Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07 15 2013 Planning Commission meeting minutes PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, July 15, 2013 1. Call to Order: Chairman Phelan called the July 15, 2013 Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Roszak, Phelan, Spieler, Blahnik and Hite, Planner Jeff Matzke, Community and Economic Development Director Dan Rogness, Engineer Seng Thongvanh, Engineering and Building Inspections Director Larry Poppler, and Community Development Assistant Peter Aldritt. 2. Approval of Agenda: MOTION BY SPIELER, SECONDED BY HITE TO APPROVE THE JULY 15, 2013 MEETING AGENDA VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Spieler, Phelan, Hite, and Roszak. The Motion carried. 3. Consider Approval of July 1, 2013 Meeting Minutes: MOTION BY HITE, SECONDED BY ROSZAK TO APPROVE THE JULY 1, 2013 MEETING MINUTES WITH A FEW CHANGES SUBMITTED BY HITE. VOTE: Ayes by Hite, Spieler, Phelan, Blahnik, and Roszak. The Motion carried. 4. Public Hearings: A. DEV-2013-0007 Bluffs of Shady Beach Preliminary Plat & P.U.D. Greg Schweich, on behalf of Copper Creek Development is proposing a Preliminary Plat and P.U.D. development consisting of 22 lots on an 8.09 acre parcel to be known as the “Bluffs of Shady Beach”. The subject site is located south of County Road 42, north of Shady Beach Trail, between Birchwood and Meadow Avenues. Planner Matzke summarized that Copper Creek Development has applied for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and approval of a Preliminary Plat to be known as the Bluffs of Shady Beach. The proposal calls for a subdivision of the property into 22 lots and 2 outlots for the development of single family homes. He presented the updated plan revision showing the cul-de-sac with supporting documents. The lot sizes have increased, and one lot was eliminated from the original design. A traffic study was completed for the area. Engineer Thongvanh presented the grading and topography of the site. He discussed stormwater and the proposed two stormwater ponds. The stormwater ponds have been oversized to receive additional water from surrounding property. This is a significant part of the benefit that the developer is providing the city in support of a PUD. He reviewed the street connections, including recommendations city staff has made to the developer for the different 1 connections. He emphasized that staff would like to see three connections made with the previously stubbed in Ridgeview streets and with Shady Beach. Commissioner Questions: Roszak asked about the grade change from Aspen to the proposed road connections and the proposed cul-de-sac. Engineer Thongvanh responded they are essentially the same; there is about a 4% grade change with the road connection. Hite asked how many cul-de-sacs are in the City; is there a ratio of homes on a cul-de-sac to the length of the cul-de-sac? Engineer Thongvanh responded there are about 200 cul-de-sacs in the city. City ordinance dictates that when topography and site conditions are limiting, then cul-de-sacs are allowed. The length of the cul-de-sac is limited to 500 feet by City ordinance. Spieler asked how many lots would need to be removed if the connection from Aspen to the cul-de-sac was made by eliminating the cul-de-sac? Engineer Thongvanh responded probably just the one, lot 4. Spieler asked whether there would be a sidewalk in the cul-de-sac? Engineer Thongvanh responded no. Spieler asked how long the cul-de-sac is as proposed? Engineer Thongvanh responded about 900 feet. Blahnik asked for further information about the conservation easement. Planner Matzke responded that the rear yards between Shady Beach Trail would have the easement, which guarantees that the trees and natural areas will be conserved even as the lots are sold to private home owners. Blahnik asked if Shady Beach Trail and the cul-de sac were to be connected, could that remove some traffic from Shady Beach? Engineer Thongvanh responded yes; drivers will take the point of least resistance. Phelan asked for further clarification on the proposed street connections. Engineer Thongvanh responded that ultimately the City would like to see all three connections made, including Aspen to the north and south, and to Shady Beach. 2 MOTION BY BLAHNIK, SECONDED BY SPIELER TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:25 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Hite, Spieler, Phelan, Blahnik, and, Roszak. The motioned carried. Applicant Greg Schweich presented the revised cul-de-sac design. He stated this is a preferred plan in response to the neighbors and commissioners. The commissioner’s requests for larger lots, the traffic report, and the extra stormwater ponding have been addressed. It is not feasible to provide land for stormwater and to lose two more lots with the loop road connections. If the connection were made, the PUD would possibly not be considered because it would not be feasible to add the cost associated with oversizing of the pond. Spieler asked about the cost to add the road connections. Applicant Schweich responded about $180,000. Public Comment: Vince Vander Top, Wenck Associates Civil Engineer on behalf of the Shady Beach residentsstated his concerns on stormwater and how it will be treated; the stormwater evaluation seems to have errors in the calculations and overall design. Tim Harper, 1434 Shady Beach Trail stated his concern with the cul-de sac design and the increased traffic if the connection goes through. John Stallings, 14210 Aspen Avenue stated how much he has enjoyed the wooded area over 30 years; his concern is with the trees and the natural beauty of the property. Marlin Saber, 14320 Shady Beach Trail stated his concern on the stormwater pond and the length of the cul-de-sac of 900 feet. Kelly Burns, 14202 Aspen Avenue asked about the impact of traffic on Aspen. The erosion on the site is a concern with the topography being very steep and significant tree removal. The stormwater needs to be closely evaluated. Ann Conklin, 14492Shady Beach Trail stated her concern with the increased traffic at the parks, and she is against the road connections. Vicki Cirillo, 14166 Aspen Ave stated her concern on the 35 foot natural buffer zone between the Aspen homes and this development; she would like to see a buffer between the homes for privacy. She questioned why a 900 foot cul-de-sac would be allowed when the standard is 500 feet. Brad Rixmann, 14291 Shady Beach Trail stated that his largest concern is the increased traffic followed by his concern on how stormwater will be handled. Harry Alcorn, 14283 Shady Beach Trail stated his concerns on the access points, road connections and the increased traffic. 3 Janine Alcorn, 14283 Shady Beach Trail stated her concerns on stormwater, the benefit that will be given to the city, and that homeowners will eventually incur future costs related to improving Shady Beach Trail. Vaughn Lemke, 14472 Shady Beach Trail stated his support for the cul-de-sac; the ordinance allows them; if the city does not want cul-de-sacs, then the ordinance should be changed. Brian Lompart,14223 Shady Beach Trail stated his concerns with stormwater and the proposed north basin. John Hewitt, 14100 Meadow Ave stated his concern about impacts on the wildlife in the subject site. MOTION PHELAN, SECONDED BY HITE TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:07 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Hite, Spieler, Phelan, Blahnik, and, Roszak. The motioned carried. Commissioner Comments/Questions: Phelan asked for further explanation of the traffic report. Engineer Thongvanh responded that there was a traffic report done by the developer, which focused on the cul-de-sac and how much traffic would be generated. It did not look at how the traffic would be impacted with the road connections. Phelan asked about the location of the conservation easement. Planner Matzke responded that the 35 foot buffer mentioned by an Aspen resident is not where the conservation easement would be located. Rather, the easement would be going along Shady Beach. The developer is not going to grade out the lots completely; the back portion of the lots will remain untouched at a width of up to 35 feet in some places. The easement will preserve the grades and trees forever. Spieler asked whether city staff feels the stormwater design is sufficient enough? Engineer Thongvanh responded that staff has not had time to review the stormwater portion of the development, which was submitted late last week. From a quick review, the water will sheet drain across to the street and be captured into the pond. The water has been directed across the development to sheet flow to a storm sewer and then directed to a pond. Spieler asked what the timeline is for further review? Engineer Thongvanh responded about a week. Hite stated she would like to see a grading and landscape plan for the buffer zone on lots 5- 11. She also would like to see a more in-depth traffic study showing traffic with the connections. 4 Roszak asked about the volume the pond can hold before it would overflow. Engineer Thongvanh responded 2,880 cubic feet. Normal water level of the pond is 923’; the high water level is 925’. Roszak asked whether there is any chance that the pond will flow into the neighbor’s property. Engineer Thongvanh responded there will be an emergency outlet flow (EOF) built into the pond directing water away from impact on properties. Blahnik asked about the cul-de-sac and street connection; which connection design is better than the other? Engineer Thongvanh responded that a full connection is best at all three locations, but a partial connection could work, too. Phelan asked about the road plan and the large change in elevation within the cul-de-sac. Engineer Thongvanh responded that the grade does go down about 48 feet, and there is a retaining wall on Lot 1. Phelan asked about the cost of street improvements and the impact of those costs now or later. Engineer Thongvanh responded that the developer would be responsible to construct the streets within the development area; when a future project comes to Shady Beach, it will be paid by assessments due from the benefitting property owners. Phelan stated he does have some concerns about the project. He did not want to impede progress but the Planning Commission is here to guide development and to make sure it is done in a quality manner. He stated he has a large issue with a 900 foot cul-de-sac. There are ordinances that are in place for street design; cul-de-sacs are allowed but should be held to the ordinance requirement. The elevation here is very steep, and the stormwater needs to be completely worked out with staff’s satisfaction. He was not in favor of either design at this time due to too many unanswered questions. Spieler stated he agreed with Commissioner Phelan. The public safety needs to be addressed, and the cul-de-sac design is very long. Stormwater needs to be thoroughly reviewed. He stated he was in favor of the “C” layout design with the road connections. Hite stated that staff needs more time to discuss the stormwater plan. The zoning ordinance allows for cul-de-sacs, but it needs to meet the standard. It would be nice to review the information more that was presented by Mr. Vander Top with Wenk Associates. She was in favor of tabling the project. Roszak stated there are a lot of questions. He feels that the full connection should be made to Aspen. A conservation easement is good, but a tree survey should be done to see what type of hardwood trees are there. He stated he was in favor of tabling the project. 5 Blahnik stated he supported tabling the project. He is content with the lot widths, sizes and depths. His issues were related to the run-off and stormwater, the long cul-de-sac, and the connection is to Aspen Avenue. He does want to see the conservation easement in place. th Hite asked if the developer could be ready to meet the August 5 Planning Commission meeting? Applicant Schweich stated yes. MOTION BY BLAHNIK, SECONDED BY SPIELER TO TABLE ITEM 4A UNTIL THE AUGUST TH 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Phelan, Spieler, Roszak and Hite. The motion carried. 5. Old Business: A. DEV-2013-0005 Copper Cove Preliminary Plat.K. Hovnanian Homes is proposing a residential subdivision of approximately 68 single family lots to be known as Copper Cove. The subject property is located south of County Road 42, on the north side of Lower Prior Lake, east of Blue Bird Trail and west of Sand Point Beach. Planner Matzke Presented the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding this plat application on June 17, 2013. Public comments were taken and included concerns about street connections to Ferndale Avenue, impacts to current traffic, and tree impacts. At the meeting City Staff identified the remaining critical issues regarding streets, utilities, trails, and storm water. The Planning Commission voted to table discussion of the preliminary plat to the July 15th Planning Commission meeting and advised the developer to consider changes to the trail network near the wetland, consider revisions to address street and utility concerns of City Staff, attempt to coordinate with the adjacent property owner to the west to develop an overall plat design that may utilize joint infrastructure needs, and revise the hydrology to meet City standards. City Staff has since meet with the developer on June 26th at which the developer submitted revised plan exhibits in response to the major comments outlined by City Staff. These revised plan exhibits are included with this report and City Staff has updated the trails, streets, utilities, and storm water sections of this report to reflect these revised exhibits. Engineer Poppler presented on the hydrology of the site, street connections and utilities of the project. He covered the changes that the city has asked the developer to make in regards to street design and the placement of utilities. Staff has met with the applicant to go over the needed changes. The hydrology, street and utility designs do not meet City standards. Staff is recommending denial. Hite asked on the elevation change from carriage hills down to the lake, what is the elevation of Carriage Hills. Engineer Poppler roughly 950, 960. Spieler asked how close the collector road could be to the wetland? 6 Engineer Poppler responded with a 30 foot minimum buffer and a 25 foot no-grade zone requirement. Blahnik asked about the status of the adjacent property owners and their development plans. Planner Matzke responded that staff has received a letter in regard to the western property owners; however, the developer may be able to better respond to that question. Applicant Kevin Clark, K. Hovnanian Homes stated that they cannot extend Carriage Hills Parkway due to the separate ownership of that property. The sanitary sewer along Rolling Oaks needs to come through that neighborhood, which would require much more city discussion and large assessments. If the line is extended to K. Hovnanian’s property at the time they are ready to do that phase, they would amend their plans to connect. There is no compelling reason to move the sewer along the lake into the street, which would would incur numerous additional costs. The design has been modified for the cul-de-sacs; the southerly one is only 8 feet from the city standard. A pond was relocated, and the retaining walls were eliminated. The hydrology changes are still being worked through; each design change triggers a change in the hydrology. They have addressed the outstanding issues to the best of their ability. Hite asked whether retaining walls would be needed around the pond if a trail were to go there. Applicant Clark responded yes. Blahnik asked if this plat could be approved with sewer connections to Ferndale? Applicant Clark responded yes. Phelan asked about a timeline for the last phase. Applicant Clark responded that their intention is to phase in the north side in 1-2 years. Phelan asked for further staff clarification on the proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) budget. Engineer Poppler responded that it is in the CIP to be done by 2014 up to the western property edge. Commissioner Comments: Phelan stated the cul-de-sac can be worked out with staff; the hydrology is a main concern for him, and the trail plan needs to be looked at. Spieler stated the stormwater is a concern; the cul-de-sacs can probably be worked out toward an agreement. There are many elevation changes, and the developer has made some changes. Hite stated that trails are in demand, but if the trail goes around the full wetland, there will be more grade changes and tree loss. The developer has done a good job of connecting the trail in other parts of the development; she is not in support with the full trail as requested by city 7 staff. However, the street issues need to be worked out with staff. Stormwater and hydrology information is incomplete. The sanitary sewer connections can likely have a contingency plan. She recommended tabling the project. Blahnik asked about the decision timeline on the project? Planner Matzke responded there would be time to table; however, staff is looking for action on the item tonight in order to allow sufficient time for city council review. Blahnik stated he is satisfied with the revised trail system. He is concerned with the northern part of the development and the sanitary sewer connection timing. He is content on the southern cul-de-sac, but would like to see the northern cul-de-sac connected. He understands that the hydrology piece needs to be further developed. He recommended tabling to the next meeting. Roszak stated that if the developer is willing to work with staff and the adjacent property owner at resolving some of these issues, then he recommends tabling. If the developer is not willing to work through the issues, he recommends denial. Phelan stated he is fine with the trails as they are presented. He recommends that staff and the developer work together and comprise on the connections. He supported tabling the project. He asked about the cost of connecting Carriage Hills Parkway to Carriages Hills Road; it looks like the cost will be burdened by the developers. Engineer Poppler responded that the City collects trunk oversizing dollars, and it participates in part of the cost for collector streets. The developer pays for the standard 36 foot width. Phelan asked whether the City has in the past paid for the entirety of the road, and in the spirit of compromise, the City may have greater benefit of the road going through from one end of the development to the other. Engineer Poppler responded that he is unaware of doing this; the City generally pays for the standard width as further defined in the city’s assessment policy. Engineer Poppler stated that the cul-de-sacs are of significant concern. There is a City ordinance and standard in terms of street intersection distance, and the proposed intersections on Carriage Hills Parkway do not meet the design manual and ordinance. He emphasized that city staff is not okay with the street intersections. Phelan stated he understood staff’s concerns. In the past two years that he has been on the commission, he has seen a number of projects come through asking for variances. He is asking in tabling of the project that these issues are worked out in a compromising manner. There is a huge benefit to the City both in revenue and connections if this development goes through to completion. Hite asked whether concerns have been adequately addressed so that both the developer and staff are clear about the commission’s direction. 8 Applicant Clark stated that one item could use direction, including the sewer line to the south along the lake. Hite asked the age of the current system? Engineer Poppler responded that the system was installed in the late 70’s or early 80’s. It is functioning without issues. Staff’s real issue, however, relates to access. It is on a steep slope, running through future backyards; it will be very problematic for maintenance. Hite stated that based on existing age and condition, she is inclined to not require the developer to relocate the sewer line; she does not see it as a necessity. Engineer Poppler stated that he is unable to allow Street 6 to connect to the Parkway. Phelan asked for clarification on the north or the south portion. Engineer Poppler responded both north and south. Phelan asked staff to clarify how are these different from Raven Court to the west. Engineer Poppler stated those were constructed prior to today’s standards; Carriage Hills is one of the most important roads in the City in terms of connections and traffic. To have three connections is unacceptable; the city could possibly support two for both sides of the vacant land to develop. Hite asked whether the collector road in the ghost plat has the third connection, and whether that is a concern to staff. Engineer Poppler said yes; the distance between Raven and Ferndale is 1,400 feet; per the ordinance, there really should only be one. Phelan asked about a connection to the east toward Cardinal Street and whether there is an opportunity to redesign to dead-end and not connect to Carriage Hills. Engineer Poppler responded that one of the complications is the developer does not control the neighboring property; however, it could possibly be redesigned to connect to Cardinal Street in the future. Phelan stated that this is an area that could be a compromise. Staff and the developer need to th work together a develop solutions by the August 5. MOTION BY SPIELER, SECONDED BY ROSZAK TO TABLE ITEM 5A UNTIL THE AUGUST TH 5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. VOTE: Ayes by Blahnik, Phelan, Spieler, Roszak and Hite. The motion carried. 6. New Business: None 9 7. Announcements and Correspondence: Director Rogness presented items that were previously brought before the Planning Commission and action taken by the City Council on those items. 8. Adjournment: MOTION BY PHELAN, SECONDED BY HITE TO ADJORN THE MEETING. VOTE: Ayes by Phelan, Spieler, Roszak, Hite and Blahnik. The Motion carried. The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Peter Aldritt, Community Development Assistant 10