Loading...
6.7. SR 04-19-2004City Item # TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Scoff Harlicker, Senior Planne~ April 19, 2004 Case No., P 04-02 Request by S & A Family Investments for Preliminary Plat - Woodland Hills 6.7. Request Consider a request by S & A Family Investments for a preliminary plat for Woodland Hills. 120-Day Rule In order to comply with the 120-day rule for action on the preliminary plat, action must be taken by May 24, 2004. Location The property is located on the east side of County Road south of the Elk River Country Club and north of Nordic HiLls Zoninq/Lancl Use Rlc (Single Family Residential) / MR Medium Density Residential) Attachments · Location Map · Development Plans · Memo from the City Engineer Memo to Mayor & City Council/P 04-02 Ap~ 19, 2004 Page 2 · Letter from Dick Corbin, Sherburne County Public Works · Memo from Rebecca Haug, Environmental Technician · Summary of Park and Recreation Commission and Planning Commission discussions regarding the proposed plat · Minutes from the Park and Recreation meetings 8/13/03, 9/10/03, 2/11/04 and 3/10/04 · Minutes from the Planning Commission meetings 2/24/04 and 3/23/04 · Diagrams showing views of project area from Great Northern Trail Overview Existing Conditions The 50.95 acre site is wooded with moderate to severe topographic changes. The topography and vegetation is similar to the other adjacent developments of Nordic and Lafayette Woods. The plat abuts the Great Northern Trail on the east, the Elk River Country Club on the north, Nordic Woods subdivision on the south and County Road 1 on the west. There is a DNR protected stream that flows through the west side of the plat; there are also two wetlands in the same area. Preliminary. Plat The plat includes 111 single family lots and 7 outlots. The plat includes three street connections with Nordic Hills subdivision. The outlots include the following uses: Outlot A is proposed park land Outlot B is a wetland Outlot C is an unbuildable remnant Outlot D is a remnant reserved for a future lot Outlot E is a trail corridor Outlot F is a remnant to be included as part of future lots Outlot G is a stormwater pond Lot Layout Under the current zoning the minimum lot size is 11,000 square feet. The lot sizes in this plat range from 11,000 square feet to 22,600 square feet. The minimum lot width under the current zoning is 80 feet. The lot widths in this plat range from 80 feet to 163 feet. All of the lots comply with the minimum dimensional requirements of the Rlc zoning district. Outlot G, which will be ufflized for a stormwater pond, should be divided in two and combined with the two adjacent lots. Outlot C should be eliminated and combined with adjacent lots. The density of this plat, using gross acres, is 2.17 u/ac. For a comparison, the density for Lafayette Woods is 2.2 u/ac and Nordic Woods is 1.9 u/ac. If this plat were to be developed at the same density as Nordic Woods, there would be 97 lots instead of 111 as proposed. If the average density of Lafayette Woods and Nordic Woods ( 2.05 u/ac ) is applied to this plat, the applicant could create 104 lots. S:kPLANNING\Case Filesk2004kP 04-02 Woodland Hills\P04-02cc4-19.doc Memo to Mayor & City Council/P 0442 April 19, 2004 Page 3 A looped street system and three cul de sacs are proposed for this plat. The streets will connect with the streets in Nordic Woods at three locations: Boston Street, Albany Street and 195th Avenue. The street connections with Nordic Woods were determined when Nordic Woods was approved in 1996. Only Albany Circle was intended to remain a permanent cul de sac. There is a main entrance proposed from County Road i at 196th Avenue. This entrance will be opposite the entrance to Windsor Oak Hills. Standard 60 foot right-of-ways are proposed with 32 foot wide streets. Sidewalks are also proposed throughout the plat. Traffic from this development will have access to County Road 1 at two locations, through this project via 196~h Avenue or through Nordic Woods/Hills via 194th Avenue. Park and Recreation The applicant is proposing to dedicate 5.35 acres of land to meet the park dedication requirements. Under the subdivision regulations, the City can ask for up to 10% (5.1 acres) for park dedication. Outlot E, which is .15 acres, will be utilized as a trail corridor to Outlot A in Nordic Hills. Outlot A, which is 5.2 acres, is intended to provide a buffer along the railroad trail. The proposal exceeds the minimum requirements by .25-acres. From the first PUD concept through the final proposed plat, the Park and Recreation Commission has consistently stated they want a buffer parallel to the Great Northern Trail. However, staff believes that the 200-foot number is somewhat arbitrary as it was based on the original 140 lot PUD concept which provided 15% land dedication for park. The buffer width has always been based on acreage of park land under a PUD development. Under the proposed Rlc zoning, only 10% land can be asked for dedication which calculates out to an approximately 147-foot wide buffer (property line to property line). Knowing that most people using the trail will have their focus forward and in a straight line, staff provided an exhibit showing sight lines through the woods based on the intent of the trail for linear activities such as walking/running, in-line skating, biking and skiing. The average cone of vision for people is 60-degrees ~See Cone of Vision a~). With the 147- feet of parallel buffer, a 30-degree vision angle from the center of the trial will yield approximately 290 lineal feet (at an angle) of sight line buffer from property line to property line. Obviously some people will look through the woods perpendicular to the trail but the main function of the trail is a linear (moving forward) experience. The average elevation (seeAverage Elevation ~) of the Great Northern Trail is 935-feet and the average elevation of the grade of the proposed lots will be 955-feet. This is a 20- foot grade separation. So an average height person will have 15-feet of heavily wooded hillside to look at below the homes, assuming that they look straight ahead and not up Staff walked the trail (in the winter with no foliage) and at several locations along ks length walked, from the trail edge, 150-feet into the woods with a tape measure. Even without the foliage, it was very difficult to see the staff person once they were 150-feet into the woods. SAPLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\P04-02cc4-19.doc Memo to Mayor & City Council/P 04-02 April 19, 2004 Page 4 This section of trail falls within the Urban Service Area which allows more dense developments and as many houses (Lafayette Woods) that are visible from the trail on the east side. This section of trail south to County Road 1 is in an urban setting, passes by a school, a business, a well house and two urban serviced housing developments, and acts as a transition into the rural areas of city. The Commission stated they are willing to purchase the extra land. They did state that if no purchase could be negotiated, they would ask the City Council to proceed with the condemnation of park land. Either a purchase or condemnation will significantly increase the land acquisition costs. There is a concern that purchasing or condemning a narrow strip of wooded property, adjacent to a development, there is no guarantee that the trees will survive in an area that has been identified as having oak wilt. The Park and Recreation Commission also recommended to the Planning Commission that this currently zoned Rlc property probably is not suitable for a single family development as it is zoned and should be denied, citing Section 30-375(3) which states: The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to totx~raphy, soils, ~ susceptibility to erosion ard siltation, susceptibility to flax~b and drabzage are not suitable for the Ope and douity of dadotm and uses April 14~h Park and Recreation Commission Meeting The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed this proposed plat again at their April 14~h meeting. The Commission's recommendation included the following: · The Commission still believes that this site is not appropriate for the type of development proposed. · A 125 foot buffer along the trail · Include Outlot G and Lot 4, Block 4 as part of the park dedication for a playground location. Because of the grade and the need for a stormwater pond, this appears to be physically impossible. · A conservation easement be placed over the rear of the lots located on the east side of Woodland H_ills Road. This increases the buffer back to 145 feet. · The proposed road to the well house be eliminated and the cul de sac in the southeast comer be shortened. For the Council's consideration, staff offers the attached drawing (P1) which includes modifications to the plat to address the Park and Recreation Commission's recommendations. The drawing includes the following changes: · Shortened cul de sac in the southeast comer. The number of lots on the cul de sac is reduced from 4 to 3. A trail corridor is provided and the road extension to the well house has been eliminated. · An additional lot is added in the northeast corner of the plat. S:kPLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\P04-02cc4-19.doc Memo to Mayor & City Council/P 04-02 April 19, 2004 Page 5 · The layout of the lots on the east side of Woodland Hills Road is unchanged. · Outlot G and Lot 4, Block 4 as parkland. · A 30 foot conservation easement on the lots on the east side of Woodland Hills Road. Because staff believes that incorporating Outlot G and Lot 4, Block 4 as parkland is not feasible, staff offers the a second drawing (P2) which includes the following differences from (Pl): · Ouflot G and Lot 4, Block 4 are not included park. · There is no additional lot added in the northeast corner of the plat. The total number of lots with shown on (P1) and (P2) is 110. E~ Issues Wetlands The plat will require crossing a DNR protected stream and filling a wetland. The applicant will require a DNR permit to cross the stream and wetland mitigation will be required to replace the wetland that is filled. The applicant's wetland representative met with the TEP regarding the wetland issues. The results of that meeting are outlined in Rebecca Haug's memo. Trees The amount of grading required will eliminate almost all of the trees on the site. The property is currently zoned Rlc (Single Family Residential) with a minimum lot size of 11,000 square feet. Because of the topography, any development of this property as single family lots under the Rlc regulations will eliminate most of the trees on this ske. The only way to preserve large areas of trees would be to rezone the property to allow townhouses, cluster the residences on the west half of the property and leave the east half undeveloped. The applicant is proposing to preserve a narrow strip of trees along the north boundary of the plat and most of the trees in Outlot A (parkland buffer). In order to limit the spread of oak wilt, the applicant should work with the City on an oak wilt suppression program. In order to reduce the number of trees removed along the Great Northem Trail. The right- of-way for woodland trails could be reduced to 50 feet, the road width could be reduced to 28 feet (with parking restrict to one side of the street) and the front yard setbacks could be reduced to 20 feet. This would allow the houses to be placed further away from the trail and reduce the amount of grading required on lots adjacent to the trail. Grading~ Drainage and Utilities Grading, drainage and utility issues are addressed in the City Engineer's memo. Grading is shown on portions of Outlot A. Since Oudot A is intended to meet the park dedication S:NPLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\P04-02cc4-19.doc Memo to Mayor & City Cottncil/P 04-02 April 19, 2004 Page 6 requirements, the grading plan should be revised to eliminate the grading on Outlot A, except for those areas needed for park development purposes. Planning Commission Meefin.q of February 24th At the Planning Commission meeting held on February 24~h, the Commission considered the applicant's requests for a zone change to PUD, a conditional use permit for the PUD and preliminary plat. Following considerable public comment from the residents of Nordic Woods and concerns raised by the Commission, the Commission tabled the requests to the March 23rd meeting. Summary. of Issues Pub//c · · · · · Increased traffic Tree removal and the spread of oak wilt The undersized lots are not consistent with the lots in Nordic Woods Impact of drainage on creek The proposed development is too dense Com~s/on · Project is too dense · Drainage · Tree removal and the spread of oak wilt · Increased traffic · Design standards as part of PUD · The project needed more amenities as part of PUD · Would like tree inventory and additional trees planted as part of PUD After considering the comments and concerns raised at the February 24~h meeting, the applicant has decided to withdraw his requests for a zone change to PUD and the conditional use permit for the PUD. He is moving forward with a revised conventional plat under the current Rlc (Single Family Residential) zoning. Planning Commission Meeting of March 25th At the Planning Commission meeting held on March 25th, two neighbors spoke at the public hearing. One neighbor was concerned about the tree loss and the other was concerned about traffic. Park and Recreation Commissioners Kuester and Niziolek also spoke against the project citing concerns about tree removal and preserving a 200 foot buffer along the Great Northern Trail. Staff and the applicant presented an alternative designs that provided a 147 foot buffer along the trail. The majority of the Commission was concerned that the property was not suitable for the type or density of development proposed by the applicant. One Commission thought S:\PLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\P04-02cc4-19.doc Memo to Mayor & City Council/P 04-02 April 19, 2004 Page 7 the plat should be approved. He believed it complied with the Rlc standards, and that by denying the plat, the Commission is treating this plat different than the adjacent plats. The Commission voted 5 to 1 to recommend denial of the plat. Recommendafion Council member Motin will not be in attendance at tonight's meeting. Approval or denial of the proposed plat for Woodland Hills can be by a simple majority. However, if the Council is tied 2:2 regarding a decision on this plat, staff recommends that the Council table this item. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the preliminary plat for Woodland Hills based on the following findings: The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and sikation, susceptibility to flooding, and drainage are not suitable for the type and density of development and uses contemplated. Because of the amount of grading required and the large number of mature trees that will be removed, the proposed subdivision will cause substantial environmental damage Should the Council approve the preliminary plat, the Council should consider basing that decision of the following findings: (1) The proposed subdivision is consistent with the zoning regulations (artide VI of this chapter) and conforms in all respects with all requirements of this Code, including the zoning regulations and this artide. The proposed subdivision is consistent with all applicable general and specialized city, county, and regional plans, including, but not limited to, the city's comprehensive development plan. (3) The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and drainage are suitable for the type and density of development and uses contemplated. The proposed subdivision makes adequate provision for water supply, storm drainage, sewage transportation, erosion control and all other services, facilities and improvements otherwise required in this artide. (5) The proposed subdivision will not cause substantial environmental damage. The proposed subdivision will not conflict with easements of record or with easements established by judgment of a court. S:x~PLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\P04-02cc4-19.doc Memo to Mayor & City Council/P 04-02 Ap~ 19, 2004 Page 8 (7) The proposed subdivision will not have an undue and adverse impact on the reasonable development of neighboring land. (8) The proposed subdivision is not premature. A subdivision is premature if any of the following exists: a. Lack of adequate stormwater drainage. b. Lack of adequate roads. c. Lack of adequate sanitary sewer systems. d. Lack of adequate off-site public improvements or support systems. Staff recommends that approval of the preliminary plat for Woodland hills include the following conditions: 1. A DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT BE PREPARED AND EXECUTED OUTLINING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE PLAT APPROVAL PRIOR TO RELEASING THE PLAT FOR RECORDING. 2. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT FEE BE PAID IN THE AMOUNT REQUIRED BY THE CITY AT THE TIME OF FINAL PLAT PRIOR TO RELEASING THE PLAT FOR RECORDING. 3. THE LETTER OF CREDIT SHALL COVER WETLAND MITIGATION. DRAINAGE EASEMENTS SHALL BE IN PLACE OVER THE WETLAND AND THE WETLAND MITIGATION AREAS. 4. RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS SHALL BE RECORDED ON THE WETLAND AND THE WETLAND MITIGATION AREAS. 5. A THREE YEAR MONITORING REPORT ON THE WETLAND MITIGATION IS REQUIRED. 6. THE CITY ENGINEER'S COMMENTS BE INCORPORATED INTO THE PLANS. 7. STREET LIGHTS BE INSTALLED AS REQUIRED BY ELK RIVER UTILITIES 8. A LETTER OF CREDIT BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY IN THE AMOUNT OF 100% OF THE COSTS OF THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. 9. UPON COMPLETING ALL OF THE IMPROVEMENTS AND HAVING THEM ACCEPTED BY THE CITY, A WARRANTY BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF 2,5% OF THE IMPROVEMENT COSTS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY FOR THE PERIOD OF ONE YEAR. 10. A SEALCOAT FEE IN THE AMOUNT TO BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY ENGINEER BE PAID PRIOR TO RELEASING THE PLAT FOR RECORDING. 11. A GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. 12. A DEVELOPMENT PLAN BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. 13. ALL GRADING BE CERTIFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. S:\PLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\P04-02cc4-19.doc Memo to Mayor & City Coun6I/P 04-02 April 19, 2004 Page 9 14. ALL MAILBOXES BE CLUSTERED. 15. A TREE PRESERVATION PLAN BE APPROVED PRIOR TO RELEASING THE PLAT FOR RECORDING. 18. ANY TREES OFF SITE OR ON SITE, NEAR THE LIMIT OF GRADING THAT ARE TO BE PRESERVED, SHALL BE FENCED WITH A SNOW FENCE AT THE DRIP LINE TO PREVENT GRADING, COMPACTION, OR STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT, DEBRIS OR MATERIALS. STAFF SHALL INSPECT FENCING PRIOR TO GRADING COMMENCING. 19. WATER ACCESSIBILTY FEES IN THE AMOUNT DETERMINED BY THE CITY BE PAID PRIOR TO RELEASING THE PLAT FOR RECORDING. 20. ANY ITEM OR CONDITION FOUND THAT INDICATES THE SITE IS LIKELY TO YIELD INFORMATION IMPORTANT TO PRE-HISTORY OR HISTORY SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE CITY IMMEDIATELY. FURTHER, THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO STOP WORK AUTHORIZED IN ITS APPROVAL UNTIL THE SITE IS APPROPRIATELY INVESTIGATED AND WORK IS AUTHORIZED. 21. NO GRADING, EXCEPT FOR THE CUL DE SAC, SHALL BE ALLOWED IN THE WOODED AREA OF OUTLOT A 22. THE DEVELOPER SHALL WORK WITH THE CITY ON AN OAK WILT SUPPREESION PROGRAM. THIS PROGRAM SHALL BE APPROVED AND IN PLACE PRIOR TO ANY TREE REMOVAL. 23. OUTLOT G BE COMBINED WITH LOTS 3 AND 4, BLOCK 4 24. OUTLOT C BE ELIMINATED. Should the Council deny the preliminary plat, the Council should consider basing that decision of the following findings: The physical characteristics of the site, including but not limited to topography, soils, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, and drainage are not suitable for the type and density of development and uses contemplated. This area has been identified on the Minnesota County Biological Survey Map of Sherburne County as one of the last remaining mature samples of deciduous dry oak forests in Elk River. Because of the amount of grading required and the large number of mature trees that will be removed, the proposed subdivision will cause substantial environmental damage An option the Council could consider should the plat be denied is to ask the applicant to come back with a plat with the same number of lots but clustered on the west side of the plat. This would require substantial reduction in lot area and lot width or the use of townhouses. S:\PLANNING\Case Files\2004\P 04-02 Woodland Hills\P04-02cc4-19.doc AW/C I SITE I I I TRAILS LEGEND EXIS'RNG SIDEWALK m m FUTURE SIDEWALK oooooooooooooooooo EX~S'ANG PAYED TR~L ~ FUTURE PAVED TRAIL FUTURE TRAIL ................ FUTURE ~DENED SHOULDER · CITY ii I I I MEADOWVALE I ILIB I II I Case Number:. Location Map WOODLAND HILLS SCOTT BREUER N oward R, Green Company February 16, 2004 File: 812540J-0240 Mr. Scott Harlicker Senior Planner City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 RE: WOODLAND HILLS ADDITION Dear Mr. Harlicker: As requested, we have reviewed the submittal package for the Woodland Hills development. As you are aware, this is the site for east of CSAH 1 and west of the abandoned railroad trail lying just north of the Nordic Woods development and just south of the Elk River Country Club. The site is proposed to be divided into 135 lots. Frontages of the lots will vary but are as small as 60 feet. Based upon our review, comments received at the staff review meeting, Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) meeting, and meetings with the developer and his representatives, we would offer the following comments: A. Grading · The site is heavily wooded and rolling terrain. The existing conditions drawing shows a series of peaks and valleys ranging from lows of approximate elevation 916 to highs of approximate elevation 975. Given the rolling nature of the topography and the development proposal, which calls for smaller lots than typically required by the City ordinance, the site will essentially be mass graded and all trees will be removed. The one area of exception is Outlot A, which is approximately seven acres in size and runs north and south along the east boundary of the plat to provide a buffer to the railroad trail. · There are areas where the grading goes out of the plat limits in the northwest corner of the development into the Bill and Joan Campbell property. It will be necessary for the developer to acquire permission and/or ownership of this property to do the grading outside of plat boundary. · There are no emergency overflow elevations and/or flow patterns shown from Iow points in the street or from the detention ponds on the site. · There are a few backyards that are relatively steep and do not provide the required flat area outside of the building pad prior to sloping away. These can be discussed with the developer's engineer after the Planning Commission 'and/or City Council comment on the overall concept. Lt r-021604-Harlicker.doc 2550 University Avenue West · Suite 400N · St. Paul, MN 55114 · 651/644-4389 fax 651/644-9446 toll free 888/368-4389 Mr. Scott Harlicker February 16, 2004 Page Two B. Drainage Calculations The general concept of the drainage calculations is to collect storm runoff, provide quality and quantity control in a series of detention ponds, and then outlet at predevelopment conditions in one of three directions: Either to the south, through the existing wetland complex on the School District property; to the south and west, through the series of ponds in the Nordic Woods development, which ultimately outlet to Ditch 31; and finally, directly west into Ditch 31. There was discussion at the TEP, and an answer will be Coming forth whether or not a two-tiered pond system will be required for the drainage area that outlets directly into Ditch 31 because of its protected water status. The ponding area located in the rear lots of Block 7 needs to have an identified means of access, which appears to be through the rear of Lot 10. This area should be called out on the plan and an additional easement document provided after the plat is filed, showing access across that lot so that the eventual owner of Lot 10 will have knowledge of the use of their property for pond access and will understand that no structures and/or landscaping may be placed in this area. The specific comments we have on the drainage calculations are as follows: Submit all drainage calculations whether they show any runoff or not. The curb numbers (CN) for the existing subcatchments seem Iow. The CN of 25 should be raised to a CN of 35. The Time and Concentration (Tc) value shown for the existing subcatchments seems high. Sheet flow was used for the entire runoff calculation on some of the subcatchments. The 300 lineal feet maximum sheet flow length is not always applicable for the Tc calculation due to steep slopes and/or swales formed in the drainage area. Shallow concentrated flow or channel flow may be more appropriate. Reevaluate the Tc calculations to be sure that the Tc is accurately modeled. The hydrologic soil group was shown as an "A" after development. We believe that this will change when lots are developed and topsoil along with irrigation systems in many cases are used in the development of the lots. Submit storm sewer tabulation and calculations when complete. Block 6 shows a highpoint in the back of several lots with approximately 4:1 slopes toward the houses. Block 7, Lots 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 are all showing a lower level house elevation that is lower than the required elevation in relationship to the HWL of the pond. These houses should have an elevation one foot higher than the 100-year HWL of the pond. The grading from Lot 1, Block 1 down to Pond B shows the disturbance of a delineated wetland. This item will need to be taken up with the TEP. > Land locked ponds with no outlet must be modeled for back-to-back 100-year storm events or the ten-day snow melt, whichever is greater. The area intake located in Block 2 behind Lots 10 and 11 should be modeled as a pond to determine how much ponding will take place during the 2, 10, and 100-year storm events. The same issue applies for the intake located in Block 7 between Lots 41, 42, and 43. Ltr-O21604-Harticker.doc Howard R. Green Company Mr. Scott Harlicker February 16, 2004 Page Three C. Wetland Issues This plat was before the TEP on Tuesday, February 10, 2004. A wetland delineation was submitted, prepared by Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company. No final decision was made by the TEP at the meeting. However, the discussion centered on a few main points as follows: · Should the detention pond prior to outletting to Ditch 31 be a two-celled pond to provide a greater level of treatment for the protected water? · The TEP did not particularly care for the area shown as wetland mitigation. The area caused significant steepness in the rear yards of lots in Block 8 and called for a retaining wall that is both potentially a safety hazard in its proximity to the public roadway and the four lots in Block 8. · A suggestion was made and discussed at the TEP that the four lots in Block 8 be eliminated, and the detention pond located north of 196th Avenue be relocated into the former Block 8. The TEP felt that this would provide an opportunity to flatten the grades in this area, potentially eliminating the need for the retaining wall, and also provide the storm water pond outlet a area of wetland to flow through before reaching the protected waters of Ditch 31. D. Street and Utility Plan · The water system in Woodland Hills needs to connect to the existing water located under CSAH 1 near the entrance. · The watermain in Albany Circle and Woodland Court cul-de-sacs needs to be looped in accordance with City design criteria. · Provisions need to be made for future looping of watermain off of 196th Avenue into the Campbell property when that area develops into the cul-de-sac shown as a "ghost" plat. · Any remnants of temporary cul-de-sacs on Albany Street, Boston Street and 195th Avenue in the Nordic Woods development need to be removed when the connections are made. · A temporary cul-de-sac needs to be provided on the end of Campbell Circle in accordance with the City design cdteda. It will be necessary to get permission from the Campbells for this temporary cul-de-sac or eliminate lots in the development to provide room for it. · The driveway to the Campbell's home off of CSAH I should be relocated to access onto Campbell Ddve and the access point on CSAH 1 eliminated. · There is a trail system shown in the southeast corner of the plat through Outlot A. This trail system needs to be built to a ten-ton standard ten feet wide in order to provide access for the Elk River Municipal Utilities to their well and treatment facility located just off the plat in the southeast corner. · The proposed plat is showing 50-foot rights-of-way, based on the design standard of the smaller lots and specific home styles. Sidewalk should be constructed in the drainage and utility easement outside of the 50-foot right-of-way in order to provide a large enough boulevard for snow storage, signing, and fire hydrants. This will Ltr-021604-Harlicker.doc Howard R. Green Cxom anv Mr. Scott Hadicker February 16, 2004 Page Four require a specific sidewalk easement to be granted in the appropriate locations after the plat is filed. Staff is still reviewing the access point onto CSAH 1. Consideration is being given to widening the access point to provide for three lanes of traffic: One coming in and two exiting - a left and through lane, and a right turn lane. E. Miscellaneous Lot 1 and 2, Block 1, require a portion of the Campbell property. It will be necessary for the developer to gain ownership of this land prior to proceeding with the final plat. The City is in the process of developing a specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) relative to erosion and sediment control in new development. The developer of Woodland Hills will need to follow the provision of the City's SWPPP in proceeding with this development. If you have any questions regarding any of these comments, please call. Sincerely, Howard R. Green Company TJM:sw Ltr-021604-Harlicker.doc Howard O reen Qornr anv February 4, 2004 City of Elk River Attn: Scott Harlicker 13065 Orono Parkway P.O. Box 490 Elk River, MN 55330 RE: Woodland Hills PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Sherb 13880 Highway 10 West Elk River, MN 55330 (763) 241-70~3,800-594-5208 Dear Mr. Harlicker; We have reviewed the proposal for Woodland Hills located in the City of Elk River and adjacent to CSAH 1 and offer the following comments. Access to CSAH 1 will be approved for the proposed 196th Avenue NW with the following conditions: 1. Access for 196th Avenue NW must align with the access to the west and create a four legged intersection at CSAH 1. 2. Pay the required permit and signage fees $850 necessary to meet our standards. 3. We require the construction of a full right turn on CSAH 1 for 196th Avenue. 4. We require that the existing right of way (highway easement) along CSAH 1 be dedicated in fee title to Sherburne County. 5. Any proposed utility construction in our right of way will require a permit from our office. The developer is responsible for all costs associated with the construction of the access and right turn lane, which includes but is not limited to, relocation of the trail, modification of the storm sewer system, removal and replacement of curbing and turf establishment. Construction of the turn lane and trail must match our typical sections as defined in our project 71-601-15. If you have questions or comments call me at 763-241-7013. Sincerely, Richard D. Corbin Sherburne County Public Works Cc~ Scott Breuer, Developer Martin P. Campion, Otto Associates Dave Schwarting, Public Works Director Russ Heiling, Traffic Engineering 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 TO' FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEM 0 RA ND UM Mayor and City Council Rebecca Haug, Environmental Technician March 15, 2004 Wetland Conservation Act Decisions - Woodland Hills, WCA 02-04 Proposal - The developer of Woodland Hills is proposing to fill 1,092 square feet ora Type 1 wetland in a single Iocation to accommodate the road for the plat. It is the only way to access the plat. The Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) for the City of Elk River reviewed the proposal and found both the filling and replacement plan acceptable. The replacement plan consists of 1,850 square feet of New Wetland Credit and 1,850 square feet of Public Value Credits (Upland buffer). The new wetland will be created adjacent to an existing wetland on the site. A map showing the filling and replacement is attached to this memo. FINDINGS Kjolhaug EnviromxaentaI Services Company prepared a Wetland Delineation Report for the property dated, September 22, _00_~. The Technical Evaluation Panel reviewed the delineation and the replacement plan on February 10, 2004. The Technical Evaluation Panel reviewed the delinea, tion and the revised replacement plan on March 11, 2004 Combined notification of the proposed filling and replacement plan was handed out at the TEP meeting to the appropriate goverm~ental agencies on February 10, 2004 and ma/led to those not in attendance on February 10, 2004. The corament period ended March 3, 2003 and no negative comments were received. The Technical Evaluation Panel found the proposed wetland filling and wetland mitigation plan application dated, February 9, 2004, acceptable under the rules of the Wetland Conservation Act with the stipulations listed below. Phone: 763.635.1000 Fax: 763.635.1090 www. ci.dk-river, mn.us RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the filling and mitigation plan for this project with the following stipulations: A restrictive covenant and drainage and utili~~ easement be recorded over the mitigation and buffer areas. The Developer's Agreement for the project includes language that places the responsibility, for the success of the wetland mitigation on the developer. The letter of credit, which covers the public improvements associated with the project, also includes the cost of the mitigation work. The developer submit a written monitoring report on the replacement wetlands one year after this mitigation work is completed and that this report be approved by ci~ staff prior to the release of the letter of credit. Date Meeting Recommendation August 13, 2003 Park & Rec -Proposed 140 lot PUD concept plan was presented which (review) had approx. 7 ½ acres of park land (which would work out to an area 250-feet in width outside of and parallel to the Great Northern Trail right-of-way on the east side of the plat). -The Commissions consensus was to maintain a green corridor along trail, they recommended approx. 250-feet parallel to trail based on the 7 ½ acres. September 9, 2003 Planning -Two other workshop meetings were held prior to this date. Commission The Commission asked for different options. (workshop) -Applicant presented 3 options: 140 lot PUD (Opdon A) 113 Rl-c Plat (Option B) 127 lot PUD (Option C) -The Commissions consensus was they preferred the 140 lot PUD because of the possibility of different priced units (affordability) and the additional park land. They gave applicant direction to continue with the 140 lot density PUD with maybe a mix of twin homes located along the north property line and/or at comer lots. September 10, 2004 Park & Rec -The Commissions consensus again was to maintain a 200- (review) foot wide buffer (this width was based on the now roughly 7-acres of park land in the proposed PUD) -Although the Planning Commission preferred the 140 lot PUD, the Park & Rec did not prefer that layout. February 11, 2004 Park & Rec -The applicant was getting different direction from the two Meeting Commissions and derided to continue with the direction given by the Planning Commission. -Park & Rec still asked for the 200-foot wide buffer (propercy line to property line) based on the number derived from the original 140 lot PUD February 24, 2004 Planning -Staff presented the 135 lot PUD Commission -6.9 acres of park land was proposed which varied in wi&h Meeting, from 85-feet to 290-feet. Public -Many area residents spoke at the public hearing of their Hearing objections to the plat based on too many homes and loss of trees. -Suggestions were made to have a cluster development t doser to County Road 1 with significantly less lots. -Consensus of the Commission was this 135 lot PUD was now too many lots. -Commission agreed that PUD was appropriate but with less lots. -Request was tabled to advertise for CUP and to resolve drainage issues. March 10, 2004 -Applicant withdraws PUD and CUP applications and proceeds forward with current Rlc zoning. March 10, 2004 Park & Rec -The Commission was updated on the revised 111 lot plan. (update) -The Commission still asked for the 200-foot wide buffer (property line to property line) based on the number derived from the original 140 lot PUD. -The Commission is willing to work with applicant to purchase the 1.89 acres they desire or if needed, ask the Council to condemn the land. -The Commission also discussed City Code Section 30- 375 (3) which discussed appropriateness of the site for development. March 23, 2004 Planning -Staff, in the afternoon prior to the meeting, worked with Commission applicant on a design that provided a parallel buffer that is Meeting, 147-feet wide (10% land dedication). Both staff and Public applicant fek the design was a fair compromise as it did Hearing provide 200-feet of buffer from trail edge to the back of lots. -Staff presented the 111 lot plat that is in compliance with the current Rlc district. -The Commissions consensus was the site was not suitable for the level of development and a more creative Rlc layout can be achieved with less impact on the environment. -The Rlc plat request was recommended for denial based on the fact that the physical characteristics of the site are not suitable for the type and density of development and k will cause substantial environmental damage with the loss of trees. April 14, 2004 Park & Rec -Asked to reaffirm their recommendation. (update) -Commission still believes the site is not appropriate for a development of this nature. -Discussion centered on playground location and that it would be best in the clearing of Lot-4, Block-4 & Oudot G. (this appears to be physically not possible) -To compensate lost lots, allow lots (out of buffer) at north end of proposed park. -They realize the buffer would be now less than the 147- feet but suggested a 20' conservation easement over the rear setback of the lots adjacent to the buffer. -Suggested muldple other considerations April 19, 2004 City -The applicant is bringing forward the original submitted Council Rlc layout that was presented to Planning Commission on Meeting March 23, 2004. -Again the plat has 5.35 acres of park land (which excee& the park dedication by .25 acres) varies in width from 85- feet to 290-feet. -Once the applicant gets clear direction from the Council, I he will work with staff to design a parallel buffer that meets ~ark dedication. 9// 13 '' WOODLAND HILLS PLAT PARK & REC RECOMMENDATION (FROM 4/14/2004) C~:" ~: p 1 S~: NOT TO SCALE ~ ~ \'X ~ I :'/',:~¥~.~ CONSERVATION FASEMENT X,X, ~ PARKLAND , · x,,\x \ ~ ~-~ ; ~~,o ..... _ __ .... 'i ~ 3 --~--- 6 k.... ' ' ' N89~7'11"~ 1105.59 ~~ WOODLAND HILLS PLAT ~g;/~oo4 P2 ~0~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION (FROM 4/14/2004) CML · ~: ~ver NOT TO SCALE March 23, 2004 5.3. Request by S & A Family Investments, LLLP for Preliminary. Plat Approval of Woodland Hills, Public Hearing - Case No. P 04-02 The staff report for this item was presented by Senior Planner Scott Harlicker. S & A Family Investments requests preliminary plat approval for Woodland Hills to subdivide 50.95 acres into 111 single family lots and 7 oudots. Mr. Harlicker reviewed access and street connections, sidewalk locations, street layout, landscaping, and park dedication requirements. Mr. Harlicker then reviewed the findings from the Subdivision Ordinance for approval of the preliminary plat. Commissioner Anderson asked what was the purpose of Oudot G. Mr. Harlicker stated that it is a &ainage area which will be split and added to the adjacent lots. Chair Ropp asked for darificadon on the condemnation proposed by the Park and Recreation Commission. Director of Planning Michele McPherson explained that 1.89 acres above and beyond the 10 percent land dedication would be required in order to maintain a 200-foot buffer. The Park and Recreation Commission is recommending that the City negotiate the sale of this property at a fair market price, and if no agreement can be reach, that the City proceed with condemnation of the 1.89 acres. Mr. Harlicker explained the difference between the two buffer layouts and distances from property line to property line along the buffer zone. Commissioner Anderson asked what the purpose of Ouflot C would be. Mr. Harlicker stated that the parcel is not large enough for a lot and would need to be combined with the adjacent tot. Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. Scott Breuer, representing the applicants, referenced the Park and Recreation memo dated September 10, 2003 regarding the buffer being between the homes and the trail. He explained that widths of the proposed buffer along the east property line in both the submitted proposal and a modified plan. He stated that they are willing to make the buffer work, but that it will require them to be more creadve in the home designs. Commissioner Anderson asked if the buffer is measured from the trail or from the property line. Mr. Breuer stated that the buffer zone is measured from the property line. Commissioner Anderson asked if Mr. Breuer knew where the homes will be located on each lot at this time. Mr. Breuer stated yes, that the grading plan shows the potential house pad locations. Commissioner Offerman asked for clarification on the differences between the two plans. Mr. Breuer explained. Mr. Harlicker noted that there is no difference in the total number of lots, just in the location of the lots. John Kuester, representing the Park and Recreation Commission, stated that the Park and Recreation Commission is willing to purchase the additional property in order to achieve a 200-foot buffer, but that they have recommended condemnation if negations are not successful. He stated that the Commission has concerns regarding the density, deforestation and elevations, and that the Commission does not feel this property is suitable for the scale of development proposed by the applicant and recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial. The Planning Commission ~) ~ & ~g=~ Pa§e5 March 23, 2004 Jim Nord, 19165 Hudson Circle, joint applicant, stated that he did not feel they shotdd be held to any higher standards than other developers of wooded properties have been such as Lafayette Woods. He stated that in 1993, his family granted a 70-£oot utility easement to the City which was dear-cut by the City. Steve Parker, 19530 Albany Circle, stated that he feels it will be a disaster to develop the property as proposed and did not see why the City was willing to give up such a valuable resoLlrce. Neil Christy, 19488 Boston Street, expressed his concern for traffic and the narrow street width. City Engineer Terry Maurer explained that the streets will be the same width as those in Nordic Hills and Nordic Woods. He stated that the developer of Nordic Hills requested to have the widened street access and median at County Road 1; it was not a requirement of the City. The City agreed to allow the access and he anticipated that a similar access would be done for Woodland Hills. Mike Niziolek, 12275 Rush Circle, representing the Park and Recreation Commission, stated that he feels this is a priceless oppommity to save a significant forest. There being no further public comment, Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. Commissioner Anderson stated that even though this proposal is less dense than the previous proposal, he still felt there would be a significant impact to the environment of the area. He stated that he will vote to oppose the plat because of the physical characteristics of the property, including the trees, vegetation, and topography. He stated that he fek the developed should be able to come up with a more creadve plan with less impact on the environment. Commissioner Stevens stated that he concurred with Commissioner Anderson's comments. He did not feel the site was suitable for the level of development being proposed. He stated that the developer needs to work around the topography and try to maintain the environmental characteristics. Commissioner Stevens stated that preservation of trees should go beyond a 200-foot buffer. Commissioner Ropp stated that he concurred that the site is not suitable for the density proposed. He stated that the topography of the site will be changed entirely and that he is not in favor of approving the request. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CURTIS TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUEST BY S & A FAMILY INVESTMENTS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF WOODLAND HILLS, CASE NO. P 04-02, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO TOPOGRAPHY, SOILS, VEGETATION, SUSCEPTIBILITY TO EROSION AND SILTATION, SUSCEPTIBILITY TO FLOODING, AND DRAINAGE ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE AND DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT AND USES CONTEMPLATED. 2. BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF GRADING REQUIRED AND THE LARGE NUMBER OF MATURE TREES THAT WILL BE REMOVED, THE March 23, 2004 PROPOSED SUBDMSION WILL CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. 5.4. 5.5. 5.6. 5.7. Page 6 THE MOTION CARRIED 5-1. Commissioner Lernke opposed. Inc. for a Land Use Map Amendment to Change the Land Use of T from MR (Medium Density Residential) to HB (Highw .ay Business - Case No. LU 04-01 Re( 04-02 Inc. for a Zone Change to Rezone Certain Properzy from Rlc to PUD (planned Unit Development), Public ~. ZC PubHc Inc. for Con&donal Use Permit for an Expansion - Case No. CU 04-04 for Preliminary. Plat Approval of Menards PubHc - Case No. P 04-03 Senior Planner Scott explained that Menard, Inc. is a land use amendment, rezoning, use permit and in order to allow an expansion of their lumber yard, a 67,700 square i storage building and a covered garden center. Menards be of Hillside Estates 10~h Addition, and adding a strip of Lot 1 Crossing and replatdng them with the existing lot as Menards Mr. Harkicker reviewed the existing land use and zone change. He then warehouse/storage building, canopy for the access, and construction of a new public additional landscaping will be accommodate the new flow of are no significant issues . the previously satisfied with the plat. and the impacts of the proposed proposed 67,773 square foot center, relocation of the emergency the lumber yard. He noted that layout will be mo&fled to Mr. Harlicker noted that there de&cation requirements were ChairRopp opened the Marv Prochaska, questions from Menards, stated that he was Commission. to answer any John Kuester, requests that the located in the 5 Street, NW, stated that Commission recommend that an analysis is buffer strip, to determine what should be saved an tmderstory of white pines be planted to enhance the Commission ~f the trees : could be Melissa 19435 19416 Dodge Street, read a letter from Arthur Jackett, at Street, expressing his opposition to the ad&don to Menards. Mr. negative impact on property values, tree replacement for trees in the by the construction ($500 flue), noise suppression of attdio provision for green space and landscaping with trees 10-15 feet in height, downward, restriction of truck traffic on Dodge Street, impact on sewer The Planning Commission February 24, 2004 Page 3 opened the public hearing. There comments, Chair Pederson closed the MOVED BY lONER STEVENS AND TO REQUEST BY USE PERMIT TO OPERATE THE BY OF THE FOR A CONDITIONAL CASE NO. CU 02-04, WITH 1. IF THE EXPAND THE SHALL APPLY FOR AN USE PERMIT. 5,091 SQUARE FEET, TO THE CARRIED 7-0. 5.3. Request by S & A Family Investments, LLLP for a Rezoning from Rlc (Single Family Residential, To PUD (Planned Unit Development), Public Hearing - Case No. ZC 04-01 Request by S & A Family Investments, LLLP for Preliminary. Plat Approval ,(Woodland Hills), Public Hearing - Case No. P 04-02 5.5. Request by S & A Family Investments, LLLP for a Conditional Use Permit for Woodland Hills Planned Unit Development, Public Heating - Case No. CU 04-03 Senior Planner Scott Harlicker presented the staff report for these items. S & A Family Investments requests a zone change from Rlc to PUD, a conditional use permit for the PUD, and preliminary plat approval to subdivide 52 acres into 135 single-family lots and 5 oudots. The proposed plat (Woodland Hills) is located on the east side of County Road 1 south of Elk River Country Club. Mr. Harl/cker reviewed lot sizes, setbacks, layout of the lots and streets, environmental issues, and park dedication considerations. He reviewed areas where trees would be saved, and also, noted that the tree loss would be relatively the same with a conventional PO plat. Staff recommends tabllng the requests to allow revisions to the plat and to publish a public hearing notice for the conditional use permit. Commissioner Stevens asked if the developer would be required to replace trees. Mr. Harlicker stated that there is nothing in ordinance to require replacement of trees, but that through the PUD, additional plantings and clustering of trees can be negotiated. Chair Pederson opened the public hearing. Marry Campion, Civil Eng, ineer of Otto & Associates, project engineer, introduced Scott Breuer, applicant. Mr. Campion stated that a number of concepts have been presented to the Commission since mid-2003, including a townhome development, a conventional plat under the existing zoning, and a Planned Unit Development (PUD). He stated that the direction he received from the Commission was that there was some work yet to be done, but that they generally supported this the layout of the PUD which is being presented, or one very similar. He explained that due to the topography, the site will have to be graded no matter what type of development is proposed. He noted that minor revisions were made to The Planning Commission Page 4 February 24, 2004 the plan that the Commission reviewed, in response to the Park and Recreation Commission's recommendations on February 11tt~. Those changes included widening the buffer between the trail on the east side and the easterly-most homes. A trail corridor was added to the southwest and a lot was eliminated near the access to County Road 1. Due to the unique topographical conditions, Scott Breuer came up with a number o£ home designs to £it the site, and the lots were designed to fit the home designs in order to preserve the buffer of trees to the east and to the north. He noted that the buffer ranges from 115 feet to 125 feet wide at a minimum and is approximately 190 feet from edge of the trail to the back of the houses. Mr. Campion stated that in discussing custom grading, it was both his and the City Engineer's opinion that custom grading of the lots creates nothing but problems and that trees that may have initially been saved end up being lost when trying to fit a house on a particular lot due to grading issues between the house, the street, and yards. He stated that the applicant is willing to work with the city to come up with a plan to replace some of the trees that will be lost. Scott Breuer, 907 Main Street, applicant, stated that have worked very hard to maximize the tree buffer as much as possible. He stated that the homes will be desigued specific to the lots; some homes having 2-car garages and some having 3-car garages. He stated that they looked at some concepts for townlaomes and rowhouses but the designs did not prove to be feasible for this site. He lek that there will be some very nice homes in the proposed development and people will be proud to live in them. Commissioner Anderson asked how many homes are proposed compared to the design that is in the Commissioner's packet. Mr. Breuer stated that 135 homes are proposed. Mr. Harlicker stated that the design being discussed is the one which was distributed to the Commission and only the grading and utilities plan have yet to be modified to match the revised plan. Mr. Breuer stated that the revised plan reflects changes were requested by the Park and Recreation Commission at their February 11~ meeting. Commissioner Franz asked what the city would be getting back in exchange for the PUD zoning. Mr. Breuer stated that the city would be getting more of a buffer area (6.9 acres versus 5.2 acres), sidewalks throughout the plat to create a more walkable neighborhood, and a theme for the homes to provide a more appealing neighborhood (garages set back near the homes). Mr. Breuer stated they have also discussed having a small park with playground equipment, and planting additional trees with a least two trees per lot in addition to the boulevard trees. Commissioner Franz asked if these amenities would be worked out by the March 23rd Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Campion stated that Mr. Breuer would continue to work with staff on these items. He noted that they will be providing over one mile of sidewalks and 1,000 feet of trail cormection. Mr. Harlicker noted the location of the trail connection between Outlot A of Nordic Hills and the city trail. Mr. Breuer noted that an access would also be provided to the Mtmicipal Utilities pumphouse so that their trucks will no longer be using the City trail to access their site. Commissioner Anderson stated that the City Engineer referred to the custom grading of lots being a fiasco when dealing with multiple builders. He asked if Mr. Breuer would be the exclusive builder. Mr. Breuer stated that he plans to build all of the homes in the development. Mr. Breuer explained problems that were encountered in developments such as Lafayette Woods and Windsor Oak Hill where trees were left that should have been taken out, causing drainage problems. I-Ie stated that all those extra costs for removing trees and grading were passed on to the consumer and could have been avoided if the lot had been properly graded in the beginning. He stated that the homes on the smaller lots will start at $225,000 - $250,000, and that will vary depending on the lot and the style of house chosen. The Planning Commission February 24, 2004 Page 5 Commissioner Anderson stated that he felt some strong language should be included in the developer agreement which would provide for tree preservation and replacement. Mr. Campion stated that he anticipated some language would be included to ensure that the lot was graded properly and trees will be saved which realistically can be saved. Mr. Breuer stated that a perimeter will be set up to mark the grading boundary. He stated that they would not be able to guarantee that trees will be saved, since there is already Oak Wilt in the neighborhood. Commissioner Anderson asked if the applicant would be open to a more aggressive reforestation of the lots, such as 3 trees on the smaller lots and 5-6 trees on the larger tots. Mr. Breuer stated that they would certainly consider the proposal. Mr. Harlicker noted that staff has discussed with the developer a minimum of 1 boulevard tree every 30 feet, so that most lots would have two trees and larger lots would have 3 or 4 trees. He stated that they will also discuss planting of trees in other areas of the plat where appropriate. Commissioner Franz concurred with Commissioner Anderson's concerns. Mr. Harlicker asked if the Commission had a preference as to the tree size or number of trees. Chair Pederson stated that he would feel the trees should be larger than 2 ½" caliper size and would prefer a 4" size. Chair Pederson stated that this area is very heavily wooded and he felt a tree inventory should be required for this site. He stated that he felt it was a very poor use of this property to cut down nearly all of the trees and poor stewardship of the land. Chair Pederson stated that he felt trails were an amenity to the PUD but sidewalks were not, since sidewalks would be required in the Rtc zoning anyway. He felt the lots were too close together and that the city needs to receive something in return for allowing the PUD zoning. Chair Pederson stated that he does not see that the City is getting anything in return. He stated that he lek a development could be designed that would protect the trees, such as cluster and would be a better use of the PUD zoning. He stated that he felt the Commission did not want to see this area leveled and that custom grading could be done. He asked if the four lots on Block 8 are proposed to be removed as recommended by TEP Panel. Mr. Campion stated that the mitigation plan has been revised by removing one lot and they feel that this plan will be accepted by the TEP. Mr. Campion asked if the Commission would consider multiple family housing with a cluster. Chair Pederson stated that he felt this would be an opdon. Commissioner Ropp asked if a park has been identified on the plan. Mr. Breuer stated that there are discussing with staff the possibility of locating playground equipment somewhere in the buffer area. Jim Nord, 19645 Hudson Circle, joint owner of the property, stated that his family has been long time property owners in Elk l~ver, residents and stewards of the land. His family owned a dairy farm in the location of the existing energy plant until the highway was changed. They then moved out to the Meadowvale area. He stated that his grandfather homesteaded the area 1880 where the golf course is now located and his parents purchased the property and sold 160 acres to the golf course in t960 for $16,000. The land being discussed has been owned by the family for approximately 75 years. District 728 School purchased a portion of the property in the early 1990's for Meadowvale Elementary School. The purchase brought sewer and water to the area, along with hundreds of thousands of dollars in assessments to his family. These assessments are an obligation that must be The Planning Commission Page 6 February 24, 2004 satisfied. He stated that theynow have a quality builder and developer. Fie stated that his family desires a development that they can also be proud of. lie stated that his family and the golf course have done a lot of work to save the trees from Oak Wilt with minimal results and that it seems to be impossible to save them. Steve Parker, 19530 Albany Circle, asked if they are to assume the rezoning will be approved to PUD and who initiated the rezoning request. Chair Pederson stated that the applicant made the request after presenting several options to the Planning Commission. Mr. Parker stated that he felt the 60-foot wide lots were not appropriate for this area and would not be aesthetically pleasing. He asked what the front yard setbacks are for the PUD. Chair Pederson stated that the setback is 25 feet, and that it has been suggested to reduce the setback to 15 -20 feet in order to preserve more trees in the backyards. Mr. Parker stated that he did not feel there would be adequate space to park a vehicle in a driveway without encroaching into the boulevard. Mr. Parker expressed his objection to parking on only one side of the street. He stated he was concerned that the property value of the homes in Nordic Woods and Nordic Hills would be negatively impacted by this development, and asked why the builder would be allowed to only build two-car garages rather than three-car garages. Mr. Harlicker stated that there is no requirement in the city's ordinance to have a more than a one-car garage. Mr. Parker expressed his objection to having the municipal utilities vehides coming down his street, and lek they should continue to use the City trail. He asked what would happen to the drainage in the area. Mr. Harlicker stated some of the existing &ainage areas would be leveled, new areas created, and that the &ainage from this development will be maintained on this property and no increase in off-site &ainage will be allowed. Peter Neises, 12879 195th Avenue, expressed his concern for safety with the number of homes, narrow streets, and reduced setbacks, lie asked why the developer chose to do this many homes and if the reason was financially driven. Chair Pederson stated that he would have to ask the developer and that the Planning Commission does not look at the financial aspects of the development. Denise Lanthier, 19533 Albany Street, expressed concern for the elimination of the trees, spread of Oak Wilt, and the environmental impact on the area. She asked if the city had a tree preservation ordinance. Chair Pederson stated no, but that a draft was presented to the City Council but was not approved due to lack of funding for staff to enforce the ordinance. Ms. Lanthier also expressed her concern for impact of the new development on the schools. She asked that the Planning Commission consider allowing fewer lots and requiring more open space for this development. Ms. Lanthier also expressed her concerns regarding traffic and decreased property values in the neighborhood. Mike Niziolek, 12275 Rush Circle, Park and Recreation Commissioner, stated that he felt it would be in the City's best interest to preserve as much of the forest adjacent to the City trail as possible. He explained that in the 1900's, the Department of Natural Resources identified this area as being naturally significant and is now One of few left in Elk River. lie stated that this may be one of the city's last chances to preserve an area of the remaining forest. Mr. Niziolek stated that he lek the City's trail corridor will be one of the City's most prized amenities in the future, especially if the remaining forest adjacent to the trail can be preserved. John Kuester, 19834 York Street, Park and Recreation Commissioner, asked if the buffer is being measured from the edge of the trail or from the right of way. Mr. Harlicker stated that the buffer is shown as 190 feet from the edge of the trail to back of the homes The Planning Commission Page 7 Februar7 24, 2004 and approximately 150 from the right-of-way to the back of the lots. Mr. Kuester stated that the Park and Recreation Commission had a difficult time with this development and their intent was to preserve the ¼ewscape of the trail He asked that the Planning Commission require that the developer meet a rain/raima 200 foot buffer from the homes. Mr. Kuester stated that the Commission was not sure how a park would fit. He stated that it was the Park and Recreation's recommendation that the access to the water filtration facility come through this development in order to eliminate heavy vehicles from the trail, making it safer for trail users. He encouraged the developer and Commission to continue to pursue some type of cluster development. Mr. Kuester stated that the city needs to seriously consider how it values trees and how trees can be preserved. Jeffrey Ochsendorf, 12932 195th Avenue, stated he lek the reduced lot and home sizes will reduce his property values. He expressed concern for traffic and safety of children. He asked that the developer be required to place covenants on the development. David Schultz, 19512 Albany Circle, asked why this property cannot be developed the same way Nordic Woods and Nordic Hills was developed. He stated he did not feel it was appropriate to place a park in the buffer zone near the trail. A resident at 19476 Albany Cirde expressed his concern that the same clear-cutting will occur in this development as was done in the Cherrywood Hills development. He stated that when the second phase of Nordic Hills occurred, large mature tree were taken down that did not need to be removed. Large equipment came w/thin 10 feet of his home to remove trees after he had been told he would not even see any machinery. He stated that the city needs to make developers accountable for statements they make. He did not feel the small lots would be appealing. Ron Whealdon, 19490 Zumbro Street, stated that they chose this area to build their home because of the larger lot sizes. He stated that the small lots being proposed are like those he moved away from in south Minneapolis. Bill Lanthier, 19533 Albany Street, stated that he built his home 15 years ago in Nordic Woods. He stated that six lots of this development will abut his lot. He expressed his concern for the amount of traffic which will be generated by this development and also for the safety of children. He stated that he feels the lots in th/s development should match what is in Nordic Hills and Nordic Woods. A resident at 19492 Albany Circle stated that he fek the development was atrocious, shrinks their property values and destroys the wilderness. Dave Anderson, 14845 County Road 30, Park and Recreation Commissioner, stated that he concurred with the comments made previously about preserving the premier walkway. He expressed concern that the drainage not be directed so that it drowns the forest area. He concurred that a minimum 200-foot buffer be maintained. He stated that he was shocked at how little forest is left when flying over Elk River recently. Mr. Anderson expressed his support for a tree inventory, clustering the homes and tree preservation. Lance Holka, 12915 195th Avenue, stated that he fek this development was an opportunity to destroy a great woodland area. He expressed his concern for traffic congestion and safety. He fek that w/th the small lots, there would be no place for the children to play except in the street. Mr. Holka stated that he felt the reason for the large number of lots is for the developer to make more money. The Planning Commission February 24, 2004 Page 8 Darryl Bellin, 12805 195d~ Avenue, expressed concern for the additional traffic through his neighborhood and safety at the County Road 1 access. He felt there will be drainage problems; trees will not be saved; and there will be noise issues. He asked that the Commission consider reducing the density of the project. Dawn Polston-Hork, 19308 Rush Court, Park and Recreation Commissioner, stated that the Commission would not recommend trees be taken out in order to put in playground equipment. Jean Olson, 19516 Boston Street, expressed her concern that the creek behind her home will be impacted and also, her concern that the trees would all be removed. Brett Benkins, 19497 Boston Street, expressed concern for safety of the ckildren playing in the streets and driveways. Neil Christy, 19488 Boston Street, stated his concem for traffic coming through his neighborhood and requested that these accesses be eliminated Chair Pederson stated that the street connections were approved as part of the Nordic Woods and Nordic Hills developments for emergency vehicle access. Mr. Christy asked if the storm sewer will nm into the creek behind his property. Mr. Harlicker explained that drainage water must be treated before discharge, and cannot exceed the rate of the existing discharge. Mr. Harlicker explained the location of the retention ponds. Mr. Christy asked if the creek would dry up. Mr. Harlicker stated no, that the wetland will be relocated from the north side of the street to the south side of the street. Mr. Christy stated that he did not feel the sidewalks will be useful or improve the looks of the property. He stated that he moved from Minneapolis to get away from this type of residential neighborhood and that he is opposed to the development. Jim Nord, joint property owner, stated that the streets were stubbed off in Nordic Hills and Nordic Woods with the City's approval. Corey Barstorf, 19493 Boston Street, stated that he fek the developer is trying to put too much into this development in order to make money. He fek the proposal was a disgrace and puts an undue burden on the people in Nordic Woods and Nordic Hills. He felt that the residents of at least 80 of these lots will use the streets in his development to access County Road 1. A resident stated he did not feel the developer was prepared. He did not feel the drainage would be contained on the property. He stated that he felt the developer was asking that the plat be tabled in order to see what they can get away with. Marty Campion, project engineer, stated that they submitted a complete application package for review and that the request for tabling is because a public hearing notice for the conditional use permit was not published. Also, there are some revisions and issues that need to be worked out with the TEP Panel. A grading plan and drainage calculations have been submitted to the City Engineer for review; a utilities plan and preliminary plat have been submitted. The preliminary plat being reviewed this evening is only a slight revision from what was submitted, in response to the recommendations by the Park and Recreation Commission 1 ½ weeks ago. Mr. Campion explained that they were prepared to go ahead with their original submittal, but that they lek that since the change was slight, the information contained in the original submittal was adequate to address the revised plan. He The Planning Comrrfission Page 9 Februar~ 24, 2004 stated that he felt the Commission tmderstands that a fu~ submittal was made and that some modifications wi~ be made before the next Platmi~g Commission meeting. He stated that they did not ask to be tabled but that they are wi]~ag to be tabled in order to address some of the corsmaents received at tor~ght's meeting. Scott Breuer, applicant, stated that they have been working closely with staff for months, and made the revision in order for the Commission to review that change at this meeting. He stated that they are not trying to pull anything; that is not how they do business, but that everyone has a right to their opinion. He suggested that if residents have questions, they should talk to staff find out if they have accommodated them in providing a complete package and met all their criteria. A resident asked if the developer was proposing these smaller homes because of the economic conditions. Mr. Breuer stated that the reason a plan was submitted with a variety of homes was based on the three workshops held with the Planning Commission and staff where there were comments that Elk River does not need all these $400,000-$500,000 homes. He stated that it has been difficult to get clear direction which way they should go. He stated that they are trying to come to a compromise to please as many people as possible. He stated that they can build different homes at different prices, and that the change to these types of lots and homes was based on what they were asked to consider. He stated that it is not the case that they are proposing to build a large number of cheap homes based on the economy. A resident asked how he could get copy of the staff report. Mr. Harlicker stated that residents wishing to obtain further information should contact City Hall. He asked if the developer will make more money with t13 homes or with 135 homes. Mr. Breuer stated that it would be about the same. He asked if it would matter to Mr. Breuer what size the lot sizes were. He stated no. Chair Pederson closed the public hearing at this time. Commissioner Stevens stated that he concurred that too many homes are being proposed for the site. He encouraged Ms. Lanthier to attend a City Council meeting and express her thoughts on a tree preservation ordinance at the Open Mike portion of the meeting. He lek that there is no place for children to play in this proposal and that neighborhood parks are needed. He stated that he fek the property needs the same care and attention that Oudot A of Brentwood received, and that more care needs to be taken to meet the needs of this property and the surrounding properties. He stated that he does not support the plat as proposed and asked that the developer rethink his proposal. Commissioner Anderson stated that he supported tabling the request in order to allow time to look at the drainage issues. He stated that he felt the developer is only gmilty of trying to listen to too many opinions of the Planning Commission, the Park and Recreation Commission and city staff. He stated the developer has met with them a number of times, and that it is unfair criticism that this developer is trying to stick anything down their throats. He stated that the applicant is in the business to make money, but that he has shown a willingness to work with them. He fek that by tabling this request it may be possible to work out an alternative plan but that he was not sure how a cluster would work in an urban service area. Also, he stated that by tabling the request, drainage issues could be worked and the possibili~ of a tree inventory could be pursued. He noted that the street connections make sense and have been planned all along. Commissioner Anderson stated that he agreed that custom grading of the lots should be considered to save trees as well as a reforestation The Planning Commission Page 10 Febmary 24, 2004 plan. He concurred that children should not be playing in the streets and that an area is needed for them to play. Commissioner Offerman concurred with Commissioner Anderson that the request should be tabled, and that no trees w/Il be preserved if the property is developed under the existing Rlc zoning. He noted that Planning Commission approved a very detailed tree preservation ordinance, but that due to financial cutbacks, the City would not be able to hire a city forester and without a city forester to enforce it, a tree preservation ordinance would not work. He stated that he would encourage the residents to talk to their City Council representative if they are in support of a tree preservation ordinance. He stated that they hope to get back some amenities through the PUD zoning, and he fee that those amenities proposed fall short. Commissioner Offerman noted that they have been given direction by the Council that Elk River is to be a place where people can both live and work. Based on current salaries, this is not happening in Elk River and there is a need for some affordable housing. He stated that things are changing due to land costs, and larger lots such as those in Nordic Woods may become a thing of the past. Commissioner Ropp stated he also would like to encourage the residents to speak to the City Council at a meeting during the Open Mike portion. He noted that there also were some issues in the discussion of the tree preservation ordinance regarding how much control the City should have over what property owners do on their own property. Commissioner Ropp also expressed concern regarding the traffic generated by the number of homes proposed and also felt that there was a better way to use this land. He stated he would likely not vote in favor of the plat if a few lots are dropped and a street or two was changed. He stated that he would like to see something completely different when the plat comes back next month. Chair Pederson stated that he felt the properv? could still be developed while saving a majority of the trees. He concurred that preservation of the trail corridor is very important. He stated that sidewalks were a safer place for children than in the streets. He stated that affordable housing was discussed with the developer but he did not feel $225,000-$250,000 is affordable housing and the focus should be shifted to redevelopment in older part of the community. He stated that he felt a cluster could work if it were moved closer to County Road i and had significandy less lots to preserve forested corridor area. Planner Chris Leeseberg asked for direction as to what the Commission would like to see. He stated that development of the property under the current Rlc zoning will also destroy most of the trees. If there is no PUD, there will be no design standards; the City cannot require the developer to plant additional trees or plantings; the buffer area along the Great Northern trail will be reduced by one th/rd (10 percent park dedication), and there will be little the city can do to prevent the developer from stripping the land down to put in the 113 lots which are allowed by the Rlc zoning. Mr. Leeseberg asked that the developer and staff be given clear direction whether they want the RIC zoning or PUD zoning. Commissioner Anderson stated that he lek it should be zoned PUD with 113 sites or less, vdth a cluster approach. Chair Pederson concurred with the PUD zoning. Commissioner Franz stated that he agreed with the PUD zoning. He stated that the Commissioner had asked the developer for a mix of affordable housing and that 84% of the lots under 11,000 square feet is not a mLx. The Ptanning Commission Page 11 February 24, 2004 Commissioner Anderson stated that the housing proposed is not what he wotdd consider affordable and that a heavily wooded area is probably the wrong site for it. Commissioner Offerman stated that he agreed that the property should be zoned PUD and that he felt the Commission was looking for some lots with affordable housing, but not this many. Mr. Harlicker asked what density the Commission considers too dense for this proposal and what would be acceptable. Commissioner Ropp stated that he agreed with the PUD zoning. He did not see how traffic and safety issues could be addressed with the number of lots being proposed. He suggested that a cluster with fewer lots be considered. Mr. Breuer stated that if there are less than 130 lots, a PUD project will not work economically due to costs of infrastructure. Chair Pederson stated that he would not like to see the developer come back with a straight Rlc development and clear-cut the trees. He asked that the developer work with the City to look at what is best for the City. Commissioner Anderson stated that the developer needs to show a creative way to lay out the site with 113 to 135 lots, the density- needs to be reduced to the south and packed to the north to reduce traffic impacts. He stated that he did recall a similar layout in one of Mr. Breurer's earlier concepts. He stated that the developer needs to meet with the Commission at a workshop to discuss some options. He stated traffic is a major issue and the developer needs to look at a way to keep the traffic to the north and away from Nordic Hills and Nordic Woods as much as possible. He stated that he supported nm'Tower road widths, and that fewer lots would eliminate some of the driveways. Mr. Harlicker asked if the Commission would support a townhome components to the development. Commissioner Anderson stated that if it saves trees he would support it. Commissioner Offerman concurred. Mr. Harlicker asked if the focus is on tree preservation and clustering. Commissioner Anderson stated that traffic, drainage and park land are also issues of concern. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO TABLE THE REQUESTS BY S & A FAMILY INVESTMENTS, LLLP TO THE MARCH 23, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND TO EXTEND THE 60 DAY REQUIREMENT FOR ACTION ON THE REQUESTS. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 6A. Update on February Park & Recreation Commission Minutes August 13, 2003 Page 4 9A.4. 9.B.1. 9.B.2. iSIONER NYSTROM MOVED TO APPOVE USE Ot PARK FOR THE 6TM ANN'UAL CROSS-COUNTRY RACE ON THE GROUP WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR EVENT AND WIL PAY A FEE OF $50 FOR USE OF TH SECONDED THE MOTION. CARRIED Camp Cozy. Update Scott Dierks, Scout Troop prairie and planted mLxed ground. Scott Fire Department for their hel~ needs to send the project into the for all his hard work. )orted that he has put up of 20 bluebird houses in the with flower mix rolled into the Anderson fc along with the Elk River The project is complete; Scott still The Commission thanked Scott Land Use Cases: Park 03-~ssissippi Highlands Staff report presented by I Michele tgI~herson. The site of Houle's Oil is being replatted for ~ on j redevelopment. A trail eas~ent on the west side of Highway 10 will provi ~ ~ connection to the trail on Twin Lake'~oad. Park dedication in r comm eas = ou= COMMISSJJ~NER POLSTON-HORK MOVED TO ACCEPT ~ ,ION FOR 2.44 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL LAND AND~0-FOOT .SEMENT OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG 1~ COMMISIONER JACKETT SECONDED THE MOTION. 71~ CARRIED 7-0 ~ Concept Plan - Scott Breuer Homes Concept plan presented by Director of Planning Michele McPherson. Ms. McPherson reviewed the preliminary concept plan for a mixed use residential development located north of Nordic Woods and south of Elk River Country Club. A portion of the site is adjacent to the railroad grade. In the concept plan, the developer proposes approximately 7 ½ acres of park providing a buffer along the railroad grade, with a large neighborhood park in the southeast comer of the site. The Commission discussed the need to maintain the green ttmnel effect of the railroad grade trail, while still providing space for a neighborhood playground structure. The Commission provided preliminary direction that a tong linear park, approximately 250 feet deep, paratlel and adjacent the railroad grade is preferable. Several members of the Commission volunteered to walk the site in order to identify an appropriate for the neighborhood playground area. Staff will provide the Commission's direction to the developer for inclusion in the ne~ concept plan. Park & Recreation Commlssioa ~¥[int<es September 10, 2003 Page 3 9.B.1. 9.B.2. 9.C.1. 10. Wild WLngs building and Burger King. Commissioner Kuester suggested they at the Boys and Girls Club as an opdon to use 'after school. m&ea~ eterson offered that if the group need anyd4ng, they can and wished them luck with the/r project. Land Use Cases: PrelJn4narv Plat - Case No. P 03~11 Park Planner Cb_tis Leeseberg property is located at the southeast and Twin Lakes Road and totals subdivide the propery/into two lot 5 units and Lot 2 will be utilized Ul~tS. for Boulder Point. The subject of Sherburne Counw No. 12 1.5 acres. The current proposal is to structures. Lot 1 will be utilized for Staff recommends that nkne resident/al ~sion consider park the form of cash for ANDERSON MOVED TO ACC RESIDENTIAL UNITS. COMMISSIONER THE MOTION. THE MOTION C)d~RIED 7-0. ,IO~TION Land Use Cases: Scott Breuer Concept Plan Park Planner Cb_ds Leeseberg gave an overview of the ~hree concepts Scott Breuer presented at the September 9, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. The or/ginal Concept A (140-unk PUD) was again preferred by the Planning Commission, yet again was not preferred by the Park and Recreation Commission. There was discussion as to why the Planning Commission wanted the original 140-unit PUD. The Park and Recreation Commission is st/ll looking for an approximately 200-foot wide buffer between the homes of the proposed plat and the Great Northern Tra/1. The Commission preferred the thought/idea behind Opt/on B, as it began to provide this desired buffer. The Commission also discussed possibly of purchasing addidonai land, if the applicant was willing, to obtain this buffer. Opt/on C Was not preferred by either of the commissions or the developer. The Park and Recreation Commission gave staff direction to let the developer know they, preferred Opdon B with some addir2onal modifications to obtain the buffer, and that they may be will/ng to purchase some land to obtain it. Development Issues: October Park Tour tO visit the following parks on their park 8, 2003: Starting Athletic Complex then Trott ghlands East and West and if there {s enou~ Royal Valley. The tour >art prompdy at 5pm from Lions Park Center .ions have a barbeque. Informat/on/Update Items This infOrmation required. the Commissioners No action was zadon Fund Balance Park & Recreation Commission Minutes February 11, 2004 Page 4 9.B.2. 9.C.1. 9.C.2. Consider Park Dedication for P 04-02 - Woodland Hills Park Planner Chris Leeseberg reviewed the request to consider park dedication for a 135 lot preliminary plat. The subject property is located between the Elk River Country Club to the north and Nordic Woods to the south with County Road 1 on the west and the Great Northern Trail to the east. The 47-acre property is heavily wooded with moderate topographic changes. The 135-1ot plat will have one access point off of CountyRoad 1 and three other connections into Nordic Woods. Sidewalks are being proposed on most streets with two trail connections to the Great Northern Trail. The Commission agreed they would like to see a minimum 200-foot buffer from property line to property line framing parallel to the Great Northern Trail with two connections to the railroad grade. The southern trail connection w/Il have to be heavy duty for trucks to access the well house. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NYSTROM TO RECOMMEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL SEVEN ACRES OF I_A_ND WITH A 200 FOOT BUFFER TO THE GREAT NORTHERN TRAIL WITH A TRAIL CONNECTION ON THE NORTHERNLY END AND SOUTHERNLY CONNECTION WITH ACCESS TO THE WELL SITE. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 3mmendation re: Consultant to Complete NRI ,f Planning, Michele McPherson stated that the Greenway subcommkte Commissioners Nystrom, Paige and Polston-Hork, in reviewed the proposals, ranked them, and selected four interview. The has selected Bonestroo and Associates consultant to cz s Inventory at a cost McPherson stated that had indicated that within this season and' report in October of: to 430.00. Ms. inventory MOVED BY COMMISSION COMMISSIONER PAIGE TO ASSOCIATES TO COMPLETE THE INVENTORY FOR THE CITY OF AND RECREATION FIELD FIELDWORK AND THE BE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. BY BONESTROO AND TO INCLUDE A PARK CONSULTANTS DURING THE 7ED BY OCTOBER 2004. Lions Park Planner. Leeseberg shared plans for the proposed changes to is currently obtaining quotes to complete the work. be at their March meeting. The Council will consider the une ' 2004 meeting. Work is slated to begin shortly thereafter with 1, 2004. Park & Recreation Commission Minutes March 10, 2004 Page 7 15. ~~Pherson stated she would add this i~ including providing t e -- ' ' utes and several options from staff for lo - Woodland Hills Development by Scott Breuer - Park Planner Mr. Leeseberg reviewed information regarding the revised Woodland Hills development. He stated that the developer has opted to present a development in compliance with the Rlc Single Family zoning standards. Commissioner Kuester suggested purchasing the additional property to maintain the 200-foot buffer parallel to and outside of the City's ex~sting trail corridor. The Commission discussed City Code Section 30-375(3) which discusses the appropriateness of the site for the development. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER KUESTER AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER POLSTON-HORK TO RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL EVALUATE THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE SITE AND IF NECESSARY, DENY THE PROPOSAL BASED ON ITEM 30-375.3 OF THE CITY CODE, AND IF THE PROJECT IS APPROVED, NEGOTIATE FOR OR CONDEMN A LAND AREA FOR PARK TOTALING 200 FEET PARALLEL TO AND OUTSIDE OF THE GREAT NORTHERN TRAIL CORRIDOR. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. ourniTl, ent There fu~er business, MOVED BY COMMISSIONER AND MEETING. MOTIOB ~. The meeting of the Elk River adjourned at 8:24 p.m. Respectfully submitted, RaeAnn Gardner Recording PROPOSED WOODLAND HILLS >© ¢ TRAIL }~ 8 ~ TRAIL __.__~ ...... LAFAYETTE WOODS · I MI~ADOWVA ~:) \ I % ZUMBRO ST. N.W. I / t / / / /.. '7 ---- (~ f\ ) -/ /, L If/ m ,,)] 4.' / / // ~ ! ri.'-' I/ "~ \ / ), / / 0 ©