The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2002 TY CITY OF ROSEMOUNT 2875 Street West Rosemount, MN Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068-4997 Phone: 651. 423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Fax: 651- 423 -5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 8, 2002 Mayor Busho swore in newly appointed Commissioner Sheila Hathaway to the Planning Commission. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, January 8, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members Myron Napper, Sheila Hathaway and Jana Carr present. Commissioner Jeff Arveson was absent. Also in attendance were City Planner Rick Pearson and Planning Intern Aaron Jones. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: There were no additions or corrections to the agenda. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Carr to approve the December 11, 2001 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Hathaway and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Segat Conditional Use Permit (Continued) On December 11, 2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Segat Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The public hearing was continued to allow the applicant an opportunity to assemble additional information required by city staff. Aaron Jones summarized the application by Leonore and Anil Segat for a CUP, which is required to expand the use of the property as a daycare /preschool. A letter was sent to the Segats listing additional information required by the city. Information has not been provided which addresses building and fire code concerns, along with information showing how the building will handle the intensified use. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Leonore Segat indicated the Fire Marshal is scheduled to inspect the property on Thursday, January 10. Ms. Segat feels the daycare /preschool use is grandfathered in and that a CUP is not necessary. The 3 -year limit on a CUP is not desirable. Ms. Segat addressed traffic concerns, indicating Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 8, 2002 Page 2 that varied schedules and car pooling would limit traffic. The standards listed as conditions for approval for a CUP were reviewed by Ms. Segat. Chairperson Weisensel opened the Public Hearing. Edward McMenomy, 4122 143 St. W., indicated the City granted the property owners the right to use the property as a daycare. He feels there is miscommunication between the Segats and the City as to the intended use. The Segats' intentions are to use the property as a daycare /nursery school. The residence has been used as a daycare in the past. Chairperson Weisensel asked Mr. Jones to address the concern of miscommunication and to clarify the standards required for approval. Mr. Jones explained that a legal, non conforming use, which is the status of the existing use, cannot be expanded. The applicants are requesting that the use be expanded into the residence. In accordance with zoning regulations, no more than 12 children are permitted in a residential daycare. A CUP is required for residential daycares with more than 12 children. Mr. Jones reviewed the standards for conditional use approval which staff feels have not been completely satisfied by the applicants. Edward McMenomy clarified that the basement in the residence was used as a daycare in the past. MOTION by Carr to close the public hearing. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Weisensel, Hathaway, Carr, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Discussions continued concerning prior use of the residence and the total number of children anticipated. MOTION by Napper to recommend the City Council direct staff to prepare findings of fact in support of denial of the CUP for Leonore and Anil Segat to expand the use of the existing daycare facility. Seconded by Weisensel. Ayes: Hathaway, Napper Weisensel. Nays: Carr. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Heritage Development Preliminary Plat- Abbott Property (Continued) On December 11, 2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Heritage Development Preliminary Plat. The public hearing was continued to allow the applicant to make revisions to the preliminary plat. Mr. Pearson indicated the applicant has not completed the necessary revisions and has requested the public hearing be continued to February 12. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 8, 2002 Page 2 that varied schedules and car pooling would limit traffic. The standards listed as conditions for approval for a CUP were reviewed by Ms. Segat. Chairperson Weisensel opened the Public Hearing. Edward McMenomy, 4122 143 St. W., indicated the City granted the property owners the right to use the property as a daycare. He feels there is miscommunication between the Segats and the City as to the intended use. The Segats' intentions are to use the property as a daycare /nursery school. The residence has been used as a daycare in the past. Chairperson Weisensel asked Mr. Jones to address the concern of miscommunication and to clarify the standards required for approval. Mr. Jones explained that a legal, non conforming use, which is the status of the existing use, cannot be expanded. The applicants are requesting that the use be expanded into the residence. In accordance with zoning regulations, no more than 12 children are permitted in a residential daycare. A CUP is required for residential daycares with more than 12 children. Mr. Jones reviewed the standards for conditional use approval which staff feels have not been completely satisfied by the applicants. Edward McMenomy clarified that the basement in the residence was used as a daycare in the past. MOTION by Carr to close the public hearing. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Weisensel, Hathaway, Carr, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Discussions continued concerning prior use of the residence and the total number of children anticipated. MOTION by Napper to recommend the City Council direct staff to prepare findings of fact in support of denial of the CUP for Leonore and Anil Segat to expand the use of the existing daycare facility. Seconded by Weisensel. Ayes: Hathaway, Napper Weisensel. Nays: Carr. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Heritage Development Preliminary Plat -Abbott Property (Continued) On December 11, 2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Heritage Development Preliminary Plat. The public hearing was continued to allow the applicant to make revisions to the preliminary plat. Mr. Pearson indicated the applicant has not completed the necessary revisions and has requested the public hearing be continued to February 12. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 8, 2002 Page 3 MOTION by Carr to continue the public hearing until February 12, 2002. Seconded by Hathaway. Ayes: Carr, Napper, Weisensel, and Hathaway. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Wensmann Homes Concept Residential PUD Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on Wensmann Homes Concept Residential PUD. Mr. Pearson presented the concept plan for a 3- story, 48 unit senior condominium development on the Wachter property, located east of Chippendale Avenue across from 155 St. W. It would be necessary for the property to be rezoned from Agriculture to BP -4. Multiple family housing is a permitted use in the BP -4 zoning district through a PUD. In addition, the property must be platted as a separate parcel from the remaining Wachter property. The applicant would have to apply for a PUD and provide further details for landscaping, grading, and building elevations. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Terry Wensmann provided additional details of the proposed development. Access is off Chippendale Ave., directly across from 155 St. W. Underground parking is proposed on the north end of the building. The condominiums will be marketed to individuals 55+ and numerous amenities are provided. The units are 1 -2 bedrooms and sell for $110,000 $160,000. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. A letter from Thomas Terry was placed into the Clerk's file. Laura Hecht, 15589 Cherry Path, supports the concept plan, however expressed her concerns with the removal of trees, the close proximity of the condominium to the property line and the height of the building. Additionally, a walking trail will be installed close to the property line around the Claret Springs townhome development. She inquired about landscaping along that trail. Chairperson Weisensel inquired about setback and height restrictions in the BP -4 zoning district. Mr. Pearson explained that when using the PUD process, the standards most appropriate for the particular use are used. For this project, the PUD process allows the opportunity to require additional improvements. The maximum building height is 35 feet. The height can be increased if the setback is increased proportionately. Patti Winston, 15581 Cherry Path, feels the senior condominium proposal is a good idea. She inquired about landscaping along the street and continuation of the walking path into that development. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 8, 2002 Page 4 Karmen Sorenson, 15655 Chestnut Way, opposes the project as it stands with the limited information provided. She believes senior housing would be an asset to the community. Ms. Sorenson does not feel the 3 -story building would fit the neighborhood and that a 2- story building would be visually more appealing. She expressed concern with the impact on traffic, the street view of the parking lot, preservation of trees, and additional liability the homeowner's association may incur for the walking path if shared with condominium residents. Tom VonBische, Heritage Development, endorses the Wensmann project. He noted that the same concerns that were raised by residents were also raised when Claret Springs East was developed. The townhomes in Claret Springs East are almost 35 feet in height, similar to the 3 -story building proposed by Wensmann. As owner of the property to the east of Wachter Lake, Mr. VonBishe stated his intent to work with Claret Springs East and Wensmann to develop a walking path to serve the entire area. Laura Hecht, is concerned with the view from Hwy. 3 if the foundation is above grade. She is also concerned with the steep slope of the path and the insurance risk for the homeowners association if an elderly person should fall. She asked whether landscaping could be done to reduce that risk. MOTION by Carr to close the public hearing. Seconded by Hathaway. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Hathaway, and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Hathaway to recommend that the City Council approve the concept for the Wachter Lake Senior Condominiums subject to: 1) Rezoning the property to Business Park -4, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; 2) Platting the property; 3) Conformance with the requirements for PUD Development Plan review; and 4) Approval of Met Council to the Comprehensive Plan Corrective Text Amendment for sewer service. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Weisensel, Hathaway, Carr and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Wiederhold Lot Split Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the Wiederhold Lot Split. Mr. Pearson presented the request by John Wiederhold to split off 5 acres from the 80 acre parcel located on the northwest corner of CSAH 42 and Akron Avenue. The property is in the 2010 MUSA. No variances are created by the lot split. The applicant's responsibility to pay GIS and Park Dedication fees was discussed. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Mr. Wiederhold expressed his desire to retain the family farmstead. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 8, 2002 Page 5 Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Hathaway to close the public hearing. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Hathaway, Carr, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Carr to recommend that the City Council approve the lot split for the 80 acres located on the northwest corner of Akron Avenue and CSAH 42 subject to: 1) Payment of GIS fees and one unit of Park Dedication; 2) Approval of Dakota County Plat Commission (as needed); and 3) Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer relative to easements or rights -of -way. Seconded by Hathaway. Ayes: Carr, Napper, Weisensel, and Hathaway. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Solberg Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the Solberg Mineral Extraction Permit renewal. Mr. Pearson reviewed the application by Solberg Aggregate for renewal of its mineral extraction permit. The permit pertains to approximately 80 acres located west of Hwy. 52, 1/4 mile north of 140 Street. The grading plan was reviewed. No complaints were received by the Police Department regarding the mining activity. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Lauren Howard was available to answer questions. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the public. There were no comments. MOTION by Hathaway to close the public hearing. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Hathaway, and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Napper to recommend that the City Council approve the mineral extraction permit renewal and grading plan for Solberg Aggregate Co. Inc. located on the Koch Refinery property subject to the attached conditions for 2002. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Weisensel, Hathaway, Carr, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Danner Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the Danner Mineral Extraction Permit renewal. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 8, 2002 Page 6 Mr. Pearson reviewed the application by Danner Inc. for renewal of its mineral extraction permit. The permit pertains to property located east of Hwy. 52, south of CSAH 42. The grading and phasing plans were reviewed. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Jerry Bachman was available to answer questions. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. Frank Knoll, 4322 145 St. E., complimented the mining operation. Mr. Knoll inquired about the status of the mining moratorium. Mr. Pearson responded that an outside consultant has been performing research on the mining issue. The moratorium is the result of council's concerns regarding end use plans and life spans of mining operations. MOTION by Carr to close the public hearing. Seconded by Hathaway. Ayes: Hathaway, Carr, Napper and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Hathaway to recommend that the City Council renew the mineral extraction permit for Marlon Danner of Danner Inc. subject to the attached conditions for 2002. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Carr, Napper, Weisensel, and Hathaway. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel recessed the regular Planning Commission meeting and opened the Board of Appeals Adjustments. Public Hearing: Jason Johnson Variance Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the Jason Johnson variance request. Mr. Pearson presented the request by Jason Johnson for a variance to lot area and frontage requirements. Mr. Johnson purchased a lot located north of CSAH 42, behind 3173 and 3175 14 St. and wishes to build a home on the lot. The 2.28 acre lot does not meet the 2t /2 acre requirement in the Agriculture district. A 33 foot wide easement provides access to the lot. The house location meets setbacks and drainfield plans have been provided. Mr. Johnson has provided the required documentation which shows the lot can be developed. 411 Commissioner Napper inquired further about the driveway easement and the necessity for County approval. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 8, 2002 Page 7 Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Jason Johnson provided background information on the lot. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the public. There were no comments. MOTION by Napper to close the public hearing. Seconded by Hathaway. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Hathaway, and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Carr to grant variances to lot area and frontage subject to conformance with uniform building and fire codes, and approval of Dakota County (as required for access). Seconded by Hathaway. Ayes: Weisensel, Hathaway, Carr, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel closed the Board of Appeals Adjustments and reconvened the regular Planning Commission meeting. Old Business: None. New Business: Evermoor Drumcliffe Addition Final Plat Mr. Pearson presented the final plat for the 46 remaining unplatted lots behind the lots lining Evermoor Parkway on the north side of the Evermoor development. Overall density is 1.39 du/ac and the lots along the northern edge average 1.1 acres in size. The final plat is consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat and PUD. Mr. Pearson noted the "flag lots" on the western edge were previously approved in order to lessen the impact on the wetlands. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Jay Libracki was available to answer questions. MOTION by Weisensel to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Drumcliffe subject to: 1) Execution of a subdivision agreement to secure public infrastructure including streets and utilities; 2) Incorporation of recommendations of the Interim City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, public streets, shared driveway (Lots 10 11, Block 1) and utilities; and 3) Payment of all platting, GIS, Park Dedication, applicable City Review fees and trunk/area fees as specified in the current fee schedule resolution. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Hathaway, Carr, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Director's Report: Mr. Pearson announced that a training session for use of the new Council Chamber facility is scheduled for Tuesday, January 15, at 5:00 p.m. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes January 8, 2002 Page 8 There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon MOTION by Weisensel and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:23 p.m. Respectfully submitted, P Dianne G. Quinnell Recording Secretary CITY HALL West 2g7 145th Stteet \1. N� Rosemount, MN Rosem g99 S E 550 R V 1 1.423 4411 �1 Phone aunt 651-423-6219 lap Rosemount!! liearin9 Fax. .65A-423 -5203 V d Everything s C planning Minutes Regular -Meeting M Reg 22, 20Q January 22 Com mission Meeting of the Pl ca led the meeting the Regular Jeff weishe Pl Jana Carr d notice thereof, Chairperson Hathaway and City Pl d call an 2002. Napper, Sheila H ce were Pursuant to Tuesday, January me 2 bers Myro Also in a ttendan ce K l as sen. was held 6 3 0 p.m er Jeff A r�'eSOn was absent. ouncilmember She to order at Aaron Jones, C n1n1 1 ssi on present. planning Intern A Pearson, Allegiance. Rick Pear with the Pledge of was o pened agenda items. Th m eeting me nts o the ag bet Klassen h no CO m agenda. C °uncilmem or corrections to the ag Agenda: There were no a ddition s Ag Commission None ular Planning Hathaway a Audience Inpu g, 20 R weisense Carr to aped ed the a h way• Ayes. Sapper 0 MOTION b y C b Hathaway. Seconded Y e ZOn1Xl Meeting Minutes. carried. S Site R file w the Carr. Nays' Lumber/St. Jose h has placed on u an d Affidavit of S L recording secr Notice e th the K ed that the Hearing Joseph's Site R Public confirm o f a Public H e wring st Chairperson c nce in ailing and on Sunrise L land I. vit of aide future Chairp ffida M public hearing City the A the p Guide Plan to g order to concerning e of the Compreh meet will occur. In including in publication os when deve certain properties, the pub wh e cert CIn itY order lamed ,,,here and to rezone Zoned C -2 with the Mr• le es t t city pr h clarify Plan, it is necessary presently use within th Those sites, p order to co nform the Comprehensive P sites. implement Joseph's s Public Institutional in Sunrise lui- nbexlSt• ed to PI P the Suer must be reZ °n Comm ercial, Comprehensive Plan. 3osep sites, ened th public hearing• iselSt• in eisensel op north of th Sum properties kept c hanging Chairperson W Auto l e change again. South Metro ed. The zoning for these rop owner °f S Chang property may require it to Todp' ow s hould not be changed. of the p rop feels the zoning d the P past, and future 1 t, r r 1 C ITY OF RO S E M O U N T 2875 C IT Y t HA reet West y Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997 Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! Phone 651-423-4411 Hearing Impaired 651-423-6219 Fax 651 423 -5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes February 26, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, February 26, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members Myron Napper and Jana Carr present. Commissioners Jeff Arveson and Sheila Hathaway were absent. Also in attendance were City Planner Rick Pearson and Councilmember Sheila Klassen. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Councilmember Klassen, as liaison to the Planning Commission, advised the Commission concerning the Evermoor Glendalough PUD Amendment. She indicated that, based upon previous discussions by the City Council, she was concerned with the extent of the proposed amenities and did not feel there would be Council support. Agenda: There were no additions or corrections to the agenda. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Carr to approve the January 22, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Heritage Development Preliminary Plat Revised Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the revised Preliminary Plat for Heritage Development. This public hearing is continued from January 22, 2002. Mr. Pearson presented the revised preliminary plat for 66 single family lots, located 1 /4 mile east of Biscayne Avenue, between CR 38 and Biscayne Pointe. Connections are made to surrounding properties, and a park is proposed in the southeast corner. The developer has agreed to shift the layout of the lots to eliminate the four lot dimension variances. The Parks Recreation Commission recommended that a sidewalk be added to the west side of Street A. 1111 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes February 26, 2002 Page 2 Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Steve Bona appeared on behalf of Heritage Development. Mr. Bona summarized changes made to the plat to satisfy city staff concerns. The developer will comply with all the conditions recommended for approval. The applicant had not been informed of the Parks Recreation recommendation to add a sidewalk on the west side of Street A, and agreed to give it consideration. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Carr to close the public hearing. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Weisensel, Carr, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Napper to recommend that the City Council approve the preliminary plat for Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition subject to: 1) Elimination of the 4 lot dimension variances identified in the summary; 2) Sidewalks on the east side of "Street A south side of "Street E north side of Connemara Trail "Street D north side of "Street B" and west, south side of "Street C a trail along the south side of Connemara Trail; 3) Enhancement of the landscaping plan to include additional plant screening along Connemara Trail; 4) Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer relative to drainage, grading, easements, right -of -way and utilities; 5) Incorporation of recommendations of the Park and Recreation Commission relative to parkland dedication; 6) Conformance with the requirements of final plat including payment of all fees associated with platting at the time of final plat; 7) No final plats will be approved until Sanitary Sewer and City Water are available to the property; and 8) St. Joseph's Church must cooperate with the dedication of right -of -way or an easement for their portion of Birchwood Avenue. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Carr, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Cenex Harvest States Transportation Facility -Site Plan Review Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the site plan review for Cenex Harvest States Transportation Facility. Mr. Pearson summarized the site plan for a truck dispatcher maintenance facility at a site located south of 140 St. and east of Hwy. 52. The site plan consists of a 13,000 sq.ft. building, with two access driveways to 140 St., sufficient parking plus an expansion area for additional parking. Elevations were reviewed. Proposed landscaping along 140 St. and the eastern edge of the property meets city requirements. The city is working on getting sanitary sewer and water to the property. The applicant hopes to have the facility operational by July, 2002. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes February 26, 2002 Page 3 Commissioners considered surrounding properties and stormwater ponding collection issues. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Matthew Long was available to answer questions. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Weisensel to close the public hearing. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Weisensel to recommend that the Planning Commission approve the site plan for Cenex Harvest States Transportation Facility subject to: 1) Sanitary sewer and city water must be available to serve the site; 2) City Engineer approval concerning driveways, entrance widths, stormwater ponding, drainage and easements as needed; 3) Providing curb and gutter around the parking lot perimeter; 4) Conformance with all applicable building and fire codes; 5) Understanding the right -in, right -out access to US Highway 52 will be closed in upcoming years; and 6) Lighting is adjusted to shine only upon the said property. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Weisensel, Carr, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Rosemount United Methodist Church Site Plan Review and Variance Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the site plan review and variance request for Rosemount United Methodist Church. Mr. Pearson presented the site plan for Rosemount United Methodist Church, consisting of a 30,000 sq.ft. addition, expanded parking lot, and an additional entrance to Canada Avenue. The driveway connecting the north and south parking lots will be removed. A 10 foot variance is required for surface parking setback encroachments for the two property lines adjacent to the single- family house located in the northwest corner. Screening of the parking lot from the house located in the northwest corner is required. The lighting and the landscaping plans were reviewed. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Carey Lyons, the architect for the project, indicated the applicant had no problems with the conditions for approval. Appropriate screening will be provided, lighting will be confined to the property, and curb gutter will be installed around the parking lot perimeter. Chairperson Weisensel recessed the regular Planning Commission meeting and opened the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes February 26, 2002 Page 4 Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. Owen Harvilla, 14755 Canada Avenue, indicated there is no sidewalk on Canada Avenue from the house owned by the church to the park. He asked whether the church could be required to install a sidewalk. He also opposed the two entrances off Canada Ave. Mr. Pearson explained that installation of a sidewalk by the church could be a condition for approval. Joel Schallehn, 3160 Lower 147 St., inquired about the radius of the lighting and whether he would still have rear access to his property. Mr. Lyons responded that existing lighting would be removed. The new lighting would be minimal and would be directed towards the parking area. Curb and gutter around the perimeter of the parking lot will prohibit rear access to Mr. Schallehn's property. Jackie Richardson, 14926 Camfield Circle, wondered how the church expansion would affect traffic on Canada Avenue. She also indicated that, in addition to there being no sidewalk, there are no traffic signs on Canada Avenue alerting motorists that there is a park in the area and children at play. She asked that the City check into this for the children's safety. A representative for Rosemount United Methodist indicated that membership growth will not be substantially more than what it is now. The church is also concerned for children's safety with the absence of a sidewalk and traffic signs on Canada Avenue. MOTION by Carr to close the public hearing. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Carr, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel acknowledged there is a safety concern with no sidewalk on Canada Avenue leading to the park. He does not feel, however, that the burden of a sidewalk should not be placed on the church. He asked that the City Council look into this further. MOTION by Weisensel to recommend that the Board of Appeals and Adjustments accept the variance request, subject to the fact that hardship is presented. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel repeated his recommendation that the City Council consider the need for a sidewalk along Canada Avenue to Camfield Park, and that this Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes February 26, 2002 1111 Page 5 recommendation not be attached as a condition to the variance granted to Rosemount United Methodist Church. MOTION by Weisensel to recommend that the Planning Commission approve the site plan for Rosemount United Methodist Church subject to: 1) Variance for the parking lot setback encroachment in the northwest corner; 2) Proper landscaping provided as screening to buffer parking lot and parking lot lights (Section 8.3); 3) Lighting is adjusted to shine only upon the said property; 4) Providing curb and gutter around the parking lot perimeter; 5) Conformance with all applicable building and fire codes including indoor sprinkling and alarms; and 6) City Engineer approval concerning driveways, entrance widths, drainage and easements as needed. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Weisensel, Carr, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Evermoor Glendalough PUD Amendment Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the PUD Amendment for Evermoor Glendalough. Mr. Pearson presented the request by Contractor Property Developers Company for a PUD Amendment for the purpose of expanding private recreational amenities for the Glendalough neighborhood. The amenities consist of a pool, gazebo, walking trail, tot lot, basketball court, and picnic area. Issues involve the "pull -in" parking spots, mail stations, and fencing surrounding the pool area. Chairperson Weisensel opened the meeting to the applicant. Homer Tompkins was present on behalf of CPDC. Mr. Tompkins described the proposed amenities constructed in other residential communities and the residents' desire to have these private amenities available to them. Peter Quam, President of Lundgren Bros., provided the reasoning for common amenities, including an opportunity for neighbors to meet. Private pools are associated with townhome associations and apartments. It is reasonable to allow this amenity in a single family community. Commissioner Napper indicated he does not support the private pool. He feels a pool should be left up to the city to provide and that it should not be limited to use by a single neighborhood. Commissioner Carr could not see a difference between a private pool in a residential community and one in a condominium association. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes February 26, 2002 Page 6 A representative of Lundgren Bros. clarified that the pool will meet all state and local requirements, would be completely fenced and controlled by the association. In response to Commissioner Napper's recommendation that the pool should be for the entire community, Mr. Tompkins explained that the City Council previously rejected the idea of a community pool. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. Verlyn Magnuson, 3472 131 St. W., noted that the Evermoor plans appear to be continually changing. He was concerned with noise and unsupervised children. MOTION by Weisensel to close the public hearing. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Carr, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Weisensel to approve the Major PUD Amendment for the Evermoor Glendalough neighborhood subject to 1) Conformance with all applicable building, fire and swimming pool codes; 2) Execution of Homeowner's Association Covenants to guarantee the perpetual management and maintenance of all of the facilities to be approved by the City Attorney; 3) Approval of the "pull -in" parking by the City Engineer; and 4) Incorporation of the trail into the plan. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Weisensel, and Carr. Nays: Napper. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Evermoor Glendalough Rezoning Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the Rezoning for Evermoor Glendalough. Mr. Pearson explained that the Glendalough property, currently zoned Agriculture (AG), must be rezoned to R1 -Low Density Residential. This rezoning is necessary for the property to conform with the City's 2020 Comprehensive Guide Plan. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Weisensel to close the public hearing. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Weisensel, Carr, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Carr to recommend the City Council approve the rezoning of the Evermoor Glendalough site to bring it into conformance with the 2020 Comprehensive Guide Plan. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Carr, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Old Business: None. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes February 26, 2002 Page 7 New Business: Evermoor Glendalough 2 Addition Final Plat Mr. Pearson presented the final plat request for Evermoor Glendalough 2nd Addition. Two parcels are created, including one parcel for the recreational amenities that are the subject of the requested PUD amendment. The remainder of the plat would be for future phases of the Glendalough neighborhood. MOTION by Carr to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Evermoor Glendalough subject to: 1) Approval of the Evermoor Glendalough PUD Amendment for the pool amenities; 2) Incorporation of recommendations of the Interim City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, public streets and utilities; and 3) Payment of all platting, G.I.S., Park Dedication, applicable city review fees and trunk/area fees as specified in the current fee schedule resolution. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Director's Report: Mr. Pearson informed the Commissioners that their terms would soon be expiring and the City Council will be conducting interviews for Commission appointments. Mr. Pearson requested that Commissioners let him know if they wish to be considered for re- appointment. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon MOTION by Weisensel and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, w v Dianne G. Quinnell Recording Secretary 110 1 CITY HALL CITY OF RO S E M O U N T 2875 145th Street West Rosemount, MN III Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068 -4997 Phone: 651- 423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651-423-6219 Fax 651-423-5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 9, 2002 Mayor Busho swore in newly appointed Commissioners David Anderson and Jason Messner. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 9, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members David Anderson, Myron Napper, Jason Messner, and Jana Carr present. Also in attendance were City Planner Rick Pearson, Code Enforcement Official Charlie O'Brien, and Planning Intern Aaron Jones. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: There were no additions or corrections to the agenda. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Carr to approve the March 12, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Amendments to Zoning Ordinance (RV Storage Parking; Waste Storage) Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. O'Brien provided details on revisions to the Zoning Ordinance concerning waste storage and the storage of recreational vehicles. Regulations pertaining to waste storage have been moved to the City Code for enforcement purposes. Revisions concerning RV storage allow temporary (24 hour) storage of RV's in front driveways. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Messner to close the public hearing. Seconded by Anderson. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Carr, and Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. 0 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 9, 2002 Page 2 MOTION by Carr to recommend that the City Council adopt the amendments to Zoning Ordinance 11.1:E and 4.9:C. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Weisensel, Messner, Carr, Anderson, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: St. Joseph Catholic Church Conditional Use Permit Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the St. Joseph Catholic Church Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Pearson presented the application by St. Joseph Catholic Church for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) allowing the development of a site for a church. The site is approximately 26 acres located east of Biscayne Avenue and north of the Biscayne Pointe development. The site is zoned Low Density Residential, which allows churches through the CUP process. Mr. Pearson reviewed the site plan and the proposed two phases of development. Staff recommends that the expansive parking lot be broken up with landscaping, along with additional landscaping along the boulevard. The 80 foot spacing between the boulevard trees does not meet the 50 foot spacing requirement. Additional details are also required to ensure the HVAC system is fully screened. Chairperson Weisensel opened the meeting to the applicant. Bruce Larson with BWBR Architects summarized plans for the first phase of the development. Mr. Larson suggested taking trees proposed along Connemara for a future phase and locating those trees along Biscayne Avenue to meet the 50 foot spacing requirement. Trees along Connemara will be planned with the future phase. Mr. Larson indicated the applicant opposed breaking up the parking lot with landscaping for safety reasons and because of the loss of parking spaces. Trails along Connemara Trail and Biscayne Ave. are joined to trails on the site in an effort to separate pedestrians from traffic. Mr. Larson provided additional information was provided on the screened HVAC unit. Commissioners reviewed lighting plans and considered a sidewalk through the center of the parking lot. Commissioners felt a sidewalk would slow traffic and provide a safer route for people. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. Melissa Hanson, 14017 Belmont Court, indicated her property abuts the church property along the southern edge. She inquired about screening, lighting, and the distance of the church driveway from the property line. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 9, 2002 Page 3 Mr. Larson described the proposed landscaping and berming and responded to concerns with noise and lighting. Spacing of the driveways is as recommended by the city and meets the required setbacks. MOTION by Napper to close the public hearing. Seconded by Anderson. Ayes: Messner, Carr, Anderson, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Commissioners further discussed issues with landscaping and a pedestrian sidewalk through the parking lot. Commissioner Anderson noted that pedestrians would be crossing the traffic flow, creating a safety concern. He felt a sidewalk would provide cars with a visual notice of pedestrians. Chairperson Weisensel agreed that a walking boulevard through the parking lot would alleviate rather than create safety problems. MOTION by Weisensel to recommend that the City Council approve the conditional use permit for Saint Joseph's Catholic Church subject to: 1) Execution of a development agreement to secure public infrastructure; 2) Provision of a walking boulevard utilizing lighting and landscaping to break up the mass of paving in the parking lot; 3) More detail on the HVAC screening; and 4) Conformance with all applicable building and fire codes. Seconded by Anderson. Ayes: Carr, Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, and Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Wensmann Homes, Inc. Wachter Lake Senior Condominiums Preliminary Plat and PUD Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the Wachter Lake Senior Condominiums Preliminary Plat and PUD. Mr. Jones presented the Preliminary Plat and PUD application for a senior condominium development located east of Chippendale Avenue, south of the Carrousel Plaza Townhomes development. The entire site, consisting of approximately 48 acres, is separated by Hwy. 3. The applicant is requesting that the 5 acre parcel along Chippendale Avenue be separated from the remainder of the parcel. Mr. Jones presented architectural details of the 48 unit facility. The development meets all setback, landscaping, and maximum height regulations. The site will be rezoned from Agriculture to Business Park (BP -4). Commissioners clarified the zoning definition for the maximum height restriction and clarified the parcel separation. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to the applicant. Terry Wensmann indicated the footprint of the building is the same as the concept plan. Mr. Wensmann summarized ite proposals for trails and efforts to preserve the trees. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 9, 2002 Page 4 Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. Laurie Hecht, 15589 Cherry Path, indicated that reduction of the end of the building to two stories eliminates some of the height concerns. She inquired about the trail along her property line and requested that the roof color blend in with the neighborhood. Mr. Wensmann explained the location of the trail along the tree line. The developer will work with city staff in selecting a proper color for the roof. MOTION by Messner to close the public hearing. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner, and Car. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the PUD development plan for Wensmann Homes' Senior Condominiums subject to: 1) Planning Commission discussion and approval of building height in relation to zoning definition of building height; 2) Standards being met for landscaping along the parking lot; 3) City Engineer approval concerning driveways, entrance widths, stormwater ponding, drainage and easements as needed; and 4) Conformance with all applicable building and fire codes. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Carr, and Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Weisensel to recommend that the City Council approve the plat for Wachter Lake Addition, subject to recommendations of the City Engineer concerning easements, grading, access, and utilities. Seconded by Messner. Ayes: Weisensel, Messner, Carr, Anderson, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Wensmann Homes, Inc. Major Amendment to Evermoor PUD Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the Wensmann Homes, Inc. Major Amendment to Evermoor PUD. Mr. Pearson summarized the requested amendments to the Evermoor PUD involving the three neighborhoods of Bards Crossing, Waterford, and Roundstone. Wensmann has requested that the locations for Waterford and Bards Crossing be swapped. Wensmann proposes an increase from 100 to 120 units in the Waterford senior housing, consisting of two three story, 60 -unit buildings. The northern building, which lies parallel with Connemara Trail, will have a visual impact on the highway. Staff supports the shifting of this higher density housing closer to Hwy. 3, and recommends that a portion of the northern building be perpendicular to the street. The Bards Crossing attached townhomes, consisting of 36 units, would be relocated to the former Waterford site. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 9, 2002 Page 5 Because of the heavily wooded site, Wensmann would custom grade the sites in an effort to save trees. Roundstone will be developed by D.R. Horton. The revised plan consists of 119 units laid out in a grid pattern. Repetition of building footprints gives the neighborhood a barracks quality. Greenspace has been pushed to the outer edge, with a significant reduction in greenspace in the interior. Chairperson Weisensel opened the meeting to the applicant. Terry Wensmann explained that topography makes the eastern neighborhood more suitable for the senior condominiums, together with its closer proximity to Hwy. 3, the downtown, and the Community Center. Wensmann is willing to rework the layout of the northern building to reduce the impact on Connemara. The western neighborhood is heavily wooded, which would present grading issues for large buildings and a greater loss of trees. The rambler style townhomes proposed for this site would be custom graded to preserve trees. Mike Souell, representing D.R. Horton, summarized the proposal for the Roundstone development and reviewed building elevations. The requirement for two -car garages resulted in less greenspace. Commissioner Napper's expressed concern with the dead -end streets prohibiting fire equipment from turning around. Mr. Souell responded that the longest dead -end street is 180 feet. Mr. Pearson indicated the Fire Marshal's limit is 150 feet or a cul -de -sac is required. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Carr to close the public hearing. Seconded by Messner. Ayes: Messner, Carr, Anderson, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Commissioner Messner inquired about the original intent for greenspace in Roundstone. Mr. Pearson explained that this neighborhood was expected to have the highest density. The new design has improved circulation and is more logical. Chairperson Weisensel supported the swapping of the Waterford and Bards Crossing neighborhoods, but wants to see a reduction in mass in Waterford. He has no objection to the increase in units in Waterford from 100 to 120. He wants more articulation in the row townhomes in Roundstone, eliminating the barracks look. Commissioner Anderson noted the long stretch of row townhomes along Connemara Trail and indicated that less exposure to the road is more desirable. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 9, 2002 Page 6 MOTION by Weisensel to recommend that the City Council approve the major amendment to the PUD subject to further refinements, including more articulation to the row townhomes in Roundstone, along with a break in the townhomes along Connemara Trail, and a reduction of mass in the Waterford neighborhood. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Carr, Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, and Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Ames Construction/Furlong Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on Ames Construction/Furlong Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal on file with the City. Mr. Pearson indicated the mining activity at the Tom Furlong site as been minimal. Extensive mining has taken place on the Nininger Township side of Fisher Ave., resulting in traffic issues on Hwy. 55. The Rosemount Police Chief is researching remedies for the situation. Chairperson Weisensel opened the meeting to the applicant. Pat Mason, representing Ames Construction, confirmed that there was no activity in this pit during the past year. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Napper to close the public hearing. Seconded by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner, and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the mineral extraction permit renewal for Tom Furlong /Ames Construction for the 2002 season subject to the attached recommended conditions of operation as may be modified by the Police Chief. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Carr, and Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Ames Construction /Ped Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on Ames Construction/Ped Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal on file with the City. Mr. Pearson summarized the mining activity at the Otto Ped site. Less than 5,000 cubic yards of material were removed last year. No changes to the permit are requested. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 9, 2002 Page 7 Chairperson Weisensel opened the meeting to the applicant. Pat Mason, representing Ames Construction, was available to answer questions. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Carr to close the public hearing. Seconded by Messner. Ayes: Weisensel, Messner, Carr, Anderson, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council renew the mineral extraction permit for the Ped property for 2002 subject to the attached recommended conditions of operation. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Messner, Carr, Anderson, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Old Business: None. New Business: Interpretation of Staff Decision Todd Franz Mr. Pearson summarized the denial of a building permit application for Todd Franz, owner of South Metro Auto, pertaining to a fence. Mr. Franz's business is a non- conforming use within the C -2 Community Commercial District. The non conforming status prohibits the alteration or enlargement of the use. Erection of a fence was viewed by staff as altering and enlarging the use and, therefore, the permit was denied. Chairperson Weisensel opened the floor to Todd Franz. Mr. Franz explained that a child living in the duplex next to the auto sales business oftentimes rides his bike into the car lot. There is also a retaining wall and steep drop off which presents a danger to children. Mr. Franz requested that he be allowed to erect a fence in front of the residence and along the retaining wall, separating the residence from the car lot. He feels this will increase safety for the child. No changes are requested for the car lot. Commissioner Messner noted that fences are permitted as an accessory use in the C -2 District. Commissioner Carr indicated she does not wish to encourage a non conforming use, however, the fence would improve the appearance of the property. Commissioners discussed the non conforming status of both the auto sales business and the duplex, standards for fences, and the safety issue presented by Mr. Franz. MOTION by Weisensel to overturn staff's decision and grant the fence building permit for 13940 South Robert Trail. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Carr, Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, and Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. ID Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 9, 2002 Page 8 New Business: Interpretation of Staff Decision Wang Vang Mr. Pearson explained the denial of a building permit application for Wang Vang to construct a 3200 sq.ft. barn on his 11.6 acre agricultural property. Mr. Wang's property is located on the corner of TH 55 and CSAH 42 in eastern Rosemount. The zoning ordinance limits the maximum aggregate square footage for accessory structures to 2400 sq.ft. if the agricultural property is under 20 acres or if the building is for non agricultural use. Even though Mr. Vang's building is an agricultural use, his property is less than 20 acres. Commissioners reviewed the language of the ordinance and Mr. Pearson summarized past issues with restrictions on accessory buildings. Consideration was given to changing the word "or" to "unless" which would change the restriction in the zoning ordinance to agricultural property under 20 acres unless the building is for agricultural use. MOTION by Messner directing staff to revisit Section 7.2.A.6 of the zoning ordinance and recommending that the language be changed to read "Accessory buildings to be constructed in the AG or AG -P Districts east of Akron Avenue are limited to a maximum aggregate total of 2,400 square feet of area for properties under 20 acres in size unless the building is for non agricultural use." Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner, and Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Weisensel to uphold the staff interpretation of Section 7.2.A.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. Seconded by Anderson. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Carr, and Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Director's Report: Mr. Pearson indicated that the rezoning of property along South Robert Trail, which was considered by the Commission at a prior public hearing, would be reviewed by the City Council at a Worksession on April 10. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon MOTION by Weisensel and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 9:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, i.g Dianne G. Quinnell Recording Secretary CITY OF RO S E M O U N T 2875 145 th Street West Rosemount, MN Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068 -4997 Phone: 651- 423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651-423-6219 Fax: 651-423-5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 14, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 14, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members Myron Napper, Jason Messner, and David Anderson present. Commissioner Jana Carr was absent. Also in attendance was City Planner Rick Pearson. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: There were no additions or corrections to the agenda. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Messner to approve the April 23, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, and Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Rezoning at 15400 Chippendale Avenue Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the City Planner has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication for this public hearing. Wachter Lake Senior Condominiums property is requested to be rezoned from Agriculture to Business Park-4 as the 2020 Comprehensive Plan directs. This will be multiple- family housing with 48 units. Chairperson Weisensel open the Public Hearing for comments, however, there wasn't any received. MOTION by Anderson to close the Public Hearing for the rezoning of 15400 Chippendale Avenue, the Wachter Lake Senior Condominiums. Second by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, and Anderson. Nays: None. Motion carried. MOTION by Messner to recommend that the City Council rezone the Wensmann Homes Wachter Lake Condominium property to BP -4, Business Park. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Weisensel, Messner, Anderson, Napper. Nays: None. Motion carried. Old Business: The Vice Chairperson for the Planning Commission needs to be appointed, however, Chair Weisensel directed the Commission to wait until the full board is present for that selection. i Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 23, 2002 Page 2 New Business: Final Plat: Wachter Lake Senior Condominiums, Wensmann Homes City Planner Pearson presented the Final Plat for the Wachter Lake Senior Condominiums by Wensmann Homes. This includes a separation of the five -acre parcel from the remaining Wachter property east of STH 3, which is in the Business Park. The easements necessary for drainage, storm water ponding and utilities are dedicated along with the plat. Some clarification questions were asked about location of the easements. MOTION by Napper to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Wachter Lake Senior Condominiums subject to: 1. Execution of a development agreement incorporating recommendations of the City Engineer relative to access to Chippendale Avenue, drainage, easements, grading, storm water and utilities; and 2. Payment of fees as specified for platting in the current fee schedule including G.I.S. and Park Dedication fees. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Messner, Anderson, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: None. Motion carried. Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition Final Plat City Planner Pearson presented the Final Plat for the first phase of Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition located north of the railroad crossing on Biscayne Avenue. It it•Poposed to build 34 single family units and will have a one acre park. The lots have been checked and verified as being in conformance with R -1, Low Density Residential standards. Lot 2 and 3 boundary line is about two inches shy of the required 130' lot depth and Steve Bona from Heritage Development of Minnesota said they will resolve that. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Biscayne Fourth subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision agreement to secure public infrastructure including streets and utilities; 2. Incorporation of recommendations of the•irterim City Engineer relative to Connemara Trail alignment, drainage, easements, grading, public streets, and utilities; 3. Elimination of lot depth deficiency at lots 2 and 3, Block 3; and 4. Payment of all platting, G.I.S., Park Dedication, applicable City Review fees and trunk/area fees as specified in the current fee schedule resolution. Second by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, and Anderson. Nays: None. Motion carried. Director's Report: City Planner Pearson reported that the City Council had up held the Planning Commissions action on Mr. Wang Vang's request for a 3,200 square foot barn on his Agriculturally zoned parcel that is less than 1i'Vres. City Council suggested looking at the merits of limiting size in certain districts and consider some revisions. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Messner, second by Weisensel, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 6:46p.m. Respectfully submitted, City Clerk Linda Jentink Recording Secretary CITY OF ROSEMOUNT "45 "St" 2875 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068-4997 Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! Phone 651-423-4411 Hearing Impaired 651-423-6219 �Eeae,a Fax 651-423-5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 28, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 28, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members David Anderson, Myron Napper, and Jason Messner present. Commissioner Jana Carr was absent. City Planner Rick Pearson also attended. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: There were no additions or corrections to the agenda. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Anderson to approve the May 14, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner and Anderson. Nays: 0. III Motion carried. Public Hearing: Rosewood Preliminary Plat for Progress Land Co. Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing. City Planner Pearson reviewed the application by Warren Isrealson of Progress Land Company for the 107.87 acre parcel located west of Biscayne Avenue between CSAH 42 and 145th Street West. This proposal has 100 single family lots and 53 townhouse units. The unique issue with this residential development is that there is a railroad spur bisecting the site. Several conditions have been provided for screening and safety around the railroad spur. Pearson noted several lots that need changes to avoid variances. There is also a proposed church site along CSAH 42 and six commercial lots, which will need an access onto Biscayne Avenue since one is not allowed on CSAH 42. There are nine recommended conditions proposed on the draft resolution to City Council. The fencing to be used along Greif Brothers and the railroad spur is six foot high black chain link fence. There are some existing trees, mostly elms and boxelders, along the Grief Brothers boundary. Pearson recommends additional landscaping for screening. The railroad does not own any right -of -way because of the liquidation of the Milwaukee Road and subsequent purchase by Progress Land Company. The railroad though, due to Eminent Domain, has the right to access and maintenance. Commissioner Napper questioned if the railroad may still want additional footage for maintenance. The proposed plan allows 25 feet between the railroad and fence. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 28, 2002 Page 2 Warren Israelson, President of Progress Land Company, requested that the fence be connected at the end of the railroad spur rather than at the street. This would make the fence about 200 feet shorter. Because the natural tree line is about 25 feet from the railroad Israelson would expect the right -of -way to stay there. Israelson said he would consider the access point across from the cul- de -sac using a corner of the residential lot just north of the most easterly commercial lot. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Messner to close the public hearing. Seconded by Anderson. Ayes: Weisensel, Messner, Anderson, and Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Discussion ensued by the Commissioners on the landscaping and berming/grading plan. MOTION by Weisensel to recommend that the City Council approve the preliminary plat for "Rosewood" subject to the recommended nine conditions plus three additional ones: 1. Additional landscaping as required by Section 8.3 of the zoning ordinance and as needed to mitigate the effects of the rail spur and adjacent Greif Brothers industrial use, for separation of the dissimilar housing types and screening along 145th Street West and Biscayne Ave. 2. Elimination of lot area/dimension variances for lot 5, Block 3 and lot 23, Block 4. 3. Re- alignment of consolidation of lots 31 and 32, Block 4 to front on the cul -de -sac. 4. Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets and utilities. 5. Park Dedication in the form of cash based upon the rate specified in the fee resolution at the time of final plat. 6. Sidewalks installed at the south side of 145th Street West, both sides of the "through" street and across from Bloomfield Path, and along one side of the (townhouse) private drive and along the cul -de -sac to connect to the through street. 7. Conformance with Section 4.18 of the zoning ordinance concerning attached housing standards. 8. Conformance with requirements for final plat. 9. Approval of the Dakota County Plat Commission as required by the Contiguous Plat Ordinance. AND: 10. Obtain a fence agreement with the developer and the railroad acknowledging the maintenance and set backs for operation and safety and the placement of the enclosure. 11. Address the method of access for the commercial lots in this preliminary plat with alignment of the cul -de -sac or the 250' off -set from it. Note additional land rezoning required. 12. Increase effective screening separation between buildings and the lots that back up to Greif Brothers. Second by Napper. Ayes: Messner, Anderson, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson noted this should be on the City Council Agenda on June 18, 2002. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 28, 2002 Page 3 Public Hearing: Lot /Split and Combination for Earl Stein, 3622 Upper 149th Street West Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the rezoning application of Holiday Companies. Mr. Pearson presented the application by Earl Stein due to enforcement activity requiring him to build a trash dumpster enclosure for the four -plex property at 3622 Upper 149th Street West. There is a storm water pond area located on the adjacent outlot and it was found there was no usable area to place the dumpster. Staff meet with Mr. Stein and it was concluded that a fifteen foot wide strip of land could be transferred to Mr. Stein with an easement for ponding in return for added green space next to Upper 149th Street West and the dumpster placed on the west end of the parking lot with an additional 12' of pavement. Curb and gutter would be required around the perimeter of the new parking lot, but staff recommends curb -stops as a reasonable alternative. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Napper to close the public hearing. Seconded by Anderson. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, and Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Messner to recommend that the City Council approve the Lot Split /Combination for the Stein property at 3622 Upper 149th Street West subject to: 1. Provision of an easement for drainage and utilities on the western eight feet of the transferred property. 2. Removal of parking from the 30 ft. front yard setback, narrowing the driveway to a minimum of 14 ft. 3. Provision of parking space striping and cub stops. 4. Payment of G.I.S. fees Second by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel recessed the Regular Planning Commission Meeting and opened the Board of Appeals Adjustments. Public Hearing: Board of Appeals Adjustments: Fence Height Variance, Michelle and Bruce Schlie, 14053 Belmont Court Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the variance application for Michelle and Bruce Schlie. Mr. Pearson reviewed the application by Michelle Bruce Schlie for a fence height variance from 42" to 48" in their rear yard. Their corner lot has adjacent front yards on both Belmont Court and Birch Street West, which restricts the fence heights to 42 Only the section of fence that extend into the 30 foot street -side yard along Birch Street West needs a variance. The applicant could bring this to City Council if the Board of Appeals Adjustments denies it. In the Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 28, 2002 Page 4 past the City Council has granted one fence variance because of busy streets and needed space for a pool and about seven years ago a fence variance was granted on a corner lot, but the style was chain link with green vinyl. Chairperson Weisensel opened the meeting to the applicant. Michelle and Bruce Schlie, 14053 Belmont Court, reviewed their fence request with the Board. They stated that they had already signed a fence contract with Midwest Fence prior to checking the set backs, so they are concerned about getting the value from their investment back. They have checked with the neighbors and they are O.K. with the height and placement. Schlie's asked several questions of staff to better understand their options. Pearson told them the set -back on the front yard is a 30' minimum. Mr. Schlie was concerned for his children, age 2 and 4, and their two dogs. Schlie asked the Board to consider that his road is one of two main entrances into his development and is very busy. Council Member Messner asked if other manufacturers made a 42" fence? Schlie's replied they didn't check any other contractors. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Anderson to close the Public Hearing for the Board of Appeals and Adjustments for Michelle Bruce Schlie, 1403 Belmont Court. Second by Messner. Ayes: Weisensel, Messner, Anderson, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel recommended denial based on past practices concerning variances and the necessary criteria for establishing a hardship. Weisensel noted that Schlie's may have a cause of action against their contractor for not securing a permit before closing the agreement. Weisensel commented that a fence will not always keep dogs in because of digging and jumping. Weisensel believed there are other options available. MOTION by Weisensel to deny the variance request based upon an inability to meet the required findings specified in Section 14.2G. of the zoning ordinance. Second by Napper. Ayes: Messner, Anderson, Napper, Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel closed the Board of Appeals Adjustments and reconvened the Regular Planning Commission meeting. Old Business: None. New Business Appeal of Staff Interpretation Proposed Day Care Use in Business Park 2 District Mr. Anil Segat requested permission to convert a portion of the Preventive Care Building in the Business Park into a commercial day -care use. The zoning for the property is Business Park —2 that does not allow day care as a use. Zoning in Business Park 3 and —4 will allow day care services because these zoning districts are usually located on the edge of commercial Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes May 28, 2002 Page 5 development and along a collector street for a transition to residential areas. City Planner Pearson maintained that day care is not an acceptable use in Business Park 2 zoning districts. Mrs. Segat explained that the office area would be temporarily converted for day care use for three to five years. This would be open to the public, not just for employees of that building. City Planner Pearson explained that use variances are not allowed by State law. Mrs. Segat's options would be to appeal the Planning Commission's decision or ask that the zoning be changed to Business Park 3. MOTION by Weisensel to uphold the staff interpretation of the zoning ordinance relative to Business Park 2 permitted uses. Second by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Director's Report: None. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Weisensel, Second by Napper, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 7:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, City Clerk Linda Jentink, Recording Secretary i CITY HALL CITY OF RO S E M O U N T 2875 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997 Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! Phone 651-423-4411 Hearing Impaired 651-423-6219 Planning Commission Fax 651-423-5203 Regular Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, June 25, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members David Anderson, and Myron Napper present. Commissioners Jason Messner and Jana Carr were absent. City Planner Rick Pearson also attended. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: Mr. Pearson noted the Planning Commission was invited to attend the Committee of the Whole meeting scheduled for Wednesday July 10, 2002. The minutes from the May 28, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, which were not included in the original packet, were distributed at this time. Audience Input: None. III MOTION by Anderson to approve the May 28, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, and Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Lot Split for Thomas Fahey Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing. City Planner Pearson reviewed the application by Thomas Fahey for an Agricultural lot split that will create a ten -acre parcel for the farmstead and a 150 -acre remnant. The only complicating issue is maintaining density for the remaining 150 acres. Staff recommended limiting future subdivision of either property to 3 dwelling units, unless the zoning regulations change. Mr. Fahey stated his reason for the splitting of the parcel was to gain full ownership of the farmhouse and to put the rest of the farmstead into one. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Napper to close the public hearing. Seconded by Anderson. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, and Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the Agricultural lot split for the Fahey property at 5369 160 Street East subject to: Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Page 2 1. Execution and recording of a restrictive covenant or deed restriction for both properties limited the density for the overall original 160 acres to four dwelling units in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 2. Provision of easements as may be recommended by the City Engineer. 3. Payment of all applicable subdivision fees as specified by the current fee resolution including one unit of Park Dedication and G.I.S. fees. 4. Approval of the Dakota County Plat Commission as needed due to the frontage of County Road 48. Second by Napper. Ayes: Weisensel, Napper, and Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson noted this should be on the City Council Agenda on July 2, 2002. Old Business: None. New Business Evermoor Clare Downs Final Plat Mr. Pearson reviewed the Evermoor Clare Downs final plat for the first half of a single family neighborhood on the south side of the extended Connemara Trail. MOTION by Napper to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Clare Downs subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and landscaping.. 2. Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets and utilities. 3. Payment of all applicable development fees as established in the current fee resolution. 4. Park Dedication in land (Outlots A C) for public use. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, and Weisensel Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson noted this should be on the City Council Agenda July 16, 2002. Evermoor Crosscroft Final Plat Mr. Pearson reviewed the Evermoor Crosscroft second phase of development, which consists of 34 acres. The project will connect the existing Crosscroft area to Connemara Trail. MOTION by Napper to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Evermoor Crosscroft subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and landscaping.. 2. Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets and utilities. 3. Payment of all applicable development fees as established in the current fee resolution. 4. Approval of the Home Owners Association documents by the City Attorney. S econd by Anderson. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, and Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes June 25, 2002 Page 3 Pearson noted this should be on the City Council Agenda July 16, 2002. Director's Report Community Development Work Plan Mr. Pearson recapped the issues that will be discussed as the year progresses. The highlighted issues include the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan, improvements to Highway 55, 52 and 42, mixed use /industrial development, land use planning in the buffer zone for the Flint Hills Refinery, mining, and the sign ordinance. Commissioners expressed concern whether the bike trail in the Evermoor project meets ADA. Planner Pearson indicated that there were no changes to be made to the original crossing but that additional crossings were to meet ADA. Mr. Pearson would forward the Commission's concerns to the Engineering Department. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Weisensel, Second by Napper, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 6:54 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Maryann Stoffel Recording Secretary i CITY OF RO S E M O U N T 2875 C 1 45 t h S A treet West 55068 -4997 Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! Rosemount, MN Phone: 651 423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Fax 651 423 -5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 9, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 9, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members David Anderson, Jana Carr, and Jason Messner present. Commissioner Napper was absent. City Planner Rick Pearson also attended. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: Chairperson Weisensel added Item 7.B. Electing a Vice- Chairperson. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Anderson to approve the June 25, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Anderson, Weisensel, Carr, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Site Plan Review GPD Associates for KFC /A &W Restaurant Chairperson Weisensel reported that the Public Hearing will be opened and then continued to June 23rd due to a delay in the publication requirements. Comments will be taken at both meetings. City Planner Pearson reviewed the application by G.P.D. Associates to develop a 3000 square foot building for a jointly owned Kentucky Fried Chicken and A W Rootbeer fast food restaurant. The location is on CR 42 and Claret Avenue. The site has a shared access onto Claret with the adjacent property owner. The traffic circulation will have a drive through with counter- clockwise circulation around the building and 40 parking spaces on the west side of the building. The minimum requirement for parking spaces is 29. The building will contain a tower cupola for KFC and an A &W arched tower over the entrances on the west and north sides. Brick is required on 50% of the building. Landscaping is above the required amount with a 4 -foot berm on the north side next to CR 42. Stan Kalhanek represented KFC and was available for questions. Commissioner Anderson asked about how the delivery trucks would proceed through the parking area. Kalhanek explained that a gated driveway would allow the truck to use the drive through when needed. Kalhanek noted that fast foods do not usually increase traffic; they depend on impulse sales, those driving by. This should generate 17 new jobs and beneficial taxes for the City. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 9, 2002 Page 2 A letter was received for the record from Daryl and Norma Hampton whose backyard is on CR 42 across from this development. Daryl Hampton, 3644 Upper 149th Street West, stated they are against the restaurant because of increased traffic noise, lights, and the smell which will render their backyard unusable. Hampton thought that his property value will decrease. City Planner Pearson explained the Comprehensive Guide Plan which has proposed that this area on CR 42 would be commercial /retail since the early 1990's. Pearson noted that this is not a "city development" but is initiated by privately owned land developers. The City can only affect the development by policy, regulations and codes and this development did meet all those requirements. MOTION by Weisensel to continue the public hearing to July 23, 2002 for G.P.D. Associates for KFC A &W Restaurant. Second by Carr. Ayes: Weisensel, Messner, Carr, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Site Plan Review Rosemount Village Center Chairperson Weisensel reported that the Public Hearing will be opened and then continued to June 23rd due to a delay in the publication requirements. Comments will be taken at both meetings. City Planner Pearson reviewed the site plan for the commercial multiple tenant building in the site south of CR 42 between Claret and Cimarron Avenues, the southwest corner lot. The property could hold up to eight tenants in the 11,950 square foot building. The back of the building will be facing 151 Street without any loading docks. Landscape screening will be provided. Developer Paul Tucci of Oppidan presented the details of the commercial building. The building color and design will share similar features as does the Cub building. More trees and shrubs will be added to the landscaping. Signage has met all requirements. The parking lot lights will be amber in color rather than white to keep down glare. The building will have at least 50% brick exterior. Storm water drainage is already in place and deposits in the pond south of the townhomes or by Goodyear. Chairperson Weisensel opened the Public Hearing for comment. There were no comments received. MOTION by Weisensel to continue the public hearing for Site Plan Review for Rosemount Village Center to July 23, 2002 with direction to staff to have more brick, more trees, and keep to the muted colors. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Messner, Carr, Anderson, Weisensel. Nays: None. Motion carried. Old Business: None. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 9, 2002 Page 3 New Business Final Plat for Rosemount Village Center City Planner Pearson reported that the final plat divides the parcel into five lots with a shared drive through the center from Claret to Cimarron Avenues. This has five conditions included in the final plat. Lot 1 is for the KFC A &W site and Lot 5 is the commercial retail center. The other lots are not committed for yet, but a restaurant is likely. MOTION by Carr to recommend to the City Council approval of the final plat for Rosemount Village Center subject to: 1) Recording of cross access easements and maintenance agreement for the shared driveway providing access to the block. 2) Incorporation of recommendations relative to easements by the City Engineer. 3) Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure for streetlights, sidewalks and utilities. 4) Payment of all applicable development fees including Park Dedication and G.I.S. at the rate established by the current fee resolution. 5) Approval as needed by the Dakota County Plat Commission. Second by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Weisensel, Messner, Carr. Nays: None. Motion carried. Election of Vice Chairperson Chairperson Weisensel called for nominations for the Vice Chairperson of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Messner nominated Commissioner David Anderson. MOTION by Messner to close the nominations for Vice Chairperson of the Planning Commission. Second by Weisensel. Ayes: Four. Nays: None. Motion carried. MOTION by Weisensel to accept Commissioner David Anderson as the Vice Chairperson of the Planning Commission. Second by Messner. Ayes: Four. Nays: None. Motion carried by unanimous ballot. Director's Report City Planner Pearson reported that the City Council has invited the Planning Commissioners to their work session, the Committee of the Whole, on July 10, 2002 to review the Transportation Plan that is being prepared by WSB Engineering. Commissioner Carr announced her intent to resign as Planning Commissioner due to an education commitment. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Carr, Second by Anderson, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, City Clerk Linda Jentink, Recording Secretary CITY OF ROSEMOU NT 2875 C Street West Rosemount, MN Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068 -4997 Phone: 651-423-4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Fax 651-423-5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 23, 2002. Chairperson David Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members Jason Messner, Jana Carr, and Myron Napper present. Commissioner Weisensel was absent. Also in attendance were City Planner Rick Pearson, Code Enforcement Official Charlie O'Brien, and Community Development Director Jim Parsons. The meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: There were no additions or corrections to the agenda. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Carr to approve the July 9, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner, Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Anderson confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavits of Mailing and Postings of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavits of Publication concerning the Public Hearings on the agenda. Public Hearing: Site Plan Review GPD Associates for KFC /A &W Restaurant Chairperson Anderson reported that this Public Hearing was continued from the July 9, 2002 due to delay in the publication requirements. City Planner Rick Pearson reviewed the application by G.P.D. Associates to develop a 3000 square foot building for a jointly owned KFC and A &W Rootbeer fast food restaurant. It will be located on County Road 42 and Claret Avenue. The site has a shared access onto Claret with the adjacent property owner. The traffic circulation will have a drive through with counter- clockwise circulation around the building and 40 parking spaces on the west side of the building. The minimum requirement for parking spaces is 29. The building will contain a tower cupola for KFC and an A W arched tower over the entrances on the west and north sides. Brick is required on 50 percent of the building. Landscaping is above the required amount with a 4 -foot berm on the north side next to CR 42. Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23, 2002 Page 2 A second letter was received for the record from Daryl and Norma Hampton whose backyard in on CR 42 across from this development. Daryl Hampton, 3644 Upper 149 Street West, stated again that they are against the restaurant because of the lights, smell and increased traffic noise. City Planner Pearson explained that the development has been zoned general commercial since 1997. It is in conformance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan since CR 42 is a principal arterial highway. There are no changes to the landscaping or brick. The traffic circulation was approved with the preliminary plat last summer. Commissioner Carr pointed out that we can't deny the type of business if it fits into the commercial zoning. City Planner Pearson reiterated that if it is zoned general commercial and a developer meets all city standards and has a PUD then the city would not have grounds to deny the development moving forward. MOTION by Messner to close the public hearing. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Carr, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Napper to recommend that the City Council approve the Site Plan for G.P.D. Associates' KFC /A &W Restaurant subject to: 1. Conformance with the Chippendale /CR 42 Partnership PUD as well as the approved Washington Heights Preliminary Plat. 2. Incorporation of recommendations relative to circulation, drainage, grading and utilities (as needed) by the City Engineer. 3. Conformance with all applicable building and fire codes. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Messner, Carr, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson noted that this should be on the City Coucil Agenda on August 6, 2002. Public Hearing: Site Plan Review Rosemount Village Center Chairperson Anderson reported that this hearing is being continued from the July 9, 2002 meeting due to a delay in the publication requirements. City Planner Rick Pearson reviewed the site plan for the commercial multiple tenant building in the southwest corner lot at the site south of CR 42 between Claret and Cimmaron Avenues. The property could hold up to eight tenants in the 11,950 square foot building. The back of the building will face 151 Street without any loading docks. Developer Paul Tucci of Oppidan stated that to meet the required 30 -foot setback they shifted the building to the east. Commissioner Napper asked how the parking lot was affected by this building shift. City Planner Pearson stated that no parking was affected since the building only shifted to the east where there was no parking. There is a shared walking area and dumpster for the tenants on the east side. Pearson said the old plan met all the requirements and that there was more parking spaces than were necessary. Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23, 2002 Page 3 MOTION by Messner to close public hearing. Seconded by Anderson. Ayes: Carr, Napper, Anderson, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Carr to recommend that the City Council approve the Site Plan for Oppidan's Rosemount Village Center subject to: 1. Conformance with the Chippendale /CR 42 Partnership PUD and the Washington Heights Preliminary Plat including a minimum of 50 percent brick on all non glazed elevations. 2. Landscape enhancements including a minimum of 28 boulevard and evergreen trees and 60 shrubs with emphasis on screening the residential uses south of 151 Street West. 3. Sidewalk connections to the sidewalks on the outer edge of the site (Claret Avenue). 4. Shifting the building east to conform with the 30 -foot setback along Claret Avenue. 5. Incorporation of recommendations relative to circulation, drainage, grading and utilities (as needed) by the City Engineer. 6. Conformance with all applicable building and fire codes. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner, Carr. Nays: 0. Motion Carried. Pearson noted that this should be on the City Coucil Agenda on August 6, 2002. Chairperson Anderson recessed the Regular Planning Commission Meeting to convene the Board of Appeals Adjusments. Public Hearing: Sean McCaffrey Garage Variance Code Enforcement Official Charlie O'Brien reviewed the application from Sean McCaffrey to add a 12' x 24' third car garage stall to his existing garage that would extend south toward their property line. The current garage is within 3 feet of the 10 -foot setback requirement. Mr. McCaffrey could build a 3 -foot addition to his garage without a variance as well as building accessory buildings in several locations on his property to meet his storage needs. The proposed 12' x 24' addition would require a 9 -foot total variance which staff feels is far too intrusive into the utility easement and too close to the property line. Based on this, staff recommends denying the variance. Commissioner Messner asked if there was anything in the 10 -foot area O'Brien stated there was a fence. Sean McCaffrey, 15639 Crocus Avenue, stated he wanted to add to his existing garage because it was very shallow only 20 -feet deep. They need to store their lawn care equipment and have a third vehicle as a hobby. He felt adding to his garage would be more secure for storing their lawn equipment and vehicle and would better suit their needs. Commissioner Messner asked if he had considered going deeper rather than extending out the side. Mr. McCaffrey stated that it would block the windows on the lower floor of the house. If they did a 12 -foot addition that would give them room inside, but with an 8 -foot addition they couldn't get out of their car. He also said he wouldn't like accessory buildings in the middle of the property. Planning staff and engineering staff both feel the proposed 9' variance would not be advisable due to intrusion into the utility easement and proximity to the actual property line Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23, 2002 Page 4 MOTION by Carr to close the public hearing. Seconded by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Carr, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Napper to deny the variance request based on the inability to meet the required findings specified in Section 14.2.G of the Zoning Ordinance. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Messner, Carr, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson noted that Mr. McCaffrey has the right to appeal to the City Council and to do so he would have to write a letter within ten working days. He would also be subject to paying another variance fee charge. Chairperson Anderson adjourned the Board of Appeals Adjustments Meeting and reconvened the Regular Planning Commission Meeting. Public Hearing: Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition City Planner Pearson reviewed this preliminary plat revision for 105 lots in an expansion of the previously approved 66 lot Biscayne Pointe Addition that adds approximately 17.8 acres to the east side. This was originally expected to be a separate project but street alignment issues with Connemara Trail caused the new project to depend on the previously approved preliminary plat for access and circulation, resulting in a minor design revision. Not all of these 105 lots will be built right away. There are two accesses into the development. Lot 3, Block 4 would need a 10- foot variance to make the street -side depth 125 -feet rather than the proposed 115 -feet and Lot 7, Block 10 would also need a 10 -foot variance to make the lot width at Connemara Trail 105 feet rather than 95 feet. There are two lots that are triangular that greatly exceed the lot area standards but will have truncated rear yards. Outlot A is proposed for park dedication. The easterly line should be shifted to align with the northeast corner of the land previously dedicated for park. As a result, the developer may lose a lot in this area. Sidewalks are recommended for one side of all local streets and cul -de -sacs except for Street D. Connemara Trail will have a sidewalk on the north side and an eight -foot wide bituminous bike trail on the south side. A stormwater pipe is anticipated between Lots 17 18, Block 1. A bike trail will be recommended for this area to provide pedestrian access to the park from the east. The landscaping plan exceeds minimum standards with two trees per lot and a row of evergreens along the Connemara edges. Steve Bono, from Heritage Development stated that Lots 3 4, Block 4 will align with the park. They will extend 10 feet at the front lot line to meet the park line. The east line would move and the rear line would angle. Commissioner Napper asked how far the park would move to the east. Bono replied it would be 43 feet on the east side and 10 feet on the west side. City Planner Pearson noted that there is an 80 foot minimum requirement and these lots are only 75 -feet wide. Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. Nancy Wolf, 14021 Belmont Trail, stated she was very concerned about the natural waterway with drainage in the park that runs through this area. A couple years ago her house was inches from being flooded and wants to know if this will be fixed. City Planner Pearson stated they Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23, 2002 Page 5 have designed a sizable storm water pipe that will take water to the east to a low ponding area. The overland drainage will be taken care of through the storm water design of this area. Deb Brown, 14004 Belmont Trail, asked how many lots were going in this development. City Planner Pearson stated there was a total of 105 lots. Ms. Brown then asked where all these children were going to go to school since Red Pine is already over capacity when it opens this fall. She asked how we could ask voters for more money for additional schools when the ones we have are so full. Commissioner Carr stated this is a major issue with all the Rosemount Schools. Ms. Brown asked why we would approve additional houses that would predominantly be younger families with younger kids when we have no where to send them to school. Commissioner Carr asked if this was in line with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and City Planner Pearson stated it was and that the school district has been provided with and anticipated development and that it is up to the school district to figure out where the kids will go to school. He stated that 145 Street and CR 42 east to Akron Avenue has been the projected growth area since 1993. Ms. Brown then asked about the lots on the far right side and how they would be affected by the gas line. City Planner Pearson stated that these lots are larger to include the pipeline easement. Ms. Brown asked about the natural tree line on Belmont Trail and what was going to happen to it. She said there was a 150- year -old oak tree and would hate to lose it. Steve Bono from Heritage Development said they have done a tree survey and tagged all significant trees. If trees in the road must go they do have a tree replacement plan. City Planner Pearson confirmed that we do have a Tree Preservation Ordinance. Commissioner Anderson told Ms. Brown to also bring her concerns to ISD 196. Jeff Gillispie, 2322 Bonaire Path, asked about the timeline for Connemara Trail project and about the sewer line. City Planner Pearson said the utility work will be done this year and Connemara Trail will be paved next year. MOTION by Messner to close the public hearing. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Carr, Napper, Anderson, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Carr to recommend that City Council approve the preliminary plat for Biscayne Pointe subject to: 1. Revision of lots 27, block 2; lot 3, block 4; and lot 7, block 10 to eliminate lot depth deficiencies. 2. Sidewalks required on one side of Belmont Trail and Street C; Birchwood Avenue; Street E; South side of Street A; north side of Connemara Trail; eight foot wide bituminous bike trail on the south side of Connemara Trail and between lots 17 and 18, block 1. 3. Increasing the width of Outlot A for park dedication to align with the northern corner of the previously dedicated park in Biscayne Pointe Second Addition. 4. Incorporation of recommendations relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets and utilities as identified by the City Engineer. 5. Compliance with the requirements of final plat including execution of a subdivision development agreement and payment of all development fees as specified in the fee resolution at the time of final plat. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23, 2002 Page 6 Seconded by Anderson. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner, Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson stated this would go to City Council on August 6, 2002 or August 20, 2002. Public Hearing: Evermoor Bards Crossing PUD Final Development Plan and Rezoning Community Development Director Parsons stated this is a three -part development south of the future extension of Connemara Trail. The City Council approved the concept plan for Waterford, Roundstone, and Bards Crossing in Evermoor in May. The concept plan includes two 60 -unit buildings which is an increase from the previous concept of two 50 -unit buildings. Wensmann has included more architectural enhancements such as roof embellishments. They have reduced the visible mass along Connemara Trail by orienting the buildings so that no wing of either building is close to or parallel to Connemara Trail. The easterly building will be 52 feet from the Connemara Trail right -of -way and the westerly building will be 40 feet from the same right -of -way. The proposed plan meets all setback requirements and is far less dense than the maximum density allowed under the R4 High Density Residential zoning. The route of the trail for Outlot A needs to be altered so that it joins the sidewalk along the south side of Connemara west of Dodd Boulevard and so that it goes south to join an existing trail in Schwarz Park to minimize the cutting of trees. The protection of the tree line along the south boundary of the property should be increased by widening the conservation easement to match the tree preservation area and by fencing that area prior to the commencement of construction. Landscaping in the front yards along Connemara should be enhanced to meet the expectation created by the concept plan for the area originally presented to the CPDC. Commissioner Messner asked how the landscaping was different and Commissioner Anderson stated that building one shows a smaller grove of evergreens and small shrubs. Developer Terry Wensmann, Wensmann Homes, Inc., stated that this is a senior condo development that will have two buildings with 60 units. They will be owner occupied. There will be guest parking in the middle between the buildings and underground parking in each building that will provide at least one stall per owner. They changed the mass of the building to move it away from Connemara Trail. Mr. Wensmann showed the commission the artist's rendering that showed the lowered roofline, dormers over the windows, 20' sofit to ground, brick, stucco, and shakes. These are upgraded condos and their prices will reflect that. Wensmann agreed to the three conditions and will work with staff. Commissioner Napper asked about lowering the dormers and how high the building was. Mr. Wensmann said that this is a 3- story building similar to Wachter Pond development but they lowered the roof more in the middle on this one. Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Messner to close the public hearing. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Carr, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. 411 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23, 2002 Page 7 MOTION by Messner to recommend that the City Council approve the final development plan for Bard's Crossing at Evermoor by Wensmann Homes with the following conditions: 1. The route of the trail on Outlot A should be altered so that it joins the sidewalk along the south side of Connemara Trail west of Dodd Boulevard, and so that it goes south to join an existing trail in Schwarz Park to minimize the cutting of trees. 2. The protection of the tree line along the south boundary of the property should be increased by widening the conservation easement to match the tree preservation area and by fencing that area prior to the commencement of construction. 3. Enhanced landscaping in the front of the buildings along Connemara Trail in conformance with the original concept for Bards Crossing presented by Evermoor master developer CPDC. 4. Conformance with all applicable building, fire and zoning codes. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Messner, Carr, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson noted this should be on the City Council agenda for August 20, 2002 MOTION by Anderson to approve the rezoning of Bards Crossing from AG- Agriculture to R -4 High Density Residential. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Carr, Napper, Anderson, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Evermoor Waterford Preliminary Plat and Rezoning City Planner Pearson reviewed this preliminary plat for the westernmost neighborhood of the three located north of Schwarz Pond in Evermoor. This 10 -acre parcel is now intended for low density townhomes that are expected to be "custom graded" on the lots to save as many trees as possible. It should be noted that the tree removal will still be extensive. There will be private streets maintained by the homeowners' association. Staff is recommending that the 25 -foot tree conservation easement be expanded to 50 -feet. There will be two- and three -unit buildings in this development. Terry Wensmann, Wensmann Homes, noted that this will be an upscale townhome development with the units ranging from $430,000 $450,000 and being owner occupied. The units will have brick, cedar siding, shakes and will be custom graded to save trees which will add value. Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Anderson to close the public hearing. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner, Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the preliminary plat for Wensmann's Evermoor Waterford subject to: 1. Conformance with final plat requirements including execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and landscaping. 2. Park dedication of Outlot C. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23, 2002 411 Page 8 3. Recording of homeowners' association documents as approved by the City Attorney. 4. Incorporation of recommendations relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets and utilities by the City Engineer. 5. Conformance with all applicable building, fire and zoning codes. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Carr, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Carr to recommend that City Council rezone the property from Agriculture to R -2 Moderate Density Residential zoning. Seconded by Messner. Ayes: Messner, Carr, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson noted that this should be added to the City Council agenda on August 20, 2002. Public Hearing: Evermoor Roundstone Preliminary Plat and Rezoning City Planner Pearson reviewed this preliminary plat for the middle property of the three neighborhoods forming the northern edge of Schwarz Pond Park. This development will consist of 119 townhomes with row houses on the outer perimeter and the interior buildings being double loaded with back -to -back units. There will be two access points along Connemara Trail on the south side. Both entrances align with local street entrances into the Glendalough neighborhood. The interior streets are private and will be maintained by the homeowners' association. Two of the streets in the southeast corner of the development terminate abruptly, yet they are in excess of 150 feet in length. To be consistent with fire code, they either will have to be connected or turn-a- rounds provided. The landscaping has been enhanced on Connemara Trail and between the units. Staff questions whether the row houses satisfy the further articulation that was needed. Commissioner Napper asked if they had considered putting row houses on the eastern edge of the development. City Planner Pearson stated this had not been explored because there was a ponding area on the east side, they wanted to take advantage of the grades that allowed the more desirable walkouts on the west side, and also because it provides transition for the density of units between all three neighborhoods. Mike Suell, D.R. Horton, stated that they could do a 4- or 5 -foot berm to increase the landscaping along Connemara Trail. They are trying to soften the view and have no walkouts along Connemara Trail. The decks, windows, and fireplace dormers would add variations to the surface. There is a 4 -foot extension every two units. They are going with vinyl shakes rather than cedar to cut down on maintenance. They would agree with extending the 25 -foot tree conservation easement to 50 feet and they do put up the fence before commencement of construction. D.R. Horton has a staff forester who advises them on how to cut the tree roots when necessary. They would be willing to work with staff in hopes of not having the loop street because he feels the landscaping would suffer as a result. Commissioner Napper again asked about putting row houses on the east side and Mr. Suell stated they would lose units if they did that. City Planner Pearson stated that this is a fire issue that our fire marshal was very adamant about it. If they did a cul -de -sac it would require a 95 -foot circle which isn't feasible. Mr. Suell restated he would like to work with staff to iron out this issue. City Planner Pearson also mentioned that the driveways in front of the units satisfy the common parking requirements and would not substitute for emergency vehicle turn- around space. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23, 2002 Page 9 Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Anderson to close the public hearing. Seconded by Messner. Ayes: Carr, Napper, Anderson, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Messner to recommend that the City Council approve the preliminary plat for D.R. Horton's Roundstone subject to the following conditions and expanding condition 1 to find an alternative to stub the private streets and that D.R. Horton work with staff and the fire marshal. 1. Connecting the two stubbed private streets at the southeast corner of the development. 2. Expanding the conservation easement on the southern edge to align with the limit of grading line. 3. Incorporation of recommendations relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets and utilities by the City Engineer. 4. Conformance with all applicable building, fire, and zoning codes including curb gutter along the perimeter of all private streets. 5. Conformance with requirements for final plat including execution of a subdivision development agreement. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner, Carr. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council rezone D.R. Horton's Roundstone to R -3 Medium Density Residential. Seconded by Carr. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Carr, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson noted that this should be on the City Council agenda on August 20, 2002. Public Hearing: Evermoor Waterford, Roundstone Bards Crossing Administrative Plat "Connemara Outlots" City Planner Pearson reviewed this administrative plat that is an interim measure to create three outlots that will be developed into different housing types for each. All the parcels will be replatted as part of the development process for each individual neighborhood. Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Anderson to close the public hearing. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Messner, Carr, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the administrative plat for Connemara Outlots subject to replatting of the three outlots and conformance with final plat requirements. Seconded by Napper. Ayes: Carr, Napper, Anderson, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Pearson noted this would be on the August 6, 2002 City Council agenda. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes July 23, 2002 M O Page 10 Old Business: None. New Business: None. Director's Report: None. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Messner, Second by Anderson, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:21 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary CITY O F RO S E M O U N T 2875 C 1 45 t h Street West Rosemount, MN Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068-4997 Phone: 651-423-4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Planning Commission Fax: 651-423-5203 Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 13, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members David Anderson, Jason Messner, and Myron Napper present. Commissioner Carr was absent. Also in attendance was City Planner Rick Pearson. The meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: City Planner Pearson stated the September 10, 2002 meeting needed to be rescheduled. This will be heard under Director's Report, item 8B. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Anderson to approve the July 23, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Second by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearings: None. Old Business: None. New Business: Rosewood Village Final Plat This final plat is the final step in creation of 43 single family lots in the north half of the Rosewood development south of 145 Street West and west of Biscayne Avenue. Outlots A and B are created that will be set aside for future townhouse development. The lots are compliant with the R -1 Low Density Residential zoning standards. Minor lot deficiencies have been corrected by the developer. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Rosewood Village subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and required landscaping. 2. Incorporation of recommendations by the City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets and utilities. 3. Park dedication in the form of cash according to the rate established by the current fee resolution. 4. Payment of all development and platting fees as specified in the current fee resolution. 1 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 2002 Page 2 5. Revisions as needed to eliminate lot dimension variances identified on lots 9, 10, 11, and 23, Block 1. 6. Approval as needed by the Dakota County Plat Commission. Second by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. New Business: Rosewood Estates Final Plat This final plat is the final step in creating 55 single family lots in the southern half of the Rosewood development south of the railroad spur. There are several large outlots for future development. The lots have been checked for compliance with the preliminary plat as well as the R -1 Low Density Residential zoning standards. Lot 1, Block 1 backs up to the railroad spur and should have additional lot width to maintain the same relationship of housing buffering and separation from the railroad tracks as the other lots. One option would be to shorten the railroad spur so the distance to the railroad tracks is equal to or greater than the distance to the other lots that have been adjusted to add additional depth. Staff will not request the lot to be enlarged if part of the track can be removed. Mike Olson of Progress Land Company stated that by increasing the lot width they would lose one entire lot. They are looking into removing a small section of the rail spur as an option based on conversations with the title company and their attorney. Commissioner Weisensel asked if they could take out that section how much more could they take out? Mr. Olson stated they could have further discussions with the railroad to come up with a solution agreeable to all involved. Commissioner Napper also questioned whether or not the railroad had an easement on the property. Commissioner Weisensel indicated they would change item 5 to indicate removal of the rail spur. City Planner Pearson recommended revising condition 5 to allow removal of the tracks as a solution to the problem or as an alternative not platting that lot at this time until the developer is satisfied that they have worked out an arrangement with the railroad. Chairperson Weisensel added "removal of the track section as indicated by the drawing. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Rosewood Village subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision agreement to secure public infrastructure and required landscaping. 2. Incorporation of recommendations by the City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets, and utilities. 3. Park dedication in the form of cash according to the rate established by the current fee resolution. 4. Payment of all development and platting fees as specified in the current fee resolution. 5. Revisions as needed to increase the lot width for Lot 1, Block 1 along side the rail spur corridor OR removal of a section of track. 6. Approval as needed by the Dakota County Plat Commission. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 2002 Page 3 Second by Messner. Ayes: Weisensel, Messner, Anderson, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. New Business: Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition Final Plat This final plat concerns the first phase in lots in the Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition development south of Connemara Trail. This first phase plats 73 single family lots connecting the existing neighborhood the the Connemara Trail alignment. The lots have been verified to be in conformance with the R -1, Low Density Residential standards and the Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition Preliminary Plat, as it has been revised. Several lot irregularities have been resolved. There is some land on the southern edge for park land which is contiguous with the existing park. Steve Bona from Heritage Development was present to answer questions. Chairperson Weisensel asked what the price point for the homes would be. Mr. Bona stated that the builder sets the prices for the homes. Chairperson Weisensel asked what the market study said and Mr. Bona thought the lots would be in the mid to upper $60's. MOTION by Messner to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Biscayne Pointe Fourth Addition subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and landscaping. 2. Incorporation of recommendations by the City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets, and utilities. 3. Park dedication of Outlot A and the balance in cash according to the rate established in the current fee resolution. 4. Payment of all development and platting fees as specified in the current fee schedule. Second by Napper. Ayes: Messner, Anderson, Napper, Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Director's Report: Transportation Study City Planner Pearson stated that this is a component of the Comprehensive Plan. It shows the existing and anticipated transportation network in Rosemount. In essence the study will take it to a more detailed study and recommendation of street alignments and locations. The consultant, WSB, has started the process and gathering information contacting other cities and agencies. Mr. Pearson emphasized the next couple of steps in the process which includes several meetings in the future. The process is expected to reach a conclusion next spring or summer. At this point we project the study to be complete in March, 2003. Director's Report: Reschedule 9/10/02 Meeting City Planner Pearson informed the Commission that the September 10, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting needed to be rescheduled due to the primary election. Mr. Pearson stated that the meeting could start at 8:01 p.m., be canceled if no applications come in, or be set for another date. The commission discussed the options. i Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 13, 2002 Page 4 MOTION by Weisensel to delay the start time of the September 10, 2002 Planning Commission meeting to 8:01 p.m. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Anderson, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 6:54 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary CITY OF ROSEMOUNT 2875 Street West 0' Rosemount, MN Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068-4997 Phone: b red 651 411 Planning Commission Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Fax: 651 423 -5203 Regular Meeting Minutes August 27 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 13, 2002. Chairperson David Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. with members Jason Messner and Myron Napper present. Commissioner Weisensel was absent. Also in attendance was City Planner Rick Pearson. The meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: No additions. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Messner to approve the August 13, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Second by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearings: None. Old Business: None. New Business: Evermoor Waterford Final Plat This is the final plat for Evermoor Waterford and is the last step in the planning process for the 36 townhome units leading up to construction. The final plat creates the individual lots for sale, as well as the right -of -way for the private street. The plat is consistent with the approved preliminary plat. Staff is recommending that Outlots A and B should be combined as a separate lot to be the responsibility of the homeowner's association. Outlot C will be dedicated to the City for a trail. Terry Wensmann from Wensmann Homes, Inc. was present to answer any questions. Commissioner Anderson asked what the timeline was for this project and City Planner Pearson stated this was in the end of the planning phase and part of it was putting together a subdivision agreement for utilities. It is the transition point between planning and engineering and construction. Once the City Council approves the final plot it will be recorded in Dakota County to create the actual lots. Commissioner Napper asked if that was when the building permits would be issued and whether the sewer and water was in. City Planner Pearson said that after the contract is signed by the City and the developer the City would be working on the public improvements and the developer would start the grading process. Sewer and water is being put in along Connemara Trail. Commissioner Messner asked why condition 4 was for an average 50 -foot conservation easement. City Planner Pearson stated that the southern edge is uneven and Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes August 27, 2002 Page 2 the average 50 -foot easement was needed for the portions of the lot that are less than 50 feet as well as the areas that are in excess of 50 feet. The average 50 feet across would act as a buffer to the park and preserve vegetation. MOTION by Napper to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Waterford subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public and private infrastructure. 2. Incorporation of recommendations of the City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets and utilities including the absorption of Outlots A and B into Lot 11, Block 1. 3. Payment of all development and platting fees as specified in the current fee resolution. 4. Recording of a conservation easement averaging fifty feet wide over the southern portion of Lot 21, Block 2 for tree preservation and buffering of the park. 5. Dedication of Outlot C for park trail use. 6. Recording of Homeowners Association documents as approved by the City Attorney. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Director's Report: City Planner Pearson reminded the Commission about the upcoming open house for the transportation study on Thursday, August 29, 2002 from 5 -9 p.m. at the Rosemount Community Center. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Messner, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary f 1 c CITY OF ROSEMOU NT 2875 C 1 45 t HS treetWest S r Rosemount, MN Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068-4997 Phone: 651 423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Planning Commission Fax: 651-423-5203 Regular Meeting Minutes September 10, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, September 10, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 8:01 p.m. with members David Anderson, Jason Messner, and Myron Napper present. Also in attendance were City Planner Rick Pearson and Code Enforcement Official Charlie O'Brien. The meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: No additions. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Anderson to approve the August 27, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Second by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Dean Doty Variance Mr. Doty has requested a variance to attach a garage to his house that will encroach two feet into the front -yard setback. The reason for the encroachment is to allow for a garage service entrance door that will be around the right corner, near the front door. The variance is also needed for aesthetic reasons. The garage will have a gable perpendicular to the roof -line of the house and separate eve soffits will frame the garage. City Planner Pearson stated that staff welcomes Mr. Doty's interest in improving his house and aesthetically improving the neighborhood, but the variance does not meet the hardship criteria for staff to recommend approval. Mr. Doty provided several picture comparisons of other houses in the area which staff reviewed the front -yard setbacks. The variance would not be needed if 40% of the properties have a front -yard setbacks averaging the 28 feet requested setback. Applicant Dean Doty was present to answer questions. Mr. Doty stated the two -foot bump -out is for the service door into the garage which would also be the main entrance. The side door has a step that would be eliminated to allow space for the vehicles to park. The only way into the garage from the house would be through that door. Commissioner Weisensel asked if he had to go outside to get into the garage from the house and Mr. Doty stated the whole front entrance will enclosed. The two -foot bump -out was also a matter of aesthetics to break up the gables and give it more eye appeal. r Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 10, 2002 Page 2 Commissioner Napper asked about the gables and trusses. Mr. Doty clarified there would be one 32 -foot gable on the garage and the trusses are 32 -feet. Commissioner Napped inquired about his plans for the existing detached garage and Mr. Doty said he would either sell it or tear it down. Commissioner Napped asked if he could move the garage back rather than encroaching into the front -yard setback. Mr. Doty said another reason for his variance request was to get rid of that side step which would be the only way to get into the house if he moved the garage back. Commissioner Napper was looking at different alternatives that would eliminate the need for the variance. City Planner Pearson stated that if the Commission was to consider a motion to grant the variance they would have to suggest findings that would include the practical difficulties of entering the garage. If the variance is approved City Planner Pearson would like some direction as to preparing findings that support the variance so that it stands alone. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Messner to close the public hearing. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Anderson. Nayes: 0. Motion carried. Chairperson Weisensel asked if this lot was affected by the Delmar and Denver Courts 5 -foot setbacks and City Planner Pearson stated it was not. It was also confirmed that this lot is not on a cul -de -sac. Based on the picture examples provided Chairperson Weisensel stated it was unclear how they could come up with the 40% in order to grant the variance. City Planner Pearson stated staff first looked at the other houses on the street and then at houses in the neighborhood. For this purpose of this variance staff went with the examples provided by Mr. Doty. Chairperson Weisensel noted how most of the houses in that area have detached garages and asked if something were to happen to the houses that were non conforming would they be able to rebuild? City Planner Pearson stated they would not without a variance. Chairperson Weisensel felt granting this variance was inconsistent with what our ordinances say. MOTION by Napper to deny the variance to front yard setbacks because of an inability to meet the hardship criteria required in Section 14.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Weisensel, Anderson, Napper. Nayes: Messner. Motion carried. City Planner Pearson informed Mr. Doty that he could appeal this action to the City Council in writing within ten working days since they make the policy and appoint the planning commission. Another public hearing would be required. Old Business: None. New Business: Animal Ordinance Amendment Code Enforcement Official O'Brien presented the commission with the proposed changes to the animal ordinance. Bases on changes in state statutes and evolving issues within the city, extensive changes were necessary to the Zoning Ordinance and City Code. Both staff recommendations and public input have been discussed at Committee of the Whole. Staff recommended repeal of sections of the zoning ordinance and adoption of new language in the Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 10, 2002 Page 3 city code. The proposed timeline is to have a public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting on September 24, 2002, the first reading and public hearing before City Council on October 15, 2002, and the second reading before City Council on November 5, 2002. Chairperson Weisensel asked if this was the proposal that was going to be presented or what format it would be in and Code Enforcement Official O'Brien stated he has done it several ways. Chairperson Weisensel asked if there was a model they followed to make the changes or if they went around to neighboring cities to find out their policies and O'Brien stated they used data from several cities, some neighboring, as well as input from the citizens. Some of the date is consistent with our neighbors, however, some of it has been expanded. Commissioner Weisensel questioned animals that were allowed regarding specific fish. O'Brien stated the ordinance primarily deals with common fish found in the household fishtank. Chairperson Weisensel asked about caged birds and whether people could let them out of their cage. O'Brien stated caged birds were mainly related to birds that are habitually kept in a cage and the owners sometimes let them out or have trained them to be out of the cage. As long as they are not a threat to the public they would be allowed. Commissioner Napper asked about wild animals. O'Brien stated the issue is the use of some of the terms in the ordinance. No one animal is being singled out. Commissioner Napper asked about the Chimpanzee and whether the resident that has them is the reason for the change. O'Brien said that is a separate issue. City Planner Pearson stated there has been an enormous effort to review the animal ordinances and the proposal is a major structural change. The zoning ordinance and city code treat animals differently and the city code has been mainly regulating the animals. The zoning ordinance deals with land use issues and the policing of animal issues with through the animal control arm of the police department and tends to be a behavioral type of issue governed by the city code. Commissioner Napper asked if there would be a "grandfather -in" type situation that would apply to some residents who had animals that would not be allowed under the new changes to the ordinance. O'Brien did not know the legal answer to that inquiry. Chairperson Weisensel asked about certain animals that were allowed by their family was not allowed. O'Brien stated that the animals allowed are the more common household pets but that the other animals in their particular family are not considered household pets. Chairperson Weisensel thought the wording in some of the proposed changes was very imprecise and needed to be clarified. The term "domesticated" animal needs more clarification as well as service animals. O'Brien stated there is a section for service animals and Chairperson Weisensel asked how they get that recognition. O'Brien stated they would have to graduate from an accredited service animal training program. Chairperson Weisensel asked why certain primates are limited. O'Brien stated that animals that are considered to be a risk to human beings because of safety or public health issues generally are not allowed. O'Brien stated some of the issues with this ordinance is how it has grown and how there will be subsections to each animal that will need to be added as it grows. City Planner Pearson stated there is always the opportunity to amend the ordinances. Ordinances tend to evolve as this one will as time goes by. Commissioner Napper questioned the ordinance as it pertains to horses and City Planner Pearson stated the current ordinance says horses are permitted in all districts provided you have at least five acres of land and there is one horse per two acres. As the rural residential land develops the ordinances will need to be amended since the parcels of land won't be as large. The language in the proposed amendments is just a draft recommendation that is the result of Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 10, 2002 Page 4 extensive research by Code Enforcement Official O'Brien. Chairperson Weisensel asked if there was a state statute that prohibits the primates and O'Brien said there was not. Commissioner Anderson asked about a time component on the animal prohibited as there are volunteers that take care of animals when they are abandoned and O'Brien said there is a provision for people accredited with wildlife rehabilitation organizations. Chairperson Weisensel asked about permits for animals and if there was threshold. O'Brien said dogs, cats and ferrets are currently licensed. Most of the time animals that are required to have licenses is for public health interests. Director's Report City Planner Pearson stated the City Council will be considering the appointment of a new planning commissioner at the September 17, 2002 meeting. The new commissioner is Thomas Schiltz, who is a long standing member of the community. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Weisensel, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 9:01 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, pp Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary CITY OF ROSEMOUNT CITY HALL N. Rosemount, MN Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 5506s -4997 Phone: 651 423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Fax: 651- 423 -5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 24, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, September 24, 2002. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. with members David Anderson, Myron Napper, Jason Messner, and Thomas Schiltz present. Also in attendance were City Planner Rick Pearson, Police Chief Gary Kalstabakken, Code Enforcement Official Charlie O'Brien, and Community Development Director Jim Parsons. The meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: No additions. Audience Input: None. III Chairperson Weisensel had one correction to the September 10, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. On Page 4 in the second line the word matches should be changed to prohibits. MOTION by Napper to approve the September 10, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as amended. Second by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Schiltz. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Animal Ordinance Amendments Code Enforcement Official O'Brien presented the proposed zoning ordinance amendments relating to animals, which were the result of several discussions with the committee of the whole, staff, citizens and outside resources with expertise in the area of animal control, veterinary medicine, animal health, and public health. The changes in Minnesota statues and evolving issues regarding non traditional animals being kept triggered this need for extensive revisions to the zoning ordinance and city code. The animal control issues will be part of the city code since the zoning ordinance is for land use issues. Chairperson Weisensel opened the public hearing. Brian Green, 13341 Cranford Circle, asked about the commercial kennel definition. Specifically, the sentence "Commercial Kennels must house all animals indoors between the hours of sunrise and sunset." He thought it should be sunset to sunrise. O'Brien stated they should be switched. III He inquired why this was only listed in the commercial kennel definition and not the residential definition. O'Brien stated the residential definition was more for those with just a few animals Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 24, 2002 Page 2 where the commercial definition is for larger amounts of animals where the nuisance would be more apparent. He also asked if the kennel nuisance is included in the city plan with the noise nuisance. O'Brien stated the kennel nuisance would be included in the city code and that there were no plans to remove any of the noise sections from the city code. Chairperson Weisensel asked for clarification if there was one general section that talks about noise or if they are listed to specific things. City Planner Pearson stated it expands references to noise. The current zoning ordinance has a general section dealing with noise nuisances city wide and is not specific to the cause of the noise. Green asked about the penalties for noise nuisances and O'Brien stated it was part of the city code and that a citation could be issued. Green asked why the language regarding the size of lots in terms of acres is being removed and wanted comment from O'Brien. O'Brien stated the language was removed because staff felt that soon there won't be very many 20 -acre parcels left undeveloped other than agricultural land and also because if you write an ordinance that makes it impossible for someone to have something because of the requirements in the ordinance that could be challenged constitutionally and would not stand up. Green asked about residential kennels and if it could be applied to all residential districts. O'Brien stated this has not been discussed. City Planner Pearson stated one of the reasons for amending the zoning ordinance is that the restrictions are exclusive to commercial kennels and that residential kennels are allowed in any residential district. The purpose is to regulate the number pets up to five and the kennel losing that restriction of having a minimum of 20 acres is a commercial kennel. MOTION by Messner to close the public hearing. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Napper, Weisensel, Messner, Schiltz, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Commissioner Anderson asked for clarification on commercial kennels being allowed in all areas zoned agricultural or commercial and whether there was language that prohibits commercial kennels in residential areas? Pearson stated that the structure of the zoning ordinance is such that if something is not listed as a permitted use then it is not allowed. If it was listed as an accessory use then it would be permitted. Commissioner Messner asked if commercial kennels would need a conditional use permit and Pearson stated they were either a permitted use or a conditional use in C2, C -3, and C -4. Commercial kennels have been permitted in the agricultural areas provided they have 20 acres or a minimum of 75 feet of clearance between any shelter for the animals and adjacent to residential uses. Chairperson Weisensel confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavits of Public Hearings. Commissioner Weisensel asked for clarification on what information was being inserted and what is being deleted in the proposed zoning ordinance. City Planner Pearson noted that this is a significant structural change to the zoning ordinance and that it regulates the land. Staff is trying to take out the animal regulation and put it into the city code which deals with behavioral issues. The complaints that arise due to animals are essentially police issues. The police enforce the city Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 24, 2002 Page 3 code taking the planning commission and city council out of the issues dealing with nuisances or animal behaviors. Police Chief Kalstabakken explained that the police department handles the enforcement issues within the city code. Removing some of the items dealing with the animal behaviors and putting them into the city code is what they deal with in animal control. Chairperson Weisensel noted that some non -human primates should not be expected to be allowed but that some should be considered to be allowed. That could be a permitting issue or process. Pearson noted that the current zoning ordinance gives staff no flexibility but the proposed changes to both the zoning ordinance and city code would allow staff to be more flexible. MOTION by Weisensel to recommend that the City Council amend the zoning ordinance as it relates to Animal Control. Second by Messner. Ayes: Weisensel, Messner, Schiltz, Anderson, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Old Business: None. New Business: Talcott Glen Final Plat This is a final plat relating to land split between Apple Valley and Rosemount. It is 5.5 acres and will have four townhome units that will be accessible from Diamond Path in Apple Valley. There is a 3.4 acre outlot east and north of the townhomes that will be added to the Birger Pond perimeter and will be the western edge of Innisfree Park. Only the park outlot is in Rosemount and that will be dedicated to the City. The storm -sewer lift- station will be part of Lot 1, Block 5 and is owned and operated by the City of Rosemount. Cross access easements will be needed for access rights over the townhome driveway, consolidating driveways to Diamond Path. Commissioner Weisensel questioned how the land became divided by the two cities and City Planner Pearson gave a brief history of the land. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Talcott Glen subject to: 1. The Developer shall provide a deed for Outlot A to the City for public use. 2. Recording of cross access easements to the City for access to the storm water lift station. Second by Napper. Ayes: Messner, Schiltz, Anderson, Napper, Weisensel. Nays: 0. Motion carried. New Business: Downtown Redevelopment Plan Community Development Director Jim Parsons presented the Downtown Redevelopment Plan that has been approved by the Port Authority. The highlights of his presentation included an analysis of the existing conditions, recommendations for public action, the concept plan for land T Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes September 24, 2002 Page 4 use and public improvements, urban design guidelines and alternatives, and recommendations for implementation. The plan is the result of work done over several months by the Port Authority, community residents, business operators and property owners, City Staff, and a consultant. The Port Authority asked that the Planning Commission review the plan and share its comments with them and the City Council. The Port Authority also asked this Commission to review the plan for conformance with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance, specifically the traditional downtown overlay district. Any discrepancies should be recommended for removal or alteration in the plan. There was some discussion pertaining to the library proposed in the downtown plan. According to Dakota County, the City of Rosemount is online to get a library in approximately 2008. Director's Report: None. Chairperson Weisensel informed the Commission and staff that he will miss several of the next meetings so Vice -Chair Anderson will run the meetings. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Weisensel, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary vo CITY HALL CITY OF RO S E M O U N T 2875 145th Street West Rosemount, MN 55068 -4997 Phone: 651-423-4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Planning Commission Fax. 651-423-5203 Regular Meeting Minutes October 22 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October 22, 2002. Vice Chairperson David Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members Myron Napper, Jason Messner, and Thomas Schiltz present. Commissioner Jeff Weisensel was absent. Also in attendance were City Planner Rick Pearson, and Community Development Director Jim Parsons. The meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: No additions. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Napper to approve the September 24, 2002 Regular Planning Commission III Meeting Minutes. Second by Schiltz. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner, Schiltz. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Old Business: Downtown Redevelopment Plan Community Development Director Parsons presented the Commission with the Downtown Market Study prepared in conjunction with the Downtown Redevelopment Plan, which has been before this Commission for the past three weeks. This market study gives a lot of demographic and market data needed to properly analyze the redevelopment plan. Community Development Director Parsons and City Planner Pearson have prepared memos to identify the key issues and inconsistencies with the comprehensive plan. In the comprehensive plan the City takes a more reactive role for scarce resources and a weak market. In the Downtown Redevelopment Plan the City would take a more proactive role by going to developers and asking for proposals for the downtown redevelopment. For land use the two plans are in sync with each other. The Comprehensive Plan does guide the downtown commercial use. In zoning ordinance, through the traditional downtown overlay district, the City added the possibility of stand -alone medium density residential as a conditional use. The Downtown Redevelopment Plan also has a proposal for a 70 -room hotel, which is more than what the limit on the number of rooms for a hotel is for the zoning ordinance. The site is also not within the traditional overlay district which is a discrepancy that should be addressed. The medium density residential was a strong recommendation in the downtown market study in order to have more people using the downtown retail and businesses. Preferred uses in the Ill Comprehensive Plan include offices, mixed uses, retail. The Downtown plan includes offices, retail commercial with offices above, medium density residential, medical clinic, and hospitality. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes October 22, 2002 Page 2 Piece by piece the two plans are very different. The zoning ordinance requires 100% brick or an equivalent on any new buildings in the downtown. Commissioner Napper asked about the brick requirement and if plaster /stucco is considered as an equivalent. Parsons stated it would not be an equivalent to brick according to the ordinance. Commissioner Napper also asked about putting residential housing next to the railroad since the newspaper has ran articles where residents complain about the train whistle. He thought it was a bad idea to put residential next to the railroad when they could put in commercial or some other type of use. Parsons clarified that the comp plan does call for some residential row houses to be next to the railroad tracks. City Planner Pearson informed the Commission this would an example of a recommendation by them to amend the comp plan to remove the row houses use next to the railroad tracks. Commission Messner inquired if inconsistencies in the redevelopment plan does the guide plan have to be amended even though it states they are preferred uses? City Planner Pearson explained that preferred use is somewhat subjective. The comp plan shows the area as being commercial. The comp plan does have suggestions for expanding the commercial uses. If the Commission feels that residential should be part of that then the newly adopted downtown overlay district includes that. The comp plan doesn't need to be amended but the distinction should be made in the recommendation to the City Council. Commissioner Schiltz asked if the majority or all of the buildings will be demolished and replaced. Parsons stated the plan shows alternatives showing the future of the existing buildings. Schiltz said a concern in the study was with all new buildings there wouldn't be an area for new start-up businesses. The market study cautions the City from moving too fast on this redevelopment because some of the businesses would need to relocate or rent. This is a key issue in the study. There could be some possible subsidizing using tax increment at the front end eligible project costs. Vice Chairperson Anderson inquired about the costs to acquire and clear existing properties. Part of the subsidy would be to sell the land to a developer for a smaller cost. Commissioner Messner went back to the inconsistencies between the two plans. The guide plan gives preferred uses with general expecations. He inquired if the Commission was to make their own interpretation to the City Council or if the City Council will make their own interpretation. City Planner Pearson stated that the City Council wants the Commission's comments and this would be a recommendation that the Council can choose to take. The Council could also come up with its own recommendations. Commissioner Schiltz asked if the comprehensive plan was the primary tool. City Planner Pearson stated the comp plan is a guide, not a design tool. It is meant to be an overall philosophy and the zoning is to be more specific. Parsons added that it would be hard to deny development if it complied with the comprehensive plan. Commissioner Messner asked if the guide plan is a guide that talks about preferred uses would the redevelopment plan be a plan that any development must conform to? Parsons said the redevelopment plan does not have the Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes October 22, 2002 Page 3 statutorily required status that the comp plan has. The City cannot make people conform with the redevelopment plan under the law. City Planner Pearson stated that the redevelopment plan is a recommendation. This process is to take that recommendation and add it to the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance and be comfortable that it does not conflict with the comprehensive plan. There could be minor amendments to the comp plan or the zoning ordinance as a result. Commissioner Messner asked if staff had looked through the redevelopment plan and compared it to the market study regarding the amount of retail square feet or number of housing units. Parsons stated that the market study identified the current amount of retail commercial space downtown as being 105,000 sq. ft with a demand for redevelopment up to 1/3 of that or 37,500 sq. ft. The whole redevelopment plan was done in 2 -3 years we would have 50,000- 60,000 sq. ft. of commercial space there would not be demand for. The market study shows what the possible steps could be over time to work towards the redevelopment of the 105,000 sq. ft. Vice Chairperson Anderson inquired if the potential library was factored into the market study taking up some of that space. Parsons stated the downtown redevelopment plan was shared with Maxfield Research and they endorsed the idea of the library. The library is not proposed to come to Rosemount until the year 2008 and it is controlled by Dakota County Library Board. It may be important but it can't happen first. Commissioner Napper felt the library should be located where education is rather than downtown. Commissioner Messner talked about the comprehensive plan and the buildings along Highway 3 should be more than one story in height. He asked if this was the only area in the redevelopment plan that talks about more than one story other than a hotel or the library? Parsons stated there are several alternatives that include buildings with more than one story. Commissioner Schiltz identified a challenge he saw was the small businesses that would potentially need to be retained and relocated during the redevelopment process. Parsons stated they would have some protection under state law for relocation. Parsons said that none of these plans put into detail mixing the commercial and residential uses in the same building. The redevelopment plan shows mixing them on the same sites but attention has not been made to putting a building in with commercial below and then housing above that. That has been permitted under our ordinance for many years but has not been a focus. There would be building height limits and the density would depend on how many dwelling units were stacked on the commercial. Parsons recapped the Maxfield Research market study by identifying the primary market areas for downtown and then secondary market areas. With the population growth and increase in household income for this area translates into demand for more retail commercial operations totaling 30,000 sq. ft. through the year 2006 and about 7,500 sq. ft. of office space in that same IP time period. On page 6 of the market study the recommendations are summarized. There is a caution not to go too much too fast. There will be some difficulty getting the existing businesses Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes October 22, 2002 Page 4 to be able to afford new space as well as the difficulty to attract new businesses to the new space. One key question is where the redevelopment should begin. Commissioner Napper inquired about the possible timeframe for this project and Parsons replied that the market study looks 4 -8 years out. It is recommended that a lot should not be done before 2004, limited demand between 2004 and 2006 with the rest going forward until 2010. Vice Chairperson Anderson asked about the next step for the planning commission. Parsons said it depended on how comfortable the commission felt with the information given. Vice Chairperson Anderson stated that with the volume of information given the commission would need at least another meeting to come up with specific recommendations to the City Council. Commissioner Messner asked if the commission's task was to look at the redevelopment plan and see how it conforms with the guide plan. City Planner Pearson said the commission should look at the land use and make recommendations on what is the most appropriate land use. If certain zoning districts in the guide plan need to be expanded upon that should be included in the recommendation. Vice Chairperson Anderson asked if the public would have a chance to voice their comments once this went back to the City Council and City Planner Pearson stated that whenever there is a change to the ordinance or comp plan a public hearing is required. Commissioner Schiltz felt that the planning commission would be a fourth body to make recommendations for the downtown redevelopment plan. Parsons stated the simplest thing would be to recommend changes to the redevelopment plan. If inconsistencies are found, that would be another level of involvement and should be included in their recommendation to the City Council. The downtown redevelopment plan discussion was tabled until the November 12, 2002 planning commission meeting. New Business: Evermoor Roundstone Final Plat This is a final plat for the D.R. Horton townhome development along the new Connemara Trail currently under construction. The lots have been verified as being in conformance with the preliminary plat. The land in Outlot A will be for park dedication. This last step in the planning process will create the actual lots. Mike Suel from D.R. Horton was present to answer any questions by the commission. Commissioner Messner inquired if the previous issue regarding the two connection streets had been resolved. City Planner Pearson stated the two streets will be connected although it is not depicted on the final plat. This issue was resolved with the final grading plan and was approved by the City Engineer and Fire Marshal. MOTION by Anderson to recommend that the City Council approve the final plat for Evermoor Roundstone Final Plat subject to: 1. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure public infrastructure and landscaping. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes October 22, 2002 Page 5 2. Incorporation of recommendations by the City Engineer relative to drainage, easements, grading, streets, and utilities. 3. Conformance with all of the conditions specified in Resolution 2002 -118, approving the preliminary plat for Roundstone. 4. Payment of all development and platting fees as specified in the current fee schedule. Second by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Schiltz, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. City Planner Pearson stated this could go to the City Council on November 5, 2002 but is dependent on the City Engineer finalizing the development agreement. Director's Report: City Planner Pearson informed the commission that the City will be losing Tom Burt as their City Administrator. He has accepted a City Manager position with Golden Valley. His last day will be November 15, 2002. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Anderson, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:02 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, CrartEd 416.0(n Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary VI C ITY OF RO S E M O U N T 2875 C Street West •S rio Rosemount, MN Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068 -4997 Phone: 651 -423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Fax: 651- 423 -5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 12 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October 22, 2002. Vice Chairperson David Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members Myron Napper, Jason Messner, and Thomas Schiltz present. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel was absent. Also in attendance were City Planner Rick Pearson, and Community Development Director Jim Parsons. The meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: No additions. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Messner to approve the October 22, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Second by Schiltz. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner, Schiltz. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Thomas Schiltz Variance This variance request is to a side yard setback for his property located at 2583 145 Street East. The current zoning is Agriculture. The variance concerns the house to add an additional 10 feet to the east side of the house. This would be approximately 15 feet from the side property line. The standard side yard setback is 30 feet. This addition would provide an entryway and would cover the existing well house and prevent the water main from freezing. This property is non- conforming in lot area having only 1 acre compared to the 2.5 acre minimum. This lot was created in the township days before the current standards applied. One of the reasons for the variance request is that the existing well house leaks and is not heated. A space heater is used in the winter to keep the water main from freezing; however, that is prone to failure and is a fire hazard. By enclosing the well house with the new addition, the water main would be heated as part of the house. The unique situation with the water service caused much discussion and debate amongst staff. Staff felt there were other options available which would not require a variance. The hardship appears to be a function of the house design, not the land. Staff is unable to support this variance. Thomas Schiltz, 2583 145 Street East, Rosemount, was present to answer questions. Commissioner Napper asked about where the main water came into the house. Mr. Schiltz stated le it came in from the bottom of the well house. Commissioner Messner asked how far below grade the main water pipe is. Mr. Schiltz said it was underneath the footings of the house and Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 12, 2002 Page 2 comes up in the well house or about 4 feet below frost level. Commissioner Napper asked if the current entry came into the kitchen. Mr. Schiltz said it came right into the kitchen and that this addition would create more of a foyer. Mr. Schiltz stated they felt the property was not zoned properly since they have only a one acre lot in the Agriculture zone. Although they are zoned Agriculture they do not enjoy any of the benefits of that zoning. Commissioner Messner asked if they had looked into other ways of dealing with the water issue. Mr. Schiltz stated they currently use a space heater in the well house which is prone to failure and is a fire hazard. Putting duct work was not considered as there is no insulation in the well house. There is mold/mildew and is very prone to leaking. Mr. Schiltz said to have the house replumbed and the landscaping redone in the front yard it would be about $6,000 and to build the addition it would only be about $10,000. The water main would have to be moved out of the well house since it freezes up in the winter. Another reason for requesting the variance for the addition is because they septic system is on the west side of the house and there is a walk -out basement on the back of the house which would be twice the cost. Plus they would still have to fix the well house. Vice Chairperson Anderson inquired they would need a variance to fix the current step and City Planner Pearson stated there is an exception to stoops, terraces and uncovered porches. Commissioner Napper asked if a new step was put in and the well house was insulated would that take care of the problem? Mr. Schiltz stated it could but their whole intent was to build the addition. They feel that although they are pushing the current setbacks they are zoned Agricultural and do not meet the zoning requirements because of the total acreage. Commissioner Messner asked if the property could be rezoned without amending the guide plan and City Planner Pearson stated it could not. City Planner Pearson said that if there is a zoning remedy it would be to change the standards in the Agriculture District. They could create special reasons why the 30 -foot setback would not apply for one acre exclusively residential lots acknowledging that it is not a farmstead. Changing the standards would be easier than rezoning. Vice Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Anderson to close the public hearing. Second by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Schiltz, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Vice Chairperson Anderson stated this was a difficult situation with the parameters set up. This property was created prior to the City and township merging and had some precluded uses from when it was a township. There are options available although maybe not the most attractive alternatives. MOTION byAnderson to deny the variance requested by Thomas Schiltz because of an inability to meet the findings specified in Section 14.2 of the zoning ordinance. Second by Napper. Ayes: Messner, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Abstain: Schiltz. Motion carried. Mr. Pearson informed applicant Thomas Schiltz that he does have the right to appeal the decision of the Board of Appeals Adjustments to the City Council in writing within 10 working days. Another public hearing would have to be conducted. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 12, 2002 Page 3 Public Hearing: Mineral Extraction Text Amendment Changes This is a topic that has been discussed within the City for many years. There is currently a moratorium halting new mining operations within the City that will expire in December. Mining is currently permitted in portions of the eastern section of the City along CSAH 42 in the Agriculture District and US Hwy 52 on land currently zoned General Industrial. There are resources north and south of CSAH 42 and east of Akron Avenue and in the area of the refinery and Mississippi River Valley. The Council gave staff the direction of limiting new mines and scaling back the life span of the mines. They will allow some mining as long as it supports an end -use plan. The purpose of the public hearing is to discuss opening up some of the areas for mining but not all of them. Staff recommends the Agriculture District north of CSAH 42 and east of Akron Avenue as a potential because of a need for storm water ponding. Another part of the strategy is to implement the Mixed Use Industrial District. Mining in this district would be a short term process that would set land up for an end use. The incentive to mine in this area would be for uses permitted in the Agriculture District or other uses acceptable to the Council. It was recommended by City Attorney Charlie LeFevere to use an Interim Use Permit as the most appropriate means of limiting the duration of a mining operation. This would setup the life span of the permit from the beginning and would establish thresholds for ending the use. By limiting the life span of a mining operation the City could avoid the nuisance to permanent land uses that are developing or are established during the usual long -term mining activity. 1111 Staff proposes that mineral extraction be allowed in areas designated for Mixed Use Industrial or General Industrial Land Use in the 2020 Rosemount Comprehensive Plan. New mining will be limited to a maximum duration of five years. The Interim Use Permit process will regulate the life span to five years based upon projections of advancing development. There will be a renewal option if the development does not advance as quickly as anticipated. There may be an incentive available for very short-term mining of one year duration or less. It could benefit the City to develop an Interim Use Permit for short-term mining for developing a larger area that would exceed the usual individual lot building permit. The site restoration plan shall be in conformance with the City standards for site development plans that incorporate building pads and planned streets and will contribute to the adopted storm water management system. The extent of the Mixed Use Industrial District will be as designated on the land use map of the 2020 Rosemount Comprehensive Plan. Land not already zoned Mixed Use Industrial will have to be rezoned as part of the permit approval process. Mineral extraction is not currently permitted in the Agriculture Land Use areas in the 2020 Rosemount Comprehensive Plan except for land within %2 mile of CSAH 42 east of US Hwy 52. There may be a public purpose that provides storm water storage capacity, park facilities or other open space or restored natural habitat as approved by the City Council. A buffer zone would be required from any residential use of district unless authorized by the City Council. Any mining in the area of Akron Avenue would only be allowed to expand in an easterly direction. Mining as part of establishing infrastructure or storm -water management facilities could be considered incidental to a grading permit and regulated for a comparatively short term. The State Legislature could provide a basis for the Council to consider allowance of mineral extraction if there is a host community fee that could be used to help mitigate the adverse effects of the mining process from surrounding incompatible land uses. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 12, 2002 Page 4 Essentially overlay districts will be created where mining is allowed in a limited area in the Agriculture and Mixed Use Industrial Districts. There was discussion about opening land up for mining where there are no resources, how the Interim use Permit will deal with mines near residential areas, and the size limit of mining operations. Vice Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. Jonathan Wilmshurst 12741 Shannon Parkway, wanted to speak in favor of this common -sense approach. He felt the land in the area has no other use so mining would be a good alternative. He said the water table is 70 -80 feet down in this area so there would not be the environmental issues. If you keep to the same grade as Rich Valley Boulevard there would still be 40 -60 feet of material above the valley floor without leaving a big hole in the ground, which can often be a problem in this industry. If it is done right a lot of the nuisances can be mitigated without too much trouble. He wanted to encourage the Commission to be flexible in their thinking. Commissioner Schiltz asked how deep the gravel was and Mr. Wilmshurst stated it was at least 50 feet in most areas. Commissioner Schiltz asked if the mining industry will mine to a certain depth and then maintain that floor? Mr. Wilmhurst stated that was an option because no investor in land wants to end up with a useless piece of property. The mining company is just as interested in having a viable end use for the property. Commissioner Napper asked if it made a difference how deep you go? Mr. Pearson stated the current standards prohibit creating new water bodies which could be desireable for stormwater management processes but additional permits would be required from agencies such as the DNR. John Chadwick 11430 Zian Circle, Bloomington, Minnesota also spoke in favor of this strategy. He said there is some good minerals and the refinery to the north that would not be desirable for residential. As the Met Council stated, the gravel should be utilized rather than be paved over. There is a community wide need if you can develop the resource nearer close nearer to your own city. He wanted to congratulate the City for looking ahead which gives them more flexibility and opportunity. There is more global storm water management that is being planning and if you have the big machinery out there you can dig a pond if it is needed. There are technical things you can do such as berming to create more eye appeal. Some of the great successes of mines include Fisher Marketplace in Apple Valley, Centennial Lakes in Edina, the development in Maple Grove. These are the positive end uses of mining. Charlie Koehnen 12255 Rich Valley Boulevard asked if this meant there would be more trucks in the area? Mr. Pearson stated he could not answer that question at this time. Mr. Koehnen stated the road is really rough past the Shafer pit and there are not trucks on it. He also stated it was a 55 mph zone and the kids are passing trucks at 70 mph which is a safety hazard. He is concerned about the school buses stopping and all the new families living in the area. He is not against gravel but cannot see anything going on based on what the refinery has said. Mr. Pearson stated that every time a permit is processed traffic is one issue that is dealt with. The traffic route is defined in the permit. Road improvements needed would be the responsibility of the pit operator. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 12, 2002 Page 5 MOTION by Anderson to close the public hearing. Second by Schiltz. Ayes: Schiltz, Napper, Anderson, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson that the City Council adopt the attached zoning ordinance amendments relative to mineral extraction. Second by Messner. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner, Schiltz. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Shafer Contracting Mineral Extraction Pit Renewal Vice Chairperson Anderson confirmed that the recording secretary has placed on file with the City the Affidavit of Mailing and Posting of a Public Hearing Notice and Affidavit of Publication concerning the public hearing on the Shafer Mineral Extraction Permit renewal. City Planner Pearson presented the application by Shafer Contracting to renew its mineral extraction permit. Mr. Pearson summarized the mining activity in 2002 and the work being done to restore the land. The Pit is still in Phase 3. There have been no complaints filed with the Police Department. Vice Chairperson Anderson opened the floor to the applicant. Scott Spisak said Shafter has owned this property since August 2000. There were numerous operators in there under the previous ownership. Since taking over they have resolved a lot of issues including cleaning up the operation and property. Vice Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There was no public comment. MOTION by Anderson to close the public hearing. Second by Schiltz. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Schiltz, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Messner to renew the mineral extraction permit for Shafer Contracting subject to the attached conditions for 2003. Second by Schiltz. Ayes: Messner, Schiltz, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Old Business: Downtown Redevelopment Plan Community Development Director Parsons stated this is the third opportunity the Planning Commission has had to review the downtown redevelopment plan. Staff has asked this Commission to comment on areas where this plan may or may not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and with the Zoning Ordinance. There has been prior discussion regarding land use issues regarding the plan. Some of the language in the comp plan lays out a brief chart on preferred land uses. Some specific ideas conflict with what is in the downtown redevelopment plan. City Attorney Charlie LeFevere was asked to clarify the language in the Comp plan that looks at preferred land uses for the downtown and how binding that language is. City Attorney LeFevere stated he does not believe the City is required to amend its comprehensive plan before adoption of the downtown redevelopment plan merely to delete references to preferred uses that are not the same as those specified in the downtown plan. The preferred uses chart in the comp plan is describing some possibilities and the guidance the comp plan provides for the downtown is for commercial development. Everything in the downtown redevelopment plan meets that commercial development guidance within the comp plan. As far Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 12, 2002 411 Page 6 as preferred uses go, staff is recommending that the Commission advise the City Council that the future uses in the downtown redevelopment plan are not inconsistent with the comprehensive plan and that no amendment to the comp plan is recommended or required. Block H has two alternatives in the downtown redevelopment plan, both consisting of a county library branch. Since the library is a county facility, this is not the only site it could go. The library board has given the City their objectives in siting a library here and putting one downtown as an anchor is not their top criterion. It is up in the air where the future library would go. Staff recommends that the downtown redevelopment plan acknowledge that a library could be built on another site downtown or within the City. There is no way to look at the library as a land use since it is a county facility and is not due to come here until 2008. The consultant was clear to point out that the ideas in the downtown redevelopment plan are a guide and the development may not happen exactly as proposed. Block J also has two alternatives for that block which consist of commercial stores and then a hotel with some retail /commercial bays. It should be pointed out that the hotel is not currently a permitted or conditional use at that site. That would create some different possibilities on how to treat that. One option would be to drop the hotel from the downtown redevelopment plan. The downtown overlay district that allows hotels could be expanded to this block. Another concept would be to leave the hotel in the downtown redevelopment plan with the understanding the land would have to be rezoned. The hotel proposal is not a strong one in demand so staff recommends the concept be dropped from the downtown redevelopment plan. Staff would like to move this plan forward and press the commission for some action. The Council would like to have some recommendation from the Council. Commissioner Napper asked if the City needs a hotel and Parsons stated there is not a real strong demand because the amount of commercial /industrial development is not enough to support a hotel. On a residential side there is a need but not for the business traveler. Commissioner Napper asked about motels and Parsons stated a motel is not proposed under the downtown redevelopment plan. Vice Chairperson Anderson asked if we left the hotel in the plan could we allocate that block for another use and if a developer brought a hotel idea forward on another site in the City we could revisit the hotel issue. Mr. Parsons stated that was correct. Michael Baxter, 14030 Cobbler Avenue, Rosemount, came forward to ask the Planning Commission to delay their action on the downtown redevelopment plan so that the newly elected Council could receive the comments. He stated a few members of the current Council were trying to get this to them before January. He wanted the commission to delay their decision because if the Council still insists on taking up the downtown redevelopment plan then they will have signaled to the citizens they are doing it without the comments of a very important Commission. If the Commission decides to move forward he wants them to understand it is not a blueprint for redevelopment it is a vision statement. This is people saying we need to do some different things and move forward and redevelop a wonderful asset in a traditional downtown. It is an outline, not an ordinance, a planning tool. We don't know what the downtown will look like in 10 years but we do know it won't look like that plan. Mr. Baxter urged the Commission to comment on the plan because it is meant to be flexible. He hoped the Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 12, 2002 Page 7 Commission would support this plan because we have to move forward. It is not a perfect plan but because it is not perfect is not a reason not to support it. Because we can't redevelop everything now doesn't mean we should do nothing. If the Commission cannot delay their action he urges them to support the plan and help Rosemount move forward. If the City doesn't move forward it will certainly move backward. Commissioner Napper felt action should be delayed for the new council. Vice Chairperson Anderson stated that all commissioners were not in consensus on moving this forward tonight before the start of tonight's meeting. He agrees with comments made that potentially the downtown redevelopment has to occur. He was also in agreement with delaying action. He asked staff for more direction and wants the plan to be as flexible as possible. Commissioner Messner asked about the brick requirements. City Planner Pearson stated the standard has been raised to brick or equivalent. Now the expectation is brick. The current standard is 100 percent brick. Commissioner Messner asked about making recommendations individually or as a consensus rather than everyone throwing out recommendations. Parsons stated that is a decision the Commission should make as a body. Vice Chairperson Anderson asked the Commissioners to come back at the next meeting with specific recommendations on changes they would like to see. He asked that those recommendations be in before the packets are sent out so everyone has a chance to review them and take action at that time. If Commissioners have recommendations they should be put in writing and to City Staff for the next packet with action to be taken at the next Planning Commission meeting. MOTION by Messner to table action until the next Planning Commission meeting on November 26, 2002. Second by Napper. Director's Report: City Planner Pearson cordially invited the Planning Commission to attend a farewell reception for City Administrator Tom Burt who is going to Golden Valley. The reception is scheduled for Thursday, November 14, 2002 from 4 -6 pm in the Council Chambers. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Anderson, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:16 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary 411 CITY OF RO S E M O LI N T 2875 C 1 45 t h Street West Rosemount, MN Everything's Coming Up Rosemount!! 55068 -4997 Phone: 651 423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Fax: 651-423-5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 26, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October 22, 2002. Vice Chairperson David Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members Myron Napper and Jason Messner present. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel and Commissioner Schiltz were absent. Also in attendance were City Planner Rick Pearson, and Community Development Director Jim Parsons. The meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: No additions. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Messner to approve the November 12, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Second by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: E E Sign Variance City Planner Pearson presented this sign ordinance variance requested by Jon Linda Frayne, owners of the Ken Rose Mall. The buildings consist of the mall, the former Champion Auto building and the land associated with the two buildings on the west side of South Robert Trail. There is currently one ground sign for the tenants of the mall that is approximately 120 sq. ft. The variance would allow for a bigger ground sign. The sign ordinance permits ground signs up to 80 sq. ft. and a maximum height of 20 feet. One sign per building and one sign identifying the multiple tenants of the mall would also be permitted; however, there must be at least 100 feet between all ground signs. This property consists of 235 feet of frontage along South Robert Trail. Based on the space limitation between signs there is not enough room for two more signs. The applicant has submitted a drawing showing the sign requested, which is 204 sq. ft. The total height for this sign is 23 feet and the ordinance allows only 20 ft. The variance would be for 124 sq. ft. sign area variance and a 3 foot height variance. If this variance was granted then no other ground signs would be allowed. Applicant Linda Frayne was present to answer questions. She stated the new sign would allow exposure to the tenants of the mall. There was discussion on the size of the current sign and the new proposed sign which will be bigger and stand taller. The current sign does have space on the bottom but would not be visible. The applicant feels this 204 sq. ft. sign would give each tenant exposure Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 26, 2002 Page 2 Vice Chairperson Anderson asked if the applicant would be willing to remove the obsolete sign structure on the old Champion building and they stated they would. Vice Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There were no comments. MOTION by Anderson to close the public hearing. Second by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Messner to grant the 204 sq. ft. variance requested by Jon Linda Frayne with the stipulation that the sign be no greater in size than the picture provided to this Commission and that it be limited to a height no greater than 23 feet and that the roof -top obsolete sign be removed. Second by Anderson. Ayes: Messner, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Mr. Pearson told the applicant that this could be appealed within 10 working days. The appeal would be submitted to the Planning Commission and acted upon by the City Council. A public hearing would have to be set up if an appeal were received. If no appeals are received within the 10 days the applicant can apply for their sign permit. Public Hearing: FTTH Communications Conditional Use Permit Amendment City Planner Pearson presented this application for the corner lot along Shannon Parkway and Evermoor Parkway. There is a building located on this parcel that contains fiber optic equipment and the requested Conditional Use Permit Amendment will allow three satellite dishes be constructed near this building. There is one 14 -foot diameter antenna and two 10 -foot diameter antennas. The proposed site for the 14 -foot dish is beyond the allowed setback for antennas but if the applicant is willing to locate it within the setbacks Staff is of the opinion the Commission could make a conditional recommendation to the City Council. The drawing handed out would require a variance as the dish encroaches into a streetside front yard setback which is 40 feet. The applicant, John Schultz of FTTH, was present to answer questions. He stated that he has been talking with Mr. Pearson trying to find the right solution for the project. Their intent would be to put in the three dishes as temporary structures until they can find a more permanent location more suitable for satellite dishes. He said there was no problem moving the dishes so they are within the setback requirements. This proposal would get them through the winter until they can find a better location for the dishes. They have talked to the two abutting homeowners to come up with solutions to shade the dishes from view, etc. There was discussion about the temporary dishes being at this location and the possible locations they could be moved to within the city. The permanent location distance is not prohibitive since they are using fiber optics to transport the signal. The reason for the temporary dishes are to satisfy promises to customers and to get the services up and running. Mr. Pearson informed the Commission that if they feel comfortable that Mr. Schultz will move the antennas so they won't require a variance and they are comfortable with the 14 -foot dish and the two 10 -foot dishes they could forward a recommendation to the City Council with a condition the 14 -foot dish be located within the setbacks as required. There was discussion about putting a time limit on these temporary dishes. Vice Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 26, 2002 Page 3 MOTION by Anderson to close the public hearing. Second by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson to recommend to the City Council approval of a Conditional Use Permit to FTTH with the condition that this is temporary in that the satellite dishes will be relocated in the future, that the 14 -foot dish be moved within the required setbacks, and also that this will be reviewed in 18 months and it will be up to Staff to bring it to the Planning Commission and City Council at that time. Second by Napper. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Mr. Pearson stated this will be on the next available City Council agenda. Probably on the December 17 2002 agenda. Old Business: Downtown Redevelopment Plan Community Development Director Parsons gave a brief overview of the previous discussions regarding the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. The City Council has indicated it would like to move forward on this plan for action in December. Based on correspondence from the City Attorney the Commission has the ability to recommend uses on specific uses in downtown that might conflict with preferred uses in the Comprehensive Plan. The Traditional Downtown Overlay District and C2 Community Commercial District make up the current downtown. They are co- terminal and do not cover the medium residential site or the sites that have zoning other than the C2 Commercial zoning. Staff recommends removing the hotel alternative from the plan; there are other ways to address the discrepancy of the hotel and zoning. One of the alternatives for Block J includes a 70 -room hotel which is not a permitted use. Hotels are permitted in the Traditional Downtown Overlay District but are limited to 24 rooms. If the Commission likes the idea of keeping the flexibility of having the hotel concept at this location they could extend the Traditional Downtown Overlay District and increase the number of rooms or decrease the size of the hotel concept at that location. The downtown plan should also acknowledge that a library may be built on another site downtown or on another site in Rosemount. There are other sites that the library board might find more suitable. There was discussion about the location of the library in the downtown plan and the potential size. These are all decisions decided by the County Library Board. The downtown redevelopment plan is planning on a 20,000 sq. ft. library being either one or two stories. The library would serve western Apple Valley and Rosemount. The Commission recommends the downtown redevelopment plan acknowledge that the library may be put on another site in the downtown or elsewhere in the city. It may or may not be part of the plan but the plan should move forward without waiting to hear where the library will be located. Discussion ensued regarding the hotel concept. Vice Chairperson Anderson asked if it would require a comp plan amendment to extend the downtown overlay district to C2 community commercial area. Mr. Parsons said it would be a zoning map amendment but not a change to the comprehensive plan. It could be an amendment brought to the City Council. There are two concepts for the hotel in the plan. The concept could be changed. To increase the allowed number of rooms would be a text amendment that a developer could request. A proposal would not be required at this time for the number of rooms the hotel could have. Vice Chairperson Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 26, 2002 Page 4 wanted to extend the overlay district and leave the plan flexible. Any site zoned as C4 General Commercial could have a hotel built on it. Commissioner Messner offered a friendly amendment in that the downtown plan be amended to show only a 24 -unit hotel so that it is consistent with the C2 Community Commercial District at this time. The recommendation of the Commission is to extend the C2 Community Commercial District boundary to include the Traditional Downtown Overlay District and that the downtown plan acknowledges a 24 -unit hotel. Commissioner Messner wanted to encourage the City Council to establish a Downtown Task Force as one of the first steps in the process. This will help the plan successfully move forward. Commissioners Anderson and Napper concurred. The Commission recommended moving forward on the plan with Staff's comments and suggestions. There was a discussion on the brick requirement for the commercial buildings that don't have as much visibility, such as along the railroad tracks. A text amendment could change the 100 percent brick requirement in the zoning ordinance. The Commission recommends Staff write a text amendment to the zoning ordinance that will allow some discretion of the materials used on properties not adjacent or having frontage on the highway. Buildings with highway frontage should have 100 percent brick on the front of the building and an alternative material on the sides and rear of the building. Acceptable materials would be natural stone, rock face block, architectural concrete cast in place, decorative block, and stucco. Commissioner Messner recommends the plan acknowledge that apartments could be allowed on the second levels of the buildings rather than having it be office space. All of the buildings on Blocks C, J, and H should be at least two stories in height so they are consistent. A similar design to blocks C and G should be proposed for block H if the library does not go there. There was discussion about height restrictions in the downtown overlay district. Mr. Pearson stated the C2 zoning ordinance has a maximum height for principle structures of 75 feet and accessory structures is 18 feet. In the traditional overlay district the maximum height is 50 feet with exceptions for chimneys, antennas, etc. The overlay district standards supercede the C2 standards. The Commission likes the plans bringing residentials into downtown and making the overlay district building height similar to the C2 zoning district to allow for 2 -3 residential floors above commercial. The Commission would also like to acknowledge that as the plan moves forward with redevelopment that some of the blocks left out for redevelopment should be opened up. MOTION by Anderson to recommend the adoption of the Downtown Redevelopment Plan with Staff's changes recommended by this Commission. Second by Napper. Ayes: Messner, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. New Business: City Planner Pearson recommended canceling the second Regular Planning Commission Meeting in December since it falls on December 24, 2002. Staff will inform developers as applications are received that they will have to wait until the first meeting in January. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 26, 2002 Page 5 MOTION by Anderson to cancel the December 24, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting. Second by Messner. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Director's Report: None. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Anderson, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 7:58.m. Respectfully Submitted, Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary CITY OF ROSEMOUNT CITY HALL 2875 -145th street West •�a Rosemount, MN zm� 55068 -4997 Phone 651- 423 -4411 Hearing Impaired 651 423 -6219 Fax 651-423-5203 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes December 10, 2002 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, December 10, 2002. Vice Chairperson David Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members Myron Napper, Jason Messner, and Thomas Schiltz present. Chairperson Jeff Weisensel was absent. Also in attendance was City Planner Rick Pearson. The meeting was opened with Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda: No additions. Audience Input: None. MOTION by Messner to approve the November 26, 2002 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Second by Napper. Ayes: Napper, Anderson, Messner, Schiltz. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Public Hearing: Steven Laura Rajavuori Variance This variance request pertains to a 4.7 acre rural residential lot located in the White Lake Acres area along Biscayne Avenue north of 130 Street. This area was platted as rural residential development in 1988. It consists of 21 parcels with an average lot area of 5.3 acres. The Rajavuori's are requesting to split their lot into two separate lots which would double the density. The current zoning for this area has a minimum lot area size of 2.5 acres and density 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres. The basis for the Raj avuori's request is that other cities have different rural standards and that Rosemount should make an exception to their standards. If granted this would result in one or both lots being smaller than the 2.5 acre minimum standard and would effectively double the allowed density in this district for that lot to 2.5 units per acre. This would also create a precedent allowing most property owners of rural residential lots that meet the current minimum standards the opportunity to split their lots resulting in the residential density in that zoning district doubling. Staff is strongly recommending denial of this variance since there is no finding that Staff can come up with to justify this variance based on the findings required. Mr. Pearson presented to the Commission a study he did of the area surrounding this lot. White Lake Acres is one of the more recent developments in the area platted in 1988. The lots average about 5 acres. Another development is Jay Simmons which was platted in 1968. Most of the lots are quite smaller than the minimum lot standard. The reason they are smaller is because it predates the merger of the township and village. The city has a policy of working with property owners who have pre- existing lots that were platted before 1972 if the owner can prove the lots accommodate septic systems, wells, meet setbacks, etc. This would be a subdivision creating a new lot. 4 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes December 10, 2002 Page 2 Applicant Steve Rajavuori, 17240 Idlewood Way, Lakeville stated the request was to subdivide the property and sell two parcels rather than one. They feel it is a reasonable request because they are familiar with similar properties in other parts of Dakota and Scott Counties where 2 or 2.5 acre lot size is standard including for a septic system. They understand the lot size requirement but feel the issue is how close the septic systems can be together. They understand that if this is granted it may require granting it to others but they feel it is reasonable because it is a standard other places. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency only required one acre for septic systems. They feel 2.5 acres is plenty of space. Mr. Rajavuori stated that Burnsville requires two dry buildable acres for a property with a septic system. Commissioner Messner asked about Scott County as an example. Mr. Rajavuori stated Credit River has mostly 2.5 acre properties. Commissioner Messner asked if this was a requirement that if the lot size was 2.5 acres if it was a clustering rather than the density being based on 2.5 acres. Mr. Rajavuori did not know if there was an amount of open space required for those 2.5 acre lots. Vice Chairperson Anderson opened the public hearing. Mike Mortenson, 2026 128 Street, asked how the density levels and open space was calculated. Some of the neighboring properties are fairly large parcels with coverage of that parcel of a house, garage, etc. He wanted to know how it was calculated of greenspace versus covered space. Mr. Pearson stated you start with the parcel of land which is essentially an area per dwelling unit. If a person has a five acre parcel of land and are asking for a subdivision, if the maximum density in the district is one dwelling unit per five acres even though the minimum lot size is 2.5 acres that parcel would already be at the maximum density and would not be allowed to subdivide. Density is just as important as lot size. The regional policy is to lower density where sewer is not available. To subdivide you would need 10 acres so that the 1 per 5 would still be maintained. Once city sewer /water is available to a property the density could go up to 3 dwelling units per acre. Doug Lundy, 12590 Biscayne, feels everyone is hung up on the septic systems. He stated the neighbors didn't move out there to have a housing development. He doesn't want to see it happen because the people want the space. Bob Nagel, 2400 126 Street, bought his property in 1987 and built a house in 1988 with the idea of having it stay rural. He would like to stay rural and that is why he pays higher and higher taxes to keep it that way. If it is because of the money then he will split his property several times too. He is very much against this variance and said the idea is to keep it rural. He does not believe Rosemount is a suburb rather a rural which is how he wants to keep it where he lives. Dan Helwig, 2145 126 Street, also believe this could create a domino effect that would be very difficult to stop. He thinks when the land was platted in 1988 the decision was made. It would be difficult to subdivide due to placement of houses, etc. He believes it is an all or nothing thing. The other issue is that they paid assessments for the road that was there that was $12,211. If this variance was granted that share would be $11,490 and that with interest over the years is nearly $40,000 worth on the road assessment. That would be an additional cost he would hope would go to that extra lot. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes December 10, 2002 Page 3 MOTION by Anderson to close the public hearing. Second by Messner. Ayes: Anderson, Messner, Schiltz, Napper. Nays: 0. Motion carried. MOTION by Anderson to deny the variance request to Rural Residential lot area and density standards because of the inability to meet the findings required in Section 14.2.G of the Zoning Ordinance. Second by Messner. Ayes: Messner, Schiltz, Napper, Anderson. Nays: 0. Motion carried. Mr. Pearson told the applicant they have the right to appeal this decision to the City Council. If the City Council receives the appeal they would also have to schedule a public hearing. The applicant has 10 working days to file that appeal with the Planning Department. It would be put on the next available City Council agenda and then they would schedule the public hearing. Vice Chairperson Anderson commented to the applicant that it goes to community standard that it wants to set certain areas of Rosemount as rural. Even though other communities have different standards we must live within our own community standards. Rosemount has a unique identity as a rural community. Many comments we have received suggest that residents want to keep it rural. The variance request is not a time for the planning commission to look at density and zoning standards. That is something that needs to be addressed prior to any variance being brought forward to the planning commission because they are the non political body of the City. The City Council would ultimately have to make those decisions. Old Business: None. New Business: None. Director's Report: Mr. Pearson gave an update on City Council actions. The Council approved the recommendations for the mineral extraction process and those will be implemented in phases with the Mixed Use Industrial district. The variance granted for E E Enterprises for the sign was appealed by City Councilmember Klassen and there will be a public hearing on December 17, 2002 to discuss that variance. The Council adopted a motion not to adopt the Downtown Redevelopment Plan. There being no further business to come before this Commission, upon Motion by Anderson, and upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 6:57 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, 11gloC Chantel Nelson Recording Secretary