03-11-2000 PC MIN - SPECIAL
.
.
.
&~~~@WE~
MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL
SATURDAY, MARCH 11, 2000
Members Present:
Chair Mesich, Commissioners Chambers, Kuester, Morphew,
Pederson and Schuster
Members Absent:
Commissioner Baker
Staff Present:
Michele McPherson, Director of Planning; Scott Harlicker, Senior
Planner; Stephen Wensman, Planner
Also Present:
Ron Dragsten and John Bogart
1. Call Meetina To Order
Chair Mesich called the meeting to order at 8:45 a.m.
2.
Consider 3111/00 Plannina Commission Aaenda
COMMISSIONER KUESTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MARCH 11,2000, PLANNING
COMMISSION AGENDA. COMMISSIONER CHAMBERS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
3.
Elect New Plannina Commission Chair for 2000 and
4.
Elect New Vice Chair for 2000
Commissioner Kuester nominated Commissioner Chambers for the position of
Chair. Mike Chambers nominated Commissioner Mesich for Chair for 2000.
Seconded by Commissioner Schuster. Commissioner Chambers indicated that he
would be willing to be Vice Chair, however, he feels that he is not ready to be
Chair at this time.
THE COMMISSION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED COMMISSIONER MESICH FOR
PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR FOR 2000, WITH COMMISSIONER CHAMBERS AS
VICE CHAIR.
5. Review Plannina Commission Rules and Procedures
The Commission reviewed their rules and procedures. Commissioner Kuester
expressed a concern with the dissolution of the MP AI AP A relationship. She
wanted to be sure that citizen planners would receive adequate attention from
the Minnesota Chapter of the American Planning Association.
Chair Mesich stated that he would like to meet with the Park and Recreation
Commission.
Planning Commission Special Meeting
March 11, 2000
Page 2
.
Commissioner Kuester discussed the purpose for workshops. Commissioner
Chambers stated that he would like to review more development proposals at
workshop meetings. Discussion occurred regarding tabling of items to the next
regular meeting, as opposed to calling a special meeting on a scheduled
workshop meeting for review of planning projects. The Commission did not have
any specific guidelines for staff to determine if a project would require workshop
review versus regular review.
The Commission then reviewed the portion within the rules and procedures
regarding time lines. The Commission agreed that time lines should be set.
however. it really is a judgment call on the part of the Chair regarding how long
to allow the public to continue to discuss a topic.
Chair Mesich indicated that they would like to meet annually with Peter Beck,
City Attorney, to review various legal issues. The Commission also indicated their
desire to meet with the Heritage Preservation Commission.
6. Review Section 214 of the Elk River City Code
The Commission briefly reviewed Section 214 of the City Code which establishes
the Planning Commission. Chair Mesich requested that this section be added to
the rules and procedures.
7.
Review Plannina Commission Schedule for 2000
.
The Commission reviewed the meeting schedule for 2000. Commissioner Kuester
noted that she has conflict with the October City Council meeting that she is
scheduled for. She and Chair Mesich "swapped" months.
8.
Formulate New Goals and Obiectives for 2000
The Commission identified the following nine goals and objectives for 2000:
a. Continuing Education:
A ttend state and national planning conference.
Attend GTS classes on planning and zoning.
b. Work with the City Council in setting planning priorities.
c. Update and amend Zoning Code as part of the re-codification process.
d. Complete area study for Northstar Corridor depot adjacent land uses.
e. Conduct a mobile workshop for cluster development.
f. Attend a joint meeting with the Park and Recreation Commission.
g. Re-acquaint themselves with the Comprehensive Plan.
h. Develop standards for the commercial property at the southwest corner of
Highway 169 and Main Street.
i. A ttend a joint meeting with Heritage Preservation Commission.
9. Discuss Topics/Issues for Plannina Commission Workshop Meetinas
The following topics are proposed for workshop meetings of the Planning
Commission during 2000:
.
a. Discuss combination of single family residential districts R 1 b - R 1 e.
Planning Commission Special Meeting
March 11. 2000
Page 3
. b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
Tree preservation standards
Focused area studies (Northstar Corridor depot site)
Conduct a mobile workshop to study cluster developments in other
communities
Accessory structures
Zoning issues identified by staff
Review the Zoning District outlines
Mobile workshop to review old plats
Comprehensive Plan and review and re-acquaintenance
Joint meetings with the Park & Recreation and Heritage Preservation
Commissions
10. Review Subdivisions:
.
.
a. Whitetail Ridae
The Commission reviewed the proposed 40 acre. 18 lot cluster subdivision
entitled Whitetail Ridge. The Commission had no major concerns regarding
this subdivision and concurred with staff's recommendations regarding
grading issues, relocating the storm water ponds, swapping Outlot A and Lot
1, and locating the trail access on the drier portion of the site.
b. Twin Lakes Townhomes
The Commission reviewed the 80 unit townhome development located north
and west of Twin Lakes Road. The Commission comments included:
1. More shared driveways on the single family detached side.
2. Full width public street extension of 6th Street to Twin Lakes Road.
3. Reduce the single family detached portion by approximately four units.
4. Provide off-street parking in both halves of the development.
5. They liked the feel of the spacing on both sides and the alternating
setbacks of the single family detached portion of the development.
6. Need for pedestrian connection to central green.
7. The plan should locate the single family homes adjacent to Twin Lakes
Road.
c. Rollina Hills
The Commission met with the applicants for Rolling Hills and reviewed the
proposed 30 lot cluster development on 113 acres. The Commission's
comments can be summarized as follows:
1. Concern with lack of direct access to the 40 acre set-aside parcel.
2. There should be preserved open space along Jarvis.
3. The pole barn proposed to be saved does not fit the development.
4. The applicants need to more specifically define their theme.
5. The two lots adjacent to Jarvis should be relocated or eliminated.
6. The lots should be smaller and clustered more tightly in the center of the
site.
7. More of the open space should be buildable and not all wetland.
8. More trees should be preserved.
9. Greater setbacks should be considered, as well as hiding the garages.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Special Meeting
March 11. 2000
Page 4
The applicants agreed to provide a narrative describing the components for the
density calculations.
11.
Discuss Possible KinderCare - Holt & Jackson
The Commission briefly reviewed the proposed 10,000 square foot KinderCare for
the City-owned property at Holt and Jackson. The Commission was opposed to
removing any trees on the site and suggested that the land be used for an entry
sign into the city, as opposed for development purposes.
13. Adiournment
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 12: 15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
)#([Ciult: 7J(O#tt-M#7[ /dk~
Michele McPherson
Director Planning