The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2008 PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Work Session of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, January 8, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with Commissioners Howell, Palda, Schultz, and Schwartz present. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Parks and Recreation Director Schultz and Planner Lindahl. Discussion: a. Outdoor Recreational Complex. Parks and Recreation Director Schultz presented this item. Mr. Schultz described the layout of the Outdoor Recreational Complex which includes: four (4) multi purpose softball /recreational baseball fields; two (2) youth baseball fields designed for 13 to 15 year olds; one (1) full size baseball field for high school students or adults; and four (4) multi- purpose football /lacrosse /soccer field. Mr. Schultz also described addition design elements of the complex, including the high tension power line easement on the west side of the complex; the location of the maintenance facilities and concession buildings; the parking lot designed to access onto Akron Avenue; and the possibility of a second access onto Bonaire Path. Commissioner Schwartz inquired about the possibility of a dog park within the complex. Mr. Schultz stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission is looking at the possibility for low intensity recreation within the power line easement, which might include a dog park or a bicycle course. There was additional discussion about the pedestrian access, field lighting and ancillary items, such as bathrooms, concessions, belchers, and maintenance facilities. Mr. Schultz discussed the proposal to install eight tennis courts in Erickson Park in place of the one soccer field in the park. Mr. Schultz discussed the proposed upgrades to the former St. Joseph's Church to bring it into compliance with Americans with Disability Act (ADA) standards and mechanical equipment replacement. The construction is proposed to occur mostly for ramps in the front entrance and an addition in the rear of the building to house new bathrooms, a mechanical room, and additional storage. Some additional changes will be made to convert the alter into a stage, included a ramp and improve stairs. Commissioner Schultz asked if a backstage area can be created. Mr. Schultz said that will be considered. b. Economic Development Element. Senior Planner Zweber presented this item. Discussion focused on the work that the Port Authority has done to create the Economic Development Element. The Economic Development Element consists of three parts: an analysis of the business within Rosemount and where Rosemount residents are employed; a description of recent economic development efforts that the City has conducted; and goals and policies for the City to expand it economic development activities in the future. There was general discussion about downtown, particularly the Development Framework for PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 8, 2008 PAGE 2 Downtown Rosemount, the downtown design guidelines, and downtown business retention. The consensus is that efforts need to be made to bring in business to the downtown that are attractive and will make residents want to come downtown. c. Housing Element. Senior Planner Zweber presented this item. The Housing Element describes the existing housing within Rosemount, subsections of housing such as senior housing and homes on individual septic systems, the additional housing needs through 2030, and the goals and policies to accommodate those needs. There was general discussion of the Metropolitan Council affordable housing goals, locating senior housing mixed within the community near their families, and housing for children returning from college and young families. Mr. Zweber explained that the Comprehensive Plan identifies the needs of the communities, but not necessarily determine the legislative solution. After the Comprehensive Plan is adopted, the next step will be determine if any revisions are needed to the Zoning Ordinance or if any new ordinances or program needed to be created. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:02 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Eric Zweber, Senior Planner PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2008 PAGE 1 Call to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, January 22, 2008. The meeting was called to order at 6:30p.m. with Commissioners Howell, Schwartz, and Palda present. Chairperson Messner and Commissioner Schultz were absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl, and Recording Secretary Hanson. Elect Chairperson Pro Tem: As a result of both the chairperson and co -chair being absent, a temporary chairperson needed to be appointed. It was determined that Commissioner Schwartz would be the Chairperson Pro Tem. MOTION by Howell to appoint Commissioner Schwartz as Chairperson Pro Tem. Second by Palda. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion carried. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of the November 27, 2007 Regular Meeting minutes. b. Approval of the November 27, 2007 Work Session Meeting minutes. MOTION by Palda to approve the Consent Agenda. Second by Howell. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion carried. Public Hearings: 5.a. Danner, Inc. Mineral Permit Renewal (08- 02 -ME). Planner Lindahl stated that the applicant, Marlon Danner of Danner Inc., requests renewal of the mineral extraction permit for his property on the south side of County Road 42, 1 1/4 miles east of U.S. Hwy. 52. This is a routine annual permit renewal as required by ordinance. During the review, staff noticed the applicant's phasing plan required updating. As a result, the applicant requests the Planning Commission open the public hearing and take any comment and then continue the hearing and this item to the February 26, 2008 meeting to allow time to revise their phasing plan. The public hearing was opened at 6:34p.m. There were no further public comments. MOTION by Howell to continue the public hearing to February 26, 2008. Second by Palda. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion approved. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2008 PAGE 2 5.b. Solberg Aggregate Mineral Permit Renewal (08- 03 -ME). Planner Lindahl presented this item. The applicant, Solberg Aggregate Company, requests renewal of the mineral extraction permit for the Otto Ped and Grace Kuznia properties located 4992 145` Street East. Solberg Aggregate Company took over operation of the pit in 2005 from Ames Construction and continues to operate the mine on a day -to -day basis. This application represents the routine annual permit renewal as required by ordinance. The public hearing was opened at 6:37p.m. There were no public comments. MOTION by Palda to close the public hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 6:38p.m. There was no discussion or questions among the Commission. MOTION by Schwartz to recommend the City Council approve renewal of the Solberg Aggregate Company (Ped Kuznia) Mineral Extraction Permit for 2008 subject to the following conditions: 1 Conformance with the attached 2008 Conditions for Mineral Extraction, including: a. Submission of an updated Surety Bond in the amount outlined in the attached 2008 Conditions for Mineral Extraction. b. Submission of an updated Certificate of Comprehensive General Liability Insurance as outlined in the 2008 attached Conditions for Mineral Extraction. Second by Howell. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Lindahl stated the item will go before the City Council at the meeting on February 19, 2008. Old Business: None. New Business: 7.a. Community Development 2008 -2009 Work S chedule. Planner Lindahl gave a background on the timeline staff has prepared for updating the City's sign ordinance in response to the City Council request in late 2007. The Council requested a timeline to understand how amendments to the ordinance would dovetail with other priority projects being undertaken by the Community Development Department. The Planning Commission had requested that the staff provide amendment information regarding reader boards in January, 2008. Mr. Lindahl further stated that at the Council meeting the timeline was accepted. Two councilmembers, Kim Shoe Corrigan and Mark Debettignies volunteered to serve on the work group along with volunteers from the Planning Commission. Staff is asking that two or three PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2008 PAGE 3 Commissioners volunteer to assist in redrafting sections of the sign ordinance. Commissioner Schwartz asked whether or not more information on signs will be presented to the sign committee. Mr. Lindahl pointed out that the first element of the sign ordinance review will include background information regarding the sign ordinance itself and then the assessment sessions will include information on specific City sign standards, other city standards, county standards, etc. Senior Planner Zweber added that the education portion is why Council members Shoe Corrigan and DeBettignies will be on the sign committee because of their past experience with serving on the Planning Commission and dealing with signs. Sign Committee meetings will begin in May on the 2° Tuesday of the month beginning at 7:OOp.m. Commissioners Howell, Palda and Schwartz all volunteered to serve on the sign committee. Reports: Senior Planner Zweber reviewed a few dates on the Community Development schedule: the February 12`" work session and February 13 for a joint Planning Commission City Council work session on Downtown Redevelopment Stonebridge, both meetings beginning at 6:30p.m. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Commissioner Palda made a motion to adjourn. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 6:51 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Work Session of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, February 12, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. with Commissioners Howell and Schwartz present. Commissioners Schultz and Palda were absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl and Recording Secretary Hanson. Also present were Don Kern of Flint Hills Resources, L.P., and Tom Mollet of CF Industries. Discussion: a. Land Use Element. Senior Planner Zweber explained that the Planning Commission needs to discuss the different maps and how they will be implemented. Any concerns raised will be evaluated and revised maps and a full development Land Use Element will be provided at the March Planning Commission work session. Mr. Zweber further explained the Met Council's goals for the Land Use Element and how the Planning Commission will meet those goals. One of the goals is to determine where it's feasible to provide resources. Mr. Zweber reviewed the Sewer System map and Water System map and explained the two different pressure zones. To construct on the East side, Mr. Zweber explained that the City will need to construct more wells and more water towers to support it which will require more capital planning in the future. With respect to the transportation plan, Mr. Zweber stated that the biggest player is the 42/52 intersection. He further reviewed the road map of full and partial accesses and different types of roads around the 42/52 intersection. In determining where additional development land will come from, Mr. Zweber explained that the northwest area will not work since it is already mostly developed, UMore will be doing their own planning, and therefore, the most logical place next to consider is southeast of the 42/52 interchange. Chairperson Messner asked if the Met Council had taken a look at the recent market fallout and changed their projections, to which Mr. Zweber replied that the Met Council will not be changing their projections. He stated that the Met Council views the market as being cyclical and that they mainly look at the infrastructure of whether or not the City can handle more expansion and they believe Rosemount can with the Empire Township treatment plant. Mr. Zweber reviewed the projections contained in the Land Use Element and discussed how much growth will be needed. He then further reviewed the Proposed Land Use Comp Plan map and showed the Planning Commission which areas the City is looking to expand the MUSA to. In addition, Mr. Zweber reviewed the different proposed land use designations contained in the Land Use Element and density levels per unit in the additional housing units projections. Chairperson Messner asked how the current mix of low density acreage to medium density acreage compared historically. Mr. Zweber stated that from 2000 -2006, medium density was at 35% and low density was at 65 The new projections come out to be 48% single family and 52% multi family. He stated that the Met Council would prefer to see more medium density or multi family units and further explained that at least three units need to be developed per acre or the Met Council will deny the comp plan. Mr. Zweber reviewed the units /acre guidelines for each density level and then opened the table for discussion. Planner Lindahl added that the lots in the Bacardi Avenue Old County 38 area will probably be handled similarly to the Harmony Addition with respect to the location of single family and multi family units. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2008 PAGE 2 Chairperson Messner asked about Business Park uses in the 42/52 area. Mr. Zweber stated that Business Park consists of office uses. The 42/52 intersection will be more auto oriented C3 zoning with gas stations, auto repair, etc. Mr. Zweber asked Don Kern of Flint Hills Resources if he had any concerns with the level of density in the mixed use area. Mr. Kern replied that Flint Hills would be concerned with any high density located next to the refinery but the higher density south of County Road 42 is quite a distance from the refinery. He stated that northwest winds could affect the residential area south of County Road 42 but that would be unpreventable. Mr. Zweber reviewed the proposed land use designations in the text section of the Land Use Element, including newly proposed areas of Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Downtown (DT) area, Community Commercial and Regional Commercial. Chairperson Messner asked if any private property is currently zoned Partial Open Space (POS). Mr. Zweber replied no but noted that particular attention will need to be paid to areas that are zoned public institutional but may not remain that way, particularly golf courses. Mr. Zweber stated that the next step in the process will be to look at requests received from current landowners with respect to land use issues and MUSA boundaries such as LeForet, Brockway, Flint Hills, and CF Industries. Chairperson Messner started a discussion on the Flint Hills owned property west of the railroad and east of Blaine Avenue and whether or not Flint Hills will be allowed to expand that far west. He stated he would be interested in seeing a long range projection on expansion from Flint Hills. He stated his desire to see the far section between Blaine Avenue and the railroad be kept as a transitional area where only certain things would be allowed. Don Kern asked the Commission if there any other concerns. Mr. Zweber stated that as the City grows closer to Flint Hills, the City may want to come up with a master plan stating what all is acceptable in that area of concern. The City does not want to use an HI land use designation but rather a GI land use where there would be a choice whether or not to approve an application for an HI use. Mr. Zweber stated that any master plan submitted by Flint Hills and similarly, CF Industries, would not have to be approved by the Met Council. In conclusion, Mr. Zweber stated that more zoning issues and specific requests will be discussed at the March work session. The next open house will be sometime in April. A City-wide mailer will be used to advertise the open house and will likely have a draft comp plan map. There will be two public hearings at the end of April and end of May and then the City will release the draft comp plan in June for public review. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Work Session of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, March 11, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:35p.m. with Commissioners Howell and Schultz present. Commissioners Schwartz and Palda were absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl and Recording Secretary Hanson. From the public were present Don Kern of Flint Hills Resources, L.P., Tom Mollet of CF Industries and Scott Dohmen, Manager of Pine Bend Warehouse. Discussion: a. Land Use Element. Senior Planner Zweber reviewed what was discussed at the February work session and potential changes to the maps. The first issue Mr. Zweber discussed is the Commercial areas. There are four separate commercial zoning districts DT Downtown, NC Neighborhood Commercial (Sixty One Stop), CC Community Commercial (Harmony area, Chippendale and County Road 46), RC Regional Commercial (Carlson Implement relocation). Neighborhood Commercial (NC), corresponds with C1 Convenience Commercial including gas stations, etc. intended to serve the local neighborhood. Minimum requirements for development needs to be a neighborhood in existence, houses need to be built first and served by sewer and water. Community Commercial (CC) consists of retail commercial areas most familiar to Rosemount. The area is mostly meant for retail but office use would also be allowed. Most appropriate zoning district for CC would be C4 General Commercial, with some limited amounts of C3 Highway Service Commercial. An example of Regional Commercial (RC) would be Canada Circle and South Robert Trail consisting of more auto orientated businesses that require outdoor storage, and commercial businesses that have a regional draw. This area could range from 10 acres for auto orientated businesses to 50 acres for bigger businesses with a regional draw. Downtown Commercial (DT) consists of mostly mixed use developments which operate efficiently in a building intended for downtown with limited shared parking, brick masonry fronts, 3 -4 story building, pedestrian focused streets. Chairperson Messner asked about the intended use of the property to the west of the Genz Ryan complex. Mr. Zweber stated that the land to the west of the Genz Ryan property would not be needed to accommodate the concept plan currently being considered. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Zweber about the number of units per acre in the Stonebridge project compared to the amounts listed in the Land Use Element. Mr. Zweber explained the requirements of the Met Council to state a certain number of units per acre. Chairperson Messner asked how the outlots were configured in the Akron and County Road 42 area. Mr. Zweber explained how the commercial outlots ended up looking and stated the map PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 2008 PAGE 2 will be updated when we receive the new GIS data from the County. Mr. Zweber stated there are requests from specific landowners that the Commission needs to address. Mr. Zweber went through each request individually. Flint Hills Resources desires to have their entire property bounded by Rich Valley Blvd., Blaine Avenue, 140` and Highway 52 zoned Heavy Industrial with a comp plan designation of general industrial. Mr. Zweber explained that the City does recommend reguiding the Flint Hills area to General Industrial. The City could consider rezoning areas to HI but will require a master development plan of that area. Mr. Zweber explained that the intent is not necessarily to put the most intense land uses on the open areas, but there are some of the less intense uses that can be used in some of those areas. A master development plan can be used to discuss those different areas. Mr. Zweber stated that staff recommends adding the requirement of a master development plan to the text of the comprehensive plan. A discussion took place on the property Flint Hills owns south of 140` what their future expansion intensions are, and what uses are designated for that area. Chairperson Messner stated his concern that if the area is zoned HI and Flint Hills decide to sell some parcels to another business, the City would not be able to prevent another HI business. CF Industries (CF) has submitted a letter requesting that all of the property they own be designated to accommodate HI Heavy Industrial zoning. All of CF's land that is not zoned FP Floodplain, with the exception of about 110 acres on the east side of their facility, is currently designated GI and zoned HI Heavy Industrial. Mr. Zweber explained that staff is not supportive of any changes to the FP Floodplain zoned land due to the additional protections needed for land that is within the 100 year floodplain. The barge docks and associated infrastructure currently located at CF is permitted with the FP Floodplain zoning. The only other area not designated GI or zoned HI Heavy Industrial is the 110 acres east of their solid fertilizer operation. Mr. Zweber stated that staff is not supportive of designating the 110 acres as GI at this time for a number of reasons, including: The area serves as a transition area between their heavy industrial use and the neighboring public and open space uses; The sensitive environment of the area and its location within the Mississippi River Critical Area Corridor; Staff does not want additional industry on the riverfront and if the property was re- guided, then CF could sell the land to a different industrial user; and Staff's desires to maximize their site that is currently zoned heavy industrial and that if CF was to expand onto the 110 acres, it would be development with less intense uses. Mr. Zweber further explained that if CF was to expand its facility, it would be expected that CF would develop a master development plan and it would be approved by the City before any additional land would be designated GI or re -zoned to HI Heavy Industrial. Mr. Zweber stated he realizes that this is treating CF differently than Flint Hills, but if Flint Hills sold some PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 2008 PAGE 3 of their land there would be no harm in having additional general industrial businesses located next to the refinery, while if CF sold some of their land it would generate additional general industrial businesses along the riverfront and within the critical area. Commissioner Schultz asked if in the event CF sold the land, wouldn't that give the City an opportunity to bring a new business to the community. Mr. Zweber stated that the City would not be able to control subdivisions if the parcel is over five acres in size and stated that the City is comfortable with saying it does not want additional development along the riverfront between Pine Bend Trail and the river itself. Commissioner Howell stated that she understands the environmental concerns but asked how the City could allow CF to use the property they now own as they desire, but prevent future HI uses in that area. Mr. Zweber stated that a master development plan is a method that would allow the City to look at their requests at this time, and the comp plan could be amended if appropriate. Mr. Scott Dohmen of Pine Bend Warehouse was present at the meeting and stated that his company is not out to destroy the critical habitat. He stated the land in that area is very steep terrain that they could not try to develop. The company recently purchased the railroad tracks on the parcel from Union Pacific. Mr. Dohmen pointed out on the map which areas would be developable. Mr. Tom Mollet from CF Industries spoke and agreed with Mr. Dohmen that CF would never develop the shoreline; the terrain is too steep and the DNR would never allow it. He further stated that CF Industries has no intentions of selling the land but they are looking at ways to run their company better. Chairperson Messner asked when they would propose development in that area. Mr. Dohmen replied they may possibly build more railroad tracks next year to accommodate more cars. If the land was guided GI, it would eliminate difficulties in the future. Mr. Mollet asked what the process would be if the land remained guided AG. Mr. Zweber explained that CF could submit a master development plan at anytime and could possibly get it approved before the comprehensive plan is adopted. Commissioner Schultz asked whether or not the City would be able to reject any new businesses corning to that area in the event CF would sell the land. Mr. Zweber explained that if the business is a use permitted or conditional within the zoning code, then no, the City would not be able to deny a type of business. Commissioner Schultz asked if the comp plan specifically states that the City cannot have any more industry along the riverfront. Mr. Zweber stated that it is mentioned in other areas of the comp plan but the one big area that addresses the issue is the Comp Plan map which is what the Commission is currently discussing. Chairperson Messner stated that the City's intention is not to take anything away from CF, but is simply asking for a master plan showing what their future intentions are. He further stated he would prefer to see more information before making a decision on this issue such as what area is buildable, how close to the park would the development be, how heavily wooded it is. He stated he would like to see specific plans for future uses and location and then he would possibly be willing to divide the area as partial AG and partial GI similar to the curved ridgeline on the Flint Hills property. There was discussion about getting additional information from CF on future 410 plans and interest in touring the actual facility. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 2008 PAGE 4 Irene Beberg, on behalf of her mother Olga Treise, has submitted a letter requesting that her mother's property be included in the MUSA and be designated as high density residential or commercial. Mrs. Treise owns approximately 50 acres located northwest of the intersection of McAndrews Road and South Robert Trail. The land is currently designated RR and has AG Agricultural and RR Rural Residential zoning. The property is about three quarters of a mile from the nearest sewer and water lines and is surrounded by other RR designated properties. Mr. Zweber explained that staff is not supportive of designating this property anything other than RR. The proposed land use map does not change any of the areas designated RR in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. In April of 2007, the City conducted an open house with the rural residential land owners and asked them if they were supportive of the one (1) unit per five (5) acre standard in the RR designation. The City received 55 responses to this question and 87% of them were supportive of the one (1) unit per five (5) acre standard. Residents overwhelmingly want the rural residential character of northwest Rosemount to be maintained and re- designating Mrs. Treise's property would urbanize this rural area and change its character. The Commission agreed with Mr. Zweber's explanation and recommendation. Mr. Lenertz owns a 2.2 acre property, only 100 feet in width that is located on the northern Rosemount boundary and is surrounded by Flint Hills refinery. The property is currently undeveloped. The property is located directly south of an 8.8 acre parcel that Mr. Lenertz owns in Inver Grove Heights and that has a truck service and tire shop. The property is currently designated GI and Mr. Lenertz has requested that the property maintain that designation. Staff is supportive of maintaining Mr. Lenertz's GI designation. The Commission agreed with Mr. Zweber's recommendation. Le Foret is a thirteen lot single family neighborhood on the west boundary of the City, located just west of the Country Hills neighborhood. The neighborhood is about 40 acres in total and is currently designated Transitional Residential (TR) and is zoned RR Rural Residential. The lots within Le Foret are typically 2.5 acres in size, but the surrounding neighborhoods all have lots less than one (1) acre in size, many less than 0.5 acres. Le Foret and the 22 lot neighborhood to the north (Birchview Terrace) are both outside the MUSA, but are completely surrounded by the MUSA both in Rosemount and Apple Valley. The Le Foret Neighborhood has submitted a letter requesting that land use designation be changed to RR. Mr. Zweber explained that staff is not supportive of this request. The lots in Le Foret meet the performance standards of a RR neighborhood, but the neighborhood is 40 acres in size; it is surrounded by urban residences; and there is sewer and water available along three of its boundaries. These traits do not provide the neighborhood the same rural nature of the RR in northwest Rosemount. Maintaining RR designation does not require the Le Foret neighborhood to change its character or zoning if they chose to stay as they are, but the ability to be served with sewer and water is available to them if they choose. The Commission agreed with Mr. Zweber's recommendation. Ed McMenomy owns a 2.7 acre parcel on the northeast corner of Chippendale Avenue and County Road 46. The property currently is occupied by a single family house, but the land is PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES S MARCH 11, 2008 PAGE 5 designated for Business Park (BP). The property used to be located west of Chippendale Avenue, but Chippendale Avenue was re- aligned west of the home a number of years ago to separate the intersection from the rail crossing at County Road 46. Mr. McMenomy requests that the property be designated commercial. Mr. Zweber stated that staff would be supportive of designating the property Neighborhood Commercial (NC). The property has frontage on a busy county road and has significant frontage onto Chippendale Avenue, making the property easy to develop into a small commercial establishment. NC is a new designation to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, but is also a reflection of the existing commercial businesses that serve a surrounding residential neighborhood, such as the businesses at the intersection of Chippendale Avenue and 145t Street West and the three (3) acre outlot south of the Harmony neighborhood. The Commission agreed with Mr. Zweber's recommendation. State Representative Dennis Ozment lives on a wooded three (3) acre lot about 700 feet west of the County Road 42 and US Hwy 52 interchange. His lot is designated BP, as is the properties to the west of his, while the properties to the north and east are designated GI. Representative Ozment requests that his property be re- designated to GI. The boundary between the BP and GI was determined during the 42 -52 planning process to be the edge of the wooded ridge running from the northwest to the southeast. Representative Ozment property lies on the west side of the ridge along with the other BP designated properties. Mr. Zweber explained that Staff does not support the designation of GI for the same reasons as was determined during the 42 -52 plan. Representative Ozment's property is located west of the wooded ridgeline, which is the BP side of the BP and GI land use designation boundary. All of the Commission members agreed with Mr. Zweber's recommendations. Report: Mr. Zweber reported that there will not be a regular planning meeting in March due to lack of agenda items. There will be a work session on the 8t of April. The regular meeting in April on the 22 will begin at 8:OOp.m. due to the referendum. There will be a community hearing on the comp plan at the April planning meeting, which is not a public hearing because no formal approval will be recommended. Staff will be looking for direction from the planning commission. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 9:03p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Work Session of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 8, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 7:02p.m. with Commissioners Schwartz, Palda and Schultz present. Commissioner Howell was absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl and Recording Secretary Hanson Discussion: Mr. Zweber explained that he has expanded upon the draft Land Use Element based on the discussions from the March 11 work session. The text of the document has been expanded to provide detailed information for unique areas of Rosemount, explanations of how the Comprehensive Plan meets the requirements of the Metropolitan Council, and the specific goals and policies for the development of the community. Staff would like to hear from the Planning Commission if this additional information addresses their concerns expressed at the March work session. Mr. Zweber also requested discussion on the remaining individual requests from homeowners. Mr. Zweber explained that Irene Beberg attended the Comprehensive Plan open house on Thursday, April 3 and continued to request the City to provide sewer and water to her mother's property. Irene Beberg, on behalf of her mother Olga Treise, submitted a second letter 410 requesting that her mother's property be included in the MUSA and be designated as high density residential or commercial. Mrs. Treise owns approximately 50 acres located northwest of the intersection of McAndrews Road and South Robert Trail. The land is currently designated RR and has AG Agricultural and RR Rural Residential zoning. The property is about three quarters of a mile from the nearest sewer and water lines and is surrounded by other RR designated properties. Mr. Zweber stated that staff is not supportive of designating this property anything other than RR. The proposed land use map does not change any of the areas designated RR in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. In April of 2007, the City conducted an open house with the rural residential land owners and asked them if they were supportive of the one (1) unit per five (5) acre standard in the RR designation. The City received 55 responses to this question and 87% of them were supportive of the one (1) unit per five (5) acre standard. Residents overwhelmingly want the rural residential character of northwest Rosemount to be maintained and re- designating Mrs. Treise's property would urbanize this rural area and change its character. Chairperson Messner asked why there was Transitional Residential on the east side of Highway 3, but not the west. I\Ir. Zweber explained that on the east side of Highway 3, there are several lots under an acre in size with wetlands within their lots. The homeowners there have septic systems that they are required to have inspected each year, but in the event their current system fails, they do not have enough property to build another system. The City has health concerns for that area more than the area west of Highway 3. These lots are labeled TR so it is easier to get them sewer and water if the need arises. Since the City isn't sure when that will happen, the MUSA was not expanded to include them at this time. PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 2 In her letter, Ms. Beberg mentions a study the City completed on the area to see if there was adequate infrastructure to serve them with sewer and water. Mr. Zweber explained that the City has adequate infrastructure to serve the entire northern portion with sewer and water but does it make sense to do so? The Commissioners all agreed with Mr. Zweber's recommendation not to change the land designation of Olga Treise's parcel. Mr. Zweber further stated that staff advised Mrs. Beberg that they are not supportive of the change but that she has the opportunity to make her request directly to the Planning Commission at the community hearings in April and May. Chairperson Messner asked to discuss the Flint Hills request with respect to property located at the corner of 140t and Blaine Avenue. He asked if the property was designated as GI, would it give them the automatic right to get HI zoning. Mr. Zweber, in response to that question, further explained the new language he added to the Land Use Element. Chairperson Messner stated that if Flint Hills does not have an immediate use for that property, the City could leave it as AG until such time as Flint Hills has an intended use. The Comp Plan map states the City intends to zone it as GI. The matter will need to be discussed in the future. Commissioner Schultz questioned the wording in the Land Use Element with respect to "four industrial businesses" in the Heavy Industrial District and whether or not if those four businesses would have turnover, would the wording still apply. Mr. Zweber stated the current wording is about the existing development as it is today, but the word "existing" could be removed so it would include development in the future also. It was decided to remove the word "existing" from the current wording in the Land Use Element. With respect to CF Industries' request, Mr. Zweber explained that staff is still not supportive of designating the 110 acres as GI at this time for the number of reasons stated in the executive summary. Chairperson Messner stated he would not have a problem with the flat undeveloped area becoming GI but further stated his concern with where to draw the line to protect the park and provide a buffer. There was a discussion about the statute requirements with respect to the Critical Corridor, and Mr. Zweber also stated that there would still be a tree preservation requirement to any development they intend to complete. Chairperson Messner stated that reguiding only the first portion does not preclude CF Industries from coming later and requesting a reguiding of the second portion if they can show what development plans they want to implement. He further suggested to inform CF Industries before the meeting on April 21" of the intended changes and get their comments. It was decided to guide the area GI up to the section line before the tree line. Another item Mr. Zweber wanted to discuss was the specific language pertaining to Transitional Residential and how it applies to the area around Dodd Blvd., Highway 3 located north of Connemara Trl. This area of TR guiding is different than the northern TR section. Mr. Zweber read through the language having to do with this area. During this discussion, the apartment building located on 132n Street was mentioned in that the owner requests that the MUSA be PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION MINUTES APRIL 8, 2008 PAGE 3 expanded to include all of his land in that area and not just the apartment building. Chairperson Messner agreed to designate the area TR and expand the MUSA to include the apartment building parcel, but not the other land. The other Commissioners agreed. Reports: Mr. Zweber stated that the next meeting will be on Monday, April 21st, due to voting on the referendum taking place on Tuesday, the 22"`'. He also mentioned the Volunteer Banquet on Wednesday, April 23"'. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES II) APRIL 21, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 21, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:31p.m. with Commissioners Howell, Schwartz, Schultz and Palda present. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl, Project Engineer Dawley, Community Development Director Lindquist, City Engineer Brotzler, Parks Supervisor Schuster, and Recording Secretary Hanson. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of the February 12, 2008 Work Session Meeting minutes. b. Approval of the February 26, 2008 Regular Meeting minutes. c. Approval of the March 11, 2008 Work Session Meeting minutes. d. Approval of the April 8, 2008 Work Session Meeting minutes. MOTION by Schwartz to approve the Consent Agenda. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion carried. Public Hearings: At 6:32p.m., Chairperson Messner recessed the regular Planning Commission meeting and opened the Board of Appeals and Adjustments meeting. 5.a. D.R. Horton (Crosscliffe) Variance Request (08- 11 -V). Senior Planner Zweber presented this item. D.R. Horton has constructed a home at 3727 Crosscliffe Path in the Crosscroft 3 subdivision that has a front porch that extends into the required 35 foot yard setback. D.R. Horton has proposed a revised plan that would reduce the size of the front porch, but the revised porch would still extend into the front yard seven (7) feet. To accommodate the revised plans, D.R. Horton has applied for a variance to allow a 28 foot front yard setback for the porch. Mr. Zweber reviewed the findings required for a variance to be approved. Commissioner Schultz asked if the porch would still match the rest of the neighborhood once it is revised. Mr. Zweber stated that yes, it would have the same aesthetics as the other homes in the area. The Applicant, Eric Gamradt of D.R. Horton, approached the Commission and apologized for the mishap on the jobsite. He stated the house would have the same aesthetics, without the four foot projection from where the garage roof is and the porch would still be gabled. Commissioner Schwartz asked the Applicant if the window was going to be blocked after the porch was pushed back. Mr. Gamradt replied that the columns of the porch will fall to either side of the window so the window will not be blocked. The public hearing was opened at 6:42p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 21, 2008 PAGE 2 There were no public comments. MOTION by Palda to close the public hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 6:43p.m. Chairperson Messner stated that although it is an unfortunate situation, he sees no other alternative to correct it. MOTION by Messner to approve the variance to allow a 28 foot front yard setback when a 35 foot setback is required for a front porch at 3727 Crosscliffe Path. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated the Board of Appeals and Adjustments is the final word for variances but there is a 10 day appeal period. If it is appealed then it would go before the City Council. At 6:43p.m., Chairperson Messner recessed the Board of Appeals and Adjustments meeting and re- convened the regular Planning Commission meeting. 5.b. TNT Fireworks Interim Use Permit Application (08 -10 -IUP). Planner Lindahl presented this item. The applicant, TNT Fireworks, requests an Interim Use Permit "IUP to allow the operation of a temporary fireworks sales lot. This application is required because the City amended the commercial zoning standards in November 2005 to classify temporary outdoor sales lots as transient merchants requiring an Interim Use Permit. Should the City approve the IUP, TNT will operate the sales lot in the northeast portion of the Cub Foods parking lot in the Rosemount Village Shopping Center located at 3784 150` Street West. Mr. Lindahl reviewed the requirements of approving an interim use permit. The Applicant was present but did not provide comment. The public hearing was opened at 6:49p.m. There were no public comments. MOTION by Howell to close the public hearing. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 6:50p.m. There was no discussion or questions among the Commission. MOTION by Palda to approve an Interim Use Permit (IUP) to allow a temporary fireworks sales lot in the northeast portion of the Cub Foods parking lot in the Rosemount Village Shopping Center, subject to the following: 1. Conformance with all conditions outlined in the attached Interim Use Permit for 2008 through 2010. Second by Howell. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 21, 2008 PAGE 3 Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Lindahl stated this item will go before the City Council on May 20, 2008. Old Business: None. New Business: 7.a. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Community Hearing. Senior Planner Zweber stated the City has completed the major elements of the draft Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Zweber reviewed the major elements and instructed the Commission that it is not expected to take any action on the Comp Plan tonight, but instead continue the public testimony to the May 27 Planning Commission meeting. The community hearing was opened at 6:58p.m. Scott Dohmen, CF Industries, 5300 Pine Bend Trail, approached the Commission. He presented a letter to the Commission from CF Industries. He thanked the Commission for attending the tour of their facilities on April 8`''. Mr. Dohmen further stated that while CF Industries appreciates the Commission's decision to move the development line to the east, they would like to do an assessment of the first grove of trees in the hopes of moving the line even further to the tree line bordering the park. He further stated that CF agrees that a PUD agreement would work for their development and thanked the Commission for the hard work they have put into the Comp Plan process. Irene Beberg, daughter of Olga Treise, owner of property located at 12391 Dodd Boulevard, in the Rural Residential area by Hwy 3 and McAndrews Road, approached the Commission. Ms. Beberg stated she feels that leaving their land rural residential without City sewer and water is not the best use of that land. She stated that if the MUSA line could be moved to include their land, they could sell the land to development that would give the City a better tax base such as senior housing, office park, or even a grocery store. Ms. Beberg mentioned she has several neighbors that are interested in selling their land but cannot without installing new sewer systems. She stated that she was assessed when County Road 38 was installed and then she agreed to let the City use the wetlands on her property for drainage. She would appreciate it if the City could help her and her family out with their request to provide them with City sewer and water. Chairperson Messner asked Ms. Beberg how much land she owned and how many acres did she deem buildable. Ms. Beberg replied that her family owns approximately 60 acres and probably only about 21 acres are buildable. She further stated that several lots on the east side of Highway 3 have problems with their septic systems but since their lots are one acre or less, they do not have any space to build a new system. Don Kern, Flint Hills Resources, approached the Commission and expressed his thanks for the Commission working with Flint Hills on Comp Plan issues. He stated that even though Flint Hills would like to see a broader scope of Heavy Industrial in the southwest area of their property, he believes they are on the right track. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Kern if he has seen the new language in the Comp Plan with respect to existing businesses. Mr. Kern replied that he has reviewed it and it looked good. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES APRIL 21, 2008 PAGE 4 Commissioner Schwartz asked Mr. Zweber if staff could verify the problems with the septic systems on the lots east of Highway 3 as mentioned by Ms. Beberg. Mr. Zweber replied that staff compiles that information periodically from owners and therefore, will be able to provide that information to the Commission. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Dohmen of CF Industries to explain the tree assessment he had mentioned earlier. Mr. Dohmen approached again and stated that they would like to commence a study of the first grove of trees since they are a poor quality of trees and not of much value. The trees on the east line bordering the park are better healthier hardwoods. CF would like to clean up the center grove of trees and move the development line to the east tree section. Chairperson Messner clarified that the quality of trees is not the only issue with the location of the development line and that he would like to see some kind of concept plan from CF before considering a further movement of the line. Mr. Dohmen replied that he agrees and is willing to work with the City within the next month to have a concept plan ready for the next meeting. There were no further public comments. MOTION by Messner to continue the community hearing until the May 27, 2008 regular meeting. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. Community hearing was continued. Reports: Mr. Zweber reminded the Commission of the Volunteer Appreciation Banquet at the Community Center on Wednesday night, April 23. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Commissioner Schwartz made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Howell. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 7:18p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary SIGN COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES MAY 13, 2008 PAGE 1 Call to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the Sign Committee was held on Tuesday, May 13, 2008. The meeting was called to order at 6:40p.m. with Commissioners Messner, Schwartz, Palda, Howell and Schultz present. Also in attendance were City Attorney Mary Tietjen, Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl and Recording Secretary Hanson. Council member Shoe Corrigan arrived later. Introduction. Election of Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. Council Member Shoe- Corrigan was nominated as Chairperson. Planning Commissioner Schwartz was nominated as Vice Chairperson. Sign Ordinance Committee Timeline and Process. Planner Lindahl gave an overview of the process and expectations of the Sign Committee over the next year, including the following steps: (1) introduction to sign ordinance; (2) assessment of Rosemount's sign standards; (3) engagement of the public in reviewing the proposed revisions to the sign ordinance; and (4) formal review and approval process. Zoning Powers and Sign Regulations Mary Tietjen, Kennedy G raven. Mary Tietjen, City Attorney with Kennedy Graven, gave a presentation on the rules and regulations relating to signs. Types of regulations include (1) content based; (2) content neutral; (3) time, place and manner restrictions. Ms. Tietjen recommended staying away from content based regulations; they are hard to uphold in court. Commissioner Messner asked if time and temperature regulations are content based. Ms. Tietjen replied that cases have said that even though restrictions on time and temperature technically deal with content, it is so benign the courts have found it okay to regulate. She further stated that allowing that type of sign has no negative impact on the community. Ms. Tietjen added that she knows of no case law on gas station signs, but that they would probably fall in the same category. Ms. Tietjen continued her presentation with two different types of speech commercial and non commercial and explained the different between the two. The next topic of Ms. Tietjen's presentation was regarding off premise signs. She stated that courts have upheld prohibiting off premises advertising signs. However, she stated the City needs to consider the following if allowing off premise signs (1) could be risky if limiting it to real estate signs, if you allow for one, you need to allow for all; (2) any of those signs allowed could be substituted for a non commercial signs; [(3) what limitations to place on off premise signs. 1 SIGN COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES MAY 13, 2008 PAGE 2 Commissioner Schultz questioned signs not specifically stating "for sale" but the intent to sell is known. Ms. Tietjen stated if you know they are selling the item, it is still considered commercial activity within a residential neighborhood and that regulations limiting this type of activity are based on the zoning district in which the sign is located and not the content of the sign's message. Ms. Tietjen continued with electronic signs and stated the City has three exceptions which should be okay. However, she recommended that any reference or restriction to the type of messages that may be displayed be removed. Ms. Tietjen stated that some cities have banned electronic signs completely, some have regulated how often the message can change, and the brightness of the sign. The final topic of Ms. Tietjen's presentation was with respect to crucial components an ordinance should contain and things to avoid, including the following: (1) statement of purpose; (2) procedural standards; (3) substitution clause; (4) severability clause; (5) political signs (6) no content regulation. Ms. Tietjen concluded by stating that all five items were addressed in the first phase of the sign ordinance update completed last November. Commissioner Schultz stated that while the Sign Committee examines the ordinance, it is important to her to keep the City looking decent, but at the same time, be fair to local business owners. Ms. Tietjen confirmed that regulations can be by aesthetics only. Council member Shoe Corrigan added that zoning districts need to be considered while restricting. Off- Premise Signs (right -of -way, real estate, even, commercial activity) Planner Lindahl reviewed the letter from Charlie LeFevere, City Attorney from Kennedy Graven regarding off premises signs. Mr. LeFevere raised the following issues for the City to be aware of: (1) equity between different types of signs, what is allowed and what is not; (2) permission or authority of property owner to install the off premise sign; (3) commercial vs. non commercial speech. Standards and Enforcement Policies from Other Communities Planner Lindahl reviewed a table provided in the packet on off premise and right -of -way regulations from other communities, including the enforcement policies of each community. Commissioner Schwartz questioned the policy of one community who has staff retrieving signs weekly that are in violation and whether or not there is a fine for violators to pay to cover the cost to the city. Mr. Lindahl replied that it was not known on Eagan's policy, but that Shakopee's policies are more specific with respect to fees. Commissioner Schultz asked if Shakopee actually enforces that policy and charges the fee. Mr. Lindahl replied that he can do more research on that to find out but assumes they do enforce it. Mr. Lindahl stated that staff needs feedback on which of the following three options the Sign SIGN COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES MAY 13, 2008 PAGE 3 Committee wants to use as a standard when reviewing the ordinance. 1. Maintain the city's existing standards and policy. This would require removal of all off premise signs and signs within the right -of -way except Official Signs regardless of topic and would be consistent with five of the fourteen surveyed communities. 2. Maintain the city's existing standards but amend the informal enforcement policy. This could include adopting a policy similar to the City of Eagan which provides uniform enforcement during typical business hours (Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) and as needed enforcement over the weekend by the Police department. Eagan's enforcement policy focuses city staff and resources on Monday mornings when most violations occur. 3. Amend the ordinance to allow some off premise and right -of -way signs subject to permission from the property owner or the person in control of the property and size, height, setback and display time standards. Commissioner Schultz stated that she could not support option #1 and asked Mr. Lindahl for an example of option #3. Mr. Lindahl replied that option #3 would allow off premise and right of -way signs but the ordinance would set restrictions on the type of signs allowed as to property and size, height, setback and display time standards and zoning districts. Senior Planner Zweber asked Ms. Tietjen if there was a way to limit off premise signs to businesses within the City of Rosemount. Ms. Tietjen stated her first reaction would be that it would be okay to make that restriction, but she would need to check more into it. Mr. Zweber asked if it could be restricted as to how far or how close the sign could be placed to the particular business doing the advertising. Ms. Tietjen replied that restriction could definitely be made. Commissioner Howell stated she could support option #3, but restrictions would have to be made such as open house or garage sale signs placed on the day of event, compared to builder signs that are displayed for long periods of time. Council member Shoe- Corrigan stated the Committee needs to consider how much staff time does the City have to go out on Monday morning to pull signs. Also, she added that she is worried about requiring permission from the property owner. Ms. Tietjen replied to Council member Shoe Corrigan's concern that within the location restriction, the issue may fall within the purpose of the easement where the City wouldn't need permission of property owner. Mr. Lindahl summarized that the Committee does not want to go with option #1, and would possibly want to combine options #2 and #3, with more information on enforcement policies. Commentary Council Members. Council member Shoe- Corrigan stated that what she hears most people say is that the City should maintain the small-town feel and signage is part of that. However, the City needs to SIGN COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES MAY 13, 2008 PAGE 4 clearly define parameters as the community grows. She also stated that the Committee should be educated on electronic reader board signs to stay current on the technology. She further stated she feels the ordinance is outdated and it needs to be brought up to date and be designed to address future issues also. Discussion of Next Meeting. Mr. Lindahl stated the next Sign Committee meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, June 10, beginning with the assessment portion of the process. Council member Shoe Corrigan requested the meeting be moved to a different date due to scheduling conflicts and it was decided to move the meeting to Wednesday, June 4` With respect to electronic signs information, Mr. Lindahl stated that it can all be very detailed to the point of being overwhelming and that Mary Tietjen may need to come to the meeting when electronic signs are discussed. Adjournment. There being no further business to come before this Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 8:28p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 27, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:31p.m. with Commissioners Howell, Schwartz, and Schultz present. Commissioner Palda was absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl, Project Engineer Dawley, and Recording Secretary Hanson. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of the April 21, 2008 Regular Meeting minutes. MOTION by Howell to approve the Consent Agenda. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion carried. Public Hearings: At 6:32p.m., Chairperson Messner recessed the regular Planning Commission meeting and opened the Board of Appeals and Adjustments meeting. 5.a. Great River Energy Variance Request (08- 16 -V). Senior Planner Zweber presented this item. Great River Energy (GRE) has a communication antenna at the switching station at Keegan Lake that does not work properly due to interference from weather and vegetation. GRE is requesting to install a new antenna on a 50 foot tall pole to resolve the interference issues. A 50 foot tall pole exceeds the allowed accessory structure height and GRE is requesting a variance to allow the construction of the pole. Mr. Zweber reviewed the findings required for a variance to be approved. The Applicant was present but did not provide any comments. The public hearing was opened at 6:38p.m. There were no public comments. MOTION by Schwartz to close the public hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 6:39p.m. There was no follow up discussion among the Commissioners. MOTION by Schultz to approve the variance to allow the installation of a 50 foot tall pole to accommodate a 700 MHz wireless communications antenna at the Keegan Lake switching station. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 2 As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated the Board of Appeals and Adjustments is the final word for variances but there is a 10 day appeal period. If it is appealed then it would go before the City Council. At 6:40p.m., Chairperson Messner recessed the Board of Appeals and Adjustments meeting and re- convened the regular Planning Commission meeting. 5.b. The Rottlund Company Major Amendment to PUD, Preliminary Plat, Rezoning and Final Plat of Harmony 5 Addition and Pickens Plat (08- 12 -AMD, 08- 13 -PP, 08- 14 -ZA, 08- 19-FP). Senior Planner Zweber presented this item. Rottlund Homes is acquiring all the vacant property within the Harmony subdivision previously owned by CPDC individually and the neighboring Pickens property. The original preliminary plat for Harmony includes an outlot for 120 rental units within two apartment buildings and another outlot for a third building that is planned for 60 units of senior housing. Rottlund has requested an amendment to the planned unit development (PUD) and preliminary plat to allow the 120 apartments and 60 senior housing units to be replaced with 78 townhomes. There is also a requested change to replace 28 Urban Villa style townhomes with 16 Garden Homes style quad townhomes. In addition, the Pickens property is requested to be platted into nine single family lots. Mr. Zweber stated that last year M I Bank (M &I) assumed possession of the vacant parcels that were owned by CPDC. M &I has been negotiating the sale of all the vacant parcels to Rottlund, but Rottlund has conditioned the sale on applying for and receiving an amendment to the planned unit development (PUD) and preliminary plat to convert the 120 apartment units and 60 senior housing units into townhouses. Mr. Zweber further explained that Rottlund is not interested in developing apartments and senior housing in Rosemount, but they have been having success building and selling townhouses within the Harmony subdivision. Mr. Zweber further explained the different areas of planned development and the characteristics including the site layout, townhome and single family design, landscaping and tree preservation, access and parking, rezoning, the city park area and utilities. In greater detail, Mr. Zweber explained that the parking spots requested by the Applicant in the townhome area are a few spaces short of what is required but that is being remedied by extra parking spaces in another area. Commissioner Schultz asked if the homeowners' association approves of giving up the six stalls at the clubhouse. Mr. Zweber replied that the homeowners' association would have to agree but that Rottlund is a part of that association. Chairperson Messner asked where the shortage of six stalls exists. Mr. Zweber showed the Commission on the site layout where the parking spaces should have been installed. Commissioner Howell asked Mr. Zweber to explain the impact on the tax money that is to be paid back to the TIF. Mr. Zweber gave a brief background of the TIF matter. He stated that the excess in the TIF monies is being used to pay for redevelopment in the downtown area. The City has recently purchased both of the outstanding TIF notes relating to the Harmony project. The townhomes Rottlund proposes would produce less TIF monies than the original apartments and senior housing proposal which is one of the reasons why the matter was discussed with the Port Authority. However, timing of development affects the TIF generated also. 411 PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 3 Chairperson Messner inquired about Outlot A on the Pickens property and Mr. Zweber replied that it is undeveloped. He stated that the pipeline easement goes through the north side of the property and it will remain private open space. The Applicant, Michael Noonan, of Rottlund Homes approached the Commission and stated he would discuss three issues. Mr. Noonan stated Rottlund Homes is thankful for the opportunity to work on completing the Harmony development, providing housing Rottlund feels the market is looking for. He stated construction on the houses should begin by this September. Mr. Noonan responded to earlier questions. He staetd the homeowners' association is in support of sharing the parking in the clubhouse. Rottlund Homes controls the association. Parking in the clubhouse area is an amenity provided by the association for overflow parking for residents. With respect to the addition of the 16 Garden home units, Mr. Noonan replied that Rottlund felt it important to construct that as four blocks of four because of the temporary ponding being placed in the area which would remove three units. With respect to the gas line easement, Mr. Noonan replied that the City staff's recommendation is acceptable. With respect to the Outlot A private open space area, Mr. Noonan stated that Rottlund would be happy to convey that piece of property to the City or Dakota County. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Noonan if there are any proposed changes to the amenities as originally designed. Mr. Noonan stated that the clubhouse is built and that CPDC and M &I were not willing to perform so Rottlund stepped in and finished the project. The pool opened up last weekend and an open house is planned for next weekend. Mr. Noonan stated that in terms of other amenities, they are largely involved with the park that the City is designing. The gazebo and clock tower are not going to change. In conclusion, Mr. Noonan stated that Rottlund felt it was important to give the neighborhood some closure and complete the development rather than wait for a developer of senior housing. The public hearing was opened at 7:13p.m. Bryan Bailey, 13667 Brick Path, Rosemount, approached the Commission and stated he feels this new development is a positive thing for the community. He stated the City should definitely go forward with medium density housing. Mr. Bailey further stated that he looks forward to the amenities being completed as the homeowners are paying for incomplete amenities through their association dues. Richard Lamotte, 2318 Bonaire Path, approached the Commission and expressed his disappointment with a new development when there are a lot of empty houses in Rosemount due to foreclosures. He stated that this will affect everyone's taxes which is especially difficult for people trying to sell their property in the current market. Mr. Lamotte stated there are too many open questions in this development and it doesn't make sense when there are so many vacant properties in Rosemount. Fred Blanchard, 13594 Brass Parkway, approached the Commission and stated he lives in the development in a single level townhome with no basement and no stairs and he really enjoys it. He stated a couple of concerns or questions for the developer regarding the 10 -12 feet of grass on the east side of their house, the completion of the road as you come into the development from the south, construction around the gas line, and concerns with the details of the location map included in his notice. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 4 Mr. Noonan approached the Commission to address Mr. Blanchard's questions. He stated that Rottlund intends to maintain the Pickens property including grading the property and advancing the infrastructure to develop the nine single family lots and to maintain it in a way that meets the expectations of the neighborhood. With respect to the completion of the road Mr. Blanchard mentioned, Mr. Noonan replied that the property there is not a part of the proposed development and is owned by another party for a commercial area. The road that is not complete is to service that parcel alone and not the Pickens property. Rottlund Homes will complete the public road network within the community at large. With respect to construction around the gas line, Mr. Noonan replied that Rottlund is not allowed by law to build on or near the gas line as there are setbacks they need to comply with. Rajan Chattanathan, 13228 Bronze Court, in Rosemount, approached the Commission and asked if Rottlund intends to complete the single family homes along Bronze Parkway that were in the original proposal. Mr. Noonan replied that the current proposed development does include the completion of the 15 lots in that area. There were no further public comments. MOTION by Schwartz to close the public hearing. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 7:32p.m. Chairperson Messner asked about the overall density of the development and asked if Mr. Zweber could explain the City's goal with respect to density. Mr. Zweber highlighted the original intent of the development and stated the City tries to accommodate housing at different stages of people's lives. The Port Authority and City Council do not want to give up that lifecycle housing element. He further explained that in the next comprehensive plan, lifecycle housing is still the goal. Since the original concept of this development, Mr. Zweber stated that other planning efforts have been completed to fulfill the apartment and senior housing needs of the community such as Bards Crossing, the new Stonebridge development, preliminary platted apartments in the Akron area. Mr. Zweber stated that density alone is not the issue but making sure the City has housing for all types of people living in Rosemount. Commissioner Howell stated that she has mixed feelings about the development in that she feels we need rental rather than townhomes and she understands the concerns regarding the current economy. She wondered if the Commission should approve a major PUD amendment based on the economy at the present time. Chairperson Messner replied that the role of the Planning Commission is not so much on the policy issues that the Port Authority and City Council deal with but more of the overall issues as they've been put forth. He stated that he also has economy concerns but that the proposed development looks like a good product and he would support the proposed amendment. Commissioner Howell asked if the garden units would possibly sell quickly if it would be possible to add a greater number of those units beyond what is currently proposed. Chairperson Messner stated that it would require another PUD amendment at the time of the addition. MOTION by Messner to recommend approval of the Major Amendment to the Planned S Unit Development, Rezoning of the Pickens Plat to R1 -PUD: Low Density Residential PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 5 Planned Unit Development, and Rezoning of Outlot D and Outlot E of Harmony 5`h Addition to R3 -PUD: Medium Density Residential Planned Unit Development, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum dated May 22, 2008. 2. Six (6) stalls of the off street parking requirement shall be fulfilled within the parking lot for the Harmony Clubhouse provided that the additional parking area shown as proof of parking is constructed. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. MOTION by Messner to recommend adoption an Ordinance B -196, an Ordinance amending Ordinance B City of Rosemount Zoning Ordinance for Harmony 5t Addition and Pickens Plat. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. MOTION by Messner to approve the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for Harmony 5` Addition and Pickens Plat subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum dated May 22, 2008. 2. Receive an agreement with the owner of the pipeline easement to allow the placement of the parking stalls and driveways on Block 7 within the easement. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated this item will be discussed at the next Port Authority meeting on June 3, 2008. It will then go before the City Council on June 17, 2008. Old Business: 6.a. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Community Hearing. Senior Planner Zweber reviewed comments from the parties that spoke at the last meeting including Don Kern of Flint Hills Resources, Scott Dohmen of CF Industries, and Irene Beberg, a partial owner of land at the corner of Highway 3 and McAndrews Road. Mr. Zweber also stated that the City received a letter from Hoisington Koegler, one of the planning consultants working with the University of Minnesota on UMore Park. The letter addresses a couple of issues, including the environmental review for UMore and interim uses. The community hearing was continued at 8:10p.m. Scott Dohmen, CF Industries, 5300 Pine Bend Trail, approached the Commission and presented a map of the CF Industries site and where new warehouses may possibly be built for future growth. Mr. Dohmen stated that he understands the setbacks governed by the critical corridor and they agree with the draft Comp Plan. Mr. Dohmen stated that one in four farmers in the Midwest use products from CF Industries. He is asking the Planning Commission to work with CF to move the tree line further to the east in order to expand their production. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES MAY 27, 2008 PAGE 6 Irene Beberg, of Ramsey, Minnesota, co -owner of property located at Hwy 3 and Hwy 38 approached the Commission. She asked the City to consider moving the MUSA line further north and allowing 2.5 acre lots. She stated their family could donate some land for a walking trail and the home site could be used for a park or recreational area by the lake. Mark Koegler, Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc., the subconsultant to Design Workshop, the primary planning consultant of the University of Minnesota regarding UMore Park, reviewed the issues discussed in the letter sent to the Planning Commission regarding agricultural research, the interim use permit language and whether or not an AUAR may be required. These issues were generally agreed to by Mr. Zweber. There were no further public comments. MOTION by Schwartz to close the community hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Community hearing was closed. MOTION by Schultz to recommend that the City Council release the draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan for the six month Public and Agency Review Period. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber explained the final hearing on this item will be some time in the future with all of the proposed changes. This item will go to Joint Work Session between Planning Commission and City Council on June 18, 2008, to discuss issues. Following on July 1, 2008, the City Council will review this and release it for six month review. New Business: None. Reports: Mr. Zweber updated the Commission on the June 18t work session agenda including (1) a presentation by the University of MN showing the latest concept of their development; and (2) discussion of the 2030 Comp Plan and how the Planning Commission came to the proposed recommendation. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Commissioner Messner made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Schwartz. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:32 .m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary SIGN COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JUNE 4, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Sign Committee was held on Wednesday, June 4, 2008. Chairperson Shoe Corrigan called the meeting to order at 6:37p.m. with Council member DeBettignies, and Planning Commissioners Schwartz, Palda, and Howell present. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl and Recording Secretary Hanson. Planning Commissioner Schultz was absent. Additions to the Agenda None. Consent Agenda a. Approval of the May 13, 2008 Regular Meeting minutes. MOTION by Schwartz to approve the Consent Agenda. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion carried. Old Business a. Off- Premise Sign Regulations. Planner Lindahl summarized the off premise sign standards in the current ordinance. Council Member DeBettignies asked for a definition of non commercial signs. Planner Lindahl replied that non commercial signs contain a non commercial message such as an idea or political message, instead of advertising. A discussion took place on whether or not church signs or signs advertising pancake breakfasts would be non commercial. It was stated that it would be cumbersome for the City or police to take time to determine whether or not those sign holders have permits. Planner Lindahl suggested issuing a sticker to permit holders to place on the permitted sign. Further discussion took place on staff responsibility on policing illegal signs and how not to have it become an administrative hassle. Council member DeBettignies suggested that more time be spent regulating home based business signs rather than garage sale or real estate signs. Planner Zweber stated that home based businesses are regulated under the ordinance pertaining to home occupations, not the sign ordinance. In that ordinance, the City allows home occupations but they are not allowed any signs so attention is not drawn to their house. The Committee decided that off premises signs can exist. The next discussion was on performance standards of permitted signs. All members agreed that rummage sale signs can be allowed no more than 120 hours in any eight day period. Planner Zweber asked if there should be a separate temporary sign permit for off premise signs for a certain period and the restrictions could include size, location, etc. A discussion took place regarding the standard of allowing a certain number of signs per intersection. It was decided to have the signs allowed at major intersections only with a distance of a quarter mile between signs. SIGN COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES JUNE 4, 2008 PAGE 2 Planner Zweber mentioned the issue of Dairy Queen and McDonalds sharing a off premise sign and whether or not those types of signs will be allowed. Council member DeBettignies stated that some businesses off of the main road do not have main road visibility. Planner Zweber suggested allowing shared off premise signs at intersections only and in commercial districts only. Council member DeBettignies requested the ordinance for shared signs in Apple Valley be researched. New Business a. Residential Districts Sign Regulations Planner Lindahl reviewed the standards of both temporary and permanent signs. Commissioner Schwartz mentioned that six feet in height may be too low for real estate signs in the front yard. A discussion on illumination standards took place and the redundancy in mentioning it in other sections of the ordinance. It was mentioned to take out any reference of illumination in the temporary signs section of the residential sign standards. With respect to commercial sign standards, the Committee decided to take out the first bullet having to do with single -two family uses allowed a permanent sign. A discussion took place on the height of signs and the definition of height. The Committee discussed changing the third bullet item of public and institutional uses to change the word "same" exterior decorative materials to "compatible" materials to the principal structure. All committee members agreed with 36 square feet as a size standard. Reports a. Next Meeting Next meeting will be July 8t to discuss the commercial section. Changes discussed at tonight's meeting will be included in packet. Adjournment There being no further business to come before this Committee, the meeting was adjourned at 8:26p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 24, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, June 24, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:30p.m. with Commissioners Schwartz, and Palda present. Commissioners Howell and Schultz were absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl, Project Engineer Dawley, and Recording Secretary Hanson. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of the May 27, 2008 Regular Meeting minutes. MOTION by Schwartz to approve the Consent Agenda. Second by Palda. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion carried. Public Hearings: 5.a. Kidder Park Townhomes Renovation Site Plan Review Boisclair Corporation (08-20 SP). Planner Lindahl presented this item. The applicant, Boisclair Corporation, requests site plan approvals to allow renovation of the existing Kidder Park apartment site. The existing site consists of 36 three bedroom apartments in nine buildings with associated garages, off street parking, green space and recreational area. The proposed redevelopment would renovate the apartment site into townhomes within the footprint of the existing buildings. Commissioner Schwartz asked if it was common practice to have the City Council approve a resolution for the Section 42 financing before the item was submitted to the Planning Commission. Planner Lindahl stated that a key component to the project was the financing and the applicant needed a resolution of support to qualify for the financing. Senior Planner Zweber added that the practice of receiving prior Council approval is not unique to this site. Other sites, such as Rosemount Greens and Core Block East, have applied for funding and the City Council approved similar resolutions in those cases. Chairperson Messner asked about the current condition of the trash enclosure currently on the site. Planner Lindahl stated the current trash enclosure is not to a level staff would expect to see in a new development. Staff would expect a full closure matching the building. He stated the applicant could elaborate on the details of how the trash enclosure will be improved. The Applicant, Lori Boisclair, of Boisclair Corporation, approached the Commission. She stated Boisclair Corporation believes the Kidder Park site could contribute to the City of Rosemount more than it currently does. With respect to the funding resolution approved by the City Council, City support is encouraged to add to the competition in being chosen by the State to receive funding. Chairperson Messner asked if Boisclair had pictures of the front elevations the Commission could see. Planner Lindahl showed elevation diagrams of how the front will look with the extended PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 24, 2008 PAGE 2 porches and Ms. Boisclair showed colored elevations of an example of the color family the buildings will be and explained the building materials that will be used. Ms. Boisclair further stated that the entrances lend to pedestrian friendliness and dresses up the buildings. The public hearing was opened at 7:01p.m. There were no public comments. MOTION by Schwartz to close the public hearing. Second by Palda. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 7:02p.m. Chairperson Messner asked what other changes to the elevation there will be other than the porches. Ms. Boiselair replied that they will be adding a smaller scale roof in areas as you approach the building; the outside staircases are being enveloped inside the building; and horizontal flats are being changed to vertical flats. They propose to move the storage out of the community center and cut out notches in the long garages for outdoor equipment storage. Ms. Boisclair further stated the dumpsters will be enclosed. The capacity set up consists of 9 one bedroom units, 18 two bedroom units and 9 three bedroom units. Chairperson Messner stated he liked the look of the proposed changes. Commissioner Schwartz asked about the presence of laundry facilities and the transition of current residents. Ms. Boisclair stated that after renovation, each unit will have their own laundry facilities. She further stated that relocation funds are being held in escrow. The site currently is 20% vacant because of the stacked units and access difficulties. Of those units that are occupied, 10 -13 of the residents has finances that will qualify to reside in the new site. There will be relocating funds provided for one year to those who will relocate. Commissioner Schwartz then asked if the rents will increase after the renovation is complete. Ms. Boisclair stated that the rent will increase but still be below the threshold for affordability to families making less than 50% of the median income that is allowed for this type of housing facility. Commissioner Schwartz's final question was whether or not the community center will have a security access. Ms. Boisclair responded that the type of access is yet to be determined, but it will be security access. MOTION by Schwartz to approve the site plan application from Boisclair Corporation allowing renovation of the existing Kidder Park site, subject to conditions: 1. Issuance of a building permit. 2. Approval of a variance allowing entryway features to encroach into the 30' setback along both Dodd Boulevard and Cimarron Avenue. 3. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum dated June 18, 2008. 4. Submission of a detailed color scheme for review and approval by staff prior to issuance of a building permit 5. Replacement of any tree lost during the renovation process that is not illustrated as being removed on the landscape plan. 6. Submission of a landscape letter of credit equal to 125% of the plantings illustrated on the approved landscape plan. 7. Submission of a detailed trash enclosure plan for review and approval by staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 8. Any changes to the existing signage must be approved through a separate sign permit. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 24, 2008 PAGE 3 9. Submission of a detailed recreation and open space plan for review and approval by staff prior to issuance of a building permit. Second by Palda. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Lindahl stated that the Planning Commission is the final approval for site plan applications. There will be a variance application item at the July 8 meeting regarding the front setbacks for the porches. 5.b. St. Joseph's School Conditional Use Permit (08 -21 -CUP. Senior Planner Zweber presented this item. St. Joseph's Parish had constructed their new church on the southeast corner of Biscayne Avenue and Connemara Avenue in 2002. During that approval, they designed the site layout to allow a school addition to the southeast of the church building. St. Joseph's is requesting a conditional use permit (CUP) to construct the 40,000 square foot school at this time. Mr. Zweber reviewed the plans and elevations with the Commissioners. Commissioner Palda asked if it was known how many children currently attend the school and how many will be bussed or dropped off. Mr. Zweber replied that just short of 200 students currently attend the school but it is unknown how they are actually transported to the school. Commissioner Schwartz commented that at first she wasn't really concerned about the playlot serving as additional parking, but that the issue of fire access to the south side of the building was more important of an issue. Chairperson Messner asked about the parking stalls situation. Mr. Zweber responded that the original plans for the church site included 383 stalls. The approval then required sidewalk access from the building to the Biscayne sidewalk which eliminated 14 stalls. 369 stalls exist today. In the new plans for the school, 22 stalls are being eliminated where the busses will line up, totaling 347 stalls; 35 less than the requirement. Commissioner Schwartz asked if the bus areas could be used at Christmas or Easter time for extra parking. Mr. Zweber replied he did not think the curb would be deep enough for regular parking unless the cars were parked at a slant. He also stated though that the area will not be marked for parking spaces. The Applicant, Steven Erickson, of BWBR Architects, approached the Commission and stated he had met with City staff earlier in the day and BWBR has no issue with the conditions. With respect to the parking spaces where the busses will line up, the curb line will not be removed or moved back so the spaces there could be striped and used on high attendance events. With respect the lower level lot, the area could be striped and lighted and the lot could be lengthened to add more spaces. With respect to fire access, Mr. Erickson agreed that it is important but hesitated agreeing with a complete ring road around the south side of the complex. BWBR is trying to preserve the green space on the site as much as possible and does not plan to connect the upper and lower parking lots. Commissioner Palda questioned the parking in the lower lot and stated his concern with traffic off of Connemara. He asked if the parking lot could be moved to the south side of the building instead. Mr. Erickson stated that the grade change between the upper lot and the lower area green space is pretty extreme, plus the school needs only one entrance to control rather than more than entrance needed if the parking lot were closer to the front. The entrance to the building from the lower lot is a service entrance only into the school, and should not be used for dropping off children. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 24, 2008 PAGE 4 Commissioner Palda asked Mr. Erickson about the current and proposed lighting in the different parking lots and entrances. Mr. Erickson replied that there will be three lights in the new lot, and no lighting was requested at the Connemara entrance. Mr. Gary Mitchell, the administrator for St. Joseph Catholic Church approached the Commission and stated that there are three or four lights at the Biscayne entrance to the church. The public hearing was opened at 7:49p.m. There were no public comments. MOTION by Palda to close the public hearing. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 7:49 p.m. Commissioner Schwartz recommended a change to Condition #3 by adding the phrase "acceptable in the asphalt play area" and to Condition #7 by adding the phrase "access acceptable to fire marshal Mr. Zweber suggested simply removing the phrase "access along the south side of the school that connects the Biscayne and Connemara accesses, as well as provides a fire access" from Condition #7 would accomplish what Commissioner Schwartz was requesting. Commissioner Palda expressed his dislike of having overflow parking in the play area. Chairperson Messner expressed his dislike of having no connection from the lower parking lot to the front of the school. Mr. Erickson stated there is a sidewalk along the south side of the building. Mr. Zweber suggested a possible solution to the extra parking spaces would be for the applicant to provide a "proof of parking" affidavit stating that the 35 parking spaces will get constructed if it is determined that the current parking arrangement is not sufficient to meet church capacity needs. The Commission liked the suggestion. It was decided to amend Condition #3 to read "Provide proof of parking affidavit for additional 35 parking stalls." MOTION by Schwartz to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the construction of St. Joseph's School, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum dated June 19, 2008. 2. Compliance with the Fire Marshal's Memorandum dated June 18, 2008. 3. Provide an additional 35 striped and dedicated parking 3ta11a. a proof of parking affidavit for the additional 35 parking stalls. 4. All roof top mechanical structures will require screening in accordance with the City Code. 5. Trash collection shall occur within the existing church collection area or completely interior to the school addition. 6. Removal of the existing curb cut approximately 1,000 feet east of Biscayne Avenue and reestablishment of the curb line and boulevard. 7. Construction of a drive access and Connemara accc33es, a3 well a3 provides a fire accea3 within 150 feet of the entire school facade and an access within 75 feet for the ladder truck. 8. Lighting shall be provided in the 35 additional parking stalls and in the asphalt play area. The lighting fixture shall have cut off fixtures and a photometric plan in conformance with the City Code be submitted before City Council approval. 9. A sidewalk shall be installed along the north side of the northern Biscayne access between the western end of the existing sidewalk and the Biscayne Avenue trail. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JUNE 24, 2008 PAGE 5 10. The landscape plan shall be revised before the City Council approval to provide foundation landscaping shall be added to the school foundation with a minimum density of one plant per ten linear feet of building. 11. The concrete tip -up panels for the gymnasium shall be architecturally textured and of a color complementary to the bricks. Second by Palda. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated this item will go before the City Council on July 15, 2008 provided the requested changes are submitted prior to July 8, 2008. Old Business: None. New Business: None. Reports: None. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Chairperson Messner made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Palda. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:04p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments was held on Tuesday, July 8, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:31p.m. with Commissioners Schwartz, Howell and Schultz present. Commissioner Palda was absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl, and Recording Secretary Hanson. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: None. Public Hearings: 5.a. Variance Request by Boisclair Corporation for a Covered Porch Front Yard Encroachment at Kidder Park (08- 22 -V). Boisclair Corporation has submitted an application for a variance to allow a reduction of the front yard setback to construct separate front porches on individual townhomes. Mr. Zweber reviewed the staff report and findings required to grant a variance. Chairperson Messner asked for other examples that have occurred in the past that the City allowed variances other than allowed through the PUD process. Mr. Zweber replied that the Harmony additions are through a PUD. He further stated that similar situations have been the site plan process of Rosemount Greens who needed a variance for a bus shelter and D.R. Horton applied for a variance to have a front yard encroachment approved. Chairperson Messner asked if the 30 foot setback requirement was because the property is on a public street. Mr. Zweber stated that this property is an exception because it's a corner lot and corner lots have the same setbacks on both streets. The Applicant, Lori Boisclair, of Boisclair Corporation, was present and stated that the front porch adds to the residential feel. She further stated that through the funding process, the front porch type of architectural was recommended by the County. The public hearing was opened at 6:42p.m. Kim Shoe Corrigan, 12990 Shannon Parkway, approached the Commission and stated that she remembers when the Kidder Park complex was built and remembered thinking it looked really nice compared to complexes she had seen in Chicago where she moved from. She further stated her opinion that this new feature will enhance the buildings and be a great addition. MOTION by Schwartz to close the public hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 6:43p.m. Chairperson Messner stated that he agrees the front porch addition will add to the overall appeal of the project and he encouraged the applicant to move forward. BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 8, 2008 PAGE 2 MOTION by Messner to approve the variance to allow a covered porch front yard encroachment at Kidder Park. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated that the Board of Appeals and Adjustments is the final approval for variances. There is a 10 day appeal period and if anyone appealed, the item would go before the City Council. Old Business: None. New Business: None. Reports: None. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Commissioner Howell made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Schwartz. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 6:45p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 22, 2008 PAGE 1 Call to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 22, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:34p.m. with Commissioners Schwartz, Howell and Palda present. Commissioner Schultz was absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Project Engineer Dawley, and Recording Secretary Hanson. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of the June 24, 2008 Regular Meeting minutes. b. Approval of the July 8, 2008 Board of Appeals and Adjustments MOTION by Schwartz to approve the Consent Agenda. Second by Palda. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion carried. Public Hearings: 5.a. Prestwick Place 2 Addition Final Plat and Final Site and Building Plan Review (08 -23- FSBP, 08- 24 -FP). The applicants, Arcon Development and Pemtom Land Company, request Final Plat and Final Site and Building Plan approvals to allow development of a 13 lot single family subdivision to be known as Prestwick Place 2 Addition. This development will be located east of the existing Bloomfield neighborhood at the terminus of Connemara Trail. Senior Planner Zweber reviewed the staff report. Commissioner Palda asked whether the 200 foot span of Connemara Trail that will be constructed will be asphalt or gravel. Project Engineer Dawley responded that plans are not final on that issue but the road will be temporarily constructed and will likely be paved with temporary bituminous curbing and storm water capabilities that can be adjusted when the permanent road is installed. The applicant, Scott Johnson, of Arcon Development, Inc., owner of the property selling to Manley Land Development, was present to answer any questions. Chairperson Messner asked about the grading differences between the Bloomfield development and the proposed area. Mr Johnson stated that the grading will match the homes that are presently there because of the storm water pond that Centex constructed behind the Bloomfield homes. Commissioner Schwartz asked if the other trees on the interior streets will be installed right away. Mr. Johnson and Mr. Zweber jointly confirmed that all trees will be installed except for the trees along Connemara Trail. The public hearing was opened at 6:45p.m. There were no public comments. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 22, 2008 PAGE 2 MOTION by Schwartz to close the public hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 6:46p.m. MOTION by Palda to recommend the City Council approve a Final Plat and Final Site and Building Plan for Prestwick Place 2n Addition, subject to the conditions: 1. Execution of a subdivision development agreement to secure the installation of public and private infrastructure and payment of all applicable fees. 2. City Council approval of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for Prestwick Place 2 Addition Planned Unit Development Agreement in conformance with the architectural elements outlined in the Final Site and Building Plan section of this report. 3. Conformance with all requirements of the City Engineer's Memorandum dated July 17, 2008. 4. Conformance with the Park and Recreation Director's Memorandum dated July 17, 2008. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated this item will go before City Council at their regular meeting of August 19, 2008. 5.b. Fairview Clinic (McRoberts Dev) Lot Split and Final Development Plan (08- 25 -FDP, 08- 26-LS). McRoberts Real Estate Development has submitted an application on behalf of Fairview Clinics to construct an approximately 10,000 square foot medical clinic on a parcel located on the northwest corner of 151 Street West and Cimarron Avenue. To accommodate this construction, McRoberts is proposing to split the 2.11 acre lot into two approximately 1 acre lots. The second lot has a concept layout to show how it can be developed to accommodate a 9,600 square foot commercial building, but the applicant is not requesting approval of the second lot at this time. Senior Planner Zweber reviewed the staff report and proposed plans of the project. The applicant, Ian McRoberts, of McRoberts Real Estate Development, brought revised plans changing some items pursuant to staff's requested conditions. Paul Dahl, of WCL Associates, Inc., the architect of the project showed new plans that included the following revisions: the removal of the wall sign; trash enclosure will be of brick material similar to the main building; and the previous elevation showed the building one foot higher than it needed to be so they made that revision. Chairperson Messner asked the Applicant if they understood all of the remaining conditions including the landscaping conditions and the Applicant replied that they were in agreement with all conditions. The public hearing was opened at 6:58p.m. Myron Napper, 3381 145 Street East, approached the Commission and asked if there was adequate parking for a medical clinic. Chairperson Messner reviewed the parking requirements pursuant to the size of the building and stated the applicant actually has four extra spaces than what is required. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 22, 2008 PAGE 3 MOTION by Howell to close the public hearing. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 7:OOp.m. Chairperson Messner stated that it has been a long time coming that the City of Rosemount have a medical clinic and he commended the applicants for moving forward with the project. MOTION by Messner to recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development Final Development Plan, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum dated July 17, 2008. 2. Compliance with the Park and Recreation Director's Memorandum dated July 17, 2008. 3. The trash enclosure shall be faced with bricks that are identical to those used in the exterior of the medical clinic. 4. Boulevard trees shall be planted along the Lot 1 frontage within the private street at a spacing of one tree per 50 feet. 5. Additional foundation plantings shall be installed to fill the southern facade of the building and wrap around the western corner of the building. 6. All wall signage shall be channel letters. 7. Removal of the wall sign on the south facade facing the residents south of 151 Street West. 8. Lights within the parking lot shall be cut -off style fixtures. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. MOTION by Howell to approval of the Lot Split, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum dated July 17, 2008. 2. Recording of a joint access easement and agreement to allow Lot 1 and Lot 2 to share their parking lots and accesses. 3. Recording of a utility easement and agreement on Lot 1 and Lot 2 to allow for the construction and maintenance of the joint utility service as proposed. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow-up, Mr. Zweber stated these items will go before the City Council at the regular meeting on August 19, 2008. 5.c. SKB Environmental Interim Use Permit (08- 18 -IUP). SKB Environmental, Inc. (SKB) is requesting a revision to their Interim Use Permit (IUP) to allow an expansion to their facility at 13425 Courthouse Boulevard from 112 acres of disposal area to 151 acres of disposal area. The proposed expansion in size includes an expansion in total disposal volume from about 15 million cubic yards to almost 27 million cubic yards, representing a 73% increase, and also includes an increase in the finish height of the landfill of 40 feet. Senior Planner Zweber stated that SKB has agreed to process an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for review of their proposed expansion. Because of the time to process this environmental review, Mr. Zweber further stated that staff is not asking for any action to be taken at tonight's meeting. He reviewed in detail the policy implications associated with aspects of the expansion, particularly the filling, buffer and mitigation of wetlands, storm water management, particularly as it concerns the wetlands, and the proposed height of the expansion. Mr. Zweber also PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 22, 2008 PAGE 4 discussed 140 Street and how the expansion could affect the future plans for the street development. The Applicant, Richard O'Gara, president and owner, SKB Environmental, Inc. provided a brief history of SKB and stated that they have never had a violation. He stated that the facility in Rosemount is the only industrial waste landfill in the state with a triple liner. Mr. O'Gara stated that the site is 240 acres zoned for waste management and SKB would like to try to maximize the use of the zoned land. He further stated that SKB has agreed to modify the plan with respect to the wetlands and modify the storm water plan to allow more water to enter the remaining wetlands. Mr. O'Gara stated that the extra height is required in an effort to get more capacity and the proposed capacity is needed to pay for additional modifications and improvements to the site. He stated it is important to understand that it will be a gradual height change over a 4000 feet of distance. He showed diagrams of the triple liner and models and photographs of the site before and after the expansion. Mr. O'Gara stated that SKB built a wildlife viewing area in the southwest corner of the site. In conclusion, Mr. O'Gara mentioned the 140 Street future expansion and stated it may difficult to complete in the southeast corner where the SKB site has previously been approved in 2003. Chairperson Messner asked for an explanation of the sloping ratios. Mr. Zweber explained the slopes using a diagram showing the earthen berm next to the landfill slope. Mr. Bill Keegan, of SKB Environmental, approached the Commission and stated that the berm height between the 2003 expansion and the current proposal did not change, nor did the road elevation. Chairperson Messner asked the applicant where the pipelines and power lines will be relocated. Mr. O'Gara showed on a diagram where they plan on moving the power lines with the assistance of Xcel Energy. He stated the pipeline will simply be placed within the earthen berm. Chairperson Messner asked the applicant about the 50 foot buffer and the storm water management conditions. Mr. O'Gara stated that SKB will have to modify the grades but they will be able to do the buffer and will work City staff to achieve the storm water conditions. The public hearing was opened at 7:56p.m. Brenda Sugii, 13701 Courthouse Boulevard, approached the Commission. She stated she lives adjacent to SKB site with her driveway on Hwy. 55 and backyard viewing the site. Ms. Sugii stated the first owners of the site told her the project would be a 20 -30 year development and within 30 years, the site would become a park. However, she stated that it is continually being expanded. Ms. Sugii stated she has been dealing with problems for 16 years of increased truck traffic on Highway 55, the noisy conditions and the site being an eyesore. She asked when it will all stop as the first owners initially proposed. She stated her firm opposition to the expansion. Myron Napper, 3381 145 Street East, stated his opposition to the expansion in account for the environmental impacts on the wetlands. He stated there should be more of a buffer around the wetlands. Mr. O'Gara approached the Commission and stated he feels it is a good idea to continue the item to next month's Planning Commission meeting and that SKB would be happy to meet with residents in the meantime to explain the project in more detail. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 22, 2008 PAGE 5 MOTION by Messner to continue the Public Hearing to the August 26, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Mr. Zweber stated two primary concerns are the wetland management plan and the filling of the two wetland areas. Commissioner Schwartz stated she is fine with filling some of the area if there will be mitigation to the remaining area. Commissioner Howell agreed. A discussion took place on the mitigation standards of Manage I and Manage II wetland areas. Chairperson Messner stated that he does not want this expansion to affect the 140 Street future development plan. Mr. Zweber stated that according to WSB's recommendation, the proposed mitigation is to begin at the 50 foot setback from 140 Street. Chairperson Messner requested that Andi Moffatt provide a more detailed explanation on wetland management. Andi Moffatt, Senior Environmental Scientist with WSB Associates, Inc, approached the Commission. She gave a brief history of the wetland classification program and the characteristics of the four categories of wetlands. She stated the smaller area proposed for filling is a Manage II wetland while the larger area to be mitigated is a Manage I wetland. The classification difference between the two areas may be due to the size difference. Ms. Moffatt further explained the mitigation process. She stated the particular wetland on the SKB site is both ground water and surface water fed. She stated this is a logical location for wetland mitigation and briefly explained her recommendations for mitigating the site. With respect to wetland filling, the Commission all agreed that filling of the smaller areas is fine as long as mitigation is done on the remaining area. Commissioner Schwartz added that even though part of the Manage I is filled, we will end up with a better qualify of wetland when the remaining area is mitigated to function properly. Mr. O'Gara approached the Commission again and stated SKB will comply with the wetland conditions and invited the Commissioners to visit the area again to view the specific wetland areas. With respect to mitigation, the Commissioners all preferred onsite mitigation. Mr. Zweber asked the Commission if they agreed that as much water as possible is being sent to the wetland as part of the proposed storm water management plan. The Commission all agreed. With respect to the development of 140 Street, Chairperson Messner stated he does not want to go against what was approved in 2003 on the east side. Mr. O'Gara showed where the permitted berm already exists and where the berm will go if the expansion is permitted. He stated they are changing it from what was permitted in 2003. He further stated they can move the storm water pond, the mitigation and the power tower to the 17 foot setback but it would be difficult to move the berm. With respect to the increase in height of 40 feet, Commissioner Palda stated his opinion that it should not cause a problem due to it being such a big area. Commissioner Schwartz stated her opinion that with the photographs SKB shared with the Commission, she liked the proposed picture better than what currently exists. Mr. O'Gara shared that SKB will be planting more trees along the roadway on the berm. They plan on removing a lot of trees but will satisfy the tree PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 22, 2008 PAGE 6 ordinance as required with respect to tree replacement. Myron Napper, 3381 145` Street East, approached the Commission again and stated his opinion that landscaping would be beneficial to drivers along County Road 42. Chairperson Messner agreed that some kind of screening would be helpful to break up the back slope of the expansion. The Commission all agreed with the 40 feet expansion with the exception of Commissioner Howell who stated she wasn't completely sure. Chairperson Messner added that he generally agrees with the increase but would like to see all revised plans at next month's meeting. Old Business: None. New Business: None. Reports: None. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Chairperson Messner made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Schwartz. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:48p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 26, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, August 26, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:30p.m. with Commissioners Schwartz, Howell, Schultz and Palda present. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl, Project Engineer Dawley, and Recording Secretary Hanson. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of the July 22, 2008 Regular Meeting minutes. MOTION by Schwartz to approve the Consent Agenda. Second by Howell. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion carried. Public Hearings: 5.a. Compost Partners, LLC Interim Use Permit, Zoning Text Amendment and Mineral Extraction Permit (08 -32 -IUP, 08- 33 -TA, 08- 34 -ME). Planner Lindahl reviewed the staff report. The applicant, Compost Partners, LLC, requests an Interim Use Permit "IUP to allow establishment of a Yard Waste Compost Facility in association with an existing mineral extraction permit. Compost Partners, LLC hopes to establish the proposed compost facility at the existing Stonex /Vestarra gravel mine. Mr. Lindahl explained that in order to allow this use, the City must approve several applications including a text amendment adding "Yard Waste Compost Facilities Associated with an Existing Mineral Extraction Permit" as an interim use in the AG district; a text amendment amending Section 5 -4 -1: Composting to include a definition of Yard Waste Compost Facility; an interim use permit allowing the composting facility; and an amendment to the existing mineral extraction permit for Stonex and Vesterra, LLC allowing the composting facility on this site. Commission Schultz asked if this was the first time this situation had occurred since the ordinance is being amended. Mr. Lindahl responded yes. Chairperson Messner asked to see the designated area on the site where the operation would function and how it would coincide with the phasing plan of the mineral extraction. Mr. Lindahl showed a site plan showing where the compost site would operate and stated the operation would only take place within the active section of the mine. Applicant, Gary Kurth, owner of Metro Compost and Sand, approached the Commission and showed pictures of compost materials and explained how the operation will function. Commissioner Howell asked how this operation will increase the traffic in and out of the site. Mr. 41) Kurth described the schedule of truck traffic from April through November. He further stated that once the product is bagged, it will leave the site on flatbeds in March and April. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 26, 2008 PAGE 2 410 The public hearing was opened at 6:49p.m. Myron Napper, 3381 145t Street East, Rosemount, approached the Commission and stated his opposition to the application. He stated there is a compost site only three miles south of the Vesterra site and another one just two miles east of the site. He further stated that residents on the east side are tired of the dirty businesses and they do not want another compost site with more smell in the area. There was no further public comment. MOTION by Schwartz to close the public hearing. Second by Palda. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 6:52p.m. Planner Lindahl stated that Flint Hills Resources is the underlying property owner and has given their approval for the project. He further stated that the interim use permit has specific conditions and is time sensitive which allows the operator an opportunity to demonstrate that they can operate by the City's terms before the City's annual review. Mr. Lindahl also stated there is a section in the permit that pertains to nuisances and highlighted Condition #7 of the permit. Chairperson Messner asked for a definition or the criteria for a nuisance. Mr. Lindahl stated our ordinance defines nuisance so the City does have a legally enforceable definition. He did not have the exact definition available. 411 Commissioner Howell asked whether or not it would be considered a nuisance if the surrounding neighbors complained about the odor. Mr. Lindahl replied that interim use permits subject the operator to periodic inspections by City staff. He further stated that the City would respond to any concerns raised by community members. Senior Planner Zweber added that City staff would inform the Commissioners at the annual review of any complaints received and the public would have an opportunity to voice their concerns. Commissioner Schwartz asked if odor was included in the definition of nuisance. Mr. Lindahl replied that it is specifically included under Section 3.B. and is more generally listed later in the permit. Commissioner Schwartz then asked how many inspections would be conducted during the year. Project Engineer Dawley replied that the operator would be subject to two annual inspections by Dakota County staff, and at least one annual inspection by the State. City staff typically completes an annual review and would respond to any complaints. He further stated that if the Commission would like to set a specific schedule for inspections, they have the ability to do so. Commissioner Palda stated his concern with the amount of finished product the applicant stated the business will have and asked where the finished product would be stored. Mr. Kurth replied that the company will only complete 20,000 yards of finished the first year. He stated that 50,000 is the maximum the buying company needs but that Metro Compost will not be able to produce that amount. The product will be bagged and the bags will be shrunk wrapped and stored outside on pallets. Mr. Lindahl pointed out that the permit requires all finished product to be stored inside a building. Mr. Kurth stated that it would not be possible to store 20,000 yards of compost indoors. Commissioner Palda stated his concern with the odor at the site. He mentioned there are two sites in St. Paul where compost material would come from and there is plenty of odor from those two PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 26, 2008 PAGE 3 sites. Mr. Kurth replied that those two sites do not have any stormwater run off and the leaves sit in water. He further stated that 90% of the material at this site will be dry leaves from people's yard so there shouldn't be much odor. Commissioner Palda suggested changing the annual review date from December 31 to a earlier date so there would be a better chance for the applicant to show how the business operates for a full season. Commissioner Schwartz stated her opinion that she does not want to see outdoor storage expanded and she is concerned with the odor issue. Chairperson Messner stated that the City has taken steps to limit outdoor storage rather than expand it. Mr. Kurth asked the Commission if the bagged and palletized product was immediately loaded onto a flatbed and taken away as soon as the flatbed was full, would this solve the outdoor storage issue. Chairperson Messner stated it would probably comply but asked how long it would take to fill the flatbed. Mr. Kurth replied less than a day to complete a full load. Chairperson Messner followed with his opinion that if outdoor storage were permitted, he would prefer to see screening in a separate area. Mr. Lindahl pointed out that extending the review date to later in the spring will result in it not coinciding with Vesterra's annual review and renewal. Chairperson Messner asked the applicant if he would prefer the application was tabled so the issue of outdoor storage could be further discussed or have the application voted on at tonight's meeting. Mr. Kurth stated he wanted the application voted on tonight. Commissioner Palda pointed out for the Commission how much material 50,000 cubic yards actually is and how much space it would take up if stored outside. Commissioner Schwartz asked the applicant where the product would go after it is loaded onto the flatbed. Mr. Kurth replied that it would be stored in a warehouse that he owns in a different city. He also stated that 50,000 yards of grass and leaves will produce only 20,000 years of finished product. He does not expect the company to reach 50,000 years of finished product. Myron Napper, 3381 145 Street East, Rosemount, approached the Commission again and requested the item be tabled for one month to give him an opportunity to discuss this matter with his neighbors and produce a petition opposing the business. MOTION by Palda to table the items to the September 23, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. 5.b. SKB Environmental Interim Use Permit (08- 18 -IUP). SKB Environmental, Inc. (SKB) is requesting a revision to their Interim Use Permit (IUP) to allow an expansion to their facility at 13425 Courthouse Boulevard from 112 acres of disposal area to 151 acres of disposal area. The proposed expansion in size includes an expansion in total disposal volume from about 15 million cubic yards to almost 27 million cubic yards, representing a 73% increase, and also includes an increase in the finish PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 26, 2008 PAGE 4 height of the landfill of 40 feet. This is a continuation of the public hearing opened on July 22, 2008. Senior Planner Zweber reviewed the changes to the plans since the July 22, 2008, meeting and the issues remaining for the Commission's discussion including the wetland fill, wetland mitigation and storm water management, the wetland buffer, and landscaping /tree replacement. Mr. Zweber also reviewed the conditions to the interim use permit having to do with recycling items within the site. The Applicant, Richard O'Gara, president and owner, SKB Environmental, Inc., approached the Commission with a few comments on the recommendations by City staff. With respect to the tree replacements, Mr. O'Gara stated that at the last meeting, he said SKB would provide a tree survey, but did not say they would supply trees tall enough to hide the landfill. He stated that they will be tearing down 505 trees and are required to install 766 new trees. Mr. O'Gara stated that SKB wishes to replace the trees in the same percentages they currently exist. He further stated that the DNR recommended in the EAW that the same kind of trees be planted to preserve the environment and that the slope is not set up to handle that many trees that are that tall. He also stated that 2.5 inch caliper trees are difficult to find and requested that 1.5 inch size be allowed since they are more readily available and easier to transplant. With respect to the decorative wall design, Mr. O'Gara stated that SKB has no problem with making the wall decorative but requests that the specific plan be required at the time of permit, not at the current approval stage. He stated the wall will not be built for several years and they will then have a better idea of what the decorative plan will consist of. With respect to the conditions added for recycling, Mr. O'Gara stated that SKB has no problem with conditions #6 and #7. He stated, however, that he is concerned with condition #8 containing the 100% masonry requirement. The proposed building would not face a right -of -way and is 1000 feet away from any proposed roadway. Mr. O'Gara stated he thinks it is an unfair burden and unnecessary. Mr. O'Gara's final comment was his concern with the ditch that runs along the south side of the property as part of the storm water management plan. He asked the Commission to considering allowing the ditch to remain within the 17 foot right -of -way. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. O'Gara if SKB agreed with the number of caliper inches required and whether or not there was a cost difference between the type of trees. Mr. O'Gara replied that he is fine with the number required and that the types of trees they chose were recommended to SKB by their tree specialists in order to be in compliance with the EAW. The EAW recommends having a variety of trees rather than the same kind and height of trees. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Zweber how specific the verbage reads on the masonry requirement. Mr. Zweber replied that any building visible from a public right -of -way is required to be 100% masonry. Chairperson Messner asked if SKB building will be visible from the right -of -way. Mr. Zweber replied that it will not be visible from the right -of -way today but would be visible from any road installed in the future on the northwest side of the property. Mr. O'Gara showed the Commission on a site plan where the operation buildings are located and where the activity will be located. He stated this is a requirement to put 100% masonry on the back of the building where it will not be visible to anyone and it is not known at this time where any future road will be installed. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Dawley for clarification on the location of the ditch on the south side of the site. Mr. O'Gara then added that the west portion of the ditch is not built yet but would like to PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 26, 2008 PAGE 5 design it together with the east portion within the 17 foot right -of -way to complete their storm water management plan. He stated that if the City would allow this, SKB would consider giving the right of -way portion to the City at no cost. Mr. Zweber replied that staff would be willing to explore this issue further with the applicant if it was a commitment to have the right -of -way given to the City. The public hearing was re- opened at 8:22p.m. Myron Napper, 3381 145 Street East, stated he has met with the neighboring residents and reported that they have no problem with the expansion SKB is requesting. Mr. Napper further stated that SKB gave him a tour of the location on the site next to where the one resident lived who spoke at last month's meeting and agreed that her backyard is right next to SKB's property. He tried to contact her but was not successful. There were no further comments. MOTION by Schultz to close the Public Hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. The public hearing was closed at 8:24p.m. Commissioner Schwartz stated her preference in staying with the same proportions of tree species that are there today. She further stated that she would agree to reducing the 100% masonry requirement to 40% since the proposed road may or may not be there for quite some time. Commissioner Palda stated that he agrees more with Mr. O'Gara proposed tree plan than what City staff recommended. He also stated he agreed that the plan for the decorative retaining wall should be held until the permit is filed for and therefore Condition #4 should be eliminated. He stated his agreement with Commission Schwartz on Condition #8 and the percentage of masonry to be required. Commissioner Schultz stated her agreement with the previous Commissioners' comments. Chairperson Messner stated he did not want to eliminate Condition #4 but that it should read "time of permit" instead of "before the City Council review". He further stated his agreement with the mixture of trees proposed but stated he would like to see the installation of the trees as near as possible to the construction of the berm. Chairperson Messner further agreed with reducing the masonry requirement to 40% masonry on all sides of the building. He stated he was unsure on the ditch issue but did not feel the need to add any other condition. Mr. Zweber stated that this is the time the Planning Commission will have the ability to give opinions on the design of the decorative retaining wall which is why staff included the condition at this time. He clarified that the condition to have trees that are a taller species is not a discussion of the differences between deciduous or coniferous. The Eastern red cedar thrives in low wet areas and the proposed areas for planting are on a high slope with low moisture. He further stated that while the shrike like red cedars as the DNR has stated, the DNR does not require the number of red cedars that SKB is proposing. There are conifers that can be selected that can grow to 80 feet or more and are native to that area. Mr. O'Gara replied that they are proposing what SKB's tree specialist recommended and it is SKB's responsibility to maintain the growth of the trees. The Commission agreed to amend Condition #4 to eliminate the phrase "before the City Council review" and add "at the time of permit The Commission agreed to amend Condition #8 to PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 26, 2008 PAGE 6 411 change "100% masonry for any side facing the boundary of the facility and 40% masonry for the remaining sides" to read "40% masonry on all sides of the facility". The Commission agreed to leave Condition #2 as is. The Commission agreed to eliminate Condition #3 in its entirety. The Commission agreed to amend Condition #1 by changing "dated August 21, 2008" to "subject to amended plans MOTION by Schwartz to recommend the City Council approve the Interim Use Permit for the expansion of the SKB landfill to accommodate a maximum of 26,874,103 cubic yards of waste, subject to the follow conditions: 1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum datcd August 21, 2008 subject to amended plans. 2. Installation of total of 2203 caliper inches of trees. grcatcr. 4. A design of the retaining walls shall be submitted bcforc thc City Council rcvicw at the time of permit that shows the decorative style of the wall. 5. Provide an exhibit of the pipeline relation to show that there is no conflict with the proposed landscape plan and retaining walls. 6. Any MSW brought to the recycling and transfer facility shall be stored indoors during the entire time that it is on site. 7. A vermin control plan for the recycling and transfer facility shall be prepared and approved by City staff that may include the plan being prepared by a pest and vermin control professional and periodic inspections of the facility by a pest or vermin control professional. 8. The recycling and transfer facility shall be constructed of 100% masonry for any sidc facing thc boundary of thc facility and 10% masonry for thc rcmaining 3idc3. 10% masonry on all sides of the facility. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated this item will go before City Council at their regular meeting of September 16, 2008, subject to revisions to the plans as discussed tonight. 5.c. Text Amendment of Section 11- 10 -11: Voting Requirement of Code Amendments (08- 35 -TA). Planner Lindahl reviewed the staff report. This text amendment application was initiated by staff to conform to changes made by the Minnesota State Legislature regarding local government's adoption or amendment of their zoning ordinance. Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of this item, it would go before the City Council at the meeting on September 16, 2008. The public hearing was opened at 8:55p.m. There were no public comments. MOTION by Schwartz to close the public hearing. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 8:56p.m. MOTION by Howell to recommend the City Council approve the attached draft PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES AUGUST 26, 2008 PAGE 7 ordinance text amendment regarding City Council voting requirements for adopting or amending the zoning ordinance. Second by Palda. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Lindahl stated this item will go before the City Council for approval at their regular meeting on September 16, 2008. Old Business: None. New Business: None. Reports: Senior Planner Zweber reminded the Commission of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments meeting on Monday, September 8, 2008, at 6:30p.m., followed by the Sign Committee meeting. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Commissioner Howell made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Palda. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:58p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a meeting of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments was held on Monday, September 8, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:32p.m. with Commissioners Schwartz, Howell, and Schultz present. Commissioner Palda was absent. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl, and Recording Secretary Hanson. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: None. Public Hearings: 5.a. Administrative Appeal Request by Rosewood Village East Homeowners Association (08- 37 -AA). Planner Lindahl reviewed the staff report. The applicant, the Rosewood Village East Homeowners' Association (HOA), has filed an Administrative Appeal seeking a ruling from the Board of Appeals and Adjustments concerning staff's decision and direction regarding a fence plan for this neighborhood. After informally reviewing the proposed fence plan, staff concluded it was not part of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement for this neighborhood and, as a result, required approval of a major PUD amendment by the City Council prior to any construction. The applicant disagreed with staff's conclusion and is looking to the Board to resolve this issue. Under Section 11 -12 -1 of the zoning ordinance the Planning Commission sitting as the Board of Appeals and Adjustments for the City has the power to hear and decide on issues of "interpretation: hearing appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in a decision or judgment made by an administrative officer in the interpretation or enforcement of this title or in the interpretation of zoning district boundaries." Mr. Lindahl showed a site plan and described what the applicant desires to do and explained the administrative appeal process. The Applicant, Dave McGee, attorney for the homeowners association, 3300 Edinborugh Way, Ste. 3600, Edina, approached the Commission. He stated that the applicant has asked for an explanation or basis for denial before in this process and they never received any information until the meeting tonight. Mr. McGee told the Commission he had not been given an opportunity to review the information provided in the staff report until tonight's meeting, and therefore, the applicant was requesting a continuance in order to properly review the material. Chairperson Messner stated he would open the public hearing to hear public comment and then have discussions among the Commission before deciding whether or not to table the item. Mr. McGee gave the Commission an explanation of the applicant's fence plan. He stated the Association is trying to balance the common interests of homeowners that have pets and contain those pets by installing fences around the residents' yards including the common area. The fences and the common area property will remain the Associations' property. But residents will have a safe place for their pets and kids to play with containment from other areas of the association. Mr. McGee stated that agreements have been signed by the property owners agreeing to the terms. He stated that he does not believe that this is a major amendment to the PUD agreement because BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2008 PAGE 2 the PUD Agreement and the plat map are intended as a visual demonstration of the initial development; they are not intended as a comprehensive vision of where the development may go forward in the future. Mr. McGee requested to see in the ordinance where it states that installing the fences constitutes a violation. The public hearing was opened at 6:53p.m. Kyle, 14540 Blackberry Way, is a new resident closing on his property next week. He stated he is a pet owner looking to have some room for his pets to safely play within his yard. He understands the fence will border his property and that it is not his property to own. Bill Ryan, President of the Association, approached the Commission. He stated there will be gates so that any area that is fenced will be accessible to every homeowner. He stated the Association does not want to hurt their chances of getting the fences by filing this appeal, but also stated he never received the denial information before the meeting. Carol Ryan, approached the Commission and stated that the fences will tie into the main fence that surrounds the whole development. She stated they have given thought of making sure there are gates running through each area so the lawns can all be properly maintained. Michele Anderson, 14572 Blackberry Way, stated she was excited with this community because it was nice to have a fence to contain her pets. She stated she has a sense of safety to have her dogs contained along with the three children they have. There was no further public comment. It was agreed among the Commissioners to table the item until next month. MOTION by Schwartz to continue the public hearing to the next Board of Appeals and Adjustments meeting on October 14, 2008. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Chairperson Messner stated he would like to see more detail on the type of fence that would be installed, together with an example of such a project existing in another community to possibly see what the applicant is proposing. He further stated he feels this item is more than a minor amendment to the PUD agreement given the issues extending from individually owned property and other concerns. This is more of a different concept than what was originally approved for the development so it would be better suited as a major amendment to the PUD. Old Business: None. New Business: None. Reports: None. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Chairperson Messner made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schwartz. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 7:04p.m. BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 8, 2008 PAGE 3 Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, September 23, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:34p.m. with Commissioners Howell and Schultz present. Commissioner Palda was absent. Commissioner Schwartz arrived later. Also in attendance were Community Development Director Lindquist, Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl and Recording Secretary Hanson. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Chairperson Messner mentioned that the item submitted by Compost Partners previously on last month's agenda has been withdrawn. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of the August 26, 2008 Regular Meeting minutes. b. Approval of the September 9, 2008 Board of Appeals and Adjustments Meeting minutes. MOTION by Howell to approve the Consent Agenda. Second by Schultz. Ayes: 3. Nays: None. Motion carried. Public Hearings: 5.a. Rosewood Village East Homeowners Association Major Amendment to PUD (08-38 AMD). Community Development Director Lindquist reviewed the staff report. The applicant, the Rosewood Village East Homeowners' Association (HOA), requests approval of a Major Amendment to the existing Rosewood Village Second Addition (Rosewood Village Townhomes) Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow the construction of the attached fence plan. This plan calls for construction of fences associated with individual lots that will also cut through the open space of the detached townhome development. While the plan illustrates fences for each lot, the applicant has indicated that only where residents have specifically requested fences will they be installed. Staff is uncomfortable with the request for a variety of reasons. The effect of this plan would be similar to a small lot plat where each of the houses, and surrounding open space area would be fenced off from each other. The difference in this case is that the platted lots are small, generally fitting around the house, leaving the remaining portion in common ownership. Fencing of these areas will effectively limit the access of individual owners within the association from open space in common ownership. Commissioner Schultz asked if staff had seen the agreements signed by each homeowner. Ms. Lindquist replied that staff had not been given a copy as of yet. Commission Schultz wondered if a new owner coming into the development would have to sign an agreement and what would happen if they didn't want a fence. Also, she asked who would be liable if anything should happen within the fenced in common area. Ms. Lindquist replied that the PUD amendment does run with the property so future homeowners would have the same knowledge of the PUD as the current homeowner. She further stated that staff is researching who would need to sign for this amendment to the PUD. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 PAGE 2 Attorney David McGee, attorney for the homeowners association, 3300 Edinborugh Way, Ste. 600, Edina, approached the Commission. He provided the Commission with copies of the consent form signed by the homeowners. Mr. McGee stated he wanted to clarify that the homes in this development are not townhomes but are single family homes with single family ownership. He further stated that the Association will have new homeowners sign an understanding that fences may be installed on their property or their neighbor's property and that the fence will be owned by the HOA. Mr. McGee showed a picture of an example of how the fence would look: four foot high black chain link. He stated that the agreements signed by homeowners should alleviate disagreements and potential conflicts between homeowners. The back and sides of the development are blocked from the public's view by a privacy fence. He stated the only people who will have a view of the common space are the people who own the homes and they want the fences. Mr. McGee stated that this amendment is not going to change ownership and is not going to change the context of who is responsible for the property. Rather, he said, it is going to provide a more efficient use of the property by trying to contain pets and children safely within the fenced in area. Commissioner Howell asked Bill Ryan, the president of the homeowners association, if new buyers receive a copy of the covenants pertaining to pets and what the rules are on pets. Mr. Ryan approached the Commission and stated the association does not have any additional rules on pets other than what is mandated by the City. Chairperson Messner asked the applicant how many owners are in the development. Mr. McGee stated that there are 13 current owners, 24 homes available and therefore 11 are currently for sale. Chairperson Messner stated that in addition to requesting to see more detail on the fencing, he also requested at the last meeting for an example of a similar situation happening elsewhere. Mr. McGee stated that unfortunately, there is no repository of information to research on the practices at different developments and associations because it is not required that this type of activity be reported. He stated that boat slips along a waterfront is somewhat similar where the association owns the waterfront property and slips but allows individual owners to use the boat slips. Mr. Ryan approached the Commission again and stated he has spoken with Wensmann Homes who informed him that they have worked with associations that have fences on the lot lines but they are still maintained by the association. Mr. McGee stated with respect to installing only a few of the fences pursuant to the owners that are currently there rather than the whole development, he stated the Association felt it was doing the appropriate thing in giving each homeowner the choice of whether or not they want a fence. Chairperson Messner asked whose desire weighs more in the decision if two adjoining neighbors disagree on having a fence. Mr. McGee stated that if a homeowner desires a fence, the association will install the fence and that the homeowner who did not want the fence knew there was a possibility a fence could get installed because of the agreement he would've signed at the time of purchasing the home. Commissioner Schultz asked the applicant why they wouldn't just install the fences throughout the whole development to avoid future disagreements between homeowners and having to install fences at a later date. Mr. McGee stated the Association thought it was behaving in a responsible manner in installing the fences on request, but he stated they will install the fences throughout the whole development if it means the amendment will pass. Chairperson Messner stated his disagreement to Mr. McGee's statement in his letter in response to the staff report that open space is not an efficient or effective use of land. Mr. McGee stated that in some developments, open space is an efficient and effective use of land, but not in the Rosewood Village development where no one outside of the development can see the open space. Mr. McGee also stated the fact that the homeowners wish to have the open space fenced in is more compelling PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 411 PAGE 3 and appropriate than providing open space in the development. Commissioner Schwartz wondered the basis for the design of the fences. She stated the reality that neighbors will not feel comfortable going into each other's perceived space. Also, she stated that the homeowners with smaller lots may feel they shouldn't have to pay as much in association dues as owners with bigger backyards. She stated this type of plan will create a myriad of problems and asked the applicant why the whole development isn't being fenced in to avoid some of those problems. Mr. McGee replied that he cannot draw any conclusions on how the owners will feel. He stated the Association thought it best to install the fences on a case by case basis rather than fencing the whole development. Mr. Ryan approached the Commission and stated the Association prefers to be able to meet with each homeowner individually to discuss fencing on an individual basis. He stated some owners may not want a fence and the Association would want to know that. Commissioner Schwartz stated though, however, that by default, a homeowner could end up with a fence even though they do not want it because their adjoining neighbor wanted a fence. Mr. Ryan confirmed that this was true. The public hearing was opened at 7:21p.m. Carol Ryan, 14750 Cedar Avenue, Apple Valley, and of Ryan Real Estate, approached the Commission. Ms. Ryan stated that nothing was selling in the development because people had pets and children and desired to have fencing around their yards. She stated people agreed to buy in the development if the Association could try to have fencing approved by the City. She further stated the Association consulted with James R. Hill who platted the development for his opinion on where the fences should be installed. He suggested following the lot lines to the privacy fence. Ms. Ryan stated that fences raise the values of the homes and confirmed that the corner lots with more green space will bring more in value. Joshua Fitch, 14573 Blackberry Way, told the Commission that he talked to the tax assessor at Dakota County and was informed that the Rosewood Village homes are considered single family homes within an association. He stated that if the Commission requires the Association to install all of the fences in the development, then he wanted the agreement that he had signed returned to him. He stated he does not want a fence and he supports the individual right to choose. Mr. McGee stated that individual homeowners could request the fence for their parcel only and cannot dictate whether or not other homeowners get fences. Commissioner Schwartz then asked whether or not one homeowner could enter another homeowners' fenced in area with a bigger yard so their pet could have more room to run around. Mr. McGee confirmed that they could. Commissioner Schultz asked for clarification whether or not a fence would be installed if two neighboring homeowners disagreed on having a fence. Mr. McGee stated that if a homeowner wants a fence, a fence will be installed, whether or not the neighboring homeowner wants the fence. He stated buyers sign a disclosure of understanding that the Association will possibly install fences and will also remove them if the fences become a problem. There was no further public comment. MOTION by Schultz to close the public hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 7:40p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 PAGE 4 410 Ms. Lindquist stated the City Attorney had informed her that the Association can install fences on the abutting property lines as if they were single family lots. Chairperson Messner added that as a result of signing the consent agreements, the homeowners possibly relinquish some of their property ownership. He further commented that he felt the Association is treating the homes in this development as single family homes and therefore, they should have been platted as singled family homes. If the development was platted as such, it never would have achieved the density it currently has. Chairperson Messner stated his opinion that these homes should be considered as detached townhomes with a common area that generally stays as open space. He further stated that given the way this development was originally platted and previous PUD approval processes, there was flexibility designed into the original PUD process when it was approved. Chairperson Messner he would not support the amendment because if the fencing is installed, the Association is creating the illusion of single family lots when they are not. Commissioner Schwartz stated her agreement to everything Chairperson Messner stated and added a few additional reasons for disapproval. She stated the fence plan creates a number of problems particularly when you incorporate private property with association property and allow people to use other homeowners' fenced in areas. Commissioner Howell shared her main reason for not supporting the item was because the original concept of the development did not include single family homes and it should not be treated as such. She further stated people should be able to raise their children and pets without the need for a fenced in backyard. Commissioner Schultz stated her concern with setting a precedent if the amendment was passed. She stated she was not in support of the amendment but would be more in favor of it if the Association would install fences on every lot to be consistent. MOTION by Messner to recommend the City Council deny a Major Amendment to the existing Rosewood Village Second Addition (Rosewood Village Townhomes) Planned Unit Development (PUD) agreement to allow construction of a series of fences throughout the common area for this development. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 3. Nays: Schultz. Motion approved. As follow -up, Ms. Lindquist stated this item will go before the Council on October 21, 2008. 5.b. Danner Inc. Mineral Extraction Permit Modification and Renewal Application (08-27 ME). Senior Planner Zweber reviewed the staff report. The applicant, Marlon Danner of Danner, Inc. owns and operates a gravel mine at 4594 145 Street East. Danner has requested the annual renewal of their mineral extraction permit for 2009 and a modification to mineral extraction permit's reclamation plan to grade the entire site for development after mining activities have ceased. Chairperson Messner questioned the elevation next to County Road 42. Mr. Zweber pointed out on a diagram the two feet difference in elevation. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 PAGE 5 The Applicant, Marlon Danner, president and owner of Danner, Inc., approached the Commission. He stated that he is trying to prepare the property for three years in phases and the development of County Road 42 shortly thereafter. He wants the property to be ready for that development. The public hearing was opened at 8:01p.m. There were no comments. MOTION by Howell to close the Public Hearing. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. The public hearing was closed at 8:01p.m. MOTION by Schultz to recommend the City Council approve renew the Danner Mineral Extraction Permit for 2009 and modify the Mineral Extraction Permit to allow the Regrading and Reclamation of the Northern Half of the Property, subject to: 1. Conformance with the attached 2009 Conditions for Mineral Extraction, including the submission of an updated Surety Bond in the amount outlined in the attached 2009 Conditions for Mineral Extraction. 2. Revising the Reclamation Protocol' Protocol Guiding Principles 7) to read "fill thickness will approach 4 to 8 feet." 3. Submit bi- annual reports to the City containing information about the quantities of material 411/ brought in, where the material came from, and the test results of the material. 4. The Final Reclamation Plan shall be revised to daylight the east property line and match the grades of the Solberg reclamation plan to the east. 5. No mining of gravel from the north half of the site will be allowed during the regrading and reclamation process. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated this item will go before City Council at their regular meeting of October 21, 2008. 5.c. Minnova Land (Chadwick) Lot Split (08 36 LS). Planner Lindahl reviewed the staff report. The applicant, Minnova Land, LLC, requests Lot Split approval to allow the creation of a 57.87 acre parcel from their existing 134.48 acre parcel. The applicant is proposing this split along the future land use designation for the property on the City's Land Use Comp Plan map. Staff is recommending approval of this item. The Applicant, John Chadwick, 11430 Zion Circle, Bloomington, approached the Commission and thanked the City staff for their work in processing this item. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Chadwick if there are any near plans with what will be done with the property. Mr. Chadwick replied that with the slow market, it is hard to make any definite future plans. The public hearing was opened at 8:07p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 PAGE 6 There were no public comments. MOTION by Schwartz to close the public hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 8:07p.m. MOTION by Schwartz to recommend the City Council approve the Lot Split request from Minnova, LLC subdividing their existing 134.48 acre property into one 57.87 acre parcel (Parcel 1) and one 76.61 acre parcel (Parcel 2), subject to the following conditions: 1. Payment of all applicable development fees including a $300 Geographic Information (GIS) fee. Second by Howell. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Lindahl stated this item will go before the City Council for approval at their regular meeting on October 21, 2008. Old Business: None. New Business: None. Reports: 8.a. Active Living Walkability Workshop. Planner Lindahl gave an update on the walkability workshop scheduled for September 30, 2008. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Commissioner Schwartz made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schultz. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 8:13p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2008 PAGE 1 CaII to Order: Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, November 25, 2008. Chairperson Messner called the meeting to order at 6:31p.m. with Commissioners Howell, Palda, Schwartz and Schultz present. Also in attendance were Senior Planner Zweber, Planner Lindahl and Recording Secretary Hanson. The Pledge of Allegiance was read. Additions to Agenda: None. Audience Input: None. Consent Agenda: a. Approval of the September 23, 2008 Regular Meeting minutes. MOTION by Schwartz to approve the Consent Agenda. Second by Howell. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion carried. Public Hearings: 5.a. Shafer Contracting Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal (08- 42 -ME). Senior Planner Zweber reviewed the staff report. Scott Spisak of Shafer Contracting has applied for the annual renewal of the mineral extraction permit for their property located one mile north of 135` Street East and 1/4 mile west of Rich Valley Blvd. (County Road 71). Mr. Zweber stated that staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend approval of the renewal of the Shafer Contracting, Inc. Mineral Extraction Permit for 2009. The Applicant, Scott Spisak, of Shafer Contracting, was present but did not have any additional comments. The public hearing was opened at 6:35p.m. Charlie Koehnen, 12255 Rich Valley Blvd., approached the Commission and asked when Shafer planned on planting grass to better control the dust. Myron Napper, 3381 145t Street East, approached the Commission and asked about the placement of top soil when the mine is completed. He further questioned the depth of the hole and stated he felt the hole was deeper than what was permitted. Mr. Koehnen approached again and stated in response to Mr. Napper's comments that the top soil is still on the property but that it hasn't yet been put back in place and that the depth of the hole is deeper than 40 feet but the digging was done after the permit was amended in 2006 to allow deeper mining. Joan Schneider, 12255 Rich Valley Blvd., approached the Commission and stated her concern with the smell of her tap water. She stated that since Shafer has begun pumping water out in large quantities that her tap water has a horrible odor. She requested the Commission to have someone look into why there is an odor. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2008 PAGE 2 Gary Ista, 12131 Rich Valley Blvd., approached the Commission with three concerns. One, Mr. Ista stated that noise is a concern on certain days depending on which way the wind is blowing. Second, Mr. Ista stated that two of his roofs are turning black due to the dust and dirt in the air. Third, Mr. Ista stated that the water has changed and there is an odor. He brought a sample of water for any of the Commissioners to taste. He requested that his water be tested. Mr. Spisak addressed the questions raised by the public comments. With respect to the planting of grass to control dust, Mr. Spisak stated that Shafer has done some planting on the top and west area of the berm. He further stated that they have not hauled any top soil off of the property. The berm on the north ends of Phases 2, 3, and 4 consists of top soil. With respect to the water, Mr. Spisak stated that Shafer has an agreement with Charlie Koehnen and Joan Schneider to test their well water annually in August. This past August, the water from a spigot on the side of the house was tested and the results showed safe drinking water. Mr. Spisak stated that Shafer would be happy to test the water on the inside of the home. He further stated that Shafer installed their own well in 2007 and haven't any problems with the water. Mr. Spisak stated that Shafer will speak with Mr. Ista about testing his water also and he stated it is the first time he's heard about the roofs turning black on Mr. Ista's property. Myron Napper approached the Commission again and asked what the term "haulback" meant. Mr. Spisak gave an explanation of haulback is the hauling back of clean fill material only from MnDOT projects Joan Schneider approached again and stated her disagreement of Mr. Spisak's claim that the water flows mainly from west to east. She believes that the extra pumping on the site is affecting her well water. The water may have tested fine chemically but the odor is there and that affects the quality of life. There was no further public comment. MOTION by Schultz to close the public hearing. Second by Schwartz. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 6:57p.m. Mr. Zweber addressed the public comments. With respect to planting grass, Mr. Zweber stated that Shafer did provide a receipt as well as a letter stating they purchased seed for approximately 7 acres of their site. Mr. Zweber stated that seed was planted late in the season and hopefully the seed will last through the winter or Shafer will have to replace it in the spring. He further stated that there is no vegetation within the haulback area but there was vegetation on the areas Shafer was repairing for erosion. Mr. Zweber stated that Shafer was approved to mine to an elevation of 840 feet and there is no indication of them exceeding that elevation. He further stated that it is a within condition within the mining permit that no top soil can be removed from the site. Mr. Zweber stated that he cannot address the odor of the water but added that Shafer is not allowed to go below the aquifer. If they hit groundwater, they are not allowed to go any deeper. Mr. Zweber stated that he has inspected the site this year, once the site has been dry and the other time was after a week of wet weather and a small amount of water was in the bottom of the mine. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2008 PAGE 3 Mr. Zweber stated that the Police Department has not received any reports of noise in the past year. He further stated that a separate account has been established in the Police Department for the Shafer site and if any resident experiences problems with noise, they are requested to report it. Mr. Zweber stated that MnDOT conducts three different tests on the haulback materials before it goes back to the site. City staff reviews all reports received. Chairperson Messner asked Mr. Zweber where the large amount of water being pumped from the site is coming from. Mr. Zweber replied that the water is coming from Shafer's well from the same aquifer as the Koehnen's well, and not from the pit. Mr. Spisak stated that the haulback testing is very thorough and Shafer has never any material hauled back to this site that has had problems. MOTION by Schultz to recommend the City Council renew the Shafer Mineral Extraction Permit for 2009. Second by Palda. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated this item will go before the Council on December 16, 2008. Chairperson Messner added that Shafer should try to figure out why there is an odor to the surrounding residents' water. 5.b. Flint Hills Resources Interim Use Permit Renewal (08 -40 -IUP). Senior Planner Zweber reviewed the staff report. Flint Hills Resources LP (FHR) has applied for an Interim Use Permit (IUP) to construct a temporary tent -like warehouse building, five trailers for construction workers, and a communication trailer for project management of a coker drum construction project anticipated to be complete by December 31, 2012. The IUP is intended to permit the buildings (and trailers) with exemption for certain zoning standards associated with permanent buildings such as required materials, parking and landscaping. The IUP guarantees that the structures will be removed upon completion of the project. The IUP process has been used in other situations when the use is expected to be temporary, and the duration is either identified, or it is clear that improvements are of a temporary nature that will not adversely effect or inhibit future re -use of the site. Mr. Zweber explained to the Commission that staff is requesting the Commission to recommend that the City Council approve an Interim Use Permit for a temporary warehouse, five construction worker trailers, and a communications trailer for Flint Hills Resources during the coker drum construction project, subject to the following conditions: 1. The date of expiration of the IUP shall be December 31, 2012. 2. Each building and trailer requires a building permit and shall conform to all applicable building and fire codes. 3. The applicant must obtain a grading permit prior to grading or installation of the temporary buildings. Don Kern of Flint Hills Resources, was present but had no comments. The public hearing was opened at 7:17p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2008 PAGE 4 Myron Napper, 3381 145t Street East, approached the Commission and asked if the permits are existing permits and whether or not extending the permits cover the construction of new coker drums and other structures. Mr. Zweber responded that this is for an extension of existing permits created in 2004 as they relate to the temporary structures, not the construction of future structures. There were no further public comments. MOTION by Palda to close the Public Hearing. Second by Howell. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. The public hearing was closed at 7:20p.m. Mr. Zweber clarified that the IUP in question essentially covers only the zoning issues as addressed in Conditions 2 and 3. Further, he stated that the extension does not exempt Flint Hills from needing other building permits. The Planning Commission only deals with zoning issues and staff will review administrative issues and other permits. MOTION by Schultz to recommend the City Council approve an Interim Use Permit to Flint Hills Resources for Five Temporary Construction Workers Trailers, a Temporary Communications Trailer, and a Temporary Warehouse for the Coker Drum Construction Project, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Interim Use Permit expires 12/31/2012. 2. Each building and trailer requires a building permit and shall conform to all applicable building and fire codes. 3. The applicant must obtain a grading permit prior to grading or installation of the temporary buildings. Second by Howell. Ayes: 5. Nays: None. Motion approved. As follow -up, Mr. Zweber stated this item will go before City Council at their regular meeting on December 16, 2008. After the IUP extension is approved, Flint Hills will have to apply for other building and grading permits as required. Old Business: None. New Business: 7.a. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Regarding Fence Materials. Planner Lindahl reviewed the staff report. These topics were initiated by staff who request direction from the Planning Commission regarding two items: (1) minimum standards for fence materials, and (2) the number of copies required with Planning and Land Use applications. This item is for discussion only. Should it be necessary, staff will draft formal text amendments and bring them back to the Planning Commission at a future time for an official review and public hearing. Commissioner Schultz asked if some direction could be taken from what the associations require for fencing. Chairperson Messner stated that the Commission should create a minimum standard that allows flexibility. Mr. Lindahl stated that the standards of association will be more detailed and specific in style and material that what staff is proposing. Mr. Zweber added that staff does not want to dictate what people should have for a fence but give them a standard for what is allowed. PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 25, 2008 PAGE 5 Discussions on barbed wire and electric fencing took place, and also dog kennels, all of which are included in separate sections of the ordinance. With respect to the number of plans staff should require for submittals, it was agreed that staff should have full control over the number of copies and that large plans for Commission review is not necessary. Reports: Mr. Lindahl provided information on the second phase of the Active Living program. Adjournment: There being no further business to come before this Commission, Commissioner Schultz made a motion to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Schwartz. Upon unanimous decision, the meeting was adjourned at 7:44p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Kathie Hanson, Recording Secretary 411