Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout04-25-2000, Special Mtg - PH PUD Ord.PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - APRIL 25, 2000 PRESENT: LENNY LEUER, SUSIE MACKAY, LIZ WEIR, JIM LANE. JERRY BROST ARRIVED AT 7:38 AND BRUCE WORKMAN ARRIVED AT 7:40. ALSO PRESENT: PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR LOREN KOHNEN, CITY ATTORNEY RON BATTY, PLANNING CONSULTANT BILL THIBAULT AND PLANNING AND ZONING ASSISTANT SANDIE LARSON. ABSENT: TOM SUPEL Chairperson Lenny Leuer called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. Lenny Leuer explained the purpose for this meeting and the public hearing. He said that the City's planning consultant, Bill Thibault, would give a short overview of the ordinance. Bill Thibault put up the areas of PUD1 and PUD2. He stated that this ordinance will become a part of the City's zoning ordinance. This ordinance will encourage unique developments where at least 50% of the site will be kept in open space. There is a heavy emphasis on preservation and restoration of the natural environment.. This official public hearing is required by law and then the city council will have to pass it by a 2/3 majority. L. Leuer asked those in attendance to hold their comments to 5 minutes and to try not to duplicate remarks and questions already presented. David Newman, President of Restoration Development - Page 6 of the proposed ordinance - trees - he said besides size, they usually look at species - some larger ones may not be in good enough shape to save. He said that Eden Prairie had a good tree ordinance; page 16 - Subd 3(b) i - he said he assumes that is buildings - he also questioned pg 18 f(ii) and page 20 B(ii) - grading - he said almost all buyers want walkouts and this ordinance has very strict grading items. Bill Thibault said it can be customized. D. Newman said the ordinance says 2-5' and in some cases we will have to grade more than that - storm and water run-off - we want to make sure it leaves at a much slower rate than pre -development, but to accommodate that, we may have to do more grading than this ordinance allows - he suggests to eliminate the restriction on the number of feet to be graded. He said bonus units were another issue - we realize we have to `earn' it and we think we can do that - he said their 1st concept was 149 lots - 20% would be 144 lots - we would hope we could convince you to leave the bonus at 25% - it gives us flexibility. Elizabeth Weir asked if those in the audience knew what `bonus' referred to. 1 L. Leuer said we had allotted 120 sewer units in the ordinance - we allow 20% bonus - we have gone from 0 to 25 and now the draft is at 20. Bruce Workman asked if the bonus was the number of lots or the number of sewer units. L. Leuer said he did not know. B. Workman said he thought our intention was the number of lots and not the number of sewer units. B. Thibault - there are three major issues - trees, grading and bonus units - page 6 - trees - it does not distinguish in types of trees - some cities try to rank them, but people tend to think of size instead of type - this ordinance goes by size. - grading - page 5 - grade preserved - in order to ensure environment is preserved there is limitations on grading - but it is flexible. - ordinance says does not apply to excavation for footings or basements - felt walkouts are allowed within this section - just so it is clear - need to further expand on the wording - bonus units - started with 20-25%, finally the committee suggested it be 20%. L. Leuer said he wanted Dave Newman to be clear on height restrictions. B. Thibault said it is not our intent for individual plans to be provided - one section he talked about (parking lots) deals with if there is a community center - would want to know height, etc. D. Newman said just to be sure we are all on the same page that house plans will not be provided until lots are sold. asked about roads. L. Leuer said we will see when a developer comes in with a plan. Michelle Waxman, 338 Cherry Hill Court, asked about the developer. L. Leuer said that no application has been received for the development - tonight we are just talking about the ordinance and there are several hurdles yet. Mike Gentile, 352 Cherry Hill Court, asked when building would take place. D. Newman said first the PUD ordinance has to be approved - then we will be at the planning commission in June with a concept plan so the planning commission can review it - then to city council - we plan on having a neighborhood meeting - then back 2 to the planning commission in August for preliminary plat approval. - he said we anticipate that the 1st phase for construction would start a year from now. M. Gentile asked about the diversity of housing types and prices that it says on page 1 and then on another page it says single family - what are we looking at - any apartments? L. Leuer explained the various wording that had been in the 1st draft and what is there now - he said both PUD's are now single family. B. Workman said the wording on page 1 is a little misleading. Susie Mackay said we might want to change the wording on page 1 to single family. Jack Clifford, 2825 Cabaline Trail, said that he wanted to commend the commission for listening to the residents on PUD2. He had a question on the MUSA line and where is was on PUD2 and wanted to know how committed the committee was to leaving it there - he said it seems to keep moving around. B. Workman explained the map. J. Clifford wanted to know how committed the commission was to where it was shown. L. Leuer said this what we are passing on to the city council. John Ferris, Mayor, explained that the sewer was inside the line and not outside of it and there is no interest in extending it any further. He said that was his position. He said these two properties we are talking about tonight make sense to have sewer. Carolyn Smith, councilmember, explained the board. She said it originally showed more lots - she said that the planner had shown where lots could go, but not all that were shown would be lots. Scott Oare, 150 Navajo Road, asked if there were plans to extend Navajo thru the Holasek property to the west. L. Leuer said that would be looked at when a developer comes in with a plan.. C. Smith says it shows it in the comprehensive plan for extension. S. Oare said he would like to see it stay where it is. Harry Robinson, 630 Shawnee Woods Road, asked if there would be a connection to Shawnee Woods from the Elwell development. 3 D. Newman said he can't imagine that they would - would have to go thru woods to do that. Robin Oare, 150 Navajo Road, asked if there would be bonus units on the Holasek property. Ron Johnson, 735 Bridal Path Trail, said he was glad to see the information on the internet - he asked why we want to change the current ordinance. L. Leuer explained that we have both rural and urban zoning and this property is slated to have sewer. Under our current urban zoning it would allow much greater density than this ordinance will allow. J. Ferris said Lenny is right - he said it is the issue of what goes here and how much. We don't want the high density and this ordinance will control the density. R. Johnson said to keep up the good work. D. Newman said he wanted to remind people that the Elwell site is not like it has been completely untouched - he said let's focus on preserving the features that are there. Allen Holasek, 3395 Hunter Drive, asked if keeping the limit of houses down, will it raise our taxes. There will be less people, but still need new roads, etc. B. Workman said it is a double edges sword - more people - more fire, police, road work, etc that needs to be done, but just by adding volume, taxes are not kept down. He said the city council is doing a good job. He said most of the taxes are from the county and the school district. J. Ferris said that your tax statement will tell you where your taxes go. He said we do not have curb and gutter, etc. - our staff is kept down so that residents always have direct access to those that you want to talk to. He said that taxes will not go up because we limit density. Julius Dorweiler, 5022 County Road 101, asked about the concept of starter homes. He said that some of us old timers would like to see our children live here. How can you have `starter' homes with such low density. S. Mackay said she is ever hopeful that this property could have starter homes, but she said a starter family will not be able to afford even the smallest home on the Elwell property. She said she finds it sad, but does not know what to do about it. She said hopefully there will be opportunities in other parts of the city. J. Dorweiler said he does care, but why talk about it when it is not possible. 4 B. Workman said that the intent is there, but we keep hearing about density and with low density you cannot have the `starter' house. There was further discussion about housing. J. Dorweiler said he is concerned with low density, but with a smaller tract of land, down the line the taxes on that land will be so you cannot afford it. B. Workman said personally he believes that even larger parcels should have sewer. A. Holasek wanted to know who the city was listening to, those who have been here for 50 years or those here for 5 years - seems like you are listening to the ones who have been here for the 5 years and you should be listening to those who have been here for the 50 years. L. Kohnen said that for starter homes, you would need 9,000 square foot lots - it is the only way it would pay. He said there are places in the comprehensive plan that are zoned for UR and MR - most of it along County Road 101, north of Highway 55. M. Gentile said you cannot get a home for less than $150-200,000. He said homes that sold for $97,000 in 1990 are on the market for $200,000+. Keith Stotts, 2845 Trappers Trail, asked who would own the green areas in the PUD's. B. Thibault said there could be parks and open space that are owned by the city, or it could be a National Trust - Minnesota Tree Trust or other agency's approved by the council. The green space would have to be guaranteed to be that way forever. K. Stotts asked who pays the developer. B. Thibault said the developer pays for the streets, parks, etc., then it is dedicated to the public. A. Holasek asked about taxes. B. Thibault said if owned by the city there are no taxes, if owned by an association there could be minimal tax. He said the streets, parks, etc. all add value to the homes in the area. There was further discussion of dedicating open space, parks, etc. Bill Herwig said his family owns property next to PUD 2 and wanted to know what the buffer zone was and what will we have between the Holasek property and the property to the east. L. Leuer said we are not designating where roads and homes could be. 5 B. Workman said there are and would be trees between the properties. J. Dorweiler said we are talking about PUD1 and PUD2. Would there be other PUD areas found in the city. L. Leuer said these are the only 2 areas we have designated in the comprehensive plan as PUD's. He said that the city does have an underlying PUD ordinance. Ron Batty, city attorney, said that the city has had a PUD ordinance for many years. He said a land owner may apply for the PUD zoning. He said the current ordinance is not unlike this proposed ordinance. He said we probably will keep what we have plus this new ordinance. He said a PUD can still be applied for if the standards are met. J. Dorweiler asked if there was any thought of Medina getting into the same situation as Maple Grove where the Metropolitan Council shut them down unless they had affordable housing to offer. J. Ferris said that is an economic issue and we will re -affirm our support for affordable housing, but that is all. There is no intention of subsidizing the property to make it work. He said he does not care if the Metropolitan Council likes what he says, as long as they understand me, my job is to take care of what the people want. He said we have told them to leave us alone. Jared Stotts, 2845 Trappers Trail, asked who will buy these homes. D. Newman said that we are targeting the 2nd and 3rd time homebuyer. He said they may have a few homes at the $450,000 range and most will be 1/2 million and up. M. Gentile asked if they had ever considered another section in Medina for smaller lots and be able to offer homes to long time residents. There was discussion of land, affordable, etc. Jerry Brost, wanted to clarify if hardcover was part of grading. B. Thibault said that it was 2 separate items - after the grading is done, then you come up with the amount of hardcover. J. Brost asked how far from the excavating does the grading come in. B. Thibault said that on page 5 - in the preservation areas, no grading unless it is for reforestation. J. Brost asked if the 3' was up or down. B. Thibault said smaller areas can be graded greater than the 3'. Jerry wanted to know if this was too restrictive. 6 D. Newman said they think it is too restrictive. He said they would like to see the focus on features with no grading limits. L. Leuer said preserving the grade goes way back to the beginning of these meetings. It was sensitive to the commission to preserve the grade and as restrictive as it sounds, we can be flexible, but it is not up to the developer - it is up to us when we see the plan. D. Newman said we do not want builders coming in and custom grading lots, We will give them information that they can use. L. Leuer said we will see top of foundation for each lot at time of submittal. B. Thibault went over the paragraph that talked about grading. S. Mackay said she has an issue with the trees. She said in other places in the ordinance it talks about what the trees will be. D. Newman talked about the presentation by Steve Apfelbaum and how the plan is to make a more meandering boundary. He said we might find a tree larger than 8" that isn't a desirable tree and would want the flexibility to be able to remove it. L. Leuer said we have the provision that if you take it down - you restore it. B. Thibault - page 12 in concept plan - provides for the flexibility. There was further discussion of trees, preservation, restoration, etc. Both Susie and Liz wanted to make sure that where it talks of understory plants - page 2, 3 7, that it is understood that there are those that are counterproductive - should say to preserve the non-invasive understory. B. Thibault said that on page 7 - L it does say it. L. Leuer said that Susie wants it to say what understory, B. Thibault said that on page 1 under open space it does say it - this allows for adjusting the understory. L. Weir asked about street lights - page 8, bottom of page - can we be that restrictive with property lines and street lighting. B. Thibault said the intent is that public lights do not intrude onto a private lot. 7 L. Leuer said concerning bonus units - one of the concept plans showed the lots to the north (Elwell property) on a community septic system. He said both Jim and John said the bonus units would be sewered. C. Smith said she thought we would not be specific and wait and look at the plan. B. Workman said he thought it was just the number, not sewered or non-sewered. S. Mackay asked Dave Newman if a community septic system was a possibility. D. Newman said there did not seem to be a strong preference in a community system - frankly we are working on having all the lots sewered. The public hearing was closed at 9:20 p.m. The following are changes to the draft PUD ordinance: the additions are underlined Page 1: Housing - Allows a diversity of single family detached houses in neighborhoods - Page 3. Top of page - delete Setting And Housing Section 830-04 - Uses - #4 in both PUD1 and PUD 2 to read: Community center or community use. End sentence here. Page 7 (I) at end of 2nd sentence add: such as removal of non -indigenous and invader species such as buckthorn. Page 8: (o) - add source at end of sentence. Page 9: Top of page (bb) - in 1st sentence add - - - shall be allowed at least on unlighted monument - - - Page 11: (e) in bold letters, omit all after community use. Page 16: Subd 3 - PUD Development Plan - (b) (i) - delete - - height, bulk and square footage. Page 17: (xiii) - Community Buildings. Location, height, bulk, square footage, general - - 8 Page 18: (v) should not have a strike through it Page 19: End of page - Subd 4 - change to: Building and Construction Plans Page 20: Top of page (a) Change Final Development plans to Building and Construction Plans and at the end of the sentence - - consistency with the PUD development - - - Throughout the rest of this page change Final Development Plans to Building and Construction Plans. Carry through the same capitalization throughout the ordinance. Bill Thibault will incorporate the changes for the copy to go to the city council. MOVED BY JERRY BROST AND SECONDED BY BRUCE WORKMAN TO ACCEPT THE CHANGES IN THE PUD ORDINANCE AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION PASSED. This will go to the city council next week - Jim Lane and Lenny Leuer will be present at the meeting. Ron Batty said that typically we do a 2 step process and typically this would be adopted at the city council meeting on May 16t" David Newman said they plan on making application on the 16t" R. Batty said that the moratorium needs to be lifted before an application can be accepted. There was discussion on the timeline. MOVED BY BRUCE WORKMAN AND SECONDED BY JERRY BROST TO ADJOURN. MOTION PASSED. Meeting adjourned at 10:33 p.m. Planning and Zoning Assistant Date 9