Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017.10.26 PC MinutesMinutes for the Planning Commission Meeting of Thursday, October 26, 2017 Commissioner Arcand called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. PRESENT: Arcand, Derr, Lessard, Luchsinger, McRoberts, Tjernlund. ABSENT: Kleissler. STAFF: Rachel Juba, Planner Rachel Leitz, Community Development Assistant Oath of Office Kim Luchsinger and Mathew Derr introduced themselves to the Commission. Both read the oath of office and signed the document. Approval of Minutes for the Planning Commission Meeting of October 12, 2017 Commissioner Arcand made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tjernlund, to approve minutes for the meeting of October 12, 2017. All Ayes. Motion carried. Commissioner McRoberts abstained. CPDC Pratt Oakwood, LLP. – Leroux Property Concept Plan Leitz presented on a concept plan for a development to be located east of Elmcrest Avenue N. and north of 159th Street N. on approximately 120 acres. The plan shows 177 proposed residential lots with a variety of product types and lot sizes, stormwater ponding areas, a large park and open space, sidewalk and trail connections, and road connections. Leitz stated the applicant would like to receive feedback on the project in regards to general layout, housing types, parks/trails, road circulation and construction, and stormwater management/ water re-use. David Hempel, project manager with Westwood, approached the podium. He stated that he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission had. Commissioner Luchsinger asked about the amenities the developer is planning to offer within the development. Mr. Hempel stated that the development is still in the planning stages and when the layout is better established, the developer will begin inserting amenities. Mr. Hempel did discuss some of the proposed trail connections, exceeding the City’s landscape requirements, and potential park improvements. Commissioner McRoberts stated that the developer has been very specific about the flexibility asked for in lot widths and setbacks, however, has been very vague on what would be given back to the City for such flexibility. Mr. Hempel stated that the preliminary plat stage will show what the developer plans to give back to the City in return for PUD flexibility. Commissioner Derr stated his concern for connections to the park for the residents living in the western quadrant of the development. Commissioner McRoberts asked the engineer if the park would be for public use. Planning Commission October 26, 2017 Page 2 Mr. Hempel stated the parkland would be dedicated for use as a public park. He also stated that the developer is proposing to install trails and sidewalk connections to tie into existing infrastructure in adjacent developments. He discussed the trail connection made from the development to the park and stated the developer is looking at other trail connections, specifically along the northern portion of the park area. Leitz stated that the proposed park is located within the City’s greenway corridor, which is called out to have significant natural resources. She also described the neighborhood area parks service areas, which does have this area as a location needing a large City park. Commissioner Arcand asked if Frog Hollow Park was close to this location. Leitz described that Frog Hollow Park is located just to the southeast of the development and is a small pocket park. Commissioner Tjernlund asked staff about the zoning and land use of surrounding properties and if the products, lot sizes, and lot widths would be compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods. Juba stated that the adjacent properties are all zoned low and medium density residential. She described some of the different product types found in the adjacent developments and how those had been constructed in both straight zoning and Planned Unit Developments. She stated that where the developer is proposing to abide by straight R-3 zoning mimics Prairie Village, which was also constructed with R-3 zoning requirements. Commissioner Tjernlund asked for further explanation on the density requirements. Juba stated that low density residential requires a minimum of 2 units per acre and medium density residential requires a minimum of 3 units per acre. She stated that the park is within the medium density residential area, which is why the development is not meeting density requirements. She stated with a PUD, the developer can combine the minimum density for the land uses. She also explained that the Met Council approved the City’s Comprehensive Plan which describes the preservation of a greenway corridor. She believes the City can work with the developer to make the density work for the project. Commissioner Tjernlund asked if there are high quality trees within the proposed parkland area. Mr. Hempel stated that they have not completed a tree survey for the property. Commissioner McRoberts inquired as to the natural resources being preserved on the property. Mr. Hempel stated that the wetlands and open space within the greenway corridor is being preserved through their design efforts. Commissioner Arcand asked the engineer to explain the layout of the different product types. Mr. Hempel stated that the property has high ground water and that has dictated the product types shown on the site. He described the villas being constructed as slab on grade and the single family homes being constructed with full basements. Commission McRoberts asked the engineer to explain the reasoning of putting a small amount of villa homes in the southeast corner, away from the rest of the housing products shown in the development. Mr. Hempel stated that the City wanted to see a street connection to the adjacent parcel to the east. In doing that, the developer was able to conceptualize a couple more lots. He stated that those lots may change based on comments received from the various Commissions and Council. Planning Commission October 26, 2017 Page 3 Commissioner Luchsinger asked if there were wetlands where the proposed ball fields were in the park. Mr. Hempel stated those were wetlands and would have to be mitigated for. Commissioner Luchsinger stated that she would like the developer to evaluate how much parking would be needed for the ballfields. Mr. Hempel stated that as the project moves forward a traffic study and parking needs study would be completed. Commissioner Tjernlund stated that if it was decided that the villa products on the southeast side of the development were removed from the project and more park space was added, the Planning Commission should be flexible on the density requirements. He believed removing those lots would be a better use of that area since they are disconnected from the rest of the development. Commissioner McRoberts asked if PUDs require certain density numbers or if that’s negotiated. Juba stated that PUDs still have to meet the land use densities from the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Arcand asked if Farnham Avenue would still be extended and connect to the adjacent parcel to the east if the villa lots are removed from the southeast corner of the development. Juba stated that the City is requiring a connection to the adjacent east property with this development because there is currently no connection to it. She also added that the 40 acre parcel to the east has a land use of Medium Density Residential, so at the time the parcel to the east develops, there will most likely be smaller lot sizes to accommodate the land use. Commissioner Arcand stated that the villa lots on the southeast corner could make sense when the adjacent parcel to the east develops in the future. Commissioner Tjernlund stated that accommodation for construction access should be discussed as the project moves forward. Commissioner Arcand discussed Oneka Parkway. He asked staff if the City is comfortable with the median being removed and the road narrowed as it is extended north. Juba stated that Oneka Parkway probably doesn’t need to be as wide as it extends north because there will be less traffic using it. Juba stated that the City Engineer has reviewed the plans and is comfortable with the center median being removed. Leitz added that there will still need to be an evaluation if turn lanes will need to be added as the project moves forward. Mr. Hempel stated the road would be similar to Oneka Parkway, south of Frenchman Road. Commissioner Arcand began discussing stormwater management and water reuse. He stated that it was an expectation that the development use water reuse for irrigation. Mr. Hempel stated that especially with the recent DNR ruling, the developer will be evaluating stormwater reuse. He discussed that the villa product will have an HOA, but the other lots will not. He stated that they would specifically be evaluating if the villa lots could use stormwater to irrigate the lawns. Planning Commission October 26, 2017 Page 4 Commissioner Arcand stated that the most recent projects in Hugo have been able to use stormwater to irrigate the entire development, which has been made up of many different types of products. Mr. Hempel said they would evaluate using stormwater reuse in the entire development. Commissioner McRoberts asked Mr. Hempel if there was anything more that he would like to receive comments on. Mr. Hempel stated he would like to add that the 65 ft. wide lots are becoming more of the “norm” compared to the 80-85 ft. wide lots because the value of property is too great to make the numbers work for people purchasing the homes. Commissioner Luchsinger stated that having a variety of lot sizes and product types is attractive for the City because it will offer more options and price points for smaller families and empty nesters. Commissioner Arcand asked Mr. Hempel if he knew the price points for the homes that were to be offered in the development. Mr. Hempel stated that he did not know that information at this time. Commissioner Luchsinger stated that along with the sidewalks and trails, previously discussed with the developer, it would be nice to have a loop through the northern portion of the park. Commissioner McRoberts stated that he would like to make sure the developer has a clear proposal of what they will be asking for flexibility on and what they will be giving back to the City in return for this flexibility when the project returns in the future. Appointment of Planning Commissioner to the Ordinance Review Committee Juba stated that the Ordinance Review Committee is a subcommittee of the Planning Commission and City Council. She stated that the subcommittee reviews ordinance updates or new ordinances as new laws/statutes come about and then make a recommendation to the Planning Commission prior to the public hearing for ordinance changes. Commissioner Luchsinger stated she would volunteer to be on the Ordinance Review Committee. Commissioner McRoberts made a motion, Commissioner Arcand seconded, to approve appointment of Commissioner Luchsinger to the Ordinance Review Committee. Approve Cancellation of November 23rd Planning Commission Meeting The Planning Commission agreed to cancel the meeting on November 23, 2017. Approve Rescheduling of December Planning Commission meetings to December 21st Juba stated that we reschedule the meetings every year in December. The regularly scheduled December meetings are on December 14th and 28th. Staff recommended consolidating these meetings into one meeting to be held on December 21st. The Planning Commission agreed to reschedule the Planning Commission meeting to December 21, 2017. Planning Commission October 26, 2017 Page 5 Adjournment Commissioner McRoberts made a motion, Commissioner Lessard seconded, to adjourn at 7:53 p.m. All Ayes. Motion carried. Respectfully Submitted, Rachel Leitz, Community Development Assistant