Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3 May 14 2018 Planning Commission Minutes - draft 1 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Monday, May 14, 2018 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Fleming called the Monday, May 14, 2018 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Bryan Fleming, Dave Tieman, William Kallberg, Dan Ringstad, Jason Tschetter and Liaison Zach Braid. Also present were Community Development Director Casey McCabe, Engineer Jason Wedel, Planner Jeff Matzke, Planner Amanda Schwabe, Project Engineer Nick Monserud and Community Development Services Assistant Sandra Woods. 2. Approval of Agenda: MOTION BY RINGSTAD SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, MAY 14, 2018 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, Ringstad and Tschetter. The Motion carried. 3. Approval of Monday, APRIL 23, 2018 Meeting Minutes: MOTION BY TSCHETTER, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, APRIL 23, 2018 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, Ringstad and Tschetter. The Motion carried. 4. Public Hearings: A. PDEV18-000015 – 15263 Fairbanks Trail NE – Variance – The homeowner, Raymond Joachim is requesting variances from the lakeside, front yard, rear yard setbacks, and impervious surface coverage. The property is located Lower Prior Lake; west of Fairbanks Trail NE; south of Quaker Trail NE in the R1-SD, Low Density Residential Shoreland District. PID: 250360130. Planner Schwabe: Introduced the request regarding variances from the minimum lot area, minimum structure setback from the Ordinary High Water (OHW) elevation front and rear yard setbacks as well as the maximum impervious surface requirement to allow the replacement of a single-family structure on property located at 15263 Fairbanks Trail NE. The property is located along the western shore of Lower Prior Lake, west of Fairbanks Trail NE and south of Quaker Trail NE. The property contains a single- family home that is a single story (with basement walkout) structure. Sh e explained the history, current circumstances, issues, and recommended a motion. She presented a resolution, location map, survey of existing and proposed structures dated November 29, 2017 and proposed floor plans. Commission Comments/Questions: Fleming: Questioned the optimal result that can be achieved in respect to impervious surface. Planner Schwabe: Explained the challenges for impervious surface with smaller lots. She stated this request for this agenda item is a reasonable request. Ringstad: Asked about the DNR proposed changes regarding the 904 OHW elevation and asked if this is part of this change. Planner Schwabe: Replied staff has been working with the DNR to adjust he lowest floor elevation from the floodplain standpoint; however, is not aware of the ordinary high water (OHW) for Prior Lake being part of that change. Tschetter: Questioned feedback from neighbors or neighboring properties. Planner Schwabe: Shared the feedback from neighbors, stating there was two inquiries and they were general to what was being proposed. She explained the drainage and the options for any issues regarding grade/drainage. 2 Tschetter: Asked if the Shoreland District mandated or if we have any rules that addresses any additional stormwater runoff litigation to prevent runoff from entering the lake through infiltration, sumps or diversion to stormwater on the street. Planner Schwabe: Stated the Engineering Department Staff would be best to ask regarding the stormwater. She explained how the building permit review also would address this. Project Engineer Monserud: Explained this house doesn’t meet our minimum disturbance or additional impervious thresholds which would require additional treatment measures. He explained the stormwater management rules, stating small lots typically are not capable of meeting the imperious surface area of 3500 square feet. Tieman: Asked if the removal of the existing concrete pad and decking materials is what the outcome is of the lower impervious surface number. Planner Schwabe: Responded, yes that is correct. Kallberg: Questioned if the existing concrete slab would remain on the side of the existing garage. Planner Schwabe: Replied approximately half of the existing concrete will be covered by the new proposed home if approved tonight. Kallberg: Commented on further reducing impervious surface by removing the concrete slab entirely. Planner Schwabe: Said the remaindered of the concrete pad is going to be removed with this project. MOTION BY TIEMAN, SECONDED BY TSCHETTER TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AT 6:17 P.M ON ITEM 4A. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, Ringstad and Tschetter. The Motion carried. Applicant No comment. Public Comment: None. MOTION BY TSCHETTER, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:18 P.M. ON ITEM 4A. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, Ringstad and Tschetter. The Motion carried. Commissioners Comments: Ringstad: Stated the five criteria have been met, the impervious surface reduction is terrific, this project is a benefit to the neighborhood, and this is a legal non-conforming lot; therefore, a good project to ask for variances. He said he will support this agenda item tonight. Tschetter: Echoed Commissioner Ringstad’s comments and stated this is an improvement for a difficult situation with a difficult lot. He commented on reducing impervious surface and said managing stormwater runoff is appreciated. Fleming: Stated he will be supporting the request for this variance with the slight addition that it comports with our shoreland ordinance 1104.306. Tieman: Said he also will be supporting this agenda item and appreciates the homeowner finding a home that fits the lot. Kallberg: Stated he will be supporting this agenda item. He gave some history of the subdivision and commented on the impervious surface and the structure being a good use of the property. MOTION BY TSCHETTER, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VARIANCES REQUESTED FROM THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, MINIMUM LAKE SETBACK, MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK, MINIMUM REAR YARD SETBACK, AND MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FOR 15263 FAIRBANKS TRAIL NE IN THE R-1 SD (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL SHORELAND) ZONING DISTRICT WITH THE LIST OF CONDITIONS. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg and Tschetter. The Motion carried. 3 B. PDEV18-000004 – Parkhaven – Preliminary Plat with Preliminary Planned Unit Development – Terry Forbord, via Parkhaven Holdings, LLC is requesting a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development application for Parkhaven, a residential development project near Pike Lake at 4230 – 140th Street NE, Prior Lake, MN in the Agriculture Shoreland District, (ASD). PID: 259230090. Planner Matzke introduced the request to consider approval to the City Council of a Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan to be known as Parkhaven at Pike Lake; a development of 55- lot, low density residential subdivision. The subject site is located north of County Highway 42, east of County Highway 21, and west of Pike Lake. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, and recommended a motion. He presented a location map, development plans dated April 18, 2018, and applicant narrative, engineering/public works department memorandum dated May 7, 2018 and a community and economic development department memorandum dated May 4, 2018. Commission Comments/Questions: Ringstad: Questioned the combination of public and private roads leading into the development. Planner Matzke: Stated all the roads are public roads for this project. He explained the roads that lead into the parks and commented on who would maintain the islands in the middle of the cul-de-sacs. Ringstad: Asked about phasing. Planner Matzke: Stated the grading of this site, roads and utilities, would need to be done as one phase. He commented on the utility connections, the taking down and platting of the homes and stated the main construction would be completed in one phase. Tschetter: Questioned the parking for Pike Lake Park and other plans for this development to achieve the vision for Pike Lake Park. Planner Matzke: Pointed out the rendering, explained the parking and the access. He mentioned some park dedication and future expansion of the parking lot and commented on the master planning of the city’s entire park system which will be considered by the city council. Tschetter: Questioned the loop trail or trail system. Planner Matzke: Explained the trail envisioned for the future and ownership of the lake shore properties. Tschetter: Asked if there is enough stability on the Ordinary High Water (OHW ) of Pike Lake. Planner Matzke: Explained the OHW and the setbacks are taken into consideration and the DNR sets the OHW/setbacks for Pike Lake. He explained the flow of the channel into Pike Lake and how the channel can be adjusted. He commented on the setbacks and the City owned areas. Kallberg: Shared some background on channel easements, flowing, flooding, outlet box, natural and manmade waterways. He explained the easements and said he hopes this development will ease some of the conflict with easements. He stated these easements must be recorded prior to this plat being recorded. Applicant: Terry Forbord: Residing at 4960 Sussex Place, Shorewood, MN thanked for the opportunity to appear before the Planning Commission, introduced Stantec’s Lead Engineer Mr. Roger Humphrey whom he has worked on multiple project in recent years including Chatonka Heights, explained this is a unique neighborhood community and gave reasons of what makes it unique and commented on working with City Staff to find the best way to proceed with this unique project. He mentioned the timeline that they have been working on project, stated they have no other comments as Planner Matzke report was very complete and stated he was open for questions. Commission Comments/Questions: Ringstad: Questioned the absorption time and the range points for the fifty-five homes. Applicant Forbord: Replied they haven’t selected a builder yet, because of Parkhaven being so unique. He explained the amount of homes, natural corridors and open space. Ringstad: Asked if it would be one or multiple builders. 4 Applicant Forbord: Explained they are primarily focusing on getting the plans approved and are unsure of the number of builders at this time. Tschetter: Asked if all the parcels are under contract. Applicant Forbord: Replied all are under contract at this time, including the one with the County right- of-way parcel. Tschetter: Questioned the timeline regarding consideration for commercial development for Outlot D, after completion of this project. Applicant Forbord: Said he is unsure as the focus has been on the residential portion of the project. Tschetter: Said thank you and realized it is preliminary at this point. Tieman: Asked about phasing of the project. Applicant Forbord: Explained the phasing of the grading and the infrastructure will occur at the same time. He commented on the collector street and entrance to the parks construction timing and the roadways, stating phasing will depend on what the builder wants to do and when we have a final plan. MOTION BY TIEMAN, SECONDED BY TSCHETTER TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AT 7:01 P.M ON ITEM 4b. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, Ringstad and Tschetter. The Motion carried. Public Comment: Dan Klamm: Resides at 4130 140th Street NE. He commented on being a resident of 30 plus years, not wanting to be a road block, explained his unique piece of property that is adjacent to this development and said he would just like to continue to enjoy his property. He talked of the drainage channel and suggested information regarding the future of the catch basin and erosion on the intersection of County Roads 42 and 21. MOTION BY TSCHETTER, SECONDED BY TIEMAN TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:04 PM VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, Ringstad and Tschetter. The Motion carried. Commissioners Comments: Planner Matzke: Mentioned the pedestrian underpass information regarding why it was put in and stated it is not being proposed now; however, would like it noted for consideration of grade adjustment down to the area where the pedestrian underpass is located as it is part of the trail system. Kallberg: Said he doesn’t like the smaller lots; but, appreciates the open space and calculating the necessity of houses on properties. He commented on clustering of the homes and open spaces. He said this is a great plan and has anticipated this project since Highway 21 was built. He said he will support this agenda item. Tieman: Stated he is impressed by this preliminary plan, mentioned it is a great opportunity and is laid out best to utilize the property. He is very much in support of this plan. Fleming: Said he will be supporting this plan. He commented on the year 2006 when he was on city council regarding conversation of establishing/cultivating this “gateway” into Prior Lake. He stated it does meet our nine-point threshold for 1106 and he does appreciate the phasing and planning for tree removal and tree replacement. Tschetter: Stated he is supportive of this project, is impressed with the work that has been done so far and appreciates the preliminary plan. He commented on future opportunities to incorporate the overall grand visions into Pike Lake regarding trail options, walkability throughout the development, and potential neighborhood parks. He said the parks at Pike Lake lack play surfaces. He applauded the fact that there is a lot of natural space. Ringstad: Stated he agrees with his prior four Commissioner’s comments and would like to add his appreciation regarding the phasing and concentration being only on preliminary platting at this point. He commented on this attracting some interested home builders and that he is in support of this plan. 5 MOTION BY TSCHETTER, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AT PIKE LAKE SUBJECT TO THE LIST OF CONDITIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING PARKHAVEN. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg and Tschetter. The Motion carried. 5. Old Business: A. PDEV18-000002 – 15420 Eagle Creek Avenue NE – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) CONTINUED FROM APRIL 23, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING – Hunter Homes, LLC is requesting a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development application for a residential development project at 15420 Eagle Creek Avenue NE to subdivide 6.83 acres into 20 single Family Lots. The property is located north of CH85 (154th Street NW) and west of CH21 (Eagle Creek Avenue NE) off Majestic Lane NW in the R1-SD, Low Density Residential Shoreland District. PID: 259340020. Planner Matzke: Stated the public hearing was closed at the last meeting; therefore any discussion with the applicant or others at tonight’s meeting would be at invitation only per Commissioner’s request for comment. He then re-introduced the request regarding the Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development to recommend to the City Council to be known as Majestic and be developed as a 20 – lot residential subdivision. The subject site is located north of County Highway 82, west of County Highway 21, and east of Majestic Lane. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, and recommended a motion. He presented a location map, development plans dated March 21, 2018, applicant narrative dated March 21, 2018, Engineering/Public Works Department Memorandum dated April 6, 2018, Community & Economic Development Department Memorandum dated April 16, 2018 and County Highway Department Memorandum dated April 13, 2018. Project Engineer Monserud: Reviewed the history of the last meeting including development areas; Regal Crest plans, Executive Ponds and Majestic Plat (present). He pointed out how the existing cul-de- sacs were designed as temporary and not intended to be permanent. He explained the benefits for connection for Majestic Road, shared an overview of the plat for Majestic and mentioned comments that were received from residents at the April 23, 2018 public hearing and addressed each comment individually. Planner Matzke: Reiterated the status of the Public Hearing being closed at the last meeting and explained how commentary could continue for the applicant or staff per the Commissioner’s request. Commissioners Comments: Fleming: Commented on the cost benefit of the cul-de-sac becoming a through road especially with snow plow savings. He asked what the fiscal savings would be to the city with respect to snow plowing. City Engineer Wedel: Stated he talked to public works staff and they explained to City Engineer Wedel the safety concerns, time and cost it takes to plow these two cul-de-sacs. Mr. Wedel provided an estimate of the additional cost to maintain the temporary cul-de-sacs over the years. Ringstad: Asked for clarification regarding the history of the cul-de-sacs being a through street. Planner Matzke: Mentioned the meeting minutes form 2001 and 2004, for both Regal Crest and Executive Ponds and stated the through street was discussed in both reports. He commented that the City obtained an escrow for future street connection costs with the plat of Executive Ponds. Tschetter: Stated the options and details presented today were needed on April 23, 2018 Meeting; therefore, he appreciates staff taking the time to go through them. He feels comfortable with answers to his questions and the clarification of issues and concerns to this proposal. Tieman: Asked the estimated amount of time it takes the fire department and police to go through these cul-de-sacs. City Engineer Wedel: Explained police and fire staff didn’t give a specific time; rather, both made statements regarding emergency responses with two points of access would assist in arriving to the area quicker than having cul-de-sacs. Kallberg: Asked what is the grade of Indian Ridge Circle SE. 6 Project Engineer Monserud: Replied 9.5 to 10 percent grade; which is a similar grade as is being proposed today for this Majestic project. Kallberg: Commented on stopping sight distance and passing sight distance. He asked City Engineer Wedel to comment on these two items. City Engineer Wedel: Explained stopping sight distance is the concept of a driver based on the design speed of the road and having enough visual sight distance to see an object and be able to stop in time without hitting it. He said both stopping sight distance and passing sight distances were reviewed and based on the design of this street, we would meet stopping sight distance for 30 mph road. Kallberg: Asked what is the calculation for stopping sight distance. City Engineer Wedel: Replied it is about 200 feet. Kallberg: Stated most vehicles at 60 mph, full breaking stop at 160-170 feet on level ground. Fleming: Stated he would like to echo Commissioner Tschetter’s comments regarding not being fully ready to commit to an agreement at the last Planning Commission meeting. He commended Staff, the developer and the residents regarding the hallmark of this community with tough conversations, exhausted strategies, interventions and creativity. He stated he will be supporting this proposal, largely informed by tonight’s updates and information. He stated this project does meet city requirements and guidelines in Section 1106. He reiterated the pride of the collaboration and energy to where we arrived at. Tschetter: Addressed the audience members that we have been deliberating on this topic for two meetings now. He commented on spending time in the community, better understanding of the project, win-win projects, better awareness on discussions that were presented tonight, and being more informed with the updates. He believes there is better service with the connection, the proposed development is consistent with what our community wants, desirable products in the community and consistent with the neighboring streets. He noted Fairway Heights Road NW; stating that street has the same feel of what is being proposed for this connection. He commented on the best pract ices, safety concerns and commended staff and police on a job well done. He reiterated that we have explored options that make sense and the opportunity to develop this parcel and allows us to move forward. He said he will be supporting this project. Ringstad: Said he will be supporting; especially with the information about additional trips making right turns and U-turns. He feels this is the best option. He commented on the cul-de-sacs being temporary as they don’t meet city’s requirements and said the connection makes a lot of sense due to safety, cost, and the additional right hand turns on to County Road 82; therefore, he will be in support of this agenda item tonight. Tieman: Stated looking through this PUD, he keeps coming back to the criteria used for PUD’s; one of those is create a sense of place and provide more interaction among people. He said this project potentially does provide more space and interaction, however, he feels this existing neighborhood will be affected and they don’t want this road to go through. He is opposed to this item. Kallberg: Stated staff has been very diligent in exploring all the issues and alternatives. He reiterated comparisons to Indian Ridge Circle and commented on the de-icing in the winter months. He said it is a good use of the property, it does eliminate the hazardous private driveway entrance from the right turn lane southbound on County Road 21. He stated he will support this project. MOTION BY TSCHETTER, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR MAJESTIC SUBJECT TO THE LISTED CONDITIONS TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING 15420 EAGLE CREEK AVENUE NE. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Kallberg, Ringstad and Tschetter. Nay by Tieman. The Motion carried. 6. New Business: ANNOUNCEMENTS • Next Planning Commission Meeting 7 o On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 ▪ Three scheduled public hearings that night. 7. Adjournment: MOTION BY TSCHETTER, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO ADJORN THE MONDAY, MAY 14, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 7:54 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, Ringstad and Tschetter. The Motion carried. Sandra Woods, Community Development Services Assistant.