Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/13/04 Hastings Planning Commission September 13, 2004 Regular Meeting 7:00 pm Chairman Greil called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. 1.Roll Call Commissioners Present: Alongi, Greil, Hollenbeck, McInnis, Schmitt, Truax, Twedt Staff Present: Planning Director John Hinzman, Associate Planner Kris Jenson, Planning Intern Courtney Wiekert 2.Approve August 23, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting Motion by Commissioner Truax, seconded by Twedt to approve the minutes of the August 23, 2004 Planning Commission as presented by staff. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3.Jeri Palmer – Special Use Permit/Site Plan #2004-50 – Neighborhood Commercial in an R-2 District (Mortgage Office) – 601 Vermillion Street. Planner Jenson presented background information on the request. She handed out a revised site plan of the lot, which was received on Monday afternoon. Chairman Greil opened the public hearing at 7:04 pm. Hearing no comments the public hearing was closed at 7:05 pm. Commissioner Alongi asked how this request related to home occupations and the newly adopted ordinance. Director Hinzman stated that at the time of application, the new home occupation ordinance was not in place, and the applicant chose to move forward with the neighborhood commercial request. Commissioner Alongi asked if Staff felt that condition number 5 was satisfied and could be removed. Jeri Palmer, applicant stated that she felt there was sufficient space in the driveway and that she certainly doesn’t want clients visiting her office to block the sidewalk with their vehicles. Commissioner Truax felt that condition #5 was not satisfied and that the existing driveway is inadequate to satisfy two off-street parking spaces. 2 Chairman Greil inquired if this use would be consistent with the vermillion Street Overlay District that has been added to the Zoning Code, but to which no property has been zoned. Director Hinzman stated that it was. Ms. Palmer stated that she very much wants to maintain the historic character of the home, and feel that a larger driveway would detract from that character. Chairman Greil asked if the proximity to the downtown area could allow this use simply to utilize on-street parking to satisfy the parking requirements. Director Hinzman stated that the line for the downtown area ended at either 4 th or 5 Street, so this property was close but not within the district. He also noted th that the proposed 390 square feet is just slightly over the 300 square foot allowance, which would only require one off-street parking space. Current parking code requires one space per 300 square feet. Ms. Palmer stated that the nature of the business would be such that generally there would be one client vehicle visiting the home at one time. The business relies on referrals and repeat customers, not walk-in traffic for it’s business. Commissioner Alongi clarified that there is a retaining wall on either side of the driveway, making expansion difficult. Ms. Palmer stated that that was the case. Commissioner Alongi asked if perhaps the office space be reduced to 300 square feet, thus reducing the off-street parking need to one space. Ms. Palmer stated that would not be a problem. Planner Jenson added that the 600 square feet indicated in the conditions was based on the maximum area allowed with two off-street parking spaces. Commissioner Twedt asked if notice was sent to the neighbors. Planner Jenson stated that as a public hearing, notice was sent to all property owners within 350’. One call was received inquiring as to the business use being proposed. Planning Commission Action: Commissioner Alongi moved and Commissioner Hollenbeck seconded the motion to recommend approval the Special Use Permit and Site Plan for 601 Vermillion Street, to the City Council, with the following conditions. 1. Compliance with applicable building codes and permits. 2. Operation of the business shall comply with the letter submitted by the applicant. A copy of the letter shall be attached and made part of the permit. 3 3. That no more than 300 square feet of space be used for the business. Any increase above that amount would require an amended special use permit and a new site plan review by the City Council due to increased parking requirements. 4. The Heritage Preservation Commission must review and approve any exterior modifications and signs. 5. Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void. Upon vote taken: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0. Motion passed. 4.Centex Homes – Preliminary Plat\Site Plan #2004-20, Continued – Construction of 114 Townhome Units – NW of 13 St & Tierney Drive. th Director Hinzman presented background on the request, including changes that have been made since the previous review of this item. Chairman Greil opened the public hearing at 7:32 pm. John Thoresen, 1844 14 St West, stated that the Sunset West Development is th fairly new, with single family homes up to $400,000. He stated that there was an assumption in the area that the minimum rear yard setback was 60’, until he spoke with City Staff, who told him it was 20’. There is a drainage pipe in his rear yard as well as his neighbors, and during the most recent heavy rain there was standing water in the yard for about 2 hours. He would like engineers to look at the drainage to the west of this area. Mr. Thoresen had planned to plant some evergreen trees at the rear of his property to buffer the view, but due to the storm sewer pipe and easement, he was unable to do that or a fence. Mr. Thoresen would like to see a berm 2’-4’ in height at the rear of the townhomes to help buffer the view of the single family homes. Mr. Thoresen stated he did have a concern over the rental of units, and that in visiting other Centex Homes developments, he noted a greater separation between townhomes and single family homes in developments where Centex was building both home styles, and he asked for the same consideration with this development in relation to the Sunset West area. Mr. Thoresen did state that he is not opposed to townhomes per se, because there is more of a guarantee of maintenance, regular lawn mowing etc. Geri Langer, 1801 13 St, expressed concern about the amount of traffic using th 13 St to gain access to General Sieben Drive, and asked that during th construction, construction-related traffic use South Frontage Road rather than the residential streets. She did acknowledge that traffic may now be reduced on 13 th because of the offset street into the townhome area. She also asked for 4 clarification that the South Frontage Road will be built to the west end of the proposed subdivision. Director Hinzman stated that it would. Joyce Recer, 1817 13 St W, stated there was no encouragement for future th residents to use the future street on the west end. Director Hinzman stated that it would not be built for some time. Ms. Recer expressed concern that 13 St W was already a very busy street and th that all the traffic from this future development would use 13 St W to enter or th exit from the development. Matt Anfang, Centex Homes representative, stated that the development exceeds the setback requirements in all areas, and that the setback to the future road area was increased to 40’. He stated that Centex would be willing to work with neighboring homeowners regarding the proposed landscaping. Mr. Anfang added that the project engineer was to attend to better explain the “babbling brook” feature, but couldn’t make the meeting. The water feature will be maintained 100% by the homeowner’s association. Chairman Greil asked what action the City could take if the water feature was not maintained. Director Hinzman stated that the City does review the language for homeowner’s associations to ensure that the association is able to levy costs back to the homeowners. If the association doesn’t, then maintenance could fall back on the City, who would then assess the association for the cost. Mr. Anfang stated that with regards to the rear of the units, some reconfigurations will be happening on the interior of the units to allow for more windows, as well as setting half of the building back a couple of feet to break up the horizontal line of the building. Ms. Recer inquired if a traffic study had been done for the proposed development. She added that General Sieben Drive is already very busy. Director Hinzman stated that a study had not been done with the annexation. Due to the collector roads in the immediate area, it was felt that the existing roadways will adequately serve the area. Kristin Muhl, 1812 13 St W, inquired as to the timeframe for development of th this project and the price ranges for the units. Mr. Anfang stated that Centex would like to grade the property this fall, start infrastructure construction in the spring, with home construction in early summer. The projected price point is $170,000 to $200,000, depending upon the location of the unit and the options selected. Centex was also undertaking the 5 oversizing of pipes in the area, as well as constructing South Frontage Road and Tierney Drive. Ms. Muhl questioned why the developer would not want to construct more expensive units on the site if the construction costs were greater than anticipated. Mr. Anfang responded that the smaller unit fit better on the site. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Greil closed the public hearing at 8 pm. Commissioner Twedt stated that he would be voting against this project, as it is very similar to the Whispering Lane project that was recently denied by the City Council. This project consists of putting multi-family units in a single family neighborhood. No traffic study has been done, yet there are more units proposed in this project. It doesn’t fit in the neighborhood, and it’s the same target market and same price points. Commissioner Twedt also stated that he didn’t feel that the units meet the architectural standards, especially since the City doesn’t know what the architectural standards are. Chairman Greil asked Commissioner Twedt what exactly could be put next to single family, if townhomes were not acceptable. Commissioner Twedt disagreed with Chairman Greil’s summary of his statement. Commissioner Schmitt stated that if this (Centex Homes proposal) was proposed at Whispering Lane, the project would have had no trouble being approved by the City. Commissioner Twedt maintained that the Whispering Lane project was denied for four reasons: it didn’t fit with the neighborhood, traffic concerns, architectural standards, and lack of landscaping/berming and tree preservation. Commissioner Alongi added that the Planning Commission needs to be careful in how they move forward. The access and egress to this site is much more varied than the Whispering Lane. The height of the building, the garages, the location, etc. is all different than what was proposed at Whispering Lane. The single family homes in Sunset West that will back up to the proposed development currently have the electrical substation and Cub Foods as their view, and this will improve their view. Commissioner Alongi also noted that he has seen considerable more engagement on the part of the developer on this project to work with the City. Commissioner Truax likes the thought of turning and breaking up the units that back up to the single family homes along 14 St W. He was concerned about th easements in the area. As far as the babbling brook goes, he has concern with it’s operation and that it could have standing water and become a breeding ground for mosquitoes, etc. 6 Commissioner Schmitt clarified that without the pump, the ponds would be like any other detention pond that holds water. Mr. Anfang tried to better explain how the water feature works. There would be a large pond to the west of and in the southwest corner of the property. Water would then flow thru the open channels to the pond in the northeast corner of the property. Rather than flowing thru a 48” pipe underground, the water will flow above ground. Commissioner Alongi asked if the Planning Department had received any comments from the Public Works Director. Director Hinzman stated that Tom Montgomery, Public Works Director, commented that an underground pipe is easier to maintain in the long term, and that this design will require much more maintenance. Commissioner Alongi asked whether Condition #15 should be modified for more specific language about the brook. Director Hinzman stated that conditions #11 and #12 should cover the water feature. Commissioner Schmitt stated that sedimentation will occur and be a maintenance issue with this feature. Director Hinzman stated that it will, and that this is an issue the City has to deal with on it’s ponds. Commissioner Schmitt clarified that future road construction will be recorded against the other property owner. Director Hinzman stated that the other property owner is aware of the requirement and that the City has discussed this issue with them. Commissioner Truax stated that in regards to traffic issues, all the traffic will end up on General Sieben Drive, but that there are several ways to get there. General Sieben Drive is functioning as intended, and this particular area of the street is the busiest. He feels that the City owes it to the area residents to do the study, as it may show that the future road is needed sooner rather than later based on the levels of the traffic study. Commissioenr Alongi added that this is another reason this project differs from the Whispering Lane proposal as there was no future possibility for a future roadway connection. Commissioner Schmitt added that while general Sieben Drive is designed and constructed to handle large volumes of traffic, he isn’t opposed to a study. Commissioner Alongi questioned whether the road extension to Highway 55 would require MnDOT’s approval. 7 Director Hinzman stated that it would need to meet access management guidelines. Commissioner Alongi asked if a right only exit would still require MnDOT approval. Director Hinzman stated that any access to Highway 55 requires MnDOT’s review and approval. Commissioner Alongi stated that requiring this development to connect to Highway 55 is too great of a burden on the development. Chairman Greil reminded the Commission that just west of the electrical substation is the city limits and the extension to Highway 55 would require further annexation. He added that traffic thru the neighborhoods in this area is will designed and that about 2/3 of the traffic from this proposed development will use South Frontage Road to access General Sieben Drive. Options at that location may or may not include stoplights. He finds it hard to believe that General Sieben Drive is at or above the capacity for which it was designed. He acknowledged that it may be very busy at times, but it’s not unbearable. Director Hinzman stated that the other issue that should be looked at is what the City gains with this development. The extension of South Frontage Road will eventually serve a greater area. Commissioner Truax also noted that General Sieben Drive narrows from four lanes to two lanes at the South Frontage Road intersection. Planning Commission Action Commissioner Schmitt moved and Commissioner Hollenbeck seconded the motion to recommend approval, to the City Council, of the preliminary plat, based on the following conditions: 1)Approval of the property rezoning from A – Agriculture to R-3\PRD – Medium High Density Residence – Planned Residential Development. 2)The Outot B private drive must be expanded to 32 feet in width between the proposed brook and Tierney Drive to accommodate parking on both sides of the roadway. 3)South Frontage Road must incorporate a temporary turnaround at the discretion of the Public Works Director. 4)All property designated for the South Frontage Road right-of-way must be annexed to the city prior to approval of the Final Plat. An annexation application for approximately 0.5 acres has been submitted for City Council approval in conjunction with the Preliminary Plat. 5)South Frontage Road must be constructed at the full expense of the developer. 8 6)A covenant shall be recorded against all land contained within the future north\south collector road located just west of the subject property. The covenant shall give notice of the obligation to construct the collector roadway to City Standards at the full cost of the owner prior to any subdivision approval. 7)Association documents and covenants will need to be established prior to Final Plat to ensure maintenance of all common items including open space and common drives. 8)Boulevard trees along South Frontage Road must be located between the sidewalk and roadway at the discretion of the City Forester. 9)The homeowner association shall be responsible for the maintenance of the off-site stormwater basin. 10)The applicant shall obtain any approvals necessary by Nininger Township in order to construct the off-site stormwater basin. 11)Further information on the functioning of the brook and equipment must be provided to the City’s consultant engineer for review and approval. 12)The homeowner association shall be fully responsible for the care and upkeep of the brook and pumping equipment and to ensure that the system continues to meet storm water drainage requirements in the future. The city shall not be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the brook and equipment. 13)All buildings consisting of three or more units will be subject to Site Plan by the Planning Commission and City Council prior to construction 14)All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover to eliminate erosion problems. 15)Final approval of the grading, drainage and utility plans by the Public Works Director, and reimbursement for any fees incurred in review of the development. 16)The disturbed areas of the site shall be maintained to the requirements of the City’s property maintenance ordinance. 17)All private roads constructed to city specifications. 18)Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to recording of the Final Plat mylars. 19)Preliminary Plat approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void. Upon vote taken: Ayes: 6, Nays: 1, Twedt dissenting. Motion passed. 9 Commissioner Hollenbeck moved to recommend approval of the site plan with the conditions in the Staff report, and Commissioner Alongi seconded the motion. Commissioner Alongi questioned condition #5 for the Site Plan approval. Director Hinzman stated that the wording give Staff flexibility. Commissioner Schmitt stated that he would prefer to see the site plan come back before the Commission for review. Commissioner Hollenbeck rescinded her motion, and Commissioner Alongi concurred. Commissioner Twedt asked if the site plan was tabled, would the plat move forward. Director Hinzman stated that the plat was out of the Commission’s hands, but the scheduling of both actions may dictate that the plat waits for the site plan to move forward to Council. Mr. Anfang stated that he would prefer that both items are heard before City Council at the same time, and would thus wait for the site plan recommendation from the Commission before taking both items to the Council. Planning Commission Action Commissioner Schmitt moved and Commissioner Truax seconded the motion to table the site plan review of the Centex Homes project to the September 27 th meeting. Upon vote taken: Ayes: 7, Nays: 0. Motion passed. OTHER ACTIONS 5.Tom Rezac – Variance #2004-48 – Expansion of a Non-Conforming Use – 2121 Glendale Road. Planner Jenson presented background information on the request. Commissioner Twedt asked what was the current use of the building. Mr. Rezac stated that it was used for storage and dog kennels. Director Hinzman stated that the applicant isn’t looking for any intensification of the site. Commissioner Twedt asked for clarification as to why the variance is needed. Planner Jenson responded that due to the fact that the lot does not meet the minimum size requirements of the Agriculture district, a building permit cannot be issued without a variance. 10 Mr. Rezac added that he did try to purchase additional land to bring the lot up to the minimum 10 acre lot size, but was unsuccessful. Planning Commission Action Commissioner Twedt moved and Commissioner Alongi seconded the motion to recommend approval of a variance for 2121 Glendale Road to the City Council, based on the following findings of fact: B. The literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicants of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10. C. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions of the applicant. Upon vote taken: Ayes: 7, Nays: 0. Motion passed. The Commission was also asked to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the appropriateness of dog grooming as a permitted use within the Agriculture District. Listed as permitted uses within the Agriculture District is “Other uses similar in nature to the above uses and which, in the opinion of the Council, will not be detrimental to the integrity of the Agriculture District.” It is Staff’s opinion that dog grooming is consistent with kennels and veterinary operations, both of which are permitted uses in the Agriculture District. Planning Commission Action Commissioner Schmitt moved and Commissioner Twedt seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that dog grooming is a similar and compatible use to kennels and veterinary establishments as a permitted use within the Agriculture District. Upon vote taken: Ayes: 7, Nays: 0. Motion passed. 6.Amcon Construction – Site Plan #2004-49 – Construction of a Bank\Office and Day Care Facility – 15xx South Frontage Road. Director Hinzman presented background information on the item. Commissioner Twedt questioned the elimination of the 17 parking spaces on the bank property, and asked what benefit to the City was. He expressed concern that the area would become weed space rather than green space. Director Hinzman clarified that the area would not be paved – it would be green space and should the parking spaces be needed in the future, the area could be converted back to parking. Commissioner Truax questioned where the drop off site for the day care was located. 11 Planner Jenson responded that under the parking code, there are not specific regulations for day care centers, and that Staff has been using the requirements for schools. However, in Staff’s experience, parents taking their children to a day care center cannot just drop them off – they must be taken into the building by the parents, thus making a drop off area unnecessary Commissioner Schmitt asked what the process was to change the zoning ordinance. Director Hinzman stated that an amendment to the code would be needed. As schools are the closest use to a day care, it has been used. The number of spaces provided for the day care are a little on the high side, but not excessive. Commissioner Alongi wanted to be sure that the excess parking spaces on the bank property were actually removed in order to reduce the amount of bituminous in the area. Commissioner Twedt concurred, saying he wanted to be sure the spaces weren’t constructed and just not striped. Planning Commission Action Commissioner McInnis moved and Commissioner Truax seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council approval of a site plan for Amcon Construction to construct a day care facility and bank/office building, subject to the following conditions: 1)A joint access and parking agreement shall be recorded against both properties to allow for cross parking and access. 2)The 17 parking spaces located directly north of the office\bank building shall either be eliminated or shown as “proof of parking” for future construction if needs warrant. 3)Any rooftop equipment must be completely screened from the front elevation, any part of the roof top equipment that is visible from any other elevation must be painted to match the building on which the equipment sits. 4)Landscaping must be added to the Highway 55 retaining wall in similar quantities, spacings and size as the neighboring Target building. The retaining wall is presently overgrown with weeds and grasses. 5)The property owner shall be responsible for the maintenance of all retaining wall plantings along Highway 55. 6)All landscaping and plantings shall be irrigated. 7)Recording of a cross drainage easement between the subject parcels at the discretion of the Public Works Director. 12 8)The waste enclosure must be constructed of materials that match the building, and be enclosed on all four sides with a door. 9)An escrow account must be established to ensure completion of outstanding site improvements, including landscaping prior to certificate of occupancy. 10)All parking and drive aisle areas shall be constructed to City standards including bituminous surfacing and concrete curb and gutter. 11)All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover to eliminate erosion problems. 12)The disturbed areas of the site shall be maintained to the requirements of the City’s property maintenance ordinance. 13)Final approval of the development grading and utility plans by the City of Hastings. The applicant shall be liable for any costs involved in consultant review of the plans. 14)Final approval of the development plans by MN Dot and adherence to any MN Dot conditions of approval. 15)Monument signs shall be architecturally consistent with the buildings on site and incorporate similar materials into their construction. 16)Lighting must incorporate cut-off shields and be directed onto parking lot areas. 17)A designated off street loading area of at least 300 square feet is required for all buildings between 5,000 and 20,000 s.f. and must be identified on the Site Plan as stipulated in the Zoning Ordinance 18)Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 19)Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void. Upon vote taken: Ayes: 7, Nays: 0. Motion passed. 7.Other Business Director Hinzman updated the Commission on Council action from the September 7, 2004 meeting. He stated the Council denied the Whispering Lane project, and at this point, the City had not heard of any actions by the developer regarding the project. 13 8.Adjourn Meeting adjourned at 9:08 pm Respectfully submitted, _________________________________ Kristine Jenson Recording Secretary