Loading...
08-10-2004 PC MIN - SPECIAL . . . SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 2004 Members Present: Chair Ropp, Commissioners Anderson, Offerman, Pederson and Stevens. Commissioners Curtis and Lemke arrived at 6:35 p.m. Members Absent: None Staff Present: Michele McPherson, Director of Planning; Scott Harlicker, Senior Planner; Chris Leeseberg, Planner; T eny Maurer, Gty Engineer; Stephen Rohlf, Building & Environmental Administrator; and Rebecca Haug, Environmental Technician 1. Call Meeting To Order 2. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chair Ropp. Consider 8/10/04 Planning Commission Agenda MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PEDERSON TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 10,2004 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Preliminary Plat of River Park Ray Baird, representing Orrin Thompson Homes, reviewed the changes to the site plan from that which was submitted to the Planning Commission in their packet. Mr. Baird indicated that nine acres of woods and the road connection to Trout Brook Estates had substantial changes to overall site plan since preparation of the staff report. Mr. Baird provided an overview of the four housing styles; the University and Homestead single-family styles and the Village and Lodge attached dwelling styles. The least expensive home style is the Lodge and the most expensive home style is the University. Mr. Baird reviewed the dedications of land for parks and water treatment and fire station site, and the restoration of the wetlands and prairies on the site. He described the entry into the development from realigned County Road 40. Commissioner Stevens asked about the connections to adjacent developments. Mr. Baird explained the various road connections. Chair Ropp asked about the phasing of the development. Mr. Baird stated that the development would start in the southwest comer with the installation of utilities and would take approximately 5 - 6 years for full build out. Commissioners Curtis and Lemke arrived at this time. . . . Planning Commission Minutes August 10,2004 Page 2 3.1. EA W for River Park Rebecca Haug provided an overview of the EA W comments which had been received from Anoka County. The Anoka County comments focused specifically on transportation congestion on Anoka County roads as a result of the development, and a potential trail connection to the Sherburne County Wildlife Refuge from East Twin Lakes Park in Anoka County. Building and Environmental Administrator Steve Rohlf reviewed the wetland impacts. There is approximately one acre of impact to Type 2 wetlands due to road crossings. The approval of the wetland impacts is predicated on the U.S. Army Cotps accepting the delineations, once the soil borings are submitted. There is also a need to verify that the proposed wetland restoration will not affect upstream flooding. The wetland impacts are recommended for approval with six conditions, plus a seventh condition requiring the Department of Natural Resources and the Army Cotps of Engineers to accept the proposed restoration plan. 3.2. Request By Orrin Thompson Homes for Rezoning of Miske Property from R1d (Single Family Residential) to PUD (planned Unit Development). Public Hearing - Case No. ZC 04-06 3.3. Request by Orrin Thompson Homes for Preliminary Plat Approval of River Park (Miske Property). Public Hearing - Case No. P 04-09 3.4. Request by Orrin Thompson Homes for Conditional Use Permit for Residential Planned Unit Development. Public Hearing - Case No. CD 04-15 Senior Planner Scott Harlicker provided an overview of the staff report. He reviewed the number of units, the street layout, the landscaping concerns with certain areas of housing in Blocks 38 and 40 which are double-frontaged lots, the park areas, and the proposed restorations. Commissioner Pederson asked for clarification on the total number of units. Mr. Harlicker stated that the total number of units with the revised site layout presented this evening is 687. Commissioner Offerman requested confirmation of on-street parking. Mr. Harlicker indicated that parking would be allowed on one side of the City streets and the main street would allow parking on both sides. The townhome streets would not allow parking. Commissioner Stevens questioned the placement of the parking areas in Block 38 and 40. He stated that it was highly unusual to have parking in the rear yard of homes. Chair Ropp asked the status of the County Road 40 improvement and the timing. City Engineer T eny Maurer stated that the City and County have had conversations regarding turning back County Road 40 to the City as a city street. The required right-of-way for this city street is being dedicated as part of this plat. Commissioner Lemke stated that he thought that County Road 40 improvements should be complete prior to development commencing. He stated that transportation movements in East Elk River are difficult and that additional traffic generated by this development would adversely impact Line Avenue and the intersection with County Road 12. . . . Planning Commission Minutes August 10,2004 Page 3 City Engineer Teny Maurer stated that Line Avenue was to have been cul-de-saced, requiring traffic to stay on the collector roadway of Twin Lakes Road. Commissioner Lemke asked why the developer is not paying for all of the improvements to County Road 40 at this time. City Engineer T eny Maurer stated that it is not the city's policy to require developers to pay for an entire improvement project of this nature. Commissioner Anderson asked why the City is allowing denser developments farther out from the core. Director of Planning McPherson stated that the City is not "allowing" anything. The applicant or any property owner has the right to apply for a project to the city. Staff cannot tell a property owner or applicant that they cannot apply for a zone change request or any other land use application. It is up to the City Council to determine if the proposal is appropriate and if it fits the long-term vision of the city. With zone change requests, the City has the ultimate discretion in approving or denying a request. Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. Randy Barney, 19008 Lincoln Street - Mr. Barney stated that he lives at the end of the Lincoln Street cul-de-sac and that exiting from his neighborhood onto County Road 13 has resulted in close calls. There are long waits to exit onto County Road 13 and some residents may make risky choices in order to leave the development. Mr. Barney suggested that perhaps one of the two exits could be closed onto the county road in exchange for not making the connection into Sunset Ridge. He suggested that the development be allowed an entrance onto County Road 13 farther east. City Engineer T eny Maurer stated that based on the Sherburne County access policy, there is not enough distance between Lincoln and Kennedy Streets and County Road 40 to allow an additional entrance onto County Road 13. Renee Pomerleau, 18996 Lincoln Street - Stated that the neighborhood should be left alone and asked why do they have to get involved. She stated that the kids live in the street and the connection between the development and their neighborhood should not be made, as it will cause increased traffic in their neighborhood. Greg Lien, 19147 Lincoln Street - Stated he was concerned with the speed on County Road 13 and increased traffic levels in the neighborhood. He felt that County Road 40 should be completed first in order to keep construction traffic out of Sunset Ridge. He stated that the neighbors paid an assessment for paving their streets and construction traffic would adversely impact the new paving. He suggested that the interconnection between Sunset Ridge and the new development be done last. He also requested that hours of operation be limited to reasonable hours with no work on weekends. Mr. Lien also asked where sewer and water would enter into this development. City Engineer T eny Maurer stated that speed limits are set by the State of Minnesota and noted that typically when development occurs, speed may be reduced on adjacent roadways by the State due to urbanization. The City would have to request, however, that a speed study be done, once the development is completed. Kim Thiry, 19031 Lincoln Street - Stated that School District is overcrowded at the elementaty level and that this development would exasperate that issue. . . . Planning Commission Minutes August 10,2004 Page 4 David Green, 19110 Kennedy Street - Stated that he was concerned with safety, traffic and speed. He felt that the project was too dense for the area. Specifically, that this is a rural area and the density should not be as high as proposed in the development. Mr. Green expressed concern with the congestion at the Main Street/Highway 169 intersection. Linda Schmeling, Cleveland Street - Stated that she lives on the east side of County Road 40 and that the Council stated that no townhomes will be allowed in east Elk River. She stated that there are five farms on the east side of County Road 40 and would they be assessed for the road, and will there be future plans so that their farms could connect to water and sewer, if needed. City Engineer T eny Maurer stated that it is staff's opinion that in all likelihood, water will be along County Road 40, due to physical barriers such as Trott Brook and Pintail Pond in the property to the south of the proposed development. Mr. Maurer stated that it is unknown who would be assessed for the road, as the City does not have enough information at this time to make that determination. Ms. Schmeling asked why the zoning needed to be changed. Director of Planning McPherson stated that the zone change is a request on the part of the applicant and that the City does not have to change the zoning. The developer could be required to construct minimum size lots for the existing zoning district, which would be 14,000 square feet. Ken Nathe, 19080 Lincoln Street NW - Stated that the City should just say "no" to the development. He felt that five and ten-acre minimum lots should only be allowed in this area and that the City should be looking for additional commercial and industrial tax base instead of homes. Mr. Nathe stated that there should be an interchange at Highway 169 and Main Street, due to the traffic back-ups at that intersection. Renee Crepeau, 19160 Lincoln Street NW - Stated that there are 13 houses in their neighborhood with total of 66 children who all play in the street because there are no parks and no sidewalks in their development. Pat Breher, 19161 Kennedy Street NW - Stated that she is concerned with traffic. She rides the bus to downtown Minneapolis and that there are a lot of non-residents utilizing the commuter bus. She stated that you cannot travel through the City at this time due to traffic congestion, and this development would only increase that problem. Patti Crepeau - Stated that the snow piles at the intersections of Kennedy and Lincoln and County Road 13 make it difficult to see. She also stated that there is congestion in Elk River and that it is very difficult to travel. They do not go to the west side of Highway 169 because it is too difficult. She also noted that there are no sidewalks in their development. Mike Nelson, 19020 Lincoln Street NW - Stated that the State of Minnesota is behind on transportation issues. Meg Johnson, 19220 Kennedy Street NW - Stated that she was a real estate agent and that schools are overcrowded. There is a lack of cohesive flow between the various areas of the City, and she felt that the developers were running the City, as opposed to the City running the City. . . . Planning Commission Minutes August 10,2004 Page 5 Linda Schmeling - Stated that she wanted to acknowledge that the property is in the Urban Service District at this time and that smaller lots can be allowed per the zoning district. Greg Lien - Stated that he objected to the zone change and requested one-acre lot mmunums. Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. Commissioner Pederson stated that the Gty will continue to grow and that in order to address some of these issues, the Council should enact a moratorium on development for a short period of time. He stated that he prefers to leave the zoning at the current singie- family district, which requires 14,000 square-foot lot minimums. He did not feel that the proposal met the intent of the area. Commissioner Pederson stated that if the developer were interested in donating land for a school, then perhaps some increase in density over the base density could be considered. Commissioner Stevens stated that he felt the site lent itself to higher density, due to the fact that it is relatively flat and there are few environmental issues preventing higher density development. He stated that he likes the applicant's intent to preserve existing trees and restore degraded wetlands, however, he could not support the project at this time, in that the City needs additional east-west corridors to resolve the traffic congestion at Main Street and Highway 169. Commissioner Offerman concurred with Commissioner Stevens' comments regarding transportation. Chair Ropp stated that transportation may not be resolved in the immediate future. He indicated that he felt the speeds on County Road 13 were extremely high and that there are transportation issues at Main Street and Highway 169. Commissioner Anderson stated that he could not support the development, and that the entire transportation situation in the City has no logic. All of the east side transportation movements funnel to Main Street and Highway 169 and that the funnel is only so large at that location. Commissioner Anderson stated that the density of the project would further adversely impact adjacent streets. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CURTIS TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE ZONE CHANGE FROM R1D TO PUD, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. THE PROPOSAL IS PREMATURE, DUE TO THE LACK OF ADEQUATE IN-PLACE INFRASTRUCTURE (WATER, SEWER, TRANSPORTATION); 2. THE PROJECT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO PUBLIC SAFETY; 3. THE PROJECT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT USES. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. . . . Planning Commission Minutes August 10,2004 Page 6 6.1. Commission Poli<.y and Handbook Director of Planning McPherson reviewed the newly adopted Commission Policy and Handbook, and reminded the Commission to attend the Joint Meeting with the City Council on October 11th. 7. Adjournment There being no further business, MOVED BY COMMISSIONER PEDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Michele McPherson Director of Planning