Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 27, 2006 Maintenance Center 17073 Adelmann Street S.E. Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, MARCH 27, 2006 Fire Station - City Council Chambers 6:30 p.m. 1. Call Meeting to Order: 2. Roll Call: 3. Approval of Minutes: 4. Consent Agenda: 5. Public Hearings: A. #EP 05-228 (continued) Tollefson Development has submitted a preliminary plat consisting of approximately 30 acres of land for the development of 51 single family dwellings to be known as Maple Glen 3rd. B. #EP05-212 & 213 (continued) Tollefson Development has submitted a preliminary plat and planned unit development application for a development to be known as Hickory Shores, consisting of 80 single family homes and 38 townhomes. 6. Old Business: None 7. New Business: A. #EP 06-104 City Council is requesting a vacation of drainage and utility easement for property owned by Roger Ferguson at 4500 Lords Street. B. #EP 06-119 Lehrer Developing, LLC submitted a petition to vacate an existing easement dedicated on Outlot B, Deerfield Industrial Park 5th Addition. C. Review Capital Improvement Program for 2007-2011. 8. Announcements and Correspondence: 9. Adjournment: Ll06 F1LESI06 PLANNING cOMMISSIONlAGENDASIAG032706WWW.cityofpriorlake.com Phone 952.440.9675 / Fax 952.440.9678 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, MARCH 27, 2006 1. Call to Order: Chairman Stamson called the March 27,2006, Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Billington, Perez, Ringstad and Stamson, Planning Director Jane Kansier, Assistant City Engineer Larry Poppler and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2. Roll Call: Billington Lemke Perez Ringstad Stamson Present Absent Present Present Present 3. Approval of Minutes: The Minutes from the February 27,2006, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. 4. Consent: None 5. Public Hearings: Commissioner Stamson read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting. A. #EP 05-228 (continued) Tollefson Development has submitted a preliminary plat consisting of approximately 30 acres of land for the development of 51 single family dwellings to be known as Maple Glen 3rd. Planning Director Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated March 27, 2006, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Tollefson Development has applied for approval of a development to be known as Maple Glen 3rd Addition on the property located south of Trunk Highway 13 (Maple Glen 2nd Addition), north of 180th Street, and west of Wedge wood Lane. The proposal calls for a single-family development consisting of 52 dwelling units on 28.86 (net) acres. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on this request on February 13, 2006. The following outstanding issues related to the proposed development were discussed: L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 1 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 . Unanswered drainage issues related to adjacent residential properties. . Plat issue of Lot 6, Block 1, not meeting Shoreland requirements. . Safety and visibility issues related to 180th Street near the entrance of the development. . Reconfiguration of Outlot B to accommodate a future roadway to provide future development options to the southeast. The Commissioners continued the public hearing and requested the developer submit new plans and information addressing the above items. Many of the issues discussed at the February 13th public hearing have been addressed through the revised plans and material submitted by the developer. As noted in the March 7, 2006, memorandum from the Engineering Department, the developer must refine the plans to assure compliance with the Public Work Design Manual requirements. Poppler gave an overview of the drainage and wetland issues. The developer is working with the landowner downstream to provide a better outlet on the southwest wetland. If that does not work out the developer has another option of creating more ponding without loosing any lots. There would have to be more easement work. Either way there are options. In addition, the wetland delineations will need to be verified in the spring. However, none of these revisions will likely impact the general design of the proposed plat. If any significant modifications to the plat are necessary, the developer will be required to resubmit for Preliminary Plat consideration and a new public hearing will be held before the Planning Commission. Staff recommended approval subject to the following conditions. 1. A Wetland Replacement Plan application, along with a wetland delineation report, must be submitted to the City for review and permitting prior to any grading on this site. The plan must be consistent with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. The comments in the City Engineer's memorandum, dated March 7, 2006, must be addressed with the final plans. All utilities and roads must be constructed in conformance with the Public Works Design Manual. 3. Provide a copy of the approved Watershed District permit for this site prior to any grading. 4. Provide a revised plat layout that demonstrates that all lot area and lot widths at the front building line will meet the Shoreland District requirements. 5. Provide a revised landscaping plan that provides at least two front yard trees per lot and at least two trees per frontage on comer lots (4 front yard trees). L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 2 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 6. Provide a revised reforestation plan demonstrating how tree replacement requirements will be meet. Comments from the Public: Todd Bodem, Tollefson Development, said staff did a great job in the overview. Tollefson made the requested changes and improvements. The project engineers were also present to answer any questions. The runoff in either direction would not cause any bounce. There is no impact to the wetlands. Their plan will work both ways. Tim Kvidera, 17776 Wedgewood, said the last time they met, the neighbors were concerned for the runoff going to the south. Now their concern is for water going to the east. Rice Lake is an environmental lake needing water to keep it being a lake and not a marsh. This proposal cuts the water by a quarter going to the east. K videra said having less water is not necessarily a benefit to him. It will change the lake. They bought the property specifically for the environment. K videra went on to say the neighbors to the south were concerned with the overflow into the wetland that already overflows too often and damages pastures, etc. There is drain tile in the area which is more of a Watershed District concern. He also has some safety concerns with visibility when cutting the hillside down but felt it can be addressed. K videra took issue with the park dedication fees and quoted the "Wavelength" stating "new developments should have park land within one-third of a mile". Kvidera felt Maple Glen 3rd does not meet the park requirements or the cash dedication. K videra said he had another concern with the City's tree presentation ordinance but did not state what it was. Kvidera felt, in his opinion, Tollefson Development are not good stewards of the land and went on to quote a Minnesota Supreme Court Ruling with developments blending into the land. Todd Bodem, Tollefson Development, said staff and the City did a good job with the park system. It would make more sense to regionalize the park and explained the plan. As far as Kvidera's comment on the integrity of the land, Bodem said that is his opinion. The City is growing and Tollefson has been sensitive to the environment and this project is a positive to the community. Billington asked Bodem ifhe has a comment regarding Kvidera's concern for the drain tile and so forth. Bodem responded he has known all along the K videras have been concerned for more water. With the drainage alteration it is actually less water but not significantly less. Project engineers and hydrologists are present to answer specific questions. Kvidera's argument has always been that they (Tollefson) would create more water. The Watershed District also pointed out there is less water and now Kvideras are concerned for less water. It is a difference of opinion. Bodem explained meeting with the Township, Watershed District and County to discuss the southwest wetland and how L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 3 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 to address the water elevation. He pointed out that even with the 100 year flood; the water would not reach the barns. Tollefson suggested they put a structure in front of it so nobody could go ahead and block it as that has happened in the past. The Township felt the clay tile is functioning and flowing. They are assuming it is fairly old and was put in years ago. Tollefson said they would put in a new structure to address all concerns. Either way the issue has been addressed. However, Tollefson's property is only 8 acres of a large watershed flowing into the wetland. No other agency wanted to pay for this; however they are willing to correct it. Tollefson explained the drainage. Bodem went on to say the developer pays a lot in fees. As far as park dedication, the general public does not understand how much money is paid into the fund. It's not just a couple of swing sets. It is a significant amount of money for the entire community. He also pointed out they are paving 180th Street to the site going west to Fairlawn. They are making a fix under the road for which they could really go the other direction. What happens ifit collapses and nobody wants to take ownership of the drain tile? It really is not Tollefson's responsibility. The Township Chair agreed to consider maintenance of the new pipe put underground (paid by Tollefson). The developer is trying to work with all agencies and felt they are doing a good job. Bodem also pointed out the hydrologists and engineers were present to answer specific questions. Tim K videra said he was never concerned with too much or too little rurroff, but to keep the water flow the same to keep the eco system in place. He went to the Watershed District with Maple Glen 2nd Addition and was told the calculations indicated there would not be quite as much water however it would flow faster. To him, that was not great either. Billington asked Poppler ifhe was satisfied with the hydrology surveys. Poppler responded he was and the City is receptive to the plan. Poppler asked the hydrologist to speak. Jon Lennander, Polaris Group, explained they looked at both issues of runoff (southwest and the change in water going to the east). There was a little bit of increase in the flood bounce going to the southwest wetland. Tollefson has agreed to include a new outlet in their project and with the replaced drain tile; the little increase balances the bounce in the wetland. As far as the water going off to the east - the total drainage area to Rice Lake is 1,100 acres. This proj ect will reduce drainage by about 8 acres which is about. 7 of a percent. The change is very slight. On an annual basis you would be looking at a reduction in volume of water of2.7 acres of water. Lennander went on to explain the studies. Lynn Kvidera, 17776 Wedgewood, asked Lennander ifhe took into consideration the affects of the existing drain tile before he made all the calculations. And did he know where the drain tile is located and what is going to happen when it is removed? L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 4 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 Jon Lennander responded he did not know what exact drain tile she was referring to. Hedlund Engineering is working on the project - understands the drain tile is off site. Lynn Kvidera responded "It's on the site! It is on the Barber property!" Jon Lennander said it does not change the water runoff. The amount of water coming from a drain tile would not change the ground water. Nancy Frinkman, 17801 Fairlawn Avenue, asked ifthere was a new map of the project area. Kansier said the basic configuration is the same, however the street has been realigned and some of the lots have been reconfigured. Frinkman said she is still concerned for the drainage and understands they are putting in a reserve pond on the southwest side adjoining her property. Her other concern is for the drainage contaminants affecting the natural wildlife and eco system. The engineering department said there is a 30 foot strip vegetation buffer. Has anyone talked about the long established oak trees and water elms being removed? It changes the entire dynamics of the eco system. Wade Waddell, 18301 Country Squires Circle, said he was concerned with the bounce and the overflow coming off the property. After talking to Tollefson, they proposed to put in a 15" drain tile rather than an 8" clay tile that is currently going under County Road 81 heading down to Buck Lake. If that works, it will help with the balance of the water situation between the neighbors. He wanted to thank Tollefson for "taking the bull by the horns" and making additional improvements at their cost. Kansier addressed the park questions pointing out the following: . The area being dedicated to the City. . There will be 39 acres of park land, much of it natural, plus a mile and a half of trail winding around Rice and Crystal Lakes. . As part of Maple Glen 3rd Addition - The park fees will be around $194,000. Those fees are used to develop the park infrastructure. . The park is roughly 1,000 feet from the northern boundary of Maple Park 3rd. Commissioner Stamson closed the public hearing. Comments from the Commissioners: Ringstad: . This has come a long way in 6 weeks. There are still some concerns from neighbors and at this point I'm going to relying on the City Engineering and hydrologists with the drainage issues. . The maj or concerns have been addressed. . Agreed with Kansier on the park dedication fees. . Support. L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 5 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 Billington: . The Planning Commission gave the applicant very substantial marching orders regarding hydrology issues at the previous meeting. I think they have made substantial strides to mitigate any adverse effects on the neighbors. . Time spent was very productive by the applicant and overviewed very substantially by the Planning and Engineering staff. . Based on what I see here with staff's conditions I will support with the staff carefully watching the process. Perez: . I think great strides have taken place since the last time we met. The majority of the issues have been addressed since the last meeting. . Support. Stamson: . Agreed with Commissioners and staff. The last time we met, we had specific concerns. The developer has done a great job addressing them for the most part. . There are still a few questions regarding drainage but am confident the Watershed District, staff and developer can work them out. . Support. MOTION BY BILLINGTON, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBJECT TO THE LISTED CONDITIONS. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This matter will go before the City Council on April 17, 2006. B. #EP05-213 & 213 (continued) Tollefson Development has submitted a preliminary plat and planned unit development application for a development to be known as Hickory Shores, consisting of 80 single family homes and 38 townhomes. Planning Director Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated March 27, 2006, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. This development was originally submitted by Giles Properties, and considered by the Planning Commission at the meeting on December 12, 2005. There were a number of outstanding issues that needed to be addressed before this proposal could move forward, so the Planning Commission tabled this item. The property owners extended the deadline for City action until May 15, 2006. In the meantime, Tollefson Development has taken over the project, and submitted revised plans. Tollefson Development has applied for approval of a development to be known as Hickory Shores on the property located at on the south side of TH 13 and north and west of Crystal Lake and Rice Lake. The application includes the following requests: L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 6 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 . Approve a Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan; . Approve a Preliminary Plat. The proposal calls for a residential development consisting of 80 single family homes and 38 townhouses, along with parks and trail on 80 acres. Section 1106.400 of the Zoning ordinance lists the types of uses and standards allowed under a PUD. The PUD provisions offer maximum flexibility in many areas, including setbacks, building heights, and so on. The developer is requesting modifications to the minimum lot area, and the development of private streets for the townhouse portion of the development. In return, the developer is offering the following: . 27.44 acres of parkland. . 6.35 acres of conservation easement covering wooded areas. . Connection of Ida Circle from the existing Crystal Addition development to Hickory Shores, which will eliminate an access to TH 13. . Dedication of a drainage and utility easement for the future construction of the CSAH 12 and TH 13 intersection. . Funds for a fishing pier on Crystal Lake. Poppler said he has just reviewed the newly submitted grading plan after the report was written - the City still has significant concerns with the ponding and stormwater. In particular, a storm basin near a home which is also within 20 feet a 13 foot retaining wall. The concerns are how is this going to work? Their calculations did not show a larger pond is needed. The other pond near Jackson Street must also be larger. Another City concern is for the stability of the retaining walls near the trail. Poppler said they were concerned with the infiltration basin up near Highway 13 and how it will function. Staff has some ideas on how it could be improved. A lot of the trails are on steep slopes and staff is not sure how the trail is configured and how the trees will be affected. Poppler's other concern is that in reducing the tree impacts the swales behind the lots are getting closer to the building pads which means there are more easements closer to the homes. He would be concerned ifhe was a homeowner with an easement so close to his home. Based on the engineering concerns with the undersized ponds and tree issues that need to be addressed staff is hesitant moving this forward. Staff's recommendation is to continue the meeting to April 10, 2006. It doesn't give the developer a lot of time to look at the issues, however if staff goes any further they will run into the statutory deadline or the developer can sign a waiver to extend the deadline. L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 7 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 Poppler said he is meeting tomorrow with the developer and his engineers to go over the Issues. Questions from the Commissioners: Billington asked for more specifics on the proposed riprap and outlets being placed outside the wetland areas. Poppler said staffhas seen it in other developments. It is not significant but explained shortening the pipe and riprapping the area to prevent erosion. Comments from the Public: Todd Bodem, Tollefson Development, said they would be happy to go back and address the engineering concerns as they just received the new comments. Bodem distributed a handout showing the tree preservation and green space (park and trail system). In a sense it is a "floating trail" until staff makes the final decision. Tollefson would like to develop in one phase. Billington asked Bodem if there were any significant challenges. Bodem and his engineer did not feel there were any problems. Perez asked if there were any issues with the April 10th deadline. Bodem felt they could meet the timeline. Jim Leslie, 4045 Heritage Lane, said his initial concern was the removal of the adjacent trees and would like to meet with the developer to find out exactly what is going to be removed. Another concern would be the melting snow and the runoff between the two properties. Leslie suggested working with the developer at Heritage Landing because the property line is a natural ditch which has turned into a large swamp in the back and is not acceptable to anyone. Thanked everyone for their efforts on the trees. Ken Wuori, 17084 Pheasant Meadow Lane, said Prior Lake is growing so fast and was concerned for the traffic off Highway 13 and asked if that was taken into consideration with this project. He asked if staff was concerned with Highway 13 expanding to 4 lanes at some point and how it would affect the 170th Street realignment. Wuori distributed a map drawing for the intersection realignment. Kansier responded to his concern. Poppler explained the current location of 170th on the south side will stay the same. MNDOT has no plans of expanding Highway 13 at this time. Wuori questioned if the State widened Highway 13 would their buildings be affected. Kansier explained the Highway 13 corridor has been extensively studied over the past 10 years. There are no plans from the State at this time. The County and City were looking at possibly changing the function of Highway 13 to maybe a parkway or arterial street through the City and routing traffic through County Road 17. This corridor is very constraint especially the northern area of Prior Lake. It would be very difficult to widen the road. L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 8 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 Poppler pointed out the western side of Highway 13 would be a right in - right out intersection. It doesn't go through to the south or east and it would not have a signal. The County construction for the intersection is scheduled for 2007. The public hearing was closed at 7:55 p.m. Comments from the Commissioners: Billington: . Satisfied with the progress made by the applicant. They're in comfliance with the staff so far and as a result will support the continuance to April 10t . Perez: . Pleased with the progress of this project. The consensus in December was that it could be a good project with items addressed. . Confident the developer working with staff will address the rest of the issues. Looking forward to seeing this in April. Ringstad: . A lot of the outstanding items have not only been addressed but been improved. It is a challenging piece of property with the tree preservation and setbacks. Hopefully ponding and engineering issues will get done in the next two weeks. . Agree with staff's recommendation to continue. Stamson: . It's a difficult piece of property as far as a PUD process. . The developer has done a great job - over all it is a nice development and appropriate for the property. . Agree with staff's recommendations. MOTION BY RINST AD, SECOND BY BILLINGTON RECOMMENDING TABLING THE PUBLIC HEARING TO APRIL 10, 2006. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. A recess was called at 9:00 p.m. The hearing reconvened at 9:04 p.m. 6. Old Business: None 7. New Business: A. #EP 06-104 City Council is requesting a vacation of drainage and utility easement for property owned by Roger Ferguson at 4500 Lords Street. L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 9 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 Assistant City Engineer Larry Poppler presented the Planning Report dated March 27, 2006, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. The Prior Lake City Council initiated the vacation of a portion of the easement for roadway purposes located adjacent to 4500 Lords Street NE. This item was originally scheduled for the March 13, 2006, meeting, but was continued due to the weather conditions and meeting cancellation. The City Council conducted a public hearing on this vacation on March 20, 2006. The Council voted to approve the vacation, subject to the condition the Planning Commission find the request consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. There is no public need for the portion of right-of-way to be vacated. In addition, the vacation will provide an easement for road purposes required in the future. The staff recommended approval of this request subject to the condition an easement for drainage and utility purposes is maintained across a portion of the existing street as determined by the City Engineer. Comments from the Commissioners: Stamson stated he was surprised from the last discussions and the general consensus at that time was that if the City did rebuild the road it would probably be moved up into the easement space. All of a sudden, they decide they don't need the land. Poppler and Kansier explained the proposed house was moved from the original site. After taking a closer look, staff found they had more right-of-way to the south. The roadway would be widen and potentially moved closer to the north but not as close to the proposed area to vacate. Utility easements will be given to the City for the realignment. Perez: . This seems to be pretty straight forward. . It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. . There is a trade off for future realignment of Lord's Street. . Commend staff and the applicant for working out a solution. . Approve. Ringstad: . When I first looked at this, I was not ready to handicap the City not knowing where the road would be rebuilt. At that time, we did not know exactly where the road would be rebuilt. Now we've had a closer look. It is a win-win solution for everybody. . Support. Billington: . Support staff. Do not see any problems. It's a reasonable move. L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 10 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 Stamson: . Questioned staff how this affects other property owners along Lords Street or did staff just study this one particular lot. . Poppler said they just studied this lot and in the future the City would have to potentially buy easements on the east to make the road function. This gives staff a little more flexibility on the east side. . Little uncomfortable rewriting things because no one can say "No". Just not comfortable that this is the way to go. . Willing to take Poppler's word this is going to work. . Uncomfortable with the process on this one. MOTION BY PEREZ, SECOND BY BILLINGTON, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE VACATION OF THE EASEMENT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION AN EASEMENT FOR DRAINAGE AND UTILITY PURPOSES IS MAINTAINED ACROSS A PORTION OF THE EXISTING STREET AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. V ote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. B. #EP 06-119 Lehrer Developing, LLC submitted a petition to vacate an existing easement dedicated on Outlot B, Deerfield Industrial Park 5th Addition. Planning Director Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated March 27,2006, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. On September 6,2005, the City Council approved the final plat known as Deerfield Industrial Park 5th Addition. This plat included Outlot B, which is zoned C-5 (Business Park). Lehrer Developing has filed an application to replat this outlot as Deerfield Industrial Park 6th Addition. The new plat would allow the development of this site for commercial buildings. Previously, there was a wetland located in the north central portion of Outlot B. On October 18, 2004 a wetland mitigation plan was approved for the site. For that reason, the drainage and utility easement is no longer necessary. The approval of this vacation would allow the development of the outlot. As a precaution, the resolution approving the vacation of these easements will not be released until the final plat is approved. The resolution will be recorded just prior to the final plat. It must also be noted this vacation does not constitute approval of any building plans for the site. Comments from the Commissioners: Ringstad: . The City no longer needs the easement. It is not inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. . Support. L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 11 Planning Commission Meeting March 27, 2006 Billington/Perez: . Agree with staff and Commissioners. Stamson: . The public is being served by allowing development of the site which is the public need we are required to find. . Will support. MOTION BY BILLINGTON, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE VACATION SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THE RESOLUTION NOT BE RECORDED UNTIL AFTER FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This item goes to the City Council on April 3, 2006. C. Review Capital Improvement Program for 2007-2011. Planning Director Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated March 27,2006, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Minnesota Statutes states all proposed capital improvements be reviewed by the Planning Commission for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The summary describes the CIP (Capital Improvement Plan) process and the funding sources available to the City and expected to be used in paying for the individual projects. The budget for the projects within the 5 year CIP totals 60.190 Million dollars. Note the City Hall and Police Station are now off the CIP as they are under construction. There are several significant projects included in the CIP. Two of the most significant projects are the City's share of the CSAH 12/13 intersection (2007) and the CSAH 21/Fish Point intersection (2007). These two projects along account for 8.260 million dollars. The CIP details the allocation of$750,000 for a joint training facility within Scott County and all the cities within Scott County. The joint facility will provide for a bum tower, fire attack training space, confined space training, outdoor shooting range and office space for use by area-wide governmental entities. As in previous year's, the CIP continues to plan ongoing improvements to the City's parks and street paving and reconstruction projects. Projects maintaining the City's sewer and water infrastructure are also scheduled throughout the five-year scope of the plan. Most noteworthy are two wells (Well #10 and #11) that will be brought on-line in 2007 and 2008 to assist in meeting the City's demand for water supply. L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 12 Planning Commission Meeting March 27,2006 Stamson asked if it was still difficult to get permits from the DNR for well permits. Poppler said it was. The public works department really deals with that issue. Kansier pointed out the County has major road reconstruction and funds will be significantly affected as the City is committed to paying their share. Kansier also explained some of the development fees. Billington commented these are long term goals and the City is at the fiscal mercy of the State and Federal governments. Billington questioned if the CIP was based on a study conducted by the City. Kansier responded staff identifies needs, i.e., street improvements, wells. The City is subject to the mercy of the some things like the well locations and funding. The County has a CIP and the next few years they have major road improvements going through our City and we have a share of those fee. Those fees will eat up a lot of our CIP dollars for the next few years. The City and County work together to try to get enough advance notice for budgeting. Kansier went on to explain some of the fee structures and funding. Comments from the Commissioners: After a brief discussion the Commissioners decided they had no recommended changes. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECOND BY PEREZ, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT CIP AS PRESENTED. V ote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. 8. Announcements and Correspondence: Kansier asked the Commissioners to think about the June 20th joint City Council and advisory councils' lake tour. 9. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 8:29 p.m. Connie Carlson Recording Secretary L:\06 FILES\06 PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\MN032706.doc 13 PUBLIC HEARING Conducted by the Planning Commission ~LV\ Ol,dOO(O The Planning Commission welcomes your comments in this matter. In fairness to all who choose to speak, we ask that, after speaking once you allow everyone to speak before you address the Commission again and limit your comments to new information. Please be aware this is the principal opportunity to provide input on this matter. Once the public hearing is closed, further testimony or comment will not be possible except under rare occasions. The City Council will not hear additional testimony when it considers this matter. Thank you. ATTENDANCE-PLEASE PRINT NAME ADDRESS L:\DEPTWORK\BLANKFRM\PHSIGNUP .doc