Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3 June 08, 2020 PC Meeting Minutes DRAFT 1 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Monday, June 8, 2020 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance: Chair Fleming called the Monday, June 8, 2020 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Bryan Fleming, Dave Tieman, William Kallberg, and Dan Ringstad. Absent were Jason Tschetter. Also present were Liaison Zach Braid, Community Development Director Casey McCabe, Assistant City Engineer Nick Monserud, Planner Jeff Matzke and Community Development Services Assistant Sandra Peppin. 2. Approval of Agenda: MOTION BY TIEMAN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, JUNE 8, 2020 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. 3. Approval of May 11, 2020 Meeting Minutes: MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE THE MAY 11, 2020 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. 4. Public Hearings: A. PDEV20-000003 – Spring Lake Lofts – Preliminary Plat and Conditional Use Permit (public hearing continued from May 11, 2020) – MWF Properties, LLC is proposing a preliminary plat to be known as Spring Lake Lofts and requesting a conditional use permit to allow 110 Multiple Family Dwelling Units within a R-3, (High Density Residential Use District.). The subject property is located at 2495 – 154th Street NW. PID: 259330181 and 259330082. Planner Matzke: Re-introduced the consideration of the Spring Lake Lofts Preliminary Plat and approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a multiple family dwelling in the R-3, High Density Residential Zoning District. MWF Inc., on behalf of the property owner, has applied for approval of a Preliminary Plat to be known as Spring Lake Lofts to be developed as a 110-unit high density residential complex as well as a Conditional Use Permit to allow a multiple family dwelling. The subject site is located south of 154th Street (Hwy 82), southwest of the intersection of County Hwy 82 and County Hwy 83. He explained the history, current circumstances, physical site characteristics, proposed plan, issues, and recommended a motion. He presented a location map, applicant narrative, development plans, Engineering/Public Works/WSB memorandum dated April 17, 2020, Community Development Department memorandum dated March 27, 2020 and a Scott County memorandum dated April 27, 2020. Commission Comments/Questions: Fleming: Asked if there have been any conversations between the SMSC and developer. Planner Matzke: Suggested the applicant respond to that question. He mentioned email communications, stating there may be a meeting set up this week. Fleming: Asked about Federal requirements regarding stormwater impacts on Trust Land. Assistant City Engineer Monserud: Replied yes, there are additional requirements in addition to what the City requires. Ringstad: Asked for clarification on the stormwater with more impervious surface than what currently exists. He gave an example of the rate/flow of a rainfall and pointed out a section of the report that stated “Plans will be 2 required to meet current City Design Requirements. He asked if this is looked closely at to make sure it is within the requirements for a development such as this. Assistant City Engineer Monserud: Replied yes, as they work through the comments, we will make sure they meet the requirements. Ringstad: Said when you have a development that is being proposed, water generally must be contained within that site, now since water currently runs off onto the wetland that exists, does that exempt it from the water continuing to flow on that site so there is no change other than what we talked about with rate and flow, etc. Assistant City Engineer Monserud: Replied that is correct. He said sites that drain to wetlands can be tricky as you don’t want to contain it all as the wetlands need to stay wet. He explained that you want to keep the same rate/volume going to the area with the new development, any excess of that would need to be contained on site, so the excess rate that would be generated from any event would need to be contained to what it is today with a single family home on it as well as the volume. Applicant: Matt Yetzer: With MWF Properties, located at 7642 Lyndale Avenue South in Richfield, MN. He thanked the Commissioners for having him here to speak again. He said there is not a whole lot of updates from when they spoke last month other than the SMSC comments that came in. He clarified Planner Matzke’s comment regarding the meeting and explained the SMSC meeting date, location, who will be at the meeting and what is going to be discussed. He said regarding the site, we have been working with our Engineers and explained the outlook and alternative plans. He stated their goal is to speak with the SMSC to get a better idea of their concerns and see if there is anything, we can do to mitigate those concerns. He commented on the feedback they are hoping for tonight being the drainage issue and stated they are happy to answer any additional question as they come up from the commissioners or the public. Kallberg: Asked about the concern of direction regarding the future street’s status, specifically the road going into property that may or may not be publicly developed. Yetzer: Replied they are currently working through that with the City Engineering Department. He explained the original plan was to extend the utilities in the drive to the east property line and asked if it is an option to re- access this original plan due to the increased stormwater retainage, we will need to have stormwater retention systems on site. He said this is currently under review and is being discussed. He said at this time the plan review remains the same as shown on the plan. MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4A AT 6:17 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. Public Comment: Steve Albrecht: With the SMSC which is located at 2330 Sioux Trail. He thanked Staff and the Commissioners for the public hearing to be extended. He commented on meeting with the developer and asked for the Land Use Plan to be shown, stating the site is unique. He commented on the Comprehensive Plan not addressing all issues and pointed out the subject property is surrounded by the reservation/SMSC land. He commented on the issues with the City’s zoning/guiding of this property, parks in the SMSC area, streets being city owned and operated, population, redevelopment of single-family lots, minimum development and lack of compliance with the Zoning/Comp Plan. He shared concerns to consider including transportation, land restoration the adjacent regional park system as well as stormwater runoff, flowage across the property, additional water volume, easements from the SMSC, water being discharged into SMSC property and federal rules/trusted land. He commented on the preliminary analysis for the amount of water coming on and off the site and closed stating the SMSC recommends that the Planning Commission deny this application as presented at this time. Fleming: Asked about how the percentage of flow breaks down. Albrecht: Explained the percentage is volume and is a twofold issue, pointing out the discharge in a natural ditch system and the wetland type. He stated these are the issues the developer is trying to work through. Kallberg: Asked what conversation with the developer have occurred to get satisfaction on both sides. Albrecht: Replied, at this time, he is unsure as their Council has not had an opportunity to talk to the developer. He said the Council feels comfortable with what is in front of us in writing; however, there has not been a 3 conversation with the developer to understand the project better. He said he is not aware of any change in position based on having a conversation. Yetzer: Added some clarification to the property being an island, working with the SMSC to mitigate their concerns, wetland running through the eastern side of the property was determined by the Army Corp of Engineers to be a manmade ditch and would not be disturbed, and that no other wetlands would be disturbed as part of this project. He explained the other alternatives to meet the retention requirements that the SMSC is requiring; however, before going down that route, they need to consider the other commitments that they have with the sellers, and MN Housing. He stated that he understood per the conversation with Steve, that there are some management changes; however, the developer has been working with the SMSC since the end of 2018. MOTION BY TIEMAN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:31 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Kallberg: Stated that Mr. Albrecht does make a good case for recommending denial of the recommendations involving wetlands and drainage runoff, etc. He said having been on the Watershed District Board for several years, he is particularly interested in watershed and wetland preservation. He commented on seeing a lot of issues surrounding these items with encroachments that are hard to control. He said he is recommending denial on that basis. Tieman: Said he has concerns about watershed; however, as he looks at the neighborhood community and the changes that have been done over the years, he feels there is ways to control waterflow, with good engineering practices, which he is sure we will enforce within our City. He said he believes we can make this work and is needed in the community. He said as far as it not being compatible with the area; he believes it is compatible. He pointed out we have a large hotel system right across the road. He stated he does support this agenda item. Fleming: Expressed strong concerns and suggested to table this item until after conversations with SMSC have occurred. He said the percentage is significant and that there is some important conversations that need to happen and there is a friendly tension between our Comp Plan and what we review, consider and approve, but there is a legitimate and serious issue regarding Federal Trust land and the requirements that are necessary to comply with regarding stormwater management. He said at this point and time in the conversation he will be recommending Tabling of this item until all the issues have been vetted/considered by the SMSC. Ringstad: Said he agrees with Commissioner Tieman’s comments and stated Staff did a nice job identifying the additional 3 issues before the Commissioners tonight with Land Use, Stormwater and Tree Impacts. He said with regards to stormwater there is a comment in our report stating, “Plans will be required to meet City design requirements”. He said with that being the case he is comfortable by proving tonight that there is still some issues out there that need to be resolved that were talking about dealing with and planning; therefore, he supports approving this tonight with the caveat of the stormwater be resolved by Staff/Applicant and SMSC. Fleming: Asked for guidance from Staff on how to go forward with the votes. Planner Matzke: Explained there are two motions, one being the preliminary plat which is a recommendation to the City Council and whatever the recommendation is, that would go onto the City Council. The Conditional Use Permit application would be acted on would require a majority vote due to this is an item the Planning Commission does act on, rather than just a recommendation. Fleming: Questioned if the motions are interdependent; the preliminary plat is interdependent on the CUP. Planner Matzke: Responded, correct and explained how they are interdependent on each other. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY TIEMAN, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SPRING LAKE LOFTS SUBJECT TO THE LISTED CONDITIONS. AT 6:38 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad and Tieman; Nays by Fleming and Kallberg. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion failed. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY TIEMAN TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING IN THE R-3 ZONING DISTRICT AT 6:38 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Ringstad and Tieman; Nays by Fleming and Kallberg. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion failed. 4 Planner Matzke: Stated the Conditional Use Permit would not be approved, due to needing a majority vote for the project. Fleming: Directed to his fellow Commissioners the option of tabling this item. Kallberg: Stated that since the commission was at an impasse, is tabling appropriate so that additional conversations can take place and perhaps the two parties can find an agreeable solution. Planner Matzke: Explained how to restate and reconsider their votes to reenact another vote. Director McCabe: Explained how the motion to approve would not pass and there can be another motion made. Ringstad: Asked for clarification on the public hearing being closed. Planner Matzke: Stated correct, it would be brought back as an Old Business item for additional discussion. Ringstad: Stated he could support that. Ringstad: Asked to offer one point of clarification regarding tabling or reconsidering to make sure we are getting the proper point of order. Fleming: Stated it is a motion and a second to table to a future planning commission meeting where we will then reconsider the request. Director McCabe: Explained the outcome regarding the motions made tonight and stated a new motion can be made stating if the Planning Commission desires to reconsider the preliminary plat recommendation, that would be a consideration; however, the motion related to the conditional use permit would be a new motion. He asked if it is the desire of the Commissioner to Table both motions until a future meeting. Fleming: Stated they need more information and is trying to find a way acknowledge formally the first two votes, but also now come back with a new recommendation/new motion that would get us to the tabling. Director McCabe: Stated without the City Attorney present, his recommendation to reconsider the recommendation related to the preliminary plat approval and with that consideration that item then could be tabled to a future planning commission meeting. MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY TIEMAN, TO RECONSIDER THE FAILED PRELIMINARY PLAT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT VOTES AT 6:42 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY KALLBERG, TO TABLE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO A FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO PROVIDE THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE OUTSTANDING STORMWATER COMMENTS, ETC. AT 6:45 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. Kallberg: Asked if a date needs to be set for the Tabling. Director McCabe: Recommended it be placed on the next available Planning Commission meeting agenda after the applicant has had the opportunity to do more research on the concerns that have been raised. B. PDEV20-000006 – Distinctive Shores – Preliminary Plat – Distinctive Land Development, LLC on behalf of the property owners, Northern Loon, LLC, is proposing a preliminary plat of 6-Lot Subdivision of single family dwellings to be known as Distinctive Shores within a R-1SD (Low Density Shoreland) Zoning District located at 5035 Beach Street NE. PID: 251350050. Planner Matzke: Introduced the consideration to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat for Distinctive Shores in the R-1 SD, Low Density Residential Shoreland Zoning District. Distinctive Design LLC has applied for this preliminary plat located at 5035 Beach Street, on the northwest shores of Lower Prior Lake, South of County Hwy 82 which includes 6 single-family residential lots. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, and recommended a motion. He presented a location map, development plans dated May 1, 2020, Public Works memorandum dated May 22, 2020, Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District Memorandum dated May 15, 2020 and a Community Development Memo dated May 28, 2020. Assistant City Engineer Monserud: Said they are going to extend Beach Street into this new development which would have six (6) Lots. He explained the grading plan for this project focusing on the cul-de-sac, infrastructure, stormwater drainage and the hauling route. 5 Planner Matzke: Added in comments on the hauling route and showed a future conceptual ghost plat, stating there are no development plans currently for that area. Commission Comments/Questions: Fleming: Asked if there was any notion as to why the previous owner didn’t start work in prior years. Planner Matzke: Explained a lot of it was timing, stating it takes a coordinated effort and a lot of timing just didn’t work out. He suggested asking the applicant why the work didn’t start in earlier years. Fleming: Asked what time of day they will be hauling for fill. Assistant City Engineer Monserud: Responded as part of their development agreement, it is outlined the City’s construction hours and typically for these types of projects it is 7am–7pm Monday-Friday and 8am–5pm on Saturdays. Fleming: Asked about the easement agreement and the neighbors not agreeing with it. Assistant City Engineer Monserud: Responded yes, if it is your land that they are going through, it could be a condition of their agreement. He stated he didn’t know of the agreement with the neighboring properties. Fleming: Asked if one homeowner disagrees, what happens to the hauling route. He asked if it would still continue to happen. Assistant City Engineer Monserud: Replied there are only two property owners and if they do not reach an agreement, then the applicant would need to find a different route. Ringstad: Questioned the memo which states; Lot 3, Block 1 may require a variance due to greater than 30 percent impervious surface and wondered if that would be problematic in the future as the lot is close to the lake and the Commission has been very protective of the 30 percent impervious surface requirement. He commented on the Planning Commission being consistent. He asked for Staff to comment on that memo. Planner Matzke: Explained that Lot 3, block 1 is the smaller lot in the corner at the cul-de-sac. He explained the housing pad location due to the cul-de-sac design, temporary easement allowing the cul-de-sac to be constructed on the Lot and pavement on the street counting as impervious surface. He commented on impervious surface on the Lot, removal of the cul-de-sac helping to remove some of the impervious surface. He said the variance request would be due to the cul-de-sac being on this property until the cul-de-sac is removed. Ringstad: Asked what the mitigating factors to the cul-de-sac being temporary. He said whether it be a year or 30 years, it still is classified as temporary and at some point, it is planned to go away. Planner Matzke: Said correct. Ringstad: Stated he is concerned on the amount of time it would take to haul 30,000 square yards of dirt. Applicant: John Anderson: Resides at 14832 Estate Avenue SE. He said he is representing the applicant (Matt Odenthal). He mentioned the applicant and the representative for the seller are in the audience tonight. He commented on the getting the plat approval, project timing goals, hauling timelines, soil corrections, no contractor just yet, hauling route, plans may need updating, grading, preservation of trees and ponding. He said they have taken the comments that the City has provided, and it appears all ponding requirements can be met. He said they have talked with Probe Engineering and may have the solution to the comments that were provided. He mentioned the Lot 3, Block 1 variance, stating they are looking at it as a temporary variance due to the temporary cul-de- sac, final design and stated this project is straight forward. He commented on the design extending the existing cul-de-sac to the eastern part of the property and adjusting the regional pond area to catch the water. He said there will be three (3) lots on Prior Lake and three (3) off lake lots. He offered himself open for questions. Tieman: Asked when the ponding activities would start. Anderson: Asked the grading of the pond. Tieman: Replied yes. Anderson: Explained when they would be grading the pond, stating about the same time they start hauling. He mentioned some great amount of dirt that would need to be moved and placed somewhere else on the property, so they would do some of that right away to get some of that work out of the way. He said he knows there is some storm sewer structures that needs to be moved and relocated as part of that process, stating that would be sometime in August or September. Kallberg: Questioned the three (3) lots that are not fronting on the lake; will they have access/right-of- way/easement to get to the lake in case they want to have a boat slip and if so will that create a boat slip issue. Anderson: Responded they will not have access to the lake; therefore, will not create a boat slip issue or anything else to do with the lake. 6 MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY TIEMAN, TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4B AT 7:06 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. Public Comment: Thomas Lenhardt: Resides at 4989 Chatonka Trail NE. He pointed out his property which is directly adjacent to proposed Lot Number 4. He said they are happy to hear, speaking on behalf of his family and neighbors, that the planned route for the fill will be coming in from the north; as the great concern of theirs is that it would be coming in through Chatonka Trail, Raven Street or Beach Street, which are quiet City streets with a lot of kids in the neighborhood and had concerns about the safety of the trucks coming down those roads. He said he is not thrilled with the idea given that all the loads of dirt will be coming in for 4-6 weeks, as it is coming from the east side of his home and the pond is just beyond the south side of his lot and so months of construction will be significantly disruptive to the enjoyment of his family and other neighbors. MOTION BY TIEMAN, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON ITEM 4B AT 7:09 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. Commissioner Comments: Ringstad: Stated he agrees with the Staff’s recommendations to approve this agenda item tonight with the conditions and as a side note, he cannot remember the last time we saw a development with 86-foot wide lots and 12,000 square feet and said it is nice to see this as it is not that common anymore. He said he sees no reason not to approve this and will be voting for this. Fleming: Said he too will be supporting the approval of the Preliminary Plat as it does meet all the thresholds for the development at this stage in the process. He said he trusts that the developer will heed the concern of the neighbors in terms of the hauling route and be sensitive as possible to any disruption that might occur during that 4-6 week process. Tieman: Agreed with his fellow Commissioners. He stated it is nice to see a project that has all conforming lots. He said he completely supports this agenda item. He pleaded with the applicant to be good to neighbors and keeping the hours minimized as much as possible and work with the neighborhood. He said he has faith that they will. Kallberg: Stated he was present for prior application requests for fill of this parcel; however, this is the first time that we have seen a plat. He said the issue with trucks coming down that private trail at the westerly edge of the property is the need for some provision/safety fencing due to children in the neighborhood. He commented on some needed dust control with the hauling and consideration of safety barriers on the west side of the fill road. He stated he is in favor of the preliminary plat. MOTION BY KALLBERG, SECONDED BY TIEMAN, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DISTINCTIVE SHORES SUBJECT TO THE LISTED CONDITIONS. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. 5. Old Business: No Old Business. 6. New Business: No New Business. 7. Adjournment: 7 MOTION BY TIEMAN, SECONDED BY KALLBERB TO ADJOURN THE MONDAY, JUNE 8, 2020, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 7:13 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Fleming, Tieman, Kallberg, and Ringstad. Absent was Tschetter. The Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Sandra Peppin, Community Development Services Assistant.