Loading...
02-08-2005 PC MIN . . . WORKSHOP MEETING NOTES ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2005 Members Present: Chair Ropp, Commissioners Anderson, Lemke, Offerman, Scott and Stevens Members Absent: Commissioner Westgaard Staff Present: Michele McPherson, Director of Planning; Scott Harlicker, Senior Planner; Chris Leeseberg, Planner; Terry Maurer, Gty Engineer Also Present: Parks and Recreation Commissioner Paige and former Councilmember Kuester 1. Call Meeting To Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission was called to order at 6:29 p.m. by Chair Ropp. 2. Greenway Implementation Strategy Parks and Recreation Commissioner Paul Paige was present to review the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding implementation of the Natural Resource Inventory- (NRI). He distributed a memo to the Parks and Recreation Commission from Director of Parks and Recreation Bill Maertz which included the implementation benefits of the NRI, protection and management strategies, and a requested action. Commissioner Paige stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission is soliciting Planning Commission support to form a joint subcommittee between the Commissions and a Councilmember to develop a plan to implement the recommendations of the NRI and to preserve the resources that it identified. Commissioner Stevens stated that he supported the proposal, but is concerned with the Gty's ability to strictly enforce items like the wetland buffer areas. Commissioner Paige stated that he is familiar with the Chanhassen standards and that there needs to be large community support for this endeavor, and that extensive signage and education will be a key component of certain parts of the process. Commissioner Stevens asked for a more detailed explanation of the transfer of development rights (fOR). Commissioner Paige explained in general how this program would work and cited examples from Washington County, Minnesota and Mary-land. The Commission discussed the issue of takings and how this type of program may be hindered by the perception of violating personal property rights. Director of Planning McPherson noted that the ordinance will need to be carefully crafted in order to provide incentives to encourage the use of transfer of development rights or other programs. Commissioner Paige cited the Rice County example in which the cluster ordinance has significant bonus incentives for developing with clusters. . . . Planning Commission Meeting Notes Febrwuy 8, 2005 Page 2 Commissioner Offerman asked about the status of the tree preservation ordinance. Ms. McPherson stated that the Council will be revisiting the tree preservation ordinance in March when they discuss the proposed plan of action by the Parks and Recreation Commission. The Council's concern with the tree preservation ordinance was equitable treatment of both private property owners and developers. As such, it may mutate into a tree reforestation ordinance, as opposed to tree preservation. Commissioner Anderson stated that he supported the request of the Parks and Recreation Commission for the formation of the subcommittee, but questioned whether or not the wetland buffer and tree preservation ordinances would be delayed for the work of the committee. Ms. McPherson stated that the creation of a IDR program may take a significant number of months in order to gather community support, and that other tools in the toolbox should not be delayed just for that particular program. There will be other overlapping and interconnected ordinances that will work to implement the recommendations in the NRI. Commissioner Stevens asked what the composition of the committee would be. Ms. McPherson stated that she and Mr. Maertz have not had a conversation about the composition of the committee, but it could be comprised of two members from each of the two Commissions and a member of the Council, making it a five-member committee. Commissioner Stevens asked if this would be a permanent committee and how would it operate. It was noted that these details need to be developed. Commissioner Stevens asked how the development rights would be purchased and it was noted that it typically would be via the private market, but if the City wanted to purchase development rights outright, some type of open space and/or park referendum would need to be presented to the citizens for approval. It was the consensus of the Commission to support the Parks and Recreation Commission request for the subcommittee work. 3. Transportation Priorities Discussion City Engineer T eny Maurer provided an overview of the information submitted to the Commission regarding the completed and in progress transportation projects. There were seven items noted as being completed and seven items noted as currently in process. Mr. Maurer stated that the next meeting regarding the reconstruction of County Road 40 will happen February 16m. Mr. Maurer provided credit to Steve Rohlf for taking the lead on the realignment of County Road 33 and County Road 77 in the gravel mining area. County Road 77 north of Brentwood in all likelihood will be closed starting Spring of 2005 to allow mining to occur within the existing road alignment. Mr. Maurer provided an update regarding access guidelines for the area that is currendy guided Agricultural and that will be shifted to a Rural Residential land use over the next five years. Staff is working with the County on this project. Mr. Maurer stated that he received news that MnDOT's central office is expected to eliminate the planning funds for evaluating Trunk Highway 169 from Trunk Highway 101 to Princeton. The City had anticipated that MnDOT would take the Inter Regional Corridor Plan for TH 169 to the next level. Commissioner Offerman requested information as to the . . . Planning Commission Meeting Notes Februaty 8, 2005 Page 3 jurisdictional boundary between MnDOT's central office and District 3's office. Mr. Maurer provided a description of how the jurisdictional differences existed. Mr. Maurer stated that regarding the Line Avenue cul-de-sac, the Council will discuss this project at the February 14th workshop meeting. The Commission discussed the merits of closing the median in Twin Lakes Road, which would prohibit left turns northbound from Line Avenue to Twin Lakes Road, and left turns southbound onto Twin Lakes Road from the Marshes of Trott Brook development. Commissioner Lemke asked about the Highway 10 IRC and the raising of Highway 10 in downtown; whether or not the railroad tracks would be raised as well so that Main Street and Jackson could traverse beneath the tracks, as opposed to having to travel over the tracks. Mr. Maurer stated that the IRC consultant indicated that studying the lowering of Highway 10 in the downtown area was beyond their scope and this would be one of the alternatives to be evaluated under the new planning funds being requested by the City. Mr. Maurer then reviewed the 14 items that he identified either through ongoing conversations or inclusion in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan adopted by the City in 2004 as to be completed within the short term period. He expanded on Item 3 - the widening of Zane Avenue through Elk River Crossing and provided an update regarding acquisition of right-of-way versus a sidewalk easement. Mr. Maurer indicated that a 10-foot sidewalk easement to be located over the 10-foot parking setback would provide the City an opportunity to widen the road if needed by moving the public sidewalk onto the Wal-Mart property in the sidewalk easement. He stated that he believes, and the Police Chief concurs, that a three-lane configuration will function very well, as opposed to creating a four-lane condition on Zane Avenue. The Commission discussed closing the median at Main Street and Zane Avenue, which would prohibit northbound left turns onto Main Street and would prohibit crossing of the intersection. This would require traffic to exit the development at the south end of Zane (179th Avenue), and utilize Twin Lakes Road to get to Main Street, CSAH 12, or Highway 10. Commissioner Anderson noted that most of the traffic currently occurs at the north end of Zane Street and that once Tractor Supply and Maxsun Furniture are built, the 179m Avenue intersection with Twin Lakes Road will be more fully utilized. Mr. Maurer provided additional explanation regarding development of a traffic calming policy. He reviewed the Bloomington process and that their policy required implementation on a city-wide basis and that inclusion of the public in the process is important. He noted that two policies could be drafted; one to resolve traffic issues in existing developments, and one to be implemented as part of new development construction. Commissioner Stevens noted that well-defined corridors need to be identified and constructed in order to effectively implement traffic calming. Commissioner Offerman stated that traffic and impacts to children always seem to be issues during public hearings. He felt that sometimes the claims of traffic impacts are exaggerated. He stated he lives on Auburn Street and now that 196m Avenue has been extended to Evans Street, there are no longer traffic issues on Auburn. Mr. Maurer stated that the City is not able to take on all 14 projects and that staff is requesting a recommendation from the Commission to the City Council as to what the City's priorities should be. . . . Planning Commission Meeting Notes February 8, 2005 Page 4 The Commissioners voted on the projects noted by Mr. Maurer. Those projects receiving votes included: County Road 44 (Meadowvale Road) reconstruction Widening of Zane Avenue through Elk River Crossing Elk Hills Drive corridor study 193rd Avenue corridor study for easterly extension Corridor study for County Road 33 to County Road 31 at Anoka County line Corridor study for School Street alignment west to Upland Avenue Tyler Street corridor study from County Road 33 to County Road 21 County Road 1!Proctor Avenue expansion just north of Tnmk Highway 10 County Road 13/Twin Lakes Road corridor study 4 votes 1 vote 5 votes 4 votes 1 vote 5 votes 1 vote 2 votes 2 votes Other Projects Identified by the Commission: Zane Avenue/Main Street median closure County Road 77 corridor - County Road 1 to 221 st Avenue County Road 40 extension - Fillmore to Jarvis to Highway 10 Highway 10 downtown re-route Main Street/Highway 169 interchange Accelerate the Highway 169 corridor plan 2 votes 1 vote 1 vote 1 vote 2 votes 1 vote The Commissioner further debated the benefits of extending 193rd Avenue versus School Street to the east. The Commission felt that the extension of School Street would reduce the pressure on the CSAH 12/Main Street/Highway 169 intersection. They also felt that this extension would alleviate the need to close Line Avenue or that it would make the closure of Line Avenue more palatable. The Commission also discussed the impact of the Commonweal development at the southwest comer of Main Street and Highway 169. The Commission then provided a weighted vote for the top four projects in order to provide them a priority rank. The projects in priority order for recommendation to the Council were: Elk Hills Drive corridor study 193rd Avenue corridor study for easterly extension Corridor study for School Street alignment west to Upland Avenue County Road 44 (Meadowvale Road) reconstruction Weighted score 19 Weighted score 18 Weighted score 13 Weighted score 10 4. Form Based Zoning This item has been delayed to the April meeting. 5. Set May Tour Date The Commission discussed the merits of an out-of-the-city tour for May. The concern of when the May fishing opener is scheduled was raised. The Commission agreed to consider April 30 or May 7 as possible tour dates. Ms. McPherson indicated that she would utilize email and check the fishing opener date and ask the Commission to review their calendars. . . . Planning Commission Meeting Notes FebIUaIY 8, 2005 Page 5 6. Adjournment Having no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.rn. Submitted by, Michele McPherson Director of Planning