Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3 April 17 2017 PC Meeting Minutes Approved 1 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Monday, April 17, 2017 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Fleming called the Monday, April 17, 2017 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Bryan Fleming, Dave Tieman, Mark Petersen, William Kallberg and Dan Ringstad. Also present were Liaison Zach Braid, Development Specialist Casey McCabe, Project Engineer Nick Monserud and Development Services Assistant Sandra Woods. 2. Approval of Agenda: MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2017 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. 3. Approval of Monday, March 20, 2017 Meeting Minutes: MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, MARCH 20, 2017 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen and Ringstad. Abstained by Kallberg. The Motion carried. 4. Public Hearings: A. PDEV16-000006 – Lake Ridge Apartments – Final Planned Unit Development – Lake Ridge Apartments, LLC is requesting a major amendment to the approved Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan to replace a previously approved 151-unit single apartment building design with three market rate apartment buildings which total s 150 units. The site is located on 10.5 acres at the northwest corner of the County Highway 42 and McKenna Road intersection. The property is designated as Urban High Density Residential (R-HD) on the 2030 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. PID: 254520050. Specialist McCabe introduced the request to consider a recommendation of a zoning application to the City Council for a major amendment to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) known as Shepherd’s Path. The property is located north of CSAH 42 and west of McKenna Road. The applicant will also submit a Final Plat to the City Council to create three lots for this property. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, alternatives and recommended a motion. He presented an approved PUD Plan and Land Use Program (2006), an approved PUD Amendment – Lake Ridge Apartments (2016, a comprehensive land use plan and zoning map, a Lake Ridge Apartment project plans and Lake Ridge Apartments unit design with underground parking. Commission Comments/Questions: Petersen asked if the current zoning is R3, what the impervious allowance; what do we normally see with this. Specialist McCabe replied it is PUD zoning; high density and guided in the Comp Plan. He said we only calculate the impervious surface allowances in the Shoreland District and in this case, this parcel is not in the Shoreland District. He mentioned there was a PUD impervious calculation assumed with the orginal plan submittal that the applicant may want to explain. He explained what was assumed to be on this parcel prior stating the purposed impervious surface is less now than what was proposed in 2005/2006. 2 Petersen questioned if the impervious surface was less than the first original proposal. Specialist McCabe said correct. Kallberg asked about the comparison in parking ratio from the single plan building to the current proposed plan and if the parking would eventually be credited against the second or third building. Specialist McCabe explained how this would provide more parking and stated the proposed parking is with assuming all three buildings are constructed; total number of parking stalls at three hundred-fifty- two. Kallberg said so the three-hundred-fifty-two spaces will not be constructed at this time. Specialist McCabe said correct. Applicant: Peter Stalland, (Developer for Lake Ridge Apartments, LLC – 19356 Meadow Ridge Trail North, Scandia, MN). He explained his reasoning behind changing the large building into three smaller ones, the phases and the upscale parking project. He commented on approval from the City last year, the seller approvals, parking agreements, ordinances for parking and working with the staff on issues prior to coming here tonight. He touched base on comments made by the SMSC, stated he talked with officials at the SMSC (tribe) and has objections to their comments. He also mentioned comments about drainage and said his engineer is here tonight. He said engineering was viewed by City Staff on the prior plan and stated this one is statistically like the current proposed project. Fleming reassured it is not our intension to continue this item, however, would like to make sure that our SMSC community members have ample time to review and offer commentary. He asked for more information about order of construction. Stalland explained the order of construction is dependent upon financing circumstances and said his best answer at this moment is to construct one fifty unit building this summer and go from there. Fleming mentioned understanding and clarifying the phasing of the buildings would be helpful. He commented on another issue; light and sound changes due to the schematics that have changed and asked if they were prepared to address that concern. He asked about the concern regarding drainage and water runoff. Stalland explained where the parking was on the previous drawing to where it is on the current drawing and stated with the three buildings we believe the lighting will be contained. Dan Tilsen, (G-Cubed, Inc.; 285 Westview Drive, West St. Paul, MN). He explained the outcome of the initial review and where the water would be running. He commented on the ultimate final design would not increase the water going to the west and the pond that was built for the development. He explained the differences in the impervious surface and size of the parking or flow of traffic that the athletic plan would have on a peak basis. He commented on stepping back on lighting and said there was a lighting plan done and should be in the packet; and the spill of light doesn’t exceed the property lines per City Code. Fleming commented on how us as a City can do our process and can ensure the storm water management plan is submitted and is in good orders to confirm that the runoff is traveling east not west. Kallberg shared the remaining concern expressed by the SMSC was lighting exposure. He explained on the original plan, light was shielded by garages and the current plan may have shining between garages; perhaps the garages could be oriented differently. Tilsen said he believes a landscape plan was submitted and it should show heavily landscaped area that would reduce or eliminate the light. Tieman asked about the phasing of this plan; which units would go first and how you keep the runoff under control during the phasing and are the parking lots going to be completed in looping or individual. Tilsen explained how the market would define the phases, which unit would be constructed first and individual parking sizes, underground parking, and surface parking. He commented on the direction of building construction, parking being constructed with each building, drainage during construction and impervious surface with each phase. Tieman asked if the excavation plan would be for the entire site. Tilsen said yes. 3 Petersen questioned the lights shining through the spaces between the garages on the north and west; he would like to see a solid plan in place for landscaping. Tilsen said they would arrange for the headlight glare to stop; with more landscaping or fencing. Ringstad questioned phasing in building number one; what would be the percentages of completion before constructing building number two. Tilsen replied about seventy to seventy-five percent is when we would start; however, finance and market would rule this. MOTION BY TIEMAN, SECONDED BY PETERSON TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 6:27 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Public Comment: Michael Leek, (2330 Sioux Trail NW, work). He apologized to the Commission and Staff for the miscommunication on the mailing and explained the confusion, stating he has revised his comments to reflect this. He commented on the agenda packet being wrong; however, quickly corrected by Specialist McCabe. He said he would leave to the side the request for continuation of the public hearing for now. He commented on three specific items he would like to clarify; before the City Council review that they have an opportunity to look at the lighting plan, the landscape plan and the garage layout plan, the stormwater management report and clarification on staging. He said he does have a better idea of the staging after the presentation. He said additional comments would like to be made on these items prior to the City Council meeting. Fleming asked Mr. Leek how long of a timeframe would he need to turn these reviews around. Leek asked Specialist McCabe when the City Council Packets go out for review. Specialist McCabe explained when the packets go out and mentioned an attachment to the Council could be made later, if it was not available to go out on that day. Leek said one day in advance would be sufficient to turn around comments. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 6:33 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Ringstad said they have some good information from the staff packet as well as the applicant and Mr. Leek. He stated the phasing in three buildings makes a obvious financial sense for the applicant. The project is still what appears to be a very high quality project. He commented on drainage and stormwater stating the applicant’s engineer’s numbers will be verified by City engineer and based on what he heard tonight he will be supporting the change. Petersen said he concurs; does see changes with the lighting and would like that to be addressed, whether it is with fencing or landscaping or extra building; the landscaping plan can be submitted and he commented on the stormwater saying it the whole drainage system was made to support impervious at sixty percent, he is not concerned about that. He will be supporting. Tieman stated overall this project appears to be a good project for the community. He said it meets all the criteria. Kallberg stated he does agree with the benefits of the community and does agree with the three separate buildings rather than the one big one; certainly, you can get one building occupied of fifty units rather than having to wait to build one-hundred-fifty-units before you can occupy anything. He talked of having rental income once the first one is completed which would leave you sufficient understanding of market and demand so you know when to start a second building and when to meet that demand. He agrees with this idea. 4 Fleming stated he will be supporting the improved PUD; offers a lot of flexibility which this City has a vision for which will benefit multifamily units or give us multifamily units that serve the need of a broad range of our community members. MOTION BY TIEMAN, SECONDED BY PETERSON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE SHEPHERD PATH FINAL PUD PLAN RELATED TO OUTLOT A TO INCLUDE A ONE-HUNDRED-FIFTY UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX IN PLACE OF A ONE-HUNDRED-FIFTY- ONE UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING WITH CONDITIONS TO ADD LANGUAGE THAT LANDSCAPING AND STORMWATER PLAN BE SUBMITTED TO THE TRIBE BEFORE THIS AGENDA ITEM GOES TO THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT OR HAVE BEEN BROUGHT OUT TONIGHT BE COMPLIED WITH AT 6:38 P.M. REGARDING ITEM 4A. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. B. PDEV17-001009 – 21 & Duluth – Greystone Construction is requesting a height variance from 25 feet to 20 feet on a one story commercial building located at the southwest corner of the Hwy 21 and Duluth Avenue intersection. PID: 259021270. Specialist McCabe introduced the consideration of a request from Greystone Construction for a five-foot variance from the required twenty-five-foot minimum height in the Town Center (TC) Zoning Use District (Subsection 1102.806, Dimensional Standards). The property is located at the southwest corner of the CH21 and Duluth Avenue intersection. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, alternatives and recommended a motion. He presented a location map, proposed site plan and proposed building elevation. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg questioned if there was concern regarding the parking lot entrance being so close to the intersection on Eagle Creek and Duluth; being a busy intersection. He asked what the prospect of entrance/exit between two family homes on the adjacent street, going south out of the parking lot which appears to be an empty lot. Project Engineer Monserud said correct, the proximity is close but is what is required. He commented on the lot between two residential house and said that is primarily there for their stubs (water and sewer) come through this lot. He said once this plan is reviewed we will see if they are proposing a connection between those homes; however, at this time they are not proposing this. Petersen asked for clarification of the minimum height of twenty-five. He said anything less than 25 would need the variance not the average of twenty-five, correct? Specialist McCabe replied correct, in this case we reviewed it as a minimum of twenty-five in all portions of the building. Petersen asked if they needed a variance to go down to twenty, but staff is recommending that everything stay at twenty-three, correct? Specialist McCabe said correct; in part to ensure that the building maintains that design. He explained the reasoning behind this. Petersen said is this plan close to the final plan? With the two ends taller; seems a little more flexibility for if someone was to build on the other side of this building. Specialist McCabe said the applicant could better address this question. He said staff has seen a couple different plans and explained the conditions recommended regarding the building design. Applicant: Todd Novak, (Mohagan Hansen Architects and Interiors, 1000 Twelve Oaks Center Drive, Wayzata, MN). He said he would be happy to answer any questions. He explained the reason behind the height request. Tieman questioned a traffic study for the number of people expected to visit this establishment. 5 Novak said he would have to ask the rest of his team on this question. Project Engineer Monserud said they would loop that in to the 21-Corridor study. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 6:47 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Public Comment: Jason McBrayer, (4472 Colorado Street SE). He stated he lives on the corner and commented on horrible traffic, accidents, running stop signs, calls to the police, more traffic with children in the neighborhood and requested flashing stop signs and speed bumps. He commented on calling the police, yelling at people and them laughing at him. He questioned the lighting, dumpsters, fencing, flooding, wandering into his backyard. He said his main concerns is traffic. Petersen asked which intersection; Duluth and 21 or Duluth and Colorado. Jason said all streets and mentioned the running of stop signs. Petersen clarified this meeting is just for the height variance; however, he would have another opportunity to speak on this at a future meeting, but did mentioned it was good that he stated these items as it allows the people working on this project to take this in to consideration for the next meeting. Fleming asked Staff to make a note to have someone from the Prior Lake Police Department to follow up with Jason to make sure to close the feedback loop Joann Brandstedter, (4452 Colorado Street SE). She thanked Specialist McCabe for assistance and Commissioner Kallberg for bring up the traffic. She commented on traffic being a big concern, especially with left hand turns. She mentioned the amount of traffic already with t he church and school there and their activities. She explained she is in the Medical Field and had needed to assist in accidents many times. She commented on the right turn only; however, that would lead you towards the Church/School and the four-way-stop. She said she has lived here for seventeen years and knew something would come into the proposed parcel; she is not arguing the development as it is part of progress. She commented on flooding, retaining walls, rain and snow in parking lot. She comment ed on comments of Specialist McCabe on engineering concerns that would be taken care of and additional concerns of treating driveway and where the chemicals would go. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY TIEMAN TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 6:55 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Ringstad said great comments from residents and he thanked the residence for showing up and bringing this to our attention. He commented on not knowing how bad the intersection was, except for the Church traffic which doesn’t seem to be the cause of what is going on. He commented on Mrs. Brandsteder comments regarding change in the neighborhood and said right now we are concentrating on the height variance request. He stated this planned use of the building is much better than what could have come to the neighborhood. He commented on drainage and the Cities involvement has always been aware of these situations as the water needs to be contained on the property and cannot adversely affect the neighboring property. He said the five variance criteria that staff laid out for the approval have been meet and therefore he will be supporting the request before us tonight Petersen said from the elevation drawings it looks like a good fit for this section. He said he goes through the intersection every day and knows exactly what the intersection is about. He said there is going to someday be something there so a Professional Building would be better than retail where there is consistent flow of traffic. He said he strongly recommends that the applicant take a very close look at the traffic before this comes before the commission the next time. He said the variance and drawing is great and does like the look of the sides of the building, as if something gets built on the sides and is taller it would fit a little bit better. He said he will be supporting the Height Variance. 6 Tieman stated he agrees with his fellow Commissioners about the concerns and traffic; however, this variance request is logical, good drawing, good layout for this type of building and this area. He stated he is in support with this variance request, but would like to look at the traffic in this area. Kallberg said he agrees also that this building would be attractive and beneficial to the neighborhood; the guidelines certainly allow for this two story, twenty-five foot building. He said it hardly is going to create a cannon effect of the downtown as we have a large stormwater pond directly across County Road 21 and there will never be any buildings on the other side to create that aspect. Due to the guidelines and the variation give the impression of what we see in many towns downtown is not every building was built at the same time so we do have variations not only in height but in the appearance, as well. The main thing is that it be built substantially as shown on the architects drawing and that the building meets all other requirements of the building codes and standards. Fleming stated he too will be supporting the resolution; it clearly meets the threshold for 1108.400. He said he likes the design elements but is concerned about the traffic; he said he had no idea it was that bad. He said he would like to state for the record; anything that Staff can do to escalate these concerns with the City Manager Frank Boyles and the Chief of police so we can get on this right away. MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FIVE FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED TWENTY-FIVE FOOT MINIMUM HEIGHT IN THE TOWN CENTER ZONING USE DISTRICT WITH THE LIST OF CONDITIONS AT 7:01 P.M. REGARDING ITEM 4B. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried C. PDEV17-001010 – 4207 Quaker Trail NE – Jon Gleisner is requesting a variance from the bluff impact zone and lake setback to construct a three -car garage and remodel a home. PID: 250360230. Specialist McCabe introduced the request of approval of a resolution approving variances from the minimum lake setback and grading in the bluff impact zone for a property in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District at a property located at 4207 Quaker Trail NE. The property is located along the northern shores of Lower Prior Lake, south of Lords Street. The property currently contains a single- family home. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, alternatives and recommended a motion. He presented resolution, location map, proposed survey dated April 11, 2017 and a building elevation dated February 28, 2017. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg commented on the bullet shaped structure on the lower right hand corner of the survey is the outlet box for the Prior Lake outlet channel; he said it was build a few years ago and is a very attractive thing to see the appearance from the lake and surroundings. He said the unimproved alley is the overland access to that outlet structure. He said the existing garage is not existing anymore. He said it will improve the appearance of the property. He said the house is gutted and there is no activity; he presumes they are waiting for some process to happen here today. Petersen asked if the foot print will remain the same or similar and will be improving the setbacks. Project Engineer Monserud said it appears to be similar. Applicant: No comment by applicant. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 7:07 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Public Comment: 7 None. MOTION BY TIEMAN, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 7:07 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg said he has already expressed his support of this; he thinks it certainly improves the property and there was some gain in the impervious surface and will improve property overall. Tieman said this will be an overall improvement; therefore, absolutely supports this agenda item. Fleming stated he will be supporting this agenda item; it meets the five point threshold of the ordinance 1108.400. Petersen said he concurs; and stated he is in support. Ringstad said agreed. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY TIEMAN TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VARIANCES REQUESTED FOR 4207 QUAKER TRAIL NE WITH THE LIST OF CONDITIONS AT 7:09 P.M. REGARDING ITEM 4C. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried 5. Old Business: A. PVR17-0001 - 14332 & 14342 Watersedge Trail NE - Variance – Copper Creek Real Estate Group, Inc. is requesting variances regarding setbacks and impervious surface to construct one new home on each parcel (Two Homes Total) in the R1SD (Low Density Residential Shoreland) Zoning District. PID’s: 251190070 & 251190080. Commission Comments/Questions: Fleming said at the outset of the meeting the developer representative for Copper Creek has requested that we postpone this agenda item until May 1, 2017. Fleming stated what he would like to understand if all the Commissioners are planning to attend the Meeting on May 1st, 2017. Commissioners agreed. Fleming asked where we are in the Statutorily defined timeline for this project and request. Specialist McCabe replied he verified with Planner Matzke this afternoon that we are at our sixty day notice now; however, we have notified at the initial notice of the applicant of the one-hundred-twenty-day extension. We have time to act as a Planning Commission. Fleming stated he was checking. Kallberg stated that the applicant requested the application then that limit is waived. 6. New Business: No New Business. 7. Adjournment: MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO ADJORN THE MONDAY, APRIL 17, 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 7:10P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried Sandra Woods, Development Services Assistant