Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout06-14-16 PC Minutes 1 CITY OF MEDINA PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes Tuesday June 14, 2016 1. Call to Order: Acting Chairperson White called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Planning Commissioners Chris Barry, Kim Murrin, Robin Reid, and Janet White. Absent: Planning Commissioners Todd Albers and Victoria Reid. Also Present: City Planner Dusty Finke. 2. Public Comments on Items not on the Agenda No comments made. 3. Update from City Council Proceedings Finke stated that Anderson was unable to attend tonight. He provided a brief update on the recent Council activity noting that final approval of the Wealshire project was granted and the Council accepted the resignation of Foote. He noted that Foote sold his house in Medina and therefore had to resign from the Commission. He advised that the City will be looking for a resident to fill the vacant position on the Commission and welcomed suggestions for residents that may be interested. He reviewed some roads in the City which will see construction in the upcoming months, noting that the Council spent the last few meetings going through the approval process for those projects. 4. Planning Department Report Finke provided an update. 5. Approval of the April 12, 2016 Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Motion by R. Reid, seconded by Murrin, to approve the April 12, 2016, Planning Commission minutes as presented. Motion carries unanimously. (Absent: Albers and V. Reid) 6. Public Hearing – Excelsior Group – 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road – PUD Concept Plan for a Subdivision of 87 Single Family Lots Finke presented a request for a PUD Concept Plan review for residential development at the property located at 2120 and 2212 Chippewa Road. He stated that the property is 37 acres, 31 net acres, and would be proposed to have 87 single family lots. He stated that the property is currently guided low density residential and is in the 2021 staging area. He noted that the property had been in the 2016 staging area but was shifted to the 2021 area when the amendment was made to the staging plan. He stated that previously the plan allowed for a property to jump ahead one five-year development cycle but when the plan amendment was made the flexibility was changed to only allow a two year jump ahead, which would allow the property to move ahead to 2019. He noted that the City is in the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan, noting that thus far in that process the subject sites have been considered rural residential. He advised that the projected growth has been substantially 2 reduced, almost 50 percent, by the Metropolitan Council which is why the staging plan was amended and why the Comprehensive Plan updates include lesser density as well. He identified the subject sites on an aerial map, noting that the properties are currently residential with pastured land and wetlands. He described the adjacent uses and noted that the Concept Plan does show the Wealshire project to the east, which recently received final approval from the Council. He reviewed the proposed access that would be provided to the site and noted that the plan includes a small arch in the center. He stated that the lots to the east would be proposed as 55 feet wide lots with detached villas while the western half of the site would be proposed as 65 to 75 feet wide with single family homes. He noted that would be similar to the north portion of the Enclave or Fields of Medina. He stated that the City is on pace to have the updated Comprehensive Plan in place prior to when the property could develop given the flexibility which would allow a two year jump ahead to 2019. He stated that for that reason staff believes that it would be logical for the Commission to review the Concept under the draft version of the Comprehensive Plan, noting that if the City does like this concept it would be possible to incorporate these properties as low density development within the draft Comprehensive Plan, which could then be adjusted accordingly. He noted that an application could be reviewed prior to the staging period but explained that in past cases that were similar the occupancy of the building was not allowed until the staging period was reached. He reviewed the land use map and noted that the Steering Committee has been operating under the guise of meeting the minimum requirements of the system statements from the Metropolitan Council. He noted that low density residential would be similar to R-1 zoning which would have larger lots, 90 feet in width, with larger setbacks than what is proposed for this concept. He noted that an R-1 zoning would allow two units per acre while this concept has 2.8 units per acre. He stated that in regard to transportation, staff noted the limited right-in/right-out access at Mohawk Drive. He stated that the potential development could have an impact on the traffic patterns planned for the City. He noted that the concept review is advisory and does not require formal action. Murrin asked for clarification as the report states that the eastern portion of the site would be within the Rockford school district while the western portion would be within the Wayzata school district. Finke replied that there are two sites, the eastern 19 acres is within the Rockford school district while the western homestead is in the Wayzata school district boundaries. R. Reid referenced the future land use plan, noting that this property and the properties around it, with the exception of the Wealshire property, are guided for rural residential. She noted that the property along Willow is guided for low density and asked for some background information on that decision. Finke stated that while he cannot speak for the entire Steering Committee, the decision would go towards the community goals to spread out development in different staging periods. He noted that the property is closer to the full access intersection as well. Barry referenced the challenge of the timing with updating the Comprehensive Plan noting that it is difficult to make a recommendation as the property straddles two different planes. Ben Schmidt stated that the Excelsior Group does a lot of residential development noting that he is present in representation of the property owners. He stated that they do understand that the property resides in the flux area. He explained that the property was in the 2016 staging area and was moved to the 2021 area. He noted that based on the surrounding uses it would make sense for this property to be residential. He explained that it would make sense to have development around the Wealshire property so that property is not on an “island”, noting that 3 the detached villas could be a good transition from that development. He displayed a sketch of what the development could look like, noting that the PUD concept is different than the normal lot size. He stated that the housing products proposed for the concept would also provide some housing types that are currently not available in abundance within Medina. He stated that they have not spoken with the Wealshire property but they would be willing to work with that property in regard to connection of trails and potential access points. He stated that the engineer believes that the sewer could be served by gravity sewer going back to the existing sewer line located at Chippewa and Mohawk. He stated that the intent was to bring the potential project to the City and determine if it would be desirable, noting that they would be flexible in the method used to go forward. He noted that preliminarily the site could be serviced by existing infrastructure and would provide a mix of housing, perhaps for the people that work across the street. He noted that the location adjacent to Wealshire would allow a family to purchase a home close to their loved one that lives at Wealshire to make visiting much easier. He noted that the yards would be irrigated through the stormwater ponds rather than using City water for irrigation. He stated that there are wetlands and open space in the middle that would be protected. He did not anticipate any updates needed for City streets. He stated that sewer and water are close and therefore could be connected to. He advised that they work with local Minnesota builders to provide a nice variety of housing types. He stated that trails and a park would be provided in the community. He stated that although the products provided would not meet the definition of affordable through the Metropolitan Council, the villas would have a price beginning in the high $300,000’s while the home would begin at $650,000 and the villas would be affordable compared to the Medina housing stock. He stated that if there is support for the concept they would work with staff to determine the best path to fruition. Murrin referenced the exits and asked if there would be only one exit for the property. Schmidt stated that they would anticipate the one entrance, where the current entrance to the property is. He stated that if there is a determination that the roads to the north will not be necessary perhaps they could work with Wealshire to connect to the fire road and make that an actual road. Murrin asked if there was a requirement for two access points for a development. Finke stated that it is not a requirement, noting that there are other developments in the City that were approved with one entrance. Murrin noted that the proposed park would be three quarters of an acre and asked if the applicant would be open to a larger park. Schmidt replied that they would certainly consider that option. White opened the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Bruce Workman stated that he is one of the landowners and has lived on the property for 30 years. He noted that originally he planned to sell the property 15 years ago but he liked it so much in Medina that he decided to stay. He stated that he was surprised by the recent potential changes to the Comprehensive Plan and did not think it was fair for the City to leapfrog over their property to develop further to the east. He stated that Chippewa was a ten-ton road, noting that he paid a high assessment, and that road would be sufficient. He noted that the utilities are in place as well and believed the City should do what is right for the landowners and the City. He noted that the other landowner has also lived on his property for over 30 years. He stated that this would be the right development at the right time. He 4 stated that the pond is 16 feet deep and has fish in it, which would be a great amenity next to the park. Craig Roy, spoke in representation of his mother who owns 1952 Chippewa Road, and stated that he is not sure how he feels about this concept compared to the draft Comprehensive Plan. He stated that he does not have any objections to the concept and believed that the market would dictate whether or not the development would be successful. He stated that if there is a demand for this development, it should be built. He noted that the properties around this area have been allowed develop and believed that the road would ultimately need to be upgraded, which his family would need to contribute towards. He did not believe that was fair as his family would be restricted to develop under rural residential. He believed that his family should be given the same consideration as this plan and as the Cavanaugh property. He stated that it seems ridiculous that this area is intended to be an island of rural residential. Brian Stephenson stated that he owns the property to the north of the eastern property. He noted that his concern is that if this concept moves forward then the surrounding properties should all be included in a similar development standards and staging. He stated that he has lived on his property for 30 years and if this property develops with houses he will move on. White closed the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Murrin asked how long the applicant has owned the land. It was clarified that the landowners still own the land and this is simply a concept. She stated that she would like to keep as much open space as possible and would be concerned with adding more houses as the draft Comprehensive Plan does not go in the direction of higher density. She stated that she has concern with the setbacks, stating that if a development was allowed on that property she would want to see less houses. She would also want to ensure that the property could be serviced by sewer and would like to see two access points. She stated that she would also like to see a larger park. R. Reid sated that there is fairly specific for PUD and even stricter criteria for the jump ahead, noting that this development does not meet virtually any of the criteria. She did not see any reason to grant the extreme variances for the small lots. She believed this to be an ordinary development and did not find it to be innovative or preservation of natural features. She stated that using the stormwater for lawn irrigation is already required and is not going above or beyond. She stated that she would want to see the lot sizes meet the requirements and did not see any reason to accommodate this development. Barry agreed that the lot sizes are a lot smaller than what is allowed under R-1. He stated that he does like the pond by the park. He stated that three parcels over is low density residential, noting that this is a similar sized space. He noted that the City is still allowing that type of development, just in different areas. He stated that perhaps the applicant should ask the Steering Committee to look at their area again, as this area has been guided for low density and is just recently proposed for change. He believed that low density residential would fit in this location but that discussion would need to be had with the Steering Committee and staff. He noted that the concept would need to better match the low density requirements if that zoning was allowed. White echoed the comments of the other Commissioners and agreed that the applicant should bring their request for low density to the Steering Committee. She agreed that she did not believe that the PUD criteria were met through this concept. 5 R. Reid stated that if a proposal were brought back that met R-1, there would be a worthwhile discussion on whether this should be allowed to develop. She noted that the PUD and jump ahead do not make sense. Finke stated that the Council will review this concept the following Tuesday. 7. Public Hearing – Clough Properties – 45 Highway 55 – Plat, Shoreland Overlay Hardcover Variance - Site Plan Review Finke presented a request from Just for Kix at the property located at 45 Highway 55 for construction of an 18,000 square foot commercial building. He noted that the first request would combine the lot with recently annexed land from Plymouth to make the land one developable site. He stated that a variance is requested from 25 to 50 percent of hardcover, noting that 25 percent hardcover is the maximum allowed within the Elm Creek Shoreland Overlay District and is similar to other adjacent properties. He advised that a rezoning would also be required to match the other surrounding properties, noting that access would be provided from the Aldi site. He noted that if the project moves forward the existing home would be demolished, noting that the site is next to Aldi and surrounding by the Creek and railroad tracks. He referenced an access to Highway 55, which would be closed. He stated that the use is permitted within the District and with the exception of the variance for hardcover all other elements of the Shoreland Overlay District would be met. He provided information on the tree preservation and landscaping. He noted that there will be fill in the wetland and the proper approval process and mitigation would be required. He noted that the setbacks from the stream location would be met along with a buffer. He noted that the application would be dependent on the variance request. He advised that similar variances have been approved along Sioux Drive but noted that each variance must stand on its own and the Commission should review the request against the variance criteria. He noted that applicant does propose stormwater filtration above and beyond the minimum requirements in order to mitigate the additional hardcover. He reviewed the proposed building materials and design, noting that staff is looking for direction on whether additional modulation would be required. He stated that the applicant does propose access from the property to the west onto Sioux Drive and to close the Highway 55 access, which will be a positive to improving the arterial flow of Highway 55. He stated that the applicant is looking for an emergency access onto Highway 55, noting that it does appear to be supported by MnDOT which would greatly improve the emergency circulation. He stated that staff suggested connecting the sidewalk to the western property line, which will improve pedestrian traffic and could connect to Aldi if the sidewalk is extended in that location. He stated that staff supports the plat in any circumstance. He noted that the variance criteria are listed in the staff report along with support of how that criteria is met and advised that there are small technical items that could be updated to meet the standards. He stated that if the Commission finds that the criteria have been met staff would recommend approval of all three action items. R. Reid asked if the Elm Creek Watershed has reviewed the project. Finke confirmed that the Watershed has reviewed and approved the request, stating that there were a few technical items they wanted updated. Andy Brandall, representing the applicant, stated that he is thankful for the cooperation of the City throughout this process. He stated that he and the owner are in agreement with the conditions noted in the staff report and advised that the Watershed took action and approved their portion of the requests at their meeting the previous week. White asked for more information on the building materials. 6 Brandall replied that the owner has decided to go with a predominantly precast building because of the energy efficiency of the materials. He noted that the owner was unable to attend and therefore he was attending in representation. He stated that the general theme (arched windows and rock) is similar to the design of the other studios they own in attempt to mimic an old New York style studio. R. Reid asked if the parents are dropping the children off. Brandall replied that there are a lot of younger students and noted that the studio design includes a viewing area for parents. He noted that while some parents drop off and pick up, a large amount of parents stay to watch their child. R. Reid asked if this amount of parking would be needed if the City did not require this level of parking. Brandall replied that this amount of parking is actually the bare minimum for the studio and therefore would not want a reduction in parking. R. Reid was not sure how the parking lot will flow, as it seems awkward. She also believed the intersection near Aldi will be problematic as this will add additional traffic to that area. Brandall replied that a traffic study was done with the Aldi development and noted that the intended use for this site was actually planned for higher use than this site as this site will have off-peak use. R. Reid stated that she likes the arched windows and the overall design and materials proposed for the building. She stated that perhaps in other locations the City would not want to compromise to this level but stated that she would be fine in this instance because the site is unique and would need to be commercial in use. Barry asked if the access to Highway 55 would be closed. Brandall replied that with access being granted through the other property it would have been very difficult to negotiate with MnDOT to maintain the access to Highway 55. He explained that because this is a destination location the owner was not interested in keeping that access open. Barry replied that he remembers taking his daughter to dance class at 5:30 p.m., which he would not consider to be off-peak. He asked what would happen when classes turn over and there are parents attempting to leave and parents attempting to come and noted that a train could come at the same time which would really throw things off. R. Reid stated that the use would be off-peak because the majority of traffic will come to the site during the evenings and weekends. Barry stated that the Highway 55 access could be used to relieve some of the congestion from the site but acknowledged that MnDOT may not have given that option. White opened the public hearing at 8:11 p.m. Jim Tiller, in representation of the Arnt property, noted that the sale of the property has closed. He stated in his opinion this is a gateway property that will be seen by hundreds of 7 vehicles going west each day and believes that this will be an attractive high quality product. He stated that this will not be a national chain property and will draw attention because it is unique. White closed the public hearing at 8:13 p.m. Barry stated that perhaps the top could include additional modulation. He noted acknowledged that the parking is intended to support a future addition but stated that the amount of parking seems excessive for just three studios. He asked when the addition would be planned. Brandall replied that they would like to complete the addition soon but noted that timing did not work financially at this time to build out the entire building. R. Reid stated that at some time she believes there will be complaints regarding traffic with the railroad. Barry asked if MnDOT would be negotiable to opening the Highway 55 access in the future. Finke replied that MnDOT wants to limit the amount of access onto Highway 55 and once an access is closed it would not be reopened. White noted that there are turn lane improvements being done on Sioux Drive currently. Finke noted that the majority of the traffic would be turning right to access Highway 55 and therefore would not be impacted by trains. Barry asked if there is a way to keep the access to Highway 55 “open” for emergency access which would provide opportunities for the future. Finke did not believe there was an in between, either it would need to remain open or close. He explained that the access is currently open for one house to access Highway 55 and approval from MnDOT would be needed with the change in use to use that access. He stated that the review and traffic study support that there will not be an issue with the proposed amount of traffic for this site. Barry stated that he would be interested in seeing that traffic study. Murrin stated that the parking lot does not appear to be setup to exit onto Highway 55 and therefore in order to use that access point the parking lot would need to be reconfigured. She stated that whoever uses this site would have an issue with traffic flow. She asked if MnDOT could be asked whether the access could remain open. Finke stated that the applicant and City presumed closure of that access from the beginning. Brandall replied that because there is an alternative access point from the Aldi site it would be rare that MnDOT would allow the Highway 55 access. Murrin asked who is paying for the turn lane improvements. Finke replied that the business owners are paying for the cost of the project. 8 Murrin stated that MnDOT should be approached to determine if the access could remain open, noting that perhaps a gravel path be used for the time being until it is known if the site will need that additional access. She agreed that further modulation should be added to the top of the building. She noted that perhaps the tan portion could be broken up as well. She stated that she did have concern with filling the wetland but noted that her concern was addressed through the staff presentation. She stated that she would support the project with additional modulation and would also request from MnDOT to leave the Highway 55 access open. R. Reid stated that perhaps some landscaping could break up the tan wall. Finke stated that the angles should be considered, noting the long wall would not be perfectly in line with Highway 55 as it pivots away. He noted that additional landscaping would be torn out when the addition comes forward. White stated that this project is so much nicer than she anticipated that it would be and appreciated the design of the applicant. She did not anticipate a large traffic problem, noting that if people have a hard time going into a business they most likely will not choose to go there. She stated that the City and businesses have done what they can to mitigate the issue through the Sioux Drive project. She referenced the entrance and suggested modulation above the entrance and noted that similar modulation could occur on the north side when the addition is built. She stated that the brick accents between the windows could be extended to the roof line to provide additional modulation. White confirmed the consensus of the Commission that the criteria for a variance would be met through this request. Murrin asked and received confirmation that both parcels are in Medina, as one portion had previously been located in Plymouth but was annexed. R. Reid stated that she would like to see additional modulation on the north and south sides. Barry agreed that both the Highway 55 side and parking lot sides would need modulation. Murrin stated that the ends also need a little modulation. R. Reid commented that the far end would not be that visible. Barry stated that it would still make sense to remain consistent. White confirmed that the Commission would desire additional modulation on the north, south and west sides. Murrin asked if the applicant should request to keep the MnDOT access open. Finke stated that would go against multiple goals of the City and therefore should not be requested. Motion by Murrin, seconded by Reid, to recommend approval of the Variance, Plat and Site Plan Review subject to the conditions noted in the staff report with an additional condition requesting additional 3-D modulation on the south, west and north sides. Motion approved unanimously. (Absent: Albers and V. Reid) 9 8. Potential Special Meeting: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 Finke stated the purpose of the August 3rd meeting would be to provide an opportunity for the Council and Planning Commission to finalize the draft of the Land Use Plan. He noted that once that portion is approved the engineers will begin to work on the technical side of the Comprehensive Plan. He suggested that the Planning Commission keep the date open at this time but noted that the meeting will not be called until it is known whether the progress remains on track to meet that timeline. 9. Council Meeting Schedule Finke advised that the Council will be meeting on Tuesday, June 21st to consider the Excelsior project and finalization of the Deerhill Preserve project. White volunteered to attend the meeting. White thanked Foote for his service and dedication to the Planning Commission. 10. Adjourn Motion by Murrin, seconded by Barry, to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.