HomeMy Public PortalAbout09-09-2014, draft1 CITY OF MEDINA
2 PLANNING COMMISSION
3 DRAFT Meeting Minutes
4 Tuesday September 9, 2014
5
6 1. Call to Order: Commissioner Nolan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
7
8 Present: Planning Commissioners Charles Nolan, Robin Reid, Kent Williams, Robert
9 Mitchell, Victoria Reid, and Janet White.
10
11 Absent: Randy Foote
12
13 Also Present: Council Member Kathleen Martin, City Planner Dusty Finke, Planning
14 Assistant Debra Peterson, and Planning Consultant Nate Sparks.
15
16 2. Public Comments on items not on the agenda
17 No public comments.
18
19 3. Update from City Council proceedings
20 Martin updated the Commission on recent activities and decisions by the City Council.
21
22 4. Planning Department Report
23 Finke informed the Commission that the City hadn't received any new land use applications.
24
25 5. Approval of the August 13, 2014 Draft Planning Commission meeting minutes.
26
27 Motion by Williams, seconded by White, to approve the August 13, 2014, Planning
28 Commission minutes. Motion carries unanimously (Absent Foote).
29
30 6. Dominium — 510 Clydesdale Trail — Mixed Use Stage I Plan for development of 26
31 affordable rental townhomes.
32
33 Sparks explained the application is requesting a Stage I phase plan which establishes uses,
34 residential density, and general site layout. He further explained that after Stage I, then Stage
35 II would be required and this stage would require building and engineering plans for the
36 project.
37
38 Sparks explained the request was for 26 townhome units and the Comprehensive Plan
39 guidance is Mixed Use Business and the zoning is Mixed Use (MU). He explained the
40 project has eight total buildings and the zoning ordinance allows for no more than 7 units per
41 acre.
42
43 Sparks explained the project was eligible for density bonuses because it included affordable
44 housing, had common open space, and that this type of construction was designed for
45 reducing noise. He stated that these bonuses give the project a maximum density of 7 units an
46 acre, or 26 units. Sparks explained that staff originally interpreted density to be net density
47 and not gross density. The applicant's attorney pointed out that the City's code does not use
48 the term "net" but only "acres." Staff and the City attorney discussed this issue and agreed
49 that, as written, the minimum area per residential unit in the MU district is based on gross
1
50 acreage. Staff believes that this was not what was intended, but is the way the code is
51 currently written. In this case, net acreage would result in a maximum of 25 units.
52
53 Sparks noted that the building design, parking, landscaping and buffer yards all appear
54 consistent with code requirements. He also noted that the site slopes down to a wetland and
55 some of the units won't have a lot of space in their rear yard, which makes the common open
56 space important.
57
58 The proposed landscaping and buffer areas meet the minimum standards.
59
60 Williams asked what the actual density of the project was as proposed. Sparks said it is right
61 below 7 units when considering gross acreage and just above using net acreage. Williams
62 asked where density bonuses come into play. Sparks said it helps the current proposal go
63 from 5 to 7 units an acre based on the density bonuses.
64
65 Williams asked how the City could be consistent with the Comp Plan if the density isn't
66 brought up to 7 units per acre. Sparks said it's an overall density within the land use.
67 Williams asked where and how will the City be able to increase the density to meet the
68 density needed. Sparks said there are other parcels out there to increase those density
69 numbers. Finke said the Uptown Hamel (UH) area has a requirement to increase density in
70 some areas. Nolan asked if in a more MU district the City would just be counting the
71 residential or would it be both. Williams said only the residential would be counted.
72
73 Mitchell asked if the building would be sprinkled. Sparks stated that the plans did not state
74 that they were, but suggested Mitchell ask the applicant for clarification. Mitchell asked how
75 the property would be platted to allow for each unit to be sold separately. Sparks said it
76 would be under one ownership as proposed.
77
78 Nolan said when he saw the application previously they had concern with the depth of
79 driveways and asked if that had been corrected. Sparks said they had improved the depth of
80 the driveways to meet the City's minimum requirements. Sparks also noted the trash
81 receptacles would also be able to fit in the garage, which had also been a previous concern.
82
83 Nick Anderson, Senior Development for Dominium, said this is the second time this has
84 come before the Commission. He said the intent of this new application was to make an
85 application that met all City regulations and under existing mixed use zoning so that a PUD
86 would not be required. They'd taken away the use of City owned lot adjacent. The majority
87 of the changes had been a reduction in density and making modifications meet all minimum
88 requirements. He said the buildings were not being proposed to be sprinklered as it is not
89 required under the state building code.
90
91 V. Reid asked how the commons area would be used. Anderson said they've provided more
92 playground space and the site would be well maintained and monitoring during business
93 hours. V. Reid said the City had an Open House and she was asked questions as to how the
94 clubhouse would be used. Anderson said a clubroom would be available to rent. It would
95 have a kitchen and seating areas. It would also be utilized for after school activities with help
96 of Interfaith Outreach and Community Partners (IOCP).
97
98 Public Hearing Opened at 7:33 p.m.
99
2
100 Holly Leurer of 4290 Wild Meadows Drive asked if the project was Section 8 or 42. She also
101 asked how the applicant would be able to monitor multiple families in a unit, such as those
102 with 4 bedrooms. She stated that various concerns were raised during the previous review
103 about how the applicant runs their projects, and stated that she does not see that anything has
104 changed except that Larkin Hoffmann is representing the applicant.
105
106 Anderson stated that they are not Section 8, but rather Section 42. He said they have a
107 maximum number of people based on number of bedrooms, which would be enforced and
108 that they would have a property manager on -site.
109
110 Anderson said within the staff report there were a number of letters from other Cities showing
111 support for their project, such as St. Paul and Lino Lakes. Nolan asked about the concerns
112 that were raised with the project in the City of Plymouth. Anderson said they had lost their
113 landscaping company and the issues weren't noticed right away. V. Reid asked what on -site
114 manager meant. Anderson said a Manager would be on -site 2-3 days per week.
115
116 Bob Belzer of Wild Meadows said he recently moved into the City and chose Medina
117 because of the current community He said he is concerned with affordable housing coming
118 to the community and it would tax our City resources along with reducing property values.
119 He asked if the project will be maintained and what the policy would be for their tenants on
120 credit score. He raised concern over the use of our Police Force and the number of Police
121 calls it would generate. He said he's against the project and understands they have a law
122 firm supporting the project and he's happy to support legally against it.
123
124 Nolan asked Sparks to walk them through the mixed use zoning and how it worked. He said
125 there was some confusion between the Comprehensive Plan and Mixed Use (MU) and how
126 just residential could comply with MU and asked about staff s position. Sparks said the MU-
127 B land use was described in the staff report and that staff believes that a single parcel
128 developing with strictly residential was not inconsistent. Sparks noted the City reviewed an
129 application last month that was guided Mixed Use -Business and only one use was proposed.
130
131 Williams asked for clarification on how the MU district could be used for only residential, or
132 only commercial and still be consistent with the land use. Finke said the property is four
133 acres in size which is a relatively small proportion of the total land use. He said when the
134 City zoned the land areas within Mixed Use -Business, it took into consideration that many
135 sites were small and would need to have individual uses or combination of properties in order
136 to develop.
137
138 Chris Hilberg of 4559 Trillium Drive North said the Comp Plan should be readily available
139 and understandable. He said when reviewing the MU Guidance, it is MU- B and that the
140 application doesn't comply. He said he reviewed the language and handed out the definition
141 of MU-B to the Commission and staff. He said that if the term "opportunities" means
142 optional, then everything in the definition is optional. He also noted that it reads "two or
143 more of the following: residential, general business, commercial, or office." He explained
144 that the two or more uses are required but staff says only one use is acceptable. If that is the
145 case, it should read "one or more." He said once a fact is pointed out that the code is being
146 misinterpreted it must be discussed and decided on interpretation. He said in the packet
147 Finke says only one use on a single parcel is allowable, but after checking all minutes and
148 reports he never saw where the topic had been discussed.
149
3
150 Hilberg highlighted language on page 7-2 of the Comp Plan which states: "the development
151 of mixed -use zoning will need to include a minimum of two districts to address vertically
152 integrated mixed use (Mixed -Use Business), where residential space is above the commercial
153 space, and lateral mixed use (Mixed -Use) where commercial and residential building exist
154 together in the zoning district." He noted that there are two similar but distinct land uses.
155 The language on 7-2 clearly implies that Mixed Use -Business is to be vertically integrated.
156 Maybe that's not what we've done, and maybe that's not how we've interpreted it, but is it
157 what is said. If this it isn't what it means, then why is the language in there?
158
159 Hilberg then handed out a copy of Page 7-2 highlighting the following language: "the Mixed-
160 Use Business designation assumes a strong business component." He said he read the Comp
161 Plan from front to back and did see a few areas of flexibility, but land use within a site was
162 not one of them. The staff report says the other uses "surrounding" the Dominium project
163 make a mix in the area, but he didn't see that it was allowable per the Comp Plan. Hilberg
164 said that the correct thing would be for the applicant to request a Comp Plan amendment for
165 high density residential, but they want to skip that step. V. Reid asked if he would support
166 the CP Amendment. Hilberg said that is the correct process. He said it would be important
167 to review just the residential use and he believes Dominium doesn't think they really are a
168 mixed use. Hilberg provided a previous memo from Dominium that stated the project wasn't
169 a mixed use.
170
171 Frank Mignone of 3316 Red Fox Drive said that when Dominium pulled their application
172 previously it was really a back door approach. He said if the City or public had questions
173 tonight the applicant should have to answer them. Fifteen years from now they could sell the
174 townhome units individually. Dominium has no power over the City.
175
176 Nolan asked the public to be respectful in their comments and process.
177
178 Kimberly Murrin of 290 Cherry Hill Trail said she was concerned with multiple families
179 living on the property and asked if multiple families would be allowed in the same unit.
180
181 Murrin also commented that the letters of recommendations from other cities all ended with
182 the same comment in the letters and found it odd. She asked what Dominium's goal was for
183 developing the project. What would the cost be to add the fire sprinklers in each townhome
184 unit? She said it would help people feel safer in case someone was being careless. She asked
185 how the City would know if there was an actual demand for affordable housing in our area.
186 She went on to say that it would be great to know if we are actually helping people in the
187 local community She further asked how the units would be advertised and if it would just be
188 to the local area or downtown. She wanted to know if they were proposing to bring people
189 out to Medina from downtown and thinks the City should get an answer. She asked if
190 Dominium would be getting property tax breaks. She said she sees hesitancy by the applicant
191 to answer questions during the Public Hearing process, which doesn't get the hearing off to a
192 great start, and she thinks that an open discussion should take place.
193
194 Nolan said installing a sprinkler system is a building code and the City can't require it if it's
195 not a code requirement. He also added that the applicant can choose how much input they
196 want to provide during the process, but stated meeting with neighbors to discuss concerns
197 was usually in their best interest and was encouraged.
198
199 Public Hearing Closed at 8:18 pm.
200
4
201 V. Reid asked what the difference was between Section 8 and 42. Anderson said Section 8
202 Housing was a direct subsidy for housing which was more popular in the past where the
203 government would pay a portion of the rent. Section 42 supports the construction cost of
204 project but the rents are fully paid by the tenants. There are income and rent limits set for the
205 whole metro area based upon 60% of the median income. For a family of four, the median
206 income is $80,000/year. The City of Medina is not providing any financial support in the
207 proposed application. Anderson also said he wasn't trying to avoid addressing some of the
208 questions, but rather the data is all available in previous minutes and documents and he would
209 rather keep the focus on the site plan.
210
211 Nolan said their charge as a Commission with the proposed application is rather narrow and
212 it's about density and land use. A concern was raised with the need for resources and that it
213 would need to be accounted for in the long range. Nolan said the subsidies used are Federal
214 and they are looking at the application no different than any other project.
215
216 Nolan asked Staff what the City of Medina's definition of "family" was and Finke said:
217
218 "Family — Family is any one of the following:
219 a. An individual;
220 b. Two or more persons related by blood, marriage or adoption and maintaining a
221 common household;
222 c. A group of not more than five unrelated persons maintaining a common household.
223
224 White asked Finke to clarify where in the packet it explained that the Planning Commission
225 and Council decided the Comp Plan designation and subsequent zoning for the property.
226 Finke said allowing a property to develop with only one use was discussed during the
227 Uptown Hamel discussion and that it was recognized that there was a number of small parcels
228 which would make mixing uses difficult. The zoning of this property was specifically
229 discussed since it was not as close to Uptown Hamel and that the MU designation was chosen
230 as an alternative.
231
232 Nolan asked if the City Attorney weighed in on the zoning and CP guidance. Finke said yes
233 it was all discussed at the time of the previous application and he concurred with the
234 information in the current staff report.
235
236 Williams said he didn't agree with Hilberg's comments and interpretation on page 7-2 of the
237 Comp Plan. He said rental property is more of a commercial type use and considered the
238 application a mixed use. He said the Commission should focus on their role and he thinks
239 they should go through the City objectives without further discussion. The Commission
240 agreed. Williams stated that going through the purpose, it would appear:
241
242 1. Site has limited open space or natural features to preserve.
243 2. The density meets code requirements based upon the applicant's proposed interpretation
244 which has been reviewed by the City attorney
245 3. The district is designed to be a type of development that is a transition, which this seems
246 to provide between the Medina Entertainment Center and the golf club and potential
247 residential to the north.
248 4. The buildings will have a sound buffer, and exterior design and landscaping appear to
249 meet requirements.
250 5. Site accessibility could be discussed by the Commission, but appears to be met.
5
251 6. The proposed development appears consistent with the City's Comp Plan goals, use of
252 resources, and the need for affordable housing.
253 7. It was acknowledged that there is a fear by some residents that the project would use too
254 much of the City's resources. The Commission doesn't have enough information to
255 confirm such a claim.
256
257 Williams said, from looking at these objectives, he thinks the project should be approved.
258
259 R. Reid said she doesn't have any reason to assume this project would need more resources or
260 use of services than any other project. Nolan said discussion on use of too many resources
261 should be brought up when looking at the Comp Plan. This should have been considered then
262 and not now with an application. Providing affordable housing and diversity is a City goal.
263 V. Reid said it would be nice to have the developer rent to people from within the area and
264 pull in renters from the City and neighboring communities.
265
266 Finke suggested modifying condition #1 to read: "The plan shall be consistent with
267 requirements of the Mixed Use zoning district. Subject to density bonuses described in the
268 Mixed Use zoning district, the maximum number of units shall not exceed the density
269 permitted in the district."
270
271 Motion by William, seconded by R. Reid , to recommend approval of the Mixed Use Stage
272 I Plan Review for development of 26 affordable rental townhomes at 510 Clydesdale Trail
273 with the conditions noted in the staff report, except for the change noted to condition #1.
274 Motion carried unanimously. (Absent Foote)
275
276 Finke announced the Dominium application will be heard by the City Council at the October
277 7, 2014 meeting.
278
279 7. Charles Cudd De Novo — Preliminary Plat and Rezoning for 15 lot single family
280 residential development to be located east of Co. Rd. 116 and south of Hackamore Road
281
282 Finke presented the application explaining the project consisted of 15 single family lots and
283 the overall land area was 16.3 gross acres and a net area of 7.9 acres. The lots are guided
284 Low Density Residential and zoned RR-UR. The rezoning request is for R-1 Single Family
285 Residential zoning with a request for a variance to the maximum cul-de-sac length. A
286 Preliminary and Final Plat is also being requested. The public hearing is for the Preliminary
287 and Final Plats. Finke reviewed an aerial of the parcel and said the City reviewed a concept
288 plan for this property in June and the current proposal is quite similar He said the Council
289 preferred the cul-de-sac designed to preserve a number of trees. The low density requires 2-
290 3.5 units/acre and the development is proposed to be 1.9 units/acre. The City may consider
291 exceptions to or modifications of density restrictions for developments that protect the natural
292 features or exceed other standards of the zoning district. Staff recommends that Lot 15 be an
293 Outlot until frontage is acquired. Staff recommends the preserved wooded area be placed
294 into an Outlot with protections established.
295
296 Finke explained that broader traffic impacts were included in the CR 116/Hackamore traffic
297 study with the Reserve of Medina previously.
298
299 Finke said approximately 50 percent of the trees were proposed to be removed and the Code
300 allows 20% without replacement. Staff recommends a tree waiver if the applicant can meet
301 the requirements of the waiver, since it would otherwise require 2398 inches in tree
6
302 replacement. He explained even if they developed the site with more density, they would
303 have to remove even more trees.
304
305 Finke said if the Commission was supportive of the rezoning and variances, the conditions
306 could remain as written. Mitchell asked if the tree waiver was added in the conditions. Finke
307 said yes it was condition #12. R. Reid asked which trees were being recommended to be
308 preserved. Finke said at the rear of lot 15, with the exception of trees being removed for the
309 Storm Water Treatment area.
310
311 Nolan said it's a 50 percent loss of trees with or without the homes. Finke said the tree
312 removal percentage assumes some tree removal in the pad areas. He said if there is support
313 for a tree waiver, it would need to be formalized approving building pads and not just lots.
314 Nolan said the homes will be placed where the rectangles are shown on the plan. Nolan
315 asked if a developer could expand the pad and take more trees in the future. Finke said trees
316 would have to be replaced if they exceed the proposed grading pad area, so yes. Two trees
317 per year are allowed to be removed without penalty. Finke said with the waiver it's possible
318 to place a condition to tighten up the restrictions to possibly not allow the two trees per year
319 without penalty within the development.
320
321 Finke explained lot sizes and lot widths. He said the minimum requirement is 90 foot width
322 lots and the applicant meets that requirement.
323
324 Mitchell wants to make sure that reducing the size of the lots is worth it. Finke said the lots
325 proposed exceed 90 feet. Williams asked concerning the tree waiver and if it would require
326 off -site planting and also wondered where the trees would be planted. Finke said the City has
327 an aggressive planting plan and could be accommodated. If not, the applicant could provide
328 money to the City for maintenance.
329
330 Nolan asked where the waterline would be located. Finke said they generally like to loop the
331 waterline. He said the waterline follows the road and loops to the west for future
332 development. They would be boring 8 feet deep and hopefully missing roots of trees during
333 the installation.
334
335 Richard Denman of Charles Cudd DeNovo presented their application and tree replacement
336 plan. He said running the road through gave them two more lots rather than the cul-de-sac,
337 yet the extended cul-de-sac saves many trees. He said the Variance is for the length of the
338 cul-de-sac. He said a cul-de-sac can serve 20 lots and their project only has 14 lots. They are
339 working with To11 Brothers and the City to resolve the frontage issue on Lot 15.
340
341 Williams said they gave up two lots to preserve the area of woods. He said if they would
342 have run the road through Lot 15 they would have gotten two more lots, but they would have
343 had to take down many trees and would then have to do tree replacement.
344
345 Nolan asked what the value of replacing 2000 trees would cost. Denman said about $100.00
346 an inch per City estimates.
347
348 Dave Nash, EVS Engineering, presented a recalculation of tree removal / replacement that
349 staff hadn't seen prior to the meeting. He said he reviewed the proposal of optional tree
350 removal minimums from the Nelson property and then the original Cavanaugh property and
351 came up with 3902 inches. He said in theory the number of inches needed for removal came
352 up to 185 inches plus the 194, making a total of 379 inches of replacement.
7
353
354 V. Reid questioned how the tree replacement was determined. Finke explained the 60 foot
355 width lots helped meet the minimum density allowed.
356
357 Nash said they are open to negotiation on the tree replacement. He said the watermain is a
358 requirement to be looped and the only other choice is to open -cut and take down more trees,
359 which they didn't want to do.
360
361 Public Hearing opened at 9:41 pm.
362
363 Steve Theesfeld of 600 Shawnee Woods said he had two concerns. 1) The egress exiting out
364 of the Reserve of Medina, since their development has to drive through the Reserve now onto
365 Aster Road to get out onto County Road 116. He said he doesn't know how the Reserve of
366 Medina got planned, since they will now have 15 more homes that will have that many more
367 vehicles utilizing the access onto Co. Rd 116. He asked that it be considered if it was even
368 safe, since vehicles exiting the Reserve out onto 116 going south bound would block the cars
369 behind them wanting to go right/north since there isn't a turn lane for the vehicles to go right
370 (north) off of Aster Road . He asked what would happen if they had to suddenly evacuate the
371 area. He said the City keeps putting more and more houses accessing through the Reserve of
372 Medina Development which is of concern to him.
373
374 Secondly, Theesfeld said he was concerned with the volume of tree removal and the
375 possibility of the Commission giving a Waiver. He told the Commission that if they approve
376 of a waiver then they would have to approve one for every development; and if this was the
377 case then why do we have the requirement.
378
379 Public Hearing Closed at 9:46 pm
380
381 Williams said he didn't have an issue with the rezoning or Variance for the cul-de-sac length.
382 V. Reid asked about the two lots being developed separately and if it would provide more
383 flexibility if a PUD was used. She said she is concerned with 50% of the trees being removed.
384 Williams said that the arborist determined that the area being preserved is the best quality of
385 trees on -site and that the application should assume the two lots developing together. V. Reid
386 said she doesn't feel we should be giving the tree waiver. Mitchell discussed tree
387 replacements. Nolan said on the variance there hasn't been any comments from the Public
388 Works (PW) Department. Finke said it's not really the length rather than the emergency
389 access. R. Reid asked why we limited the length of the cul-de-sacs. Nolan asked if the PW's
390 absence of comments on the issue meant they were in favor of the cul-de-sac. Finke said PW
391 was fine with the length.
392
393 Denman said he was working on road frontage with Toll Brothers to find a solution for the
394 Outlot. The Outlot would turn into a buildable lot and hopes to have that resolved before it
395 gets to the City Council.
396
397 V. Reid said she wasn't in favor of the tree waiver. Nolan suggested the City work with the
398 developer to issue a partial waiver since the developer is preserving the most valuable area of
399 the site. Mitchell asked if the extensive use of retaining walls were to save more trees. Nash
400 said yes, the retaining walls were necessary to save trees. Nolan suggested a 50 percent
401 waiver. Williams asked for clarification of what a 50 percent waiver would entail. Nash said
402 it would equate to approximately 1200 inches and he thinks we should consider how the
403 applicant had been working with the City on redesigning the layout of the development.
8
404
405 Charles Cudd, applicant, said they met with the City Arborist and the proposed woodland
406 area to be preserved is the highest quality wooded area. He said they are losing two lots and
407 he doesn't feel they should have to do so much tree replacement since they don't think they
408 are benefited enough. He also stated that he doesn't feel 1200 inches of tree replacement is
409 realistic. He said the City Arborist supported this plan and to have to provide so many inches
410 of trees isn't balanced with what they are giving up in revenue. Williams said he would be
411 willing to go down to 1000 inches with the Waiver.
412
413 R. Reid said she is concerned with the traffic, but since the City has given the green light on
414 developing this site she thinks we have to make a decision.
415
416 Ryan Lindell of 565 Hackamore Road said you can't go south on 116.
417
418 Nolan asked that in the future when the City receives new subdivisions that the Commission
419 also gets in their packet a street map/area map of existing developments. He said it would
420 help to better understand the traffic flow in the area of the proposed project. He said they
421 can't require this developer to pay for traffic improvements at this point.
422
423 Motion by Williams, Seconded by R. Reid, to approve of the Charles Cudd DeNovo
424 Variance and Rezoning with the conditions set forth by staff with the exception of #8 in that
425 the applicant replace up to 1200 inches. Ayes by Williams, Mitchell, R. Reid, White, and
426 Nolan. Nay by V. Reid. V. Reid opposed the project since she was not in favor of a tree
427 waiver and the intensification of development and traffic. (Absent: Foote)
428
429 8. Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Potential amendment to the Staging/Growth Plan
430 regarding the pace of development in the City.
431
432 Finke informed the Commission that notification had been given to the public via a public
433 hearing notice and mailing.
434
435 Mitchell suggested the Commission take all the testimony and then table and bring it up at the
436 next meeting. V. Reid said she'd be comfortable with taking action.
437
438 Finke explained that there had been a reduction in growth recommended by the Metropolitan
439 Council. He said staff was asking if this was the time to revise the Plan. He reviewed the
440 current growth of residential and commercial. He said the current staging period had quite a
441 bit of capacity available yet. The updated Met Council Forecasts show the number of
442 households would reduce from 125 units per year to 60 units per year. He said it was the Met
443 Council Forecast change that led the City to decide to send out a City wide mailing and hold
444 Open Houses to seek feedback for the Commission and Council. Attendees were asked to
445 complete a questionnaire. Finke said at the Open Houses potential actions were provided
446 such as "Take no action"; "Take no immediate action"; "Expedite 2015-18 Comp Plan
447 Update"; "Remove flexibility (jump ahead provision)"; "Amend the Staging Growth Plan to
448 move property into later staging periods"; and to consider if "Commercial/business properties
449 should be part of the changes."
450
451 R. Reid said she remembered the "jump ahead" process, but asked why we had it. Finke said
452 it allows for flexibility. V. Reid asked Finke if he could put all the responses together rather
453 than separate and all be combined. At minimum put them all on one page. Finke said "yes".
454
9
Public Hearing Opened at 10:33 p.m.
455
456
457 Reg Peterson of 225 Hwy 55 said he owns land within the City. He was part of the CP
458 process, all the meetings and time he dedicated; and that now the City would potentially
459 change the Staging Periods concerned him He said in 2003 163 homes were permitted. His
460 family came to the City in 1966 and felt it would develop in a week and didn't live to see
461 development. He said nothing in the City will change the traffic. Wayzata School District is
462 getting full and they said they have planned for development and will need to fill them. The
463 Met Council said they have plenty of capacity.
464
465 Peterson said the City budget was based on development coming in and it's needed to keep
466 up all the things we are funding. If it were to all stop, how would the City meet its budget.
467 He thinks the current CP is fine and will restart the new one when it's required. He is hoping
468 to leave the Comp Plan the way it is.
469
470 Fernando Vivanco of 4508 Bluebell Trail South said he had talked to a lot of residents that
471 live north of Hwy 55 and didn't think there was an antigrowth issue, but rather that the City
472 needed to look at infrastructure and if we are overcrowding. To better understand the
473 implications of the houses being built today and the ones in the future. He said he agreed
474 with V. Reid's comment to request the surveys from the Open House and ones received from
475 Resident's that didn't attend the Open House be combined.
476
477 Mark Czech of 660 Shawnee Woods Road informed the Commission that it's never a great
478 time to advertise for things such as Open Houses, so suggested the next time the City needed
479 resident input to send out a comment card in the City newsletter.
480
481 Elizabeth Theesfeld of 600 Shawnee Woods Road said she agreed that the traffic wasn't just
482 a Medina problem. She asked that a motion be made that the area north of 116 be put in a
483 different Staging Plan.
484
485 Chris Hilberg said the City went from 125 residential units per year to 60 residential units per
486 year. He encouraged the Commission to recommend slowing things down.
487
488 Martin, council member, of 440 Pheasant Ridge Road said she would like to hear from
489 residents. She wondered if the City should be promoting commercial development rather
490 than residential. Steve Theesfeld said it was a fabulous idea since the biggest traffic jams
491 were earlier in the morning and evening rush hour.
492
493 R. Reid said conceptually the jump ahead five year rule should be eliminated. She felt the
494 situation had changed from the time it was adopted.
495
496 White said she didn't disagree with pushing the years out, but felt they still needed to discuss
497 some of the percentages or figure out which properties should be removed from the staging
498 plan. She said they should consider the majority of the comments from the Open House and
499 they should be residents and land owners. R. Reid said the survey is skewed. White said the
500 Met Council had given us the opportunity to amend the CP and thought we should. She said
501 she thinks they should only reduce residential and not commercial properties.
502
503 Finke said the study directed by City Council was directed towards the staging plan only. He
504 said next fall during the CP changes would be the time, rather than now to make the changes.
505
10
506 Williams thinks they should recommend expediting the CP process and modify portions of
507 the CP with various amendments wouldn't be a good process. He said a lot of assumptions
508 had changed since its creation and it will take time to make the necessary changes, but it
509 should be limited to residential.
510
511 Mitchell said he agreed with Williams. He said he met with the Met Council and that their
512 estimates were extrapolated data and they think our growth will be slower. He said he would
513 like the City to look at their data also since we've been waiting 50 years for the infrastructure
514 to come to the City so we can develop and now we're concerned. He said we could still
515 preserve the City with a rural atmosphere and we don't have to have a grid layout like
516 Plymouth where every road would be a through road. He said he's in favor of going slow
517 with new population growth with new people.
518
519 Nolan said he generally agrees with Williams and Mitchell. He has some concern with a
520 disjointed approach. He was part of the CP process and feels staging growth isn't just about
521 density and cost of infrastructure and how and when to plan the infrastructure. Before we
522 dislodge the two plans we need to at least look at it as a point of consideration.
523
524 R. Reid said she is concerned with Mitchell's comment when he said the Met Council
525 thought we are going to be taking a breather on development coming in the future.
526
527 Nolan said Lennar was the one to start development, which then triggered more development
528 to come to the City.
529
530 R. Reid said if you live in the area you wouldn't think the CP worked. Mitchell said they
531 raised enough money to continue with the growth. Everyone knows the schools were being
532 planned for large schools over the last 10-15 years. V. Reid said the Met Council is not
533 pushing us right now and we should ratchet down development. Remove the flexibility in the
534 staging plan.
535
536 Public Hearing Closed at 11:09 pm
537
538 Motion by R. Reid, Seconded by V. Reid, to approve the elimination of the jump ahead
539 option for all uses and to move each of the staging periods back five years for residential
540 only.
541
542 Mitchell felt the proposal was moving too quickly and the data we have is insufficient to
543 make that recommendation. Williams agreed with Mitchell and hoped Finke would review
544 this next month. Mitchell said further study was necessary and that with the public sentiment
545 over the topic the City should begin immediately reviewing the staging issue.
546
547 R. Reid amends motion, William seconded, to direct staff to draft language for future
548 discussion to eliminate the jump -ahead provision and move back each of the staging areas by
549 five years, except for Business, Commercial, and Industrial zoned properties. Ayes by R.
550 Reid, Kent Williams, V. Reid, and Janet White. Nays by Nolan and Mitchell (Absent Foote).
551
552 9. Farhad Hakim — 22 Hamel Road — Site Plan Review to construct an Apartment
553 Building and an Accessory Parking Garage.
554
555 Sparks presented the updated aspects of the application. One foot bump -outs on each side
556 drive aisle 22' wide was proposed and a hip roof added to the side (alternative could be flat
11
557 roof), with one foot of green space next to the garage. The applicant was also proposing to
558 enlarge the windows.
559
560 R. Reid asked why the rendering was three stories, but the plans show two. Sparks said they
561 originally went for three stories, but there was insufficient parking. They didn't want to
562 update the 3D rendering.
563
564 Stan Ross shows the attached stone and the horizontal lap siding.
565
566 Nolan stated that there had been some improvements. He prefers the flat roof since it does a
567 better job of modulations. The applied stone looks fine except on the corners.
568
569 R. Reid stated that it didn't seem normal to have stone all of the way up a two-story building.
570 She also noted that the windows seemed awfully small along the sides.
571
572 Mitchell said he prefers the white colonial.
573
574 Williams said he prefers the stone.
575
576 Nolan and Mitchel stated that they much prefer the dark colors.
577
578 Nolan inquired if there was an opportunity to add a landscaping island in the parking lot.
579
580 Motion by Mitchell, seconded by White, to approve the Site Plan Review with the
581 recommended conditions noted in staff report and to add a 7th condition requiring an accurate
582 color rendering be submitted, along with adding an additional landscaping island in parking
583 lot. Ayes: Williams, Mitchell, V. Reid, White, and Nolan. R. Reid opposed. R. Reid stated
584 it is not a good fit for Uptown Hamel. (Absent: Foote)
585
586 10. Council Meeting Schedule
587 Mitchell agreed to attend and present at the October 7, 2014 Council meeting.
588
589 11. Adiourn
590 Motion by Williams, seconded by R. Reid, to adjourn at 11.42 p.m. Motion carried
591 unanimously (Absent: Foote).
12