HomeMy Public PortalAbout11-13-2001, DRAFTPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 13, 2001
PRESENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS DICK PICARD, MARY VERBICK, TOM
SUPEL, LENNY LEUER, ELIZABETH WEIR AND RANDY BRINKMAN.
JERRY BROST ARRIVED AT 7:35 P.M. ALSO PRESENT: PLANNING
AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR LOREN KOHNEN, PLANNING INTERN
BILL DERMODY AND PLANNING AND ZONING ASSISTANT SANDIE
LARSON.
ABSENT: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS RON JOHNSON AND SHARON
JOHNSON
Chairperson Lenny Leuer called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
1. DALE GRONBERG - 565 HACKAMORE ROAD - SIDE YARD SET -BACK
VARIANCE REQUEST - PUBLIC HEARING
Loren Kohnen read his memo to the planning commission and went thru his analysis of
the request. He then put up overheads of the area and of the proposed floor plan of the
garage addition. He mentioned that he felt the proposed addition could be reduced to
12' instead of 14' wide. He also mentioned that a detached building could maybe be put
in, but it would be in front of the house.
Dale Gronberq said that Loren covered it pretty well, but. He said that he has a circular
drive and it tends to be wet during times when it rains.
Tom Supel asked if the building was put detached and in front of the house, how far
would it be from the road.
L. Kohnen said at least 200 feet. He said a building could be set off to one side so it
would not be directly in front of the entrance to the house.
Lenny Leuer said that the information shows two different sizes of the proposed
building.
D. Gronberg said that the previous owner had planned on an addition and he used
some of that paper work to show the setbacks.
L. Leuer asked if there had been a formal application in the past.
Sandie Larson said she did not think so, but had talked to the former owners (in
checking, there was a formal application, but it was withdrawn before going to the
planning commission because of the sale of the home).
L. Kohnen put up the overheads and explained the old vs the new proposals.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
1
Mary Verbick asked if the proposed septic site was an alternate site or is a new one
needed now.
D. Gronberg said it was an alternate site and it is the only site available because the
property is low.
L. Kohnen said that any other location is wet or steep. He said the City is putting in a
pipe to help with the drainage on the property.
T. Supel asked if the soils were o.k. for a standard system.
L. Kohnen said yes, that both mound and trench systems are now considered standard.
Dick Picard asked Mr. Gronberg why a 12' width would be a problem.
D. Gronberg said he has room for a 9' door in front and to get his boat in, he needs the
14' to maneuver it around and to also get all his other items inside.
D. Picard if the addition is placed where you want it, where would the dog kennel be.
D. Gronberg said it would be behind the addition - he pointed it out on the overhead.
T. Supel said 1 - this appears the request is similar to another we heard about 2-3
months ago and that outcome had a favorable resolution which did not require a
variance (Bennis) - why is this different than that and 2 - criteria `b' - my understanding
that the essence is getting at a reasonable use of the property and it is already being
used that way 3 - criteria `c' - applicant didn't create the lot or the wetlands, but the lot
supports a reasonable use and it seems to me criteria `c' does not apply. Tom said
subject to other comments, he does not see that the criteria for a variance is met.
Elizabeth Weir said that she agrees with Tom - there are other options available on the
site.
L. Leuer asked Loren about the surrounding area.
L. Kohnen said the Mr. Gronberg does not have the same options that Mr. Bennis did -
the Bennis property was served by sanitary sewer, there was other land available to add
to the property.
M. Verbick said when she looked at the property, it seemed many of the criteria was
met, but looking at it closer, it is different. She said it would be more pressing if there
wasn't a garage at all, so similar to others in area already and also this is a very large
variance that is being asked for. She said we (the planning commission) are trying to
be consistent, which hasn't happened in the past. She said this could be a catalyst to
come up with a creative solution without a variance needed.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
2
Randy Brinkman said he is not sure if Mr. Gronberg had discussed having an addition to
the back of the existing garage - it could go straight back or a nice pole barn in the front
and this is quite a large variance request.
D. Gronberg said that it would not work going to the rear of the garage - there is a patio,
hot tub, deck and retaining wall back there and then the property drops off.
D. Picard said that he sees more factors for granting the variance than not granting it -
he said there would be very little intrusion in the neighborhood, it reflects the
neighborhood and the lack of practical options and also no impact on the adjacent
properties and the willingness of the owner to make improvements.
L. Leuer said the lot does not meet our current ordinance so this would be intensifying
the use on a non -conforming lot and a 3rd stall is pushing this to a `luxury' item - so
those three items put me on the no side.
T. Supel asked Loren if he confers that this is a non -conforming lot and Loren said yes.
M. Verbick asked if a variance would be needed to put up a building in another location
and Loren said no, not as long as the setbacks are met.
T. Supel said then this is a Type C non -conforming.
MOVED BY ELIZABETH WEIR AND SECONDED BY TOM SUPEL TO RECOMMEND
DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST AT 565 HACKAMORE ROAD FOR THE
FOLLOWING REASONS:
1. Variance too large
2. There are other options
3. Does not deny applicant reasonable use of his property
4. Luxury items are not to be considered for a variance.
MOTION PASSED 4-2
Randy Brinkman abstained and Dick Picard voted no stating there were more factors in
favor than not for granting the variance.
Commissioner Jerry Brost arrived at 7:35 p.m.
2. ACE PROPERTIES, LLC - 5105/5125/5145 COUNTY ROAD 101 -
COMBINATION OF THREE LOTS TO ONE LOT - PUBLIC HEARING
Loren Kohnen read his memo to the planning commission and put up an overhead of
the area showing the three lots.. He pointed out the easement for future road and also
the telephone easement on the property. He stated the telephone easement could be
moved and that it was up to the applicant to have it moved before they came back with
a conditional use permit application. He said this telephone easement is a private
easement between the telephone company and the owners. Loren explained the
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
3
request for the 30' easement on the west side of the applicants property and showed
where a future road could go to meet up with Clydesdale. He explained that an
easement would be needed from Cates and also Berthiaume to complete a road there.
, Ace Properties, said it not presently being used. She stated that they
were just requesting the re -plat at this time and they do not know what they will be doing
there.
L. Kohnen said in talking with Hennepin County, they do not require additional right-of-
way for 101 since the new alignment will be moved to the east.
Jerry Brost asked if we should take it if the applicant says it is o.k.
L. Kohnen said there is no need for it. The County will grant a temporary access from
101 for this new parcel.
Lenny Leuer asked the applicant if she had read the letter from the city engineer and
she said yes and had no questions. Lenny asked Loren if we have to show the county
plans for the future road to Clydesdale.
L. Kohnen did not think it was necessary at this time.
L. Leuer said one of the city engineers requests is for 40' right-of-way on 101.
L. Kohnen said that Tom had not talked to Hennepin County when he wrote his letter.
Tom Supel asked if there was any chance we might not get the easement we need from
Cates for this future road to the west.
L. Kohnen said when Cates develops his property there will not be a problem with him,
but could be a problem with Berthiaumes.
L. Leuer said we ran into the telephone easement with Cudd's - is this easement being
used.
L. Kohnen said no, that they are abandoning these small telephone buildings all over.
Mary Verbick wanted to know how this easement affected the replat.
L. Kohnen said it does not, only when building.
, asked what will happen if Berthiaume's do not give an easement - what will
happen to the road.
L. Kohnen said that the City has never done it as far as he knows, but he said property
could be condemned.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
4
MOVED BY ELIZABETH WEIR AND SECONDED BY RANDY BRINKMAN TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE RE -PLAT AT 5105/5125/5145 COUNTY ROAD
101 TO ONE LOT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1. All conditions of city engineer Tom Kellogg be met except for the 40' right-of-way
on County Road 101.
MOTION PASSED.
3. DOUG AND LOUISE LEATHERDALE - 2075 COTTONWOOD TRAIL -
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR ADDITIONAL SQUARE
FOOTAGE AND # OF ACCESSORY STRUCTURES - PUBLIC HEARING
Loren Kohnen read his memo to the planning commission - he put up overheads
showing the area and the proposed buildings and addition.
Jerry Brost wanted to know what a run-in shed was.
L. Kohnen said it was open on 1 side for horses to go in for shelter. Loren said that the
Leatherdale's have a problem with having a NURP pond because of standing water. He
said that what he meant was a retention pond to slow down run-off after a rain.
Doug Leatherdale said that they are asking to amend their conditional use permit to
build another stable and they are prepared to abide with all of the conditions outlined in
Loren's memo except for the pond. He said they had a letter from the University of
Minnesota about a virus and having standing water where mosquitoes could bread with
manure run-off really bothered them and felt it was very unsafe. He said that they have
a state of the art manure disposal system, it is removed every 14 days and taken off the
property. He said the worst thing they could do is have manure go into a pond with
standing water. He said he urged favorable action by the planning commission and
wanted to assure them that the facility would be built to the highest standards. He then
read the letter from the equine center at the University of Minnesota.
Kirsten Chapman, 1910 Iroquois, said that the Leatherdale's have worked very closely
with the neighbors on all of the issues related to this project. They have been great
producing a plan showing what Medina is all about. She said she is not concerned with
the number of horses.
Kathy Taylor, 1665 County Road 24, said she supports this proposal.
Tom Crosby, 1612 Willow Drive, said he also supports this proposal.
Elizabeth Weir said she is concerned about the drainage and what she is hearing, fecal
drainage.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
5
D. Leatherdale said he is not clear on what the issue is.
L. Kohnen said that he had contacted the DNR and they have said with manure you do
not want a pond and stop the water like a NURP pond which has standing water in it -
he said a retention pond just slows the water down. He said something can be worked
out with our city engineer and the Leatherdale's.
E. Weir said she is concerned if there is fecal drainage and it goes into the raven, which
drains quite quickly into Wolsfeld Lake.
D. Leatherdale said there is really no run-off because we use shavings in the manure
and it stays quite dry.
L. Kohnen said the engineer is talking about water run-off from the buildings.
Tom Supel asked if the manure area was covered.
D. Leatherdale said you do not want it covered - it could cause combustion. The
manure is in a cement contained area, floor and three sides.
Mary Verbick said that it rained last night and she was at the Leatherdales this
afternoon and the manure was dry.
J. Brost said that in Tom Kellogg's letter he mentions a pond or by best management
practice.
D. Leatherdale said our manure policy is state of the art, so lets go with best
management practices.
J. Brost talked about condition #2 - the number of horses which states 30 horses and up
to 10 foals up to 2 years of age. He said you could end up with 40 horses and asked
the Leatherdale's if they wanted to be held to this or do you want just the total 40 and
use your discretion about age of the horses.
D. Leatherdale said they would prefer the 40 without the limitation of age. He said they
would probably never get to that number.
There was discussion of the number of horses, the number of acres, city ordinance, etc.
It was stated that the number of horses is only regulated according to the number of
acres in a commercial horse facility and property that has been rezoned to RR1.
L. Leuer asked Loren if he had done the calculations as if this were commercial.
L. Kohnen said with the Leatherdale's acreage, it would work with 40 horses.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
6
David Weetman, 2475 Morningside Road, asked of the watershed district gets involved
in an application like this, where ponds are involved. And Loren said no.
The public hearing was closed at 8:20 p.m.
Tom Supel said if we look at the drainage it seems like we've spent a lot of resources
looking at this kind of issues (Wild Meadows). He said the Leatherdale's could get
come clues from there. Tom asked if once conditions are set in a conditional use
permit, do they stay with the property and Loren said yes. Tom then asked Mr.
Leatherdale about the condition that states no commercial boarding, would he then
have riding lessons.
D. Leatherdale said that boarding and giving lessons to the public is commercial and he
will not be doing that.
J. Brost said the bottom line is you cannot charge anyone on your property.
T. Supel wanted to credit Hugh Maynard for the good job of the analysis for granting this
conditional use permit.
D. Picard wanted to know the status of the pond.
L. Kohnen said that the reference to a NURP pond would be deleted from condition #9.
There was discussion of manure and if there is a certain number of horses on a
property before manure must be hauled away and what the city requires.
T. Crosby said even with one horse if manure is never hauled away, it would then come
under the city's nuisance ordinance if there was no conditional use permit on the
property.
MOVED BY ELIZABETH WEIR AND SECONDED BY TOM SUPEL TO RECOMMEND
APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DOUG AND
LOUISE LEATHERDALE AT 2075 COTTONWOOD TRAIL WITH THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
1. Total accessory structures may not exceed 7 in number with a total of 34,400 square
feet.
2. The number of adult horses maintained on the property may not exceed 30 with a
maximum of 10 foals up to 2 years in age.
3. There shall be no commercial use and horses are for personal use only.
4. Erosion control methods must be utilized and approved by city staff.
5. Site drainage and retention shall be reviewed and approved by city staff.
6. There shall be no living quarters for humans in any accessory structure.
7. The fire marshall shall review the plans for all accessory structures.
8. The applicants shall maintain all fencing on the property in good repair.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
7
9. Manure must be removed from the property every 14 days. Manure storage areas
must be shown on the site plan.
10.Any exterior lighting shall be designed and constructed so that the globe is recessed
and open only on the bottom and no light is cast directly on any adjacent property or
any off -site roadway.
11.There shall be exterior loudspeakers or telephone bells.
12.The applicant shall pay a fee to the city in the amount determined by the staff to
represent the actual cost to the city of reviewing this application.
MOTION PASSED
4. FIRST APOSTOLIC LUTHERAN CONGREGATION OF MINNEAPOLIS - 2300
COX TRAIL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CHURCH - PUBLIC
HEARING
Bill Dermodywent thru his memo to the planning commission explaining the proposal
and he put up overheads of the area. He also showed samples of siding and roofing
and explained the use of the interior space.
Loren Kohnen read his memo to the planning commission. He said that city engineer
Tom Kellogg mention in his letter of having water coming from Medina Morningside, but
both he and public works director Jim Dillman did not feel this was necessary.
Kevin Kangas, building chair for the church introduced others with him: Phillip Baum
and Brent Lindstrom from Stahl Construction and Bruce Tamte, architect from Station
19 Architects. Kevin went thru the conditions and voiced their concerns:
Condition #1 - They did not see any requirements for exterior building materials in the
rural residential zoning district;
#2 - They question this one - work is usually done simultaneously.
L. Kohnen said that other people use Cox Trail and if work is being done before parking
lot and driveway are done, there will be lots of mud on the road and the accessibility for
both residents and emergency vehicles would be hampered.
Phillip Baum asked for a compromise. He said there is a lot of underground work to be
done and wondered if they could do a construction road and do the rest in staging. He
said they also have a street sweeping program with a contract.
Lenny Leuer asked the dirt balance on site.
P. Baum said it balances.
L. Leuer asked Loren he and Jim should address this condition.
L. Kohnen said between Jim, Tom Kellogg and himself, they could work it out.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
8
Condition #5 - Kevin said they would like a better definition of `available' and if they
have to plant the trees.
L. Kohnen said yes, the church would plant them and it would be something that would
be worked out with the neighbors.
L. Leuer asked, when, after the improvements?
L. Kohnen said this would be done by neighbor request, after the berms are built.
Mary Verbick asked if there was assurance for the applicant that they won't be required
to plant a large number of trees. There should be some guidelines that the applicant
will be protected from unreasonable requests.
K. Kangas said that is their main concern, but also with any stipulation of the
requirement, who would determine `adequate screening'.
L. Leuer said he sees no reason why we would hold you to a higher standard than we
do for commercial developments.
Condition #8 - Kevin said that we show 0 foot candles on our lighting plan and in
addition to that you are requesting that the standards be brought down to 20'. He said
when the trees are fully grown, there would not be enough light. He pointed out that the
proposed lighting ordinance says 30'.
L. Kohnen said that Polaris had to take down all of their 30' and put up 20'.
K. Kangas said that Polaris can have a higher light level in the parking lot than we can.
There was further discussion of lighting in residential districts, neighbors, etc.
M. Verbick said that we learned that studies show crime is more apt to happen in lit
areas than dark. Higher does not always light better.
K. Kangas said they are more concerned with safety than they are with crime. The
height is a concern because of the trees. He wondered if there was any way the 20'
could be changed.
M. Verbick said because of all the recent talks, she did not think that the council would
be willing to change.
Tom Supel said he thought 30' was o.k. with glare and Loren said that was in the
commercial areas.
K. Kangas said they concede to the 20' height.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
9
Condition #13 - Kevin reiterated how the height is measured so that if someone said
that it looked higher than what was said.
L. Kohnen sowed how the height was measured on the overhead.
Condition #23 - L. Kohnen clarified that the 7 feet would be changed to 5 feet.
Condition #29 was clarified.
K. Kangas said that the exact color of the siding and roof have not been chosen or
approved by the congregation yet, but would be in the earth tones. Colored boards of
the proposed church were shown.
M. Verbick asked if the residents in the area would see the parking lot.
Bruce Tamte said most of the berms will be over 3' in height and then the trees on top
of them. He thought the parking will be pretty well covered.
K. Kangas explained the lot layout with the colored board.
L. Leuer said he sees no steeples or bell towers and asked if there would be any
monuments.
K. Kangas said only a sign at the entrance of Cox Trail.
Mary Griffen, 1460 Willow Drive, asked how the church would look like from the north.
She was referring to condition #5. She said their house sits back, but they have a big
pasture that abuts the church property and they would like the same consideration as
the other neighbors.
L. Kohnen put up an overhead of the north view of the church.
K. Kangas said it might be a little excessive to put trees all along your property line.
Wayne Gisslen„ 1460 Willow Drive, said he is in favor of a more restrictive lighting
condition. He said any light will make a significant change.
K. Kangas said that the church schedule of activities is very limited - Wednesday night,
Sunday morning and Sunday night. He said the lights would not be on 90% of the time.
Steve Mann, 2275 Cox Trail, said that he favor adequate berms to limit the view of the
parking lot - adequate berms with trees on the berm. He said the sanctuary seems
large compared to membership. If the church is planning on renting it out to others, it
should be brought forward now.
L. Leuer wanted to know how we define special events.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
10
L. Kohnen said other than the services. Holy Name has a couple of special events a
year, bazaars, flea markets, etc.
S. Mann wanted to know if a provision could be made that they have to come back if
there are changes in their schedule or level of activities.
K, Kangas said that this congregation has been in existence for over 100 years and
during that time the schedule may have added 2 night services.
M. Verbick said that condition #31 seems to cover it.
S. Mann said our only access to our home is Cox Trail and it is very important to have
provisional parking during the construction and if there is church growth in the future
that a 2nd driveway not be put in without approval.
L. Kohnen said any deviation from the site plan would have them come back..
K. Kangas answered three concerns: #1 - the church will work with the construction
company for proper access for residents; #2 - the berming will be worked out with the
neighbors and #3 - they will submit a church schedule to staff.
Glen Kero, church member, said that as far as special events, they do occasionally
have birthday parties, anniversary parties, maybe New Years, maybe a kid's party. He
wanted to know if special permits were required for all of these.
L. Kohnen said no.
K. Kangas said they will address and inform the City of anything that may seem out of
the ordinary.
Steve Pflaum , 2725 Deer Hill Road, said that all in the area welcome the church. He
said he does have a couple of concerns: 1 - He said this is a very high and dense use of
the land and he is concerned for the general aesthetics for the neighborhood. He said
with the best of intentions and leaving it up to the applicant, it doesn't work with a
building that is 20-30' tall and a berm that is only 3' tall with 6' trees. He said that will
not come close to screening the building. It will take 20 years for the trees to reach as
high as shown on the drawings. He said it would be helpful to have the overall
appearance looked at by a landscape engineer employed by the City to tell if there is
adequate screening. #2 - he said he is uncomfortable that the City has not addressed
the impact of traffic. He said that the intersection of Willow Drive and County Road 6 is
a very bad intersection. He said that the churches to the east in Plymouth employ off -
duty police to handle traffic. He said the City needs to asses this before a permit is
issued. Something should be done about the traffic first.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
11
K. Kohnen said that Woodridge church just east of city hall has about 200 cars coming
and going during a service. The City talked with both Hennepin County and MnDOT
and there have been no problems with the traffic there and there are no turn lanes. He
said there are some problems with Holy Name, but then again they have 5000+
members.
Elizabeth Weir wanted to know what `acting on it immediately' means if there are
problems.
L. Kohnen said possibly traffic control, turn lanes, etc.
T. Crosby said in condition #3 add `applicant will use reasonable measure to enforce';
#6 - add be replaced with materials at least as mature as what has died'; #18 - add
some language that bazaars, flea markets, etc. are special events. He wondered in #9 -
what governs security lighting. He also questioned the outlot shown going SE. It was
explained that the outlot both on the Church property and on Phillips Drive property are
outlots that have been designated for future roads if the two properties were ever to
connect.
Rosanne Eppel,1462 Willow Drive, said from where they live, they will have the best
view of the church. She said she understood how the height was measured, but how
high will the church be to the top of the roof.
L. Kohnen said 32' to the top of the roof.
R. Eppel wanted to know how many members there were and Kevin said 230 dues
paying members. She then questioned the berms on the north side. She said it looks
like there is a dip in the middle and wondered if it could be straight across.
L. Kohnen said yes, it can be. It is there to screen the church.
R. Eppel then asked about the outside lights, numbers, etc.
L. Kohnen said 12 outside, 10-20' tall.
R. Eppel wanted to know how many lumens. She also said security lights are often
bare bulbs.
L. Kohnen said we are concerned with the lumens at the property line and it is 0. He
also said that the security lights will be downcast.
R. Eppel said she would like to see part of the property left natural, it grows fast and
needs no upkeep. She said she supports the 20' height for light poles.
Lynette Budeslich, 2465 Morningside Road, said that traffic is a concern. She also
wondered how late the lights could be on.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
12
L. Kohnen said the lights can only be on if the building is being used.
K. Kangas said it probably would never be after 10 p.m. unless someone is cleaning up
after a wedding. He said, yes there could be something at the church every night, but
the possibility is 0. He said there is very limited use as we have outlined. He said the
church has no full time staff, there is no paid staff except for the pastors.
David Weetman, 2475 Morningside Road, said he did not feel the 350' for notification
for this hearing was enough. He only knew about it because of a neighbor. He said the
watershed uses 600', why not the city.
L. Kohnen said that it is staffs duty to decide, but 350' is required by law.
D. Weetman said that there are lots in Medina Morningside that may not even know
about this.
R. Eppel asked if the church is higher than the house to the south and Loren said no.
K. Kangas said that if they are required to use 20' light poles, then their photometric
plan may need revision.
L. Kohnen said as long as it is downcast.
E. Weir asked to see the example of the vinyl siding.
B. Tamte said the longevity of the siding was a consideration. He said this siding is a
20 year surface. He said they also considered the buildings around them and they have
similar siding.
E. Weir asked if it would be substantially more expensive to use brick. Both Kevin and
Bruce said yes, 30-35,000 more.
Randy Brinkman asked the applicants about the thickness and etc. about the siding.
There was further discussion about the thickness of the siding, the durability, etc. It was
noted that this would be a commercial grade siding.
L. Kohnen said that when we first met with the church, we stressed that we wanted it to
look more residential than commercial.
R. Brinkman said that this example of siding was not an architectural grade. He said
high grade vinyl is something to consider. He also talked about different kinds of
shingles, the wear, looks, etc.
There was further discussion of siding and roofing.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
13
MOVED BY ELIZABETH WEIR AND SECONDED BY RANDY BRINKMAN TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR FIRST
APOSTOLIC LUTHERAN CONGREGATION OF MINNEAPOLIS FOR A CHURCH AT
2300 COX TRAIL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. Exterior building materials shall be compatible to residential use
2. The driveway and parking lot construction timing to be worked out with city staff.
3. No parking will be allowed on Cox Trail, Willow Drive or on the driveway leading to
the parking lot.
4. Additional 6' Black Hill spruce trees must be added to the berms and also the design
of the berms, to aid in blocking the view of the church building and parking lot to be
done with direction of city staff.
5. Additional 6' Black Hills spruce trees to be made available to neighboring properties
east, west, north and south of the church property with the plan approved by city
staff.
6. All landscaping and all areas not covered by hardcover must be seeded and
maintained. Landscaping must be installed in accordance with the requirements of
the zoning administrator. All landscaping must be well maintained and plant
materials which die must be replaced with sizes to keep comparable screening.
7. Applicant must provide a driveway agreement with the two residential properties on
the south side of Cox Trail.
8. All exterior lighting must be designed and installed so that the globe is recessed and
enclosed on all sides except the bottom and not light is cast directly on any other
property or public right-of-way. The lighting must be installed in accordance with the
plan submitted by the applicant and with the recommendations of the city staff.
Artificial light contribution at the property lines must be limited to zero foot candles.
Light standards maximum height of 20'
9. Security lighting shall be controlled by a light sensor. All other exterior lighting must
be placed on a timing device. No exterior lighting shall be permitted when the
building is not is use other than the exterior security lighting. Egress lighting shall
average .5 foot candles power.
10.The applicant agrees that if the entrance driveway to Willow Drive becomes a
problem in the future, the applicant will take corrective action. The City will
determine if there is a problem and evaluate the appropriateness of the applicant's
proposed corrective action.
11.All garbage or trash containers must be located inside a permanent enclosure on a
concrete pad with an exterior material compatible with the construction of the church
building.
12.All mechanical equipment, including all roof top mechanical, must be screened from
view from adjacent parcels.
13.The building may not exceed the height limit of the zoning ordinance for structures
within the rural residential district.
14.The building must be constructed in accordance with Minnesota building code.
15.All plans for the building must be approved by the fire marshall.
16.All plans must be reviewed by the Medina chief of police.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
14
17.There shall be no outside bells, speakers or amplified sound systems.
18.The buildings and grounds shall be used only for church related activities as per
schedule outlined in the application. Special events such as bazaars and flea
markets will require a special use permit, even though they are sponsored by the
applicant.
19. Erosion control must be in place prior to any grading activity on the site and must be
maintained throughout the period of construction.
20.The storm sewer must be constructed in accordance with city standards.
21.The applicant must obtain permits and approvals from the City of Medina and the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for any measure regarding storm sewer.
22.Top soil must be salvaged and respread around the ponding area to the minimum
depth of 4 inches and 25' natural buffer provided around the NURP pond.
23.The sediment pond depth at the outlet must be monitored annually. When the depth
has decreased below 5 feet, the pond must be dredged out by the applicant. The
applicant must review this and report to the City.
24.The applicant must provide standard drainage and utility easements around the
perimeter of the subject property (10 feet in width along Willow Drive and Cox Trail
and 5 feet in width elsewhere).
25.All septic sites must be fenced and protected prior to beginning of grading or
construction. This protection must be maintained until all construction is completed
and adequate cover is established.
26.The applicant must install a stop sign on Cox Trail at the intersection of Cox Trail
and Willow Drive.
27. Parking per plan submitted - 218 parking spaces shown per Phase 1.
28.Cox Trail to be paved in it's entirety to a 24' width, up to and including the cul de sac.
29.The applicant must submit to the city engineer for review and approval the storm
water calculations and water quality and storage calculations for the site.
30.The applicant must submit to the city a letter of credit in an amount to be determined
by the city engineer to cover site improvements and exterior lighting.
31.The applicant must comply with the terms and conditions of the approved site plan
which is hereby incorporated by reference.
32.The conditional use permit may be reviewed annually or as deemed necessary to
ensure compliance with the conditions set forth herein. Violations of the terms of
this conditional use permit may result in the imposition of additional conditions.
33.There may be no residential use of the property.
34.Any sign constructed must meet city ordinance requirements.
35.The applicant must pay to the city an administrative fee in an amount sufficient to
reimburse the City for the cost of reviewing this application.
MOTION PASSED.
5. DISCUSSION OF SURVEY RESULTS
The planning commission discussed the comments from the survey.
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
15
7. DISCUSSION OF PLANNING COMMISSION TRAINING GUIDE
Lenny Leuer passed out a Suggested Site Review Process.
Since Sharon Johnson is spear heading this project, it was decided to delay the
discussion until she is present.
MOVED BY TOM SUPEL AND SECONDED BY JERRY BROST TO ADJOURN.
MOTION PASSED.
Meeting adjourned at 11:40 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Assistant Date
Planning Commission Minutes-11-13-01
16