vonhof suggested moving it to the August 27, 2001, meeting. Kansier stated staff would need the applicant's information by August 17. Comments from the Commissioners: Lemke: · No comments until the next meeting. Criego: · Concerned the request for impervious surface is 57.5%. This matter has gone on for several months. Each time it is reviewed there is new information. With the new information did not see it getting down to 30%. · Have no problem delaying to the next meeting. Somehow the applicant needs to know what to look for. Time and money is being added to the effort. · There needs to be more direction. Realizes there is no solid data. Stamson: · Concurred with the Commission regarding the delay. There needs to be some direction. · Pessimistic the applicant will meet the requirements. · Staff detailed how to get meet the requirements, given the new information. It looks possible he could get to the 30% impervious surface. · Applicant should research his options. Atwood: · Agreed. But it is hard to pick a target number without knowing what the new figures will be. · Continue for more information. Vonhof: · Agreed with Stamson, there are no accurate figures. A new survey will have to be done and the facts spelled out. · Regarding lakeshore areas and riparian lots - felt very strongly in retaining a 30% impervious surface. · There is a possibility ora solution. Continue to August 27, 2001. Criego: · 30% impervious surface is the goal. L:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminutesWIN072301 .doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2001 If in fact, the railroad right-of-way does belong to the applicant, does the street get calculated or not? Does the Planning Department feel comfortable in saying the area is a public right-of-way? There should be clear direction. MOTION BY LEMKE, SECOND BY STAMSON, TO CONTINUE THE MATTER TO THE AUGUST 27, 2001, MEETING. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. 5. Old Business: None 6. New Business: A. Case File #01-055 Eagle Creek Development is requesting a vacation to a drainage and utility easement located over the former Holly Court right-of-way located on Lot 2, Block 1, Creekside Estates. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated July 23, 2001 on file in the office of the Planning Department. Eagle Creek Development has filed an application to vacate the drainage and utility easement located over the former Holly Court right-of-way located on Lot 2, Block 1, Creekside Estates. The applicant is in the process of developing this site with a 24-unit senior apartment building. Upon review of the building permit plans, a deck not shown on the approved site plan will encroach into the existing easement. There is no need for the retention of the entire easement. A standard 10' wide drainage and utility easement will be retained along the perimeter lot lines. The Planning staff recommended approval of this request subject to the condition the applicant deed the necessary 10' wide drainage and utility easement along the perimeter of the lot line to the City prior to the recording of the resolution vacating this easement. Criego questioned the need for the property owner to vacate. Kansier explained the deck encroachment. Comments from the Commissioners: Criego: · No problem with the request. Stamson: · Staff spelled out the situation. Supported the request. Atwood, Lemke and Vonhof.' · Agreed L:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminuteshMN072301 .doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2001 MOTION BY ATWOOD, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE PROPOSED VACATION OF EASEMENTS WITH STAFF'S CONDITION. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This matter will go before the City Council on August 6, 2001. B. Case File #01-038 Charles Boissiere is requesting a vacation of 30 feet of the Ashland Road (Eau Claire Trail) right-of-way adjacent to the east side of Lot 4, Grainwood. (4120 Eau Claire Trail) Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated July 23, 2001 on file in the office of the Planning Department. Charles Boissiere has filed an application to vacate 30' of the dedicated fight-of-way for Ashland Trail (Eau Claire Trail) adjacent to the east side of Lot 4, Grainwood Heights. There is an existing home on the property at 4120 Eau Claire Trail. The applicant is proposing an addition to the east side of the house. Without the vacation of the fight-of- way, the proposed addition will not meet the minimum required setback. There is no need for the retention of the entire fight-of-way. The Planning staff recommended approval of this request. Comments from the Commissioners: Stamson: · Staff spelled out there is no real need from the City's standpoint for this property. The State spells out it has to be in thc public's interest to do so. The public interest served his is that allows a higher development of that property. · Go ahead and vacate. Atwood: · Agreed with Stamson there is no public need. Lemke: · Agreed, the fight-of-way is excessive. Proceed to vacate. Criego: · No problem Vonhof: · Concurred. L:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminuteshMN072301 .doc 5 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2001 MOTION BY LEMKE, SECOND BY CRIEGO, TO RECOMMEND CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE PROPOSED VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This item will go before the City Council on August 6, 2001. C. Case Files #01-062 & 01-063 Merlyn Olson Development is requesting review of a concept plan for a townhouse development to be known as Eaglewood East consisting of 5 acres to be developed with 35 units, common open space and private streets to authorize the acceptance of an application for a Preliminary Planned Unit Development of less than 10 acres. This property is located south of County Road 21, north of Colorado Street, east of West Avenue and west of Duluth Avenue. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated July 23, 2001 on file in the office of the Planning Department. Merlyn Olson Development is requesting an exception to the 1 O-acre minimum area requirement for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The applicant is proposing to develop a 5-acre site located on the south side of CSAH 21, north of Colorado Street, west of Duluth Avenue and east of West Avenue. Access to this site is presently from Racine Street, a private street. The staff felt the applicant would not be able to assemble 10 contiguous acres for a PUD development at this location. The site, however, could still be developed with townhouses under the Conditional Use Permit process. The need for a PUD is triggered by the use of a private street within this development. Staff recommended approval of the applicant's request for an exception to the minimum 1 O-acre requirement for a PUD, and requested authorization to staff to accept an application for a Preliminary PUD Plan for a site with less than 10 acres. Approval of this exception does not guarantee approval of the PUD plan. Criego: · Does the private street go on to Duluth Avenue? Kansier responded it would. · Does the road border on the property line? Is that within standards? Kansier said it has not been reviewed that closely. A road can be placed on the property line. There were no comments from the applicants or the public. Comments from the Commissioners: Atwood: · In favor of letting the applicant proceed forward. Lemke: · Agreed to proceed with the 10 acre exception requirement. L:\01 files\01 plancomm\0 lpcminutes~MN072301 .doc 6 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2001 Criego: · Question to applicant: Could you explain what type of housing is being proposed? · Merlyn Olson, president of the company, said they are planning 4-plexes. There will be two story units in the middle with single walkout on the ends. The market will be for families, singles, a wide range, with a $160,000 to 195,000 price range. The square footage will be 11,000 to 17,000 finished area. There is a plan for an open area for park and a playground by Outlot C. · Questioned the plans for the steep hill. Olson explained the proposal. · No problems - continue the process. Stamson: · Go ahead with PUD process. Vonhof: · Concurred. The property is bound by 3 public streets. · Allow for the exception. MOTION BY CRIEGO, SECOND BY STAMSON, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ACCEPT A PUD APPLICATION FOR THE PRELIMINARY PUD PLAN. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. D. Downtown Zoning discussion. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier gave a brief overview of the joint City Council/Planning Commission workshop with the revised draft downtown design ordinance. Auggie Wong and Suzanne Rhees, the City's consultants, were present for questions. Auggie Wong, landscape architect, distributed a handout and went on to present the streetscape for the downtown area. Criego felt Dakota Street and Main Avenue were the main focal point of the downtown area. There was a brief discussion on the center of downtown and slowing traffic on Eagle Creek Avenue. Kansier pointed out the City was mainly working with Main Avenue because the City owns significant property. Utilities and improvements will be updated in the near future. The streetscape will expand to the rest of the downtown. Vonhof questioned the width of the sidewalks and maintaining the street width. Wong responded and gave examples of slowing traffic. L:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminutesWIN072301 .doc 7 Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2001 Suzanne Rhees said the draft includes comments from the meetings and workshops. This ordinance can be used as a guide. Rhees recapped the facades of the buildings in the Design Standards. The next step is to refine the draft. Eventually, there will be a public hearing. Criego suggested having another joint workshop with the City Council. 7. Announcements and Correspondence: None 8. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 7:58 p.m. Jane Kansier Planning Coordinator Connie Carlson Recording Secretary L:\01 files\01 plancomm\01 pcminutesWIN072301 .doc 8