Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout06-28-2000PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - JUNE 28, 2000 PRESENT: LENNY LEUER, SUSIE MACKAY, ELIZABETH WEIR, JERRY BROST, TOM SUPEL AND JIM LANE. ALSO PRESENT: PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR LOREN KOHNEN, PLANNING CONSULTANT BILL THIBAULT, CITY ENGINEER TOM KELLOGG AND PLANNING AND ZONING ASSISTANT SANDIE LARSON. ABSENT: BRUCE WORKMAN Chairperson Lenny Leuer called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. Lenny reminded everyone that this was a public meeting, but not a public hearing. After the applicants and staff had presented their material and gone over it, if any one attending had any comments, we would then hear them. He said that Bill Thibault would start with a short presentation and then the applicants would give their presentation. Bill Thibault, Thibault Associates, planning consultant for the City, gave a brief synopsis of what had been occurring. The City had adopted a PUD ordinance that covered the PUD1 and PUD2 areas. Tonight the application concerned PUD1. Tonight's concept plan is based on this new PUD ordinance, PUD1, which covers the `Elwell' property. He said that this concept plan needs to be reviewed under the guide of the ordinance. Bill stated that some of staffs concerns included: 1) some encroachment in the area that is to be preserved; 2) proposing some development in the steep slope area; 3) the N-S trail; 4) SW corner - the buffer strip not completely done. Bill said that the City has received some rationale from the applicants on why they have deviated from the guidelines. He felt that the overall plan was a good one, but some changes were needed. He said tonight's findings would go to the city council and the developer will use the comments from tonight and from the city council in their application for re- zoning and preliminary plat. Bill also mentioned that the drainage plan is a complex issue that needs to be looked at. David Newman, Restoration Development, 1521 94th Lane NE, Blaine, said he first wanted to thank the planning commission for holding this special meeting and also wanted to thank the staff for keeping them so well informed. He said that meetings were scheduled to go over concerns and because of being so well informed, they were not at all surprised at the staff memos for tonight's meeting. Dave said that the concept plan is very detailed and he said if it is adopted by the city council, will then come back with the preliminary plat with more detail. He said they would touch on the drainage issue tonight, but they realize that it needs more work. He said that when he 1st came to the city he did not know about conservation developments and since then has learned a lot. He introduced Steve Apfelbaum, John Uban, and Marty Campion that were here tonight to help with the presentation.. He said that Steve would explain the conservation development and John would talk about the overall plan. He said they 1 would also assure us that the open space will be permanent open space. Dave said that Restoration Development was made up of: Bancor Group, Lundgren Brothers and VKO Enterprises (Vance Opperman). Steve Apfelbaum, Applied Ecological Services - Wisconsin, had slides of various landscapes, plants, etc. He stated that they wanted to restore some of the history of the land and want others to look up to this project as an example of what can be done. He stated that those who went on the tour of the property saw the major reshaping of the land that has occurred over the years - canary grass, an Asian import, woods that look wonderful from a distance, but there is nothing growing in the understory - buckthorn is present - he stated that the developers are proposing to restore the land back to the way it was. Steve had slides of work that had been done in Illinois at a development called Prairie Crossing and also had slides of the Elwell property. He said earlier they had toured the Elwell property and there had only been 2 bird species there when at this time of night there should have been many more. He talked of restoring drainage ways without impacting trees - reduce the undesirable shrubs and trees and keep the desirable ones - he said this will take some major grading to restore the drainage ways - he said they are very familiar with alternative ways to stabilize sites which are different from engineering methods - he said that Prairie Crossing is a 700 acre development which has much open space and was designed around what we call the stormwater treatment train - this reduces the total amount of water that leaves the land - it was 50- 75% at Prairie Crossing - he said that swales are not ditches, they drain into prairies, then into wetlands. He said that many of the residents at Prairie Crossing have chosen native plantings vs manicured lawns. John Uban, planner with Dahlgren, Shardlow, Uban, said that he wanted to show how the ecological approach relates and integrates with the proposed design of homes. He explained the concept and had slides - he said this development has a single minded focus - ecological restoration with a system of upkeeping - stewardship of the land. He had other slides of the property - he said that an overview of the property was needed for the concept plan and planning. He said there are 150 lots and 95% of the lots abut open space - 40% abut open space on 2 sides - he said there were 1000's of trees on site and they will be planting many more. The inner trails will be `soft' trails and the trails along 101 and Evergreen will be hard - he said the plan far exceeds the ordinance, so their plan includes the bonus units for the total of 150 units. He said without the bonus units, they could not do the extensive restoration. Marc Anderson, Lundgren Brothers, said there will be a homeowners association and covenants (a recorded document) that will govern architectural control. He said the association will own the outlots and the covenants will govern that they stay preserved. The PUD also calls for a conservancy - the job will be to come in periodically and inspect that it is being done, the preservation, etc. He said the key to structure is maintenance and education. The homeowners will pay an annual fee at about $1000 per year to maintain the conservation areas - he said the education plan is to hire a part time ecologist who will be an employee of the homeowners association and educate and help manage the program. 2 D. Newman said they are excited about the project - he said on the south end there will be areas of significant grading - he said once we remove the topsoil, we will have to preserve and protect it. He said someone from Steve's company will be on site at all times during the grading. He said this project is market driven - he said the remnant piece on the east side of 101 will be left until the Plymouth side is being developed and then will integrate into that. He said the 35% of the site is comprised of lots - that there are unique environmental features - he mentioned the water train, the amount of lots that about open space, the trails, buffers and the attempt to preserve views - tree replacement - he said they felt that they had earned the bonus units with what they are proposing to do with the restoration of the land. David said that they hope this is a premier conservation development in the Twin Cities area and they think this plan does that. Staff: Bill Thibault, planning consultant, highlighted the key issues. He said the ordinances calls for 50% of the area to be preserved and their plan shows 58%. He said the plan shows 22' street width and they are willing to make them 24'. Loren Kohnen pointed out the area where it looks like the street is narrower. B. Thibault said there is one way traffic around the cul de sac and if a road is too wide it encourages parking, etc.. He said that the infrastructure is a key issue; who is responsible for the open space; drainage of the system; he said the development is consistent with the preservation guide, but wanted to look closer at the plantings, etc.; slopes - 10' in some areas - he said the city was willing to discuss this; excavation for the walk out units; N-S trail; trails. J. Uban talked of the trails, he said that in some places it might need to be in the righ-of- way, over the creek, etc. where 101 crosses and where the wetland juts into the ROW they might have to bring the trail out and around it. Lenny Leuer said he has a problem with any part of the trail being close to the traveled portion of 101. There was further discussion about trails. Tom Supel wanted to know if the inner soft trails were public. D. Newman said that some will be dedicated to the homeowners association - he said they will not be checking id's, buy if there are a huge number of users, they may have to restrict the use. He said the perimeter trails will be public. J. Uban said that the park is not intended for a public park for community use. 3 T. Supel said this seems like a use for very few residents. He also asked about the trails having linkage to the adjacent community to the east. He said this is in the recommendations, but does not see it mentioned. B. Thibault said that the N-S trail needs to be better defined. There was further discussion concerning the trails. B. Thibault said that in the bonus provision, the developers are meeting and exceeding in some areas - design and development and close to exceeding in the restoration area. Jerry Brost asked how the building would be done - south to north. D. Newman said they would start at the south end to the creek for Phase I and maybe do Phase I of the estate lots to the north at the same time. He said there would also be phasing of the restoration work. He also said they cannot get ahead of themselves. T. Supel asked about the re -doing of the plan and J. Uban explained. There was discussion about the re -alignment of County Road 101. B. Thibault explained on an overhead how they answered the west border question - he highlighted some of the other issues to talk about - grading, drainage, public roads, etc. He said some items will not be known until the preliminary plat. He explained the concept process: 1. Concept review and then to city council, then presented to developer as a guideline; 2. Next step to have the public hearing on the zoning change and the preliminary plat and 3. Developers construction plans are reviewed by staff. Tom Kellogg, city engineer, showed alternative for the realignment of County Road 101 - he said the county is the authority here, this is just one option. Paul Robinson said that this option came out of staff discussion and this is an idea for a 50 MPH curve. Elizabeth Weir said that straight roadways encourage speeding. B. Thibault said it is important for the county for the developers to show what they propose for under the roadway by the creek. T. Supel said that the developers don't have control over the road - so why #25. B. Thibault said the county needs city approval for changing a design. P. Robinson said this needs to be brought to the attention of the city council and then get going with the county for a design. 4 J. Brost said that a curve is needed to diminish the speed. Jim Lane asked if the city knew the county's schedule on this. P. Robinson said it is in the capital improvement plan for this year, but it will be delayed because there has been no agreement on the design. Jim Dillman said that is correct - probably is a 2-3 year project. There was further discussion on 101. J. Lane said we should do some fact finding on this. There was discussion of roads, width, etc. Susie Mackay said how about sidewalks. L. Kohnen said he felt there should be sidewalks on at least one side of the road. S. Apfelbaum said in Prairie Crossing there are connecting trails and roads are 18-24' wide with 1-side parking. B. Thibault said there is a relationship between the width of a road and pedestrians. J. Dillman discussed manholes, placement, etc. He said that the street trees also need discussion. T. Supel asked if the City was going to supply more resources for the public works department to take care of this subdivision. J. Dillman said it is critical that the design calls for low maintenance now and in the future. He said that durability and sustainability is important. B. Thibault said that he recommends that the planning commission accepts this report with any changes they may have. L. Leuer asked about the burns that will happen annually. S. Apfelbaum said it would not be large acreage all at once - he explained the procedure and stated that it is very safe. Planning commissioner Susie Mackay left the meeting at 10:07 p.m. L. Leuer said that the lift station is needed and asked where it would dump to. 5 Marty Campion showed on the map where and said that it would be a municipal lift station. L. Leuer asked if there would be access from 101 for the lift station. M. Campion said it will show up on the larger map. J. Dillman said that it would look like the one at Foxberry Farms. M. Campion said that it would be replaced when the Elm Creek Interceptor comes thru. L. Leuer said that during the drive around the site, he noticed manure piles and wondered how they would be taken care of. S. Apfelbaum said it had not been discussed - he said maybe spread it out where the prairie will be - it is all old and composted. L. Leuer asked Loren about the old farmstead, how many wells. D. Newman said that will be part of the environmental study by the county - all that are found will be properly abandoned except the one that is in use. He said in our purchase agreement we have to accept the alignment that is done. He said that the county has agreed it will happed in 2001. L. Kohnen asked how many areas are to be protected and how many lots there are in the protected areas. P. Robinson said that in looking at the plan, 10-15 lots could be taken out of the southern end and if the council is silent about bonuses, it will happen. L. Kohnen said this is part of the bonus - where will you get land to take the place of areas being developed. He said we want this to work properly. There wasn't a prairie here before - it was all woods - he said it looks like the developer is trying to put lots in areas that the city asked to be protected. B. Thibault said that a judgement is to be made re the developers response to how they are responding to our concerns. T. Supel asked if there was a question on how precisely you read the PUD . L. Kohnen thought it was result of what the committee, planning commission and city council wanted. J. Lane said that he is enthused with the concept. He had some questions: 1. What kind of entity is Restoration Development. D. Newman said LLC and he is the president. 6 2. Jim said he was concerned with the bonus units - he felt the concept plan should be based on 120 units and improved from there. 3. Is it assumed that the bonus units will be sewered. L. Kohnen said yes. T. Supel asked Steve Apfelbaum about the storm water treatment train - is it effective and stated that at least one city council member was very concerned with what works. Do you have hard evidence that it works? S. Apfelbaum said yes - he said it has worked in previous subdivisions and there are papers that have been published, and there are research documents about it. E. Weir asked how would it cope with a major storm. S. Apfelbaum said it was designed to handle it. He put up a board and with M. Campion, further explained it. M. Campion said that as part of the preliminary plan, there will be a complete analysis and we will meet with city engineer Tom Kellogg and go over it. P. Robinson said that the hydrologist from Bonestroo was here and will work on it also. J. Brost asked if in the impervious square footage, was the roof of the house taken into account. M. Campion said yes. There was further discussion of drainage. L. Weir said the drainage seems to be a key component in the development. Helen Soars, 326 Cherry Hill Court, asked about the trails. She said that Cherry Hill is likely to be part of the trail system - she said they don't seem to go into the open space. She also asked if there had been any talk of the types of homes there would be. D. Newman said there would be an architectural review committee. He said that Lundgren's would not be the only builder and no one builder will be designated to one neighborhood. Sue , 18825 32nd Ave. N., Plymouth, said that they were looking for a new house and wondered who the other builders may be. D. Newman said LeGran Homes and they are also talking to other builders and real estate people. 7 Sue said that there are playgrounds, tennis courts and pools in other Lundgren developments. Will you have that in this one. D. Newman said they are looking at maybe a playground, but no tennis courts or pools. Sue asked about the swales and what they were. J. Uban put up an overhead and explained the difference between a swale and a ditch - he said that a swale retains water at a 1-1 1/2% slope and a ditch at 2% minimum - he said a swale is natural vs engineered. Rita Gorman, Bloomington, said that her father-in-law has property to the west of this proposal and wanted to know what was proposed next to his property. D. Newman explained. Rita mentioned the speed on 101 and on Hackamore - she asked if there had been any discussion of the increased traffic on Hackamore. J. Uban said that the majority will use the 101 access. Carolyn Smith, council member, said she has been looking at the plans and strongly disagrees with a N-S road thru the development - she said she wants to see it kept green and also asked about a possible hook up to Shawnee Woods Road - she said she liked the idea of a public trail on the outside and also stated that it was unfair to the community to think that the interior trails would be public - she said the investment in this is substantial and maybe there should be a public trail someplace, but they shouldn't all be public. She said she would like to see an extension of the trail from Evergreen road and utilize the park in Hamel. L. Leuer said it was time to come up with findings of fact to send forward to the city council. 1. Follow up with overlay that was shown with modifications. 2. As such 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Delete `add a park with' and replace with Consider - - - 8. As such 9. 10. 11. Delete `alter the plan and' 12. As such 13. 14. 15. 16. 4{ if if 4{ it ti ii I{ if 4{ 8 17. Review instead of reduce - also delete `solely' . Add after 1st sentence - - and to facilitate drainage with natural drainage system. 18. As such 19. " " 20. 21. 22. 4 out of 5 planning commissioners felt that the Evergreen trail should be off the road - trail on Hackamore on the south side and no closer than 8' to the hard surface of the road - other wording the same. 23. As such 24. Delete 25. Provide more details on the protected areas and reasons for 26. To be reviewed by the fire and police departments if if if The approval of the planning commission is based on 120 units - Jim Lane and Tom Supel agreed on this. L. Weir felt that they have met many of our conditions and desires. J. Brost said they are showing good intent There was discussion on when the bonus units are determined MOVED BY TOM SUPEL AND SECONDED BY ELIZABETH WEIR TO PASS ON THE FINDINGS TO THE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION PASSED. 2. MINUTES OF JUNE 13, 2000 There were a few minor changes on pages 4,5,7,9 MOVED BY ELIZABETH WEIR AND SECONDED BY TOM SUPEL TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MOTION PASSED. MOVED BY ELIZABETH WEIR AND SECONDED BY JERRY BROST TO ADJOURN. MOTION PASSED. Meeting adjourned at 1 a.m. Planning and Zoning Assistant Date 9