HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-01-03 P & Z
terviCfe
'E.stabfWw{ 1857
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, JANUARY 3, 2006
6:30 p.m.
L CALL TO ORDER
1. Ron Call
n. APPEARANCESIPRESENTATION(S)
m PUBUC BEARING (S)
IV. OLD BUSINESS
1. Nuisance Signs
2. Bridges in Easements (Bring your previous documentation)
v. NEW BUSINESS
1. Church of St. Genevieve - Proposed Request for Variance
2. B & R Properties - 6805 - 20th Avenue Request for Rezone
3. Comments on AUAR Comprehensive Plan Amendment
VL DISCUSSION ITEMS
1. Downtown Redevelopment
VB. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. December 6, 2005 Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes
vm ADJOURNMENT
ervif{e
~JB57.
J 0:> v~~ os- PETITION FOR VARIANCE
-'t't} r &~
Date: ~ 0 Fee: $ + Legal Fees Zoning:
Applicant: S T Ce&i~ LI't?..i~ 6.m4.'~ eJ.lu~~J.l
Street Address:' l' <1 !.- '-'6 i' 7 Cb' 'p).'Gid\) Rei Phone: ,\ -) tI ~ 'I - 793 7
City/StatelZip: {lfS~ Tu'vl tit-, /1A-...J S~b} r
Status of Applicant: Owner Lease Holder Other -';(J \ ,~ €" fi-.. 5-;-
Legal Description of Property: ~ J - 31 -cJ~ - ;)J-6l>~3
Street Address (subject property): 6,f'rS- CtJ.....1i,.. Vi Ll.e E!.( J ~e....,Tf, VI II,
A variance is a use that is not generally permitted by the City's zoning ordinances but which is
allowed in special cases only. A request for a variance from the City's zoning ordinances will be
granted upon a showing of undue hardship by a property owner who is determined to have a unique
situation. "Undue hardship" means that the property cannot be put to a reasonable use if the
conditions of the zoning ordinances are followed, that the property owner's particular circumstances
are unique and not self-created, and that granting a variance will not alter the essential character of
the locality or neighborhood. Economic hardship alone will not constitute undue hardship if some
reasonable use currently exists under the terms of the City's zoning ordinance. If the property
owner purchased the property knowing that the City's zoning ordinances prohibited a use, the
property owner's circumstances are self-created.
Minnesota Statutes (MS 462.357, Subd. 6) and City Ordinances (Ord. #4, Division 180) require that
the following conditions must be satisfied for approval of this request. Please respond to these
conditions using additional sheets of paper ifnecessary.
1. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical
conditions of the parcel or lot, the proposed variance would relieve an undue
hardship, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, should the applicable
ordinance be strictly enforced.
signature ofAppJi&': ./ ~~
*By paying the above stated fee, I tbat no refunds will be issued in full, in part, or at any time, even
though the outcome of Council's action is denial of the request.
APPLICANTS, PLEAsE NOTE:
All developers or property owners must submit the following information to the City of
Centerville by the Tuesday that is 30 days PRIOR to the meeting of the Planning and Zoning
Commission or the City Council meeting at which the request will be heard at a public hearing.
1. Complete the application for the specific request and pay the fee.
2. Submit a complete survey and site plans (including measurements, dimensions),
showing lot lines and building footprint, driveways, sidewalks, curb cuts, ingress,
egress, etc. on the property and its relation to adjacent properties.
3. Explanation of materials that will be used and plans for screening, landscaping,
fencing and dumpster enclosures.
4. Drawings of completed buildings, if appropriate to the project, and materials used.
5. Storm water retention and drainage plans. The Rice Creek Watershed District
and/or other water management organizations may need to be notified of the
project.
6. A letter explaining the reason for the variance request. The letter must also
demonstrate the variance will not impact the surrounding properties nor impact
the characteristic of the neighborhood in any manner.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE OR REZONING
VARIANCE
)(
*FEE
REZONING
DATE PAID
STREET LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Coiff'tJ,J Rti -J- /,kj't.';rAGf$ Sf
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: k") I~ ~ I4tJ,J,iTirl.. S,;JJ,..j ,.... II L)~
~3'" 31- J.J -- ~ 3- t)()J3 (11J1'l.(;t.t, It) Jt I)()J'i-(j~l) 6}~7JJ 73
SIZE OF PARCEL(S) /'1 SS At.If..tJ~
PROPERTY OWNER: sr CitUe,VI e, iJ" t1.1M l'L ~ ~IILJ#'t "'- 'PHONE ,C!..J. -I t( J 9 - 7? '3 -;
FEE OWNER: S7 Ce,.J~v}itv~!j ([.It, 1TI~Lie
ADDRESS: t'o~1!'- t!.t'!...,r~\I,l.u tJ IV' 71>1/ 7 C6/ rt'~..J ,cJ J et..,..T.nl\li Lh /~ ~
APPLICANT'S INTEREST IN PROPERTY:
><
FEE OWNER
CONTRACT PURCHASER
* Plus any additional costs
incurred for engineering,
~ Ad~ -~-,; legal fees, publication
~ e%) bM JrJ Ill/ JtJeJw'or other requirements.
Signature of property owner
y ~er ~t>~~
i~ 17B{., Date
1
'-..
-~
-
.~~
'-'-~
,~
~qDY[JJ L
MAIN ST. IHWY. 14
CENTERVIfLE
LAKE
Q
G:)
C::J
\
\\
,\,
~0~
....... I I
__________________________________________::..~,,-------___________________________J
,"-
c.,J
fj
~
I
D
SOUTH OPTION
ffi
AREA MAP
t ,
o so' 100' 200'
~ :;!
fIl Q)
.'6" . ~
- ~
:tl::
N c::
-.. 0'
-.. ..,
N ~
~
0-
~
S" -
CD
~
~il -n 0 ~
:r
0 e
5-= t9 g. ~
:J& !a.
20
f~ ftl c
el i -0
1 '11
!
i . -, S
a .
.-
....
J" en 0 ,
. C J:
, :;u m
0 0
i "
:tl:: N
.....
....
(j) N
I\) m
0 ~
~ ~....
~ I
I - ~
I ft 0
c
z
8 -I
..
co
~g>
rf
~c"
~j
'fi t;1 ~
'.~~.~
1la:~
~i.~~
..
. . ,. ......w........"1?....
. . ..... _H....._.___
-,
~50
f'''' "Q
, I'" \ 't"... 1<1 ~Q6 , c;.:
... r'" ,I ' ".. "'.. '''''''''1''\ -0 ,.... , I'" ' .....
~ r tot .. ' ::t ":0, 9'-- 0 ... r'" ,I '. ".. "..
r.. ",\ ' t"..'''' g) A~.~> ~\'t , .-t" c;.. tot, ·
,.. t-- " " \ ,:! ~.r", . gq\'" ...Cl r" "" \ .....'
, ~ ~ .uw _f)~~ ,.... -'..'
...,.... ,;:s .,~ ~'t I~O . '.., toO' INTERSECTION POINT OF
69~sP'tlO f..1 ~~,,~ ~ 0 /1.J ~~22- ~~~"'2.\1'2.9 THE NORTH UNE OF LOT .. ~~~
_Ii!!!: - -I-IERITAGE&TREE1 (0 &TREETJt!..-: ,*,,0 ~~'... - ~,'fL- --fI#JJ ~&t~g.~A~J-~,
NORTH UNE OF LOT 15 AND 0 rei ~ '\'lO~. 'tC ~~~t 1/4. 'f/p 'tC 0 CENTERVlLLE ROAD \
SOUTHERLY RIGHT-Of-WAY __.JQ____ ~19 It" A'" '\. 81190"6 37!:, ~~_.... II) 0 49 (S89-48'30-E DEED) :
UNE OF HERITAGE STREET '. ----...... (j . .-' ~ d'" ~.-- ~"'''l 0,,""'" '.~' (569... DEED)
! ~ _P~!!!!G~UMENTATlON o\.'}.\ ;.... \. ..........:. .... '" . ....... 't _ _ J!,16.57 MEAS) _ _ _ _ _ ~
. 7 ~........ 7 :2B . ....:~ . "~ ..... -n:::~ 100 JI ~ 342.02 r- 100 -1
INlERSECTlON POINT OF THE ............ -60. ~~ \ ,~i9 ..~~ f f ') .....~ . ~\~"'I'"l I'
THEASlERlY RIGHT-Of-WAY OF ------7-... ~. ~ .o~\~. \u~~ .,,~~~ . ....." fA~t~ , WESTERI.:YJ~IGHT-OF-WAY .
LaMOTIE DRIVE AND THE SOUTH ~ ~ 1~ l?:..... ...... .... ~. ..... ...... \',~ UN~F "-1:fTERVlLLE ROAD ---...,
-OF-WAY OF HERITAGE STREET ' . \ i '('. ...~D..... ". \. {.". .... I~': \
"I .If).39 \~,2.9 '..:~ ...... ...... l ( ....... ~, , <D () I '3' l&I ~
: / . ~ · _.._...~.~. \,\ \ \ ( . W ~ I ~ \ , 'ii I \:!J ~~
\ -gO\~ ......... .... : \ ~ (" I 0 . \ \ ~ i~
/ \."''' , 29: - i'~~ ~IGS '\ . . I -I
/ '. \ ~0 ,{~ ~
/ .... \ I ..'.i 'dA:,.1;,'\o L~' 100:1: 100
90.~Q'1. ........... ..90\, \, \ ~ ~ cr - - - - - -;:;;e
. ~ .~ , .' '. ". ' gQ~~96 9of1,~~~O\".r:, ~ ~~.
: ~ ....... ...... ~ -..... \'.."'. , V!'r~~ "~:1 "...s1 601.:!Cf-~ I
. : I'l. : ...... ......,..\.>-... ". ~ I' ".. ',!) SOu \. ~ "'(i'W"Q'
_.: ~...~ 1 .,. 90"'&4 'tJ i /1.'$6 !!I=.... .~\~;._.l'.~ ,0, I ,~
~ v i II - _..').. ....;~
...... : 0 't: "'" .... f' 'Sl
... : /1. Q.Q JQ~ ,~r1~ ii,
.... : .,.10 e .~ ft... /; ......, 0
. . ..- .oJ . "'" ." ,p'. 10)
. .... : .....- .,' ~ 9) ........~1 II '.. ~
76. ( " e\.Q ~\!S.............. A~'?1~ ..' ~ g../: ~......~........... ...:> \ ",
. ......"..,... . : ~::. ~Olo\C ~',o.1t~1 .... : ' ~..~f{ .,. 104-'''...\..... gait.,,'
..... er!.k~ -~ .... ..': ..' ,. .. gOIt-f16> .
..::,;:/fft.........~~~. _ IQ'!.16 ..........t~o'!J!.. " . ..,.:\~ i
lL ~ .............. ~ .... CE 1
....... ........................... ........ -" J'
...... . ......... ......
..'
..' l 11 8 67-._
..' -...., "..::' . CE.""';
904-"'~/ ~...........
....... ..... ASr
......... ........ .. .. ...... ....
..... A....... ............................................................... ....
-"d. p'tJvt .~.... ._. -........-.............. .
II ....~ ._................... ................ .....Jl.. rJ Q6
.... ...... -.1 ...........ii01t.a1t.......... .- 01 JfjS'~ .....9OT......................;1'90 .
.... pit' ,~... _ OQ\r.:ro........ .,. v ......"..........................1.. ..... .,. ....
. .,.go&.~..............g;6...........................:.n;._~................ ................ AREA. ............. ............
\;1 ~ l(Q ........ ............... · .' ....
.,.gCi ..... ..................... 643 5......6........2.........+... ......S Q
-, ........... .......... -' " ,,'
.......... ...................... ,,- . ..... " .....
....0907................. ....... ....... - ·
":1\ .................................................... 1 A 7.....7........~........... ACR ES
"\ ~ g01. _ 991..&'$....... , .,. IQ8.19 . Q&.61t ........ ....fr:j! ..........
................0908.............. .,. 9 ........ 90li. .......... .. 9 .......9 . ....... .. . M06 i1.&4- &4-
.......... .' ". .. ...... .. 90 ' .,. g01.
... r,::" ............ ..' .... ......
........ ........... _ .__ _ _,..... "'_ _ ,.....,... / I r--,-",,...... .......r.:'\.....j'(.'I...,.,.........
UN
A
-r- AN~
FT.
l
10F'
,-
FOR:' . ST.
NE CORNER
OF LOT 15
,.-- AUD SUB JLUl
( . REVISED rrn.o
I
I
@
,,: i Jl~~
~ ':
q~' .
~ tJ8S021f.-It"
t : 389.92 i1.1tO
"l~~ j342.oo
~.()> ;
~/
{' .,.901.~''
...
'.
.......~~v.fG
.....
........
...................
e5
~Ii:
s-
~fj
~~
.,~;
~~
~6
~~
I-~
B~
i2c
1&.1'"
i5~
_ g01 :J.6
901......
.....F '" ~.
........... l
....... !
(~~\ pl-
...... - :
..... 2'
...... i
...:~> .,. gO&3-' 1 f
......- i
.... 908' :
.... i
.... It ;
~'JD,.I 9~,!.k:k
" ,..r.,,,,,,,,,.\iV
December 7, 2005
f~J& CEr~iltiaJ
DEe 0 8 Z005
,~i)))
t/ Il' rl Y
Dallas Larson
City of Centerville
1880 Main Street
Centerville, MN 55038-9794
The City of Lino Lakes is reviewing an application to amend the city's comprehensive
plan. We are seeking comments on the proposed amendment from our neighboring
communities and jurisdictions.
The application includes amending the proposed future land use map, adding land to the
Metropolitan Urban Service Area, and addressing issues of our growth management
policy. If approved, the amendment also will revise specified text in the existing plan to
address some issues not adequately covered now. The enclosed "Comprehensive Plan
Amendment Form" describes the proposed amendments.
I would appreciate any comments you may have one the amendment by January 9, 2006.
This will allow staff to revise the amendment based on your comments, if necessary, and
present the revised amendment to the Lino Lakes City Council for approval.
I respectfully ask that you send me a response even if you have no commefifs on the
amendment. This will help us ensure that you have received the information. Comments
or no-comment responses can be mailed to me at City Hall or e-mailed to
ieff.smyser@ci.1ino-Iakes.mn.us .
Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you for your time and help.
Sincerely,
Jeff Smyser
City Planner
(651-982-2425
jeff.smyser@ci.1ino-Iakes.mn.us
600 Town Center Parkway, Lino Lakes, Minnesota 55014-1182
Phone: 651-982-2400 · Fax: 651-982-2499
L__
"
~ Metropolitan Counen
Local Planning Handbook I Amendment Form
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Form
AMENDMENT NAME
Lino Lakes, West Side of 1-35E: Hardwood Creek LLC Site
This form is available in Microsoft Word format on the Metropolitan Council's Local Planning Assistance
website at: http://www.Metropolitanrocouncil.ora/plannina/assistance/resources.htm.
COMMUNITY PROFILE AND AMENDMENT OVERVIEW
1. Provide the following information:
Local governmental unit Citv of Lino Lakes
Contact name Jeff Smyser
Contact title City Planner
Address 600 Town Center Parkwav
City, State, and Zip Lino Lakes, MN 55014-1182
Telephone number 651-982-2425
FAX number 651-982-2499
Email address ieff.smvserlWci.lino-lakes. mn. us
Date of preparation December 1, 2005
2. Identify type of amendment and describe. Check all that apply:
X from Industrial, High Density Residential, and Medium Density
2a. Land use change Residential to Mixed Use
X 370 acres of additional MUSA to be applied within pre-2010
2b. MUSA Expansion or Change rowth area: rowth areas were a roved with 2002 com Ian
X . description of Mixed Use category
· summary of development on the site
2c. Text Change . criteria for amending comprehensive plan to exceed growth
mana ement limits
2d. Other
3. Provide a description of the amendment.
General location
Brief description
* mile north of Main St. CSAH 14 , between 1-35E and 20th Ave. CSAH 21 .
Change land use category for the 370-acre site and include site in MUSA. Also,
amend text to describe the Mixed Use land use category and to address
amending comprehensive plan to exceed growth management limits. The Mixed
Use category exists on the existing land use map, but the text of the
comprehensive plan does not include a description of the category.
Note that there has not yet been an application for platting or planned unit
develo ment, so site s ecifics are not et desi ned.
"
'.
Affected area, in acres 370 acres for the currently proposed land use change and expansion of the
MUSA.
The text amendments will affect other areas of the city that are considered for
the Mixed Use cateaorv in the future.
SECTION 1: PROCESS OVERVIEW
4. Indicate official local status of the plan amendment. (Check all that apply.) The local governing body
must take action on the proposed amendment before submittal to the Metropolitan Council.
Action
Acted u on b commission
Approved by governing body, contingent upon
Metro olitan Council review
Date of Action
Se tember 27,2005
pending
5. List adjacent local governments, school districts and other jurisdictions and the date the copies were sent.
Notifying adjacent governmental units and affected school districts is one of the criteria the
Council will use in determining whether an application is deemed complete for review.
Cities: Centerville, Hugo, Blaine, Shoreview, North Oaks, Circle Pines, Ham Lake, Forest Lake
Townships: White Bear, Columbus
School Districts: Centennial (#12), White Bear (#624), Forest Lake (#831)
Counties: Anoka County Highway Dept.,
Washin ton Coun De t. of Trans ortation and Ph sical Develo ment
~
'2-1-05
September 2005
2
6. Identify outstanding issues or conditions made in the Metropolitan Council's review of the municipality's
2020 Comprehensive Plan Update or subsequent comprehensive plan amendment?
No, the Council's review did not identify any issues or conditions.
Issue/Condition
City to adopt ghost platting
ordinance.
City to adopt hydric soils
ordinance.
City to report annual use of
MUSA reserve.
City re-examine urban
density and forecasts and
respond to Met Council
olic with 2008 Ian u date.
City re-examine growth
management policy.
City to recognize and
implement two
recommendations from the
Marketplace EAW.
City to update transit section
information.
Tier II sewer plan
Water Ian
Add solar access protection
to com Ian.
September 2005
Ste s taken or future lanned actions, includin date
Ghost platting is included in requirements in the 2003 subdivision ordinance.
Met Council letter of 11/2104 acknowled ed this condition has been met.
City code, the subdivision ordinance, and standard development review
combine to address hydric soils. Met Council letter of 11/2104 acknowledged
this condition has been met.
City has been sending in annual reports on MUSA usage.
City will begin plan update process in 2006. The site included in the land use
change to Mixed Use will have a residential density of 4+ units per acre.
City growth management policy limits the number of new lots/units to be
platted annually (often misunderstood as metering building permits).
Conservation development is exempt from this limit under policy amendment
approved in 2004. The overall policy will be examined as part of comp plan
u date rocess.
Reconstruction of I 3SWILake Drive interchange: As noted in 11/2104 Met
Council letter, the City is exercising due diligence in implementing appropriate
improvements through partnerships, developer agreements, and City funding.
The City is working with Anoka County to design, obtain funding for, and
complete the interchange reconstruction.
New Ingress road to the new town center: This new intersection of Town
Center Parkway and Lake Drive currently is under construction. Intersection
desi n will accommodate future interchan e reconstruction.
City will incorporate in 2008 comp plan update the latest changes and status
of transit lannin b Metro Transit and Anoka Count .
City has submitted information supporting Met Council decision to construct
new Lino Lakes interceptor to serve eastern part of Lino Lakes. The City has
a draft comprehensive sanitary sewer system plan that is being revised and
will be submitted to Met Council when com leted.
A 2004 com rehensive water s stem Ian has been submitted to Met Council.
This was added for final city council approval of 2002 comp plan.
3
7. Willlhas an environmental review (Environmental Assessment Worksheet, Environmental Impact
Statement or Alternative Urban Areawide Review) be/been completed for the site?
No, none re uired.
X Yes, indicate type of review and approximate date of completion. Include a summary of
findings, if completed:
The 370-acre site is within the area of the 1-35E Corridor Alternative Urban Areawide
Review. This AUAR was approved by the city council on October 24, 2005. The complete
AUAR includin miti ation Ian was distributed to Met Council.
SECTION 2: FORECASTS
8. Complete the following forecast table to reflect any changes in population, household and employment
forecasts. If the proposed amendment does not change the community's household, population or
employment forecasts, as shown in the municipalities Metropolitan Systems Statement, fill in the pre and
post amendment columns with those forecasts.
City-wide Forecasts City-wide Forecasts
Pre-Amendment Post-Amendment
2010 2020 2030 2010 2020 2030
Households 7100 8600 10,100 7610 9280 10,780
Pooulation 22,500 25,900 29,700 24,075 27,972 31,700
Emplovment 2950 3300 3550 2950 3300 3550
For all amendments that propose land use or forecast changes, you must complete the questions #10
(land use), #11 (housing), #12 (trip generation), #20 (sewer flow) and #30 (water supply).
SECTION 3: LAND USE
9. Does the plan amendment propose any impacts to wetlands located on the site?
No wetlands on the site.
No imcacts to wetlands located on the site.
X Yes, describe the type of wetland, potential impacts and mitigation plans: _
Site design has not yet been prepared. There are 13 acres of wetlands on the site. There likely will be
some impact to wetlands, but the conservation development approach that makes up a fundamental
aspect of the AUAR mitigation plan will require careful design to enhance environmental features in all
develooment in the AUAR area.
September 2005
4
i .
10. Describe land use changes in acres, applicable to this amendment site, using the following tables and
filling in the community's specific land use categories:
Not A Iicable.
. -... .
. .. .
'Landll~e;Qesjgnatioi1'~fiIlAn
. sp~cifip .land use categories) .. .....
Industrial
Commercial
I\Uland.Uses
.:Act~s....'
Pre CPA PQ~f:CPA'
290
o
Low Densi Residential 0 0 0
Medium Density Residential 55 3-6 ula, 0
165-330 units
High Density Residential 25 6-12 ula, 0
150-300 units
Mixed Use 0 370 0 approx. 1200 units
approx. 4.5 u/a
also includes 500,000+sf
of commercial deve!.
Total 370 370 315-630 units a rox. 1200 units
CPA = Comprehensive Plan Amendment
11. If the proposed amendment changes the amount of land city wide staged for development by 2011 for
medium density, high density or mixed use residential development, complete the following table to identify
the amount of land available pre and post amendment:
FUlin all land use categories
tha~allowfor multifamily
re~idential. development
Total.
Acres
a
Acres cIty-wide for each .Ianduse
category.
Pre-amendment
Dev~l()ped . Pevel()pable
acres Acres.
ba';bi=c
Acres city-wide for each
landtisecategory
Post-ame.ndment
Amendment Developable
acres**acres
d c+d:;:::e
Medium Densi Residential 557 235 322 0 322
~ 0 ~ 0 ~
22 14 8 0 8
Mixed Use 156 141 15 370 385
* "Developable" means land planned for urban residential development, infill or redevelopment before 2011.
- Amendment acres from the municipality's response to Question #10 above.
September 2005 5
SECTION 4: TRANSPORTATION
12. Complete the following table using the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 6th
Edition, to show whether this plan amendment increases or decreases trip generation from the planned
land use and transportation element of the community's comprehensive plan.
Trip Generation for the Site Based Trip Generation for the Site Based
on Planned Land Use on Planned Land Use
Pre-Amendment Post-Amendment
Est. averaae dailv traffic 17,260 21,048
Est. peak hour traffic 1988 1984
13. Will these changes require improvements to the existing local and regional road network or interchanges
beyond what is in the community's current transportation plan?
No, existina local and reaional road networks can accommodate increase.
X Yes, describe improvements and who will pay for them:
CSAH 14 will be improved by Anoka County in 2006/2007. This will include additional traffic lanes, turn
lanes, median, and signals at the intersectio"n with CSAH 21. The developer of the 370-acre site will be
responsible for improvements to CSAH 21, which will include additional traffic lanes and turn lanes, and
possible a median. The 1-35E interchange needs reconstruction without the new development, but
funding is lacking. Uno Lakes, Hugo, Anoka County, and Washington County have worked with other
jurisdictions to acquire design funding for a new interchange. Developers in the area may need to help
with this in order for this important piece to be rebuilt in order to ensure that adequate infrastructure
exists to serve their developments. In addition to these regional arterial roads, a system of local collector
streets will be needed to serve new development. These will be constructed by development as it
oroaresses.
Access
14. If the site has direct access to a principal or "A" minor arterial, is location and spacing consistent with
applicable County guidelines or MnDOT's Access Management Guidelines
(http://www.oim.dot.state.mn.us/accesslindex.html)?
Not a Iicable, no direct access to a
No, ex lain:
X Yes, describe:
The specific site involved in this amendment will access CSAH 14 and CSAH 21. Access locations will
be consistent with the AUAR transportation study, which incorporated County spacing guidelines.
Access spacing onto CSAH 21 will be at % mile intervals. Uno Lakes is working with Anoka County to
analyze access options for CSAH 14 in accordance with the County access spacing guidelines. The
specifics of the intersection designs, including traffic controls, will be designed as part of the
develo ment roo ect Ian. Access onto Count roadwa s will re uire the a roval of Anoka Coun .
September 2005
6
Transit and Other Modes of Transportation
15. Will this amendment enhance access to transit services, increase or decrease the demand for transit
services or warrant the extension of new transit service?
No, not currently served by transit or will not affect transit.
X Yes, list existing routes, describe changes and identify proposed/necessary transit facility improvements
(e.g. shelters, park and rides):
Metro Transit has been reducing service to this area. The only Metro Transit route is 275, which runs
approximately one mile from the site. Future Metro Transit planning includes the potential for a park and
ride location several miles north of the site.
Anoka County has no fixed route transit service in the area. Dial-A-Ride is available anywhere in Anoka
County. Anoka County has applied for funding to assist with the development of a park and pool or park
and ride site near the 1-35E interchange, approximately Y:z mile from the residential areas proposed on
the development site.
Additional development in the area has the potential to generate demand for additional transit services.
This will be analyzed as development progresses in Lino Lakes and Hugo as well as in communities to
the north.
16. Does the plan amendment include Traffic Demand Management (TOM) strategies or land use and urban
design measures, if applicable?
No, ex lain:
X Yes, describe (e.g. car and van pooling, flexible work hours, mixed land uses that discourage vehicle
trips and promote walking, biking, ridesharing, and transit):
The purpose of the amendment is to provide for a master plan for the 370 acres. This would include low
and medium density residential as well as 500,000+ sf of commercial space. The commercial
development will provide services to a large area and its proximity to the residential development will
reduce vehicle trips. Pedestrian and bicycle access to commercial services will be an important element
of site design. Another goal is to link to regional trail corridors to provide recreational and transportation
links to the re ional ark reserve as well as other arts of the communit and surroundin communities.
17. Does the plan amendment include pedestrian and bike access and facilities, including crosswalks, bridges,
trails, sidewalks, and bike racks, if applicable?
No, wh not:
X Yes, describe:
Pedestrian and bicycle access to commercial services will be an important element of site design.
Another goal is to link to regional trail corridors to provide recreational and transportation links to the
re ional ark reserve as well as other arts of the communi and surroundin communities.
September 2005
7
Aviation
18. Does the plan amendment affect any airport functions?
X
SECTION 5: WATER RESOURCES
Wastewater
19. What type of wastewater treatment will be utilized to serve the proposed amendment?
LocallMunici al Owned Wastewater Treatment Plant.
X Re ional Wastewater Treatment.
2000
2010
2020
2030
Mgd = million gallons per day
20. Complete the following table, to show whether this plan amendment increases or decreases wastewater
flow from currently planned land use and sewer flow projections.
Total Community Flow
Pre-Amendment (mgd)
0.82
2.08
2.49
NA
Total Community Flow
Post Amendment-(mgd)
NA
2.21
2.87
NA
21. Does the local wastewater system have adequate capacity, or staged capacity to accommodate the
proposed amendment?
X Yes, explain:
The existing gravity sewer, which currently ends at Main St., will be extended north to
serve the new development. The existing lift station (no. 8) on 21st Ave., south of Main
St., has sufficient capacity to serve the development through approximately 2010. It can
be u raded to serve the ultimate develo ment b re lacin um s.
No, ex lain:
September 2005
8
22. Does the regional wastewater system have adequate capacity, or staged capacity to accommodate the
proposed amendment?
X Yes, explain: Lino lakes has met with MCES several times in 2003-2005 and has provided updated
flow projections to MCES which include the proposed development project and other
future development in the NE area of Lino lakes. MCES planning currently includes a
new interceptor from Lino lakes, along Co. Rds. 14/8 to the Forest Lake Interceptor.
MCES lannin also includes ca aci im rovements in the Forest lake Interce tor.
No, ex lain:
23. Has the community andlor Metropolitan Council identified an inflow and infiltration (1&1) problem?
X Yes, describe the steps taken to address the III issue and plans for future action:
Lino lakes conducted an III study in 2001 and identified localized areas of.excessive III in various
arts of the Ci . A ro ram to clean, televise, and re air sewers in these areas is underwa .
No, the Cit rrw does not have an identified III roblem.
24. Identify interceptor(s) that will be impacted by these changes and indicate if flows will be diverted from one
interceptor service area to another?
The development area will be served by a local trunk leading to the Centerville interceptor, which flows to the
Forest lake interceptor.
25. Does the plan amendment include any wastewater flow to an adjacent community? For new
intercommunity agreements, the receiving community must also amend the sewer element of its plan.
Yes, enclose a co of the inter-communi a reement
X No.
Surface Water
26. Will stormwater runoff generated from proposed amendment be treated on-site?
No, check one of the following and describe:
Runoff will receive no treatment:
Runoff will be treated off-site, identifv off-site treatment facilitv:
X Yes, describe type and level of on-site pollutant removal treatment/mitigation plans:
Stormwater runoff from the site will flow to Clearwater Creek, which flows into Peltier lake in the park
reserve. Water quality will receive special attention through the design of stormwater management for all
development within the AUAR study area. This will include infiltration, buffering and overland filtration,
volume control as well as rate control, and onsite ponds. Specific design elements will be reviewed with a
development application.
September 2005
9
27. Does the community have an updated stormwater management plan, including best management practices
and implementation strategies?
X Yes, Year adopted: Approved by City, reviewed by Met Council and Rice Creek Watershed District,
revisions approved by Met Council 2005. Final plan approval by City scheduled
for December 12, 2005.
No, explain:
28. Does the community have an adopted erosion control ordinances?
X Yes, Year adopted: 2003 Sec. 3, Subd. 11 of zoning ordinance, and development plans for site
plans and plats must include erosion control details
No.
Water Supply
29. Does the community have an updated water supply plan?
~ ~:~' Yearadopled: 12004
30. Will the proposed plan amendment increase or decrease projected water use from the community's current
water supply plan?
X No increase or decrease in ro'ected water use from water su I Ian.
Yes, rovide water su I Ian amendment to describe necessa facilities im rovements or chan es:
SECTION 6: PARKS
31. Does the amendment include, or is it adjacent to or within % a mile of an existing or planned regional park,
reserve or trail, as identified in the 2030 Regional Parks Plan?
X No.
The Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve is just over % mile from the development site.
Stormwater runoff from the site will flow to Clearwater Creek, which flows into Peltier Lake in the park
reserve. Water quality will receive special attention through the design of stormwater management for all
development within the AUAR study area. This will include infiltration, buffering and overland filtration,
and volume control as well as rate control.
Trail connections will increase usage of the regional park reserve and regional trails by residents of new
develo ment.
September 2005
10
32. Does the community have a Parks & Open Space Plan including regional park elements?
~I ~:~' Year adopted: 12004
SECTION 7: IMPLEMENTATION
33. Will the plan amendment require changes in zoning or subdivision ordinances, capital improvement
program (CIP), or other official controls?
No.
X Yes, describe proposed changes and timeline:
The development site will require rezoning. Any needed changes to the city's CIP will be part of the
annual reviews of the CIP.
34. Does the community have natural resources protection ordinances, including wetland, tree preservation,
and steep slopes?
X Yes, identify: Both the subdivision and zoning ordinances include tree preservation plans.
Wetlands are protected by the Wetlands Conservation Act, administered by the
Rice Creek Watershed District. The city's subdivision ordinance requires
drainage and utility easements that extend at least ten feet beyond delineated
wetland edges. Because the site is within the AUAR area, conservation
development practices will be required for all development. This will include
preserving and buffering wetlands as well as extensive attention to stormwater
management to protect and even enhance water quality. The shoreland
ordinance includes steep slope orotections.
No.
September 2005
11
.....
16 1ii
E :g
a. Q)Q)
0L-'c"C
- 0......-
Q)_oUJ
ij)-o.....~
~~n1i5
0'5 co c .
c C)~o.5
,2 -g ._ c .c:
~ co 1ii ,2 ~
co-:;::;~o
a.C)c~ ~
XCQ)........
Q) '2 15.Q ~
<( 'ffi a. ~ ~
OOE.....o-
::JQ).E:;::;8
:!:L-.....mc
CO-g16~~
0) co E ..... .-
co"C:JUJ
,- 0 C co en
~oQ),C~
a.N E ~
E Q) m 3:.5
a.gQ)+"2
UJ .- ,C mE co
..... en..... _
c....... Q)
Q)c.....O-
EQ)CO-....
"CE~Q)C!
ca.>o=
Q)OQ)xo
E- we::
co~-gq::5
...._cogo
o "" VI 0
--3:0....
Q) ,~ Q) a e::
:0 ....... .- ,- co
""c>oo:::~
wQ)Q)"':-
""'-0"" cO
g>'f3 ~ '0; E
';: L- 0 ~ 1i5
.Q -0 '0 ~ :!:
-~cQ) ,
.EQ):J3:j
Q);:OUJ
,CQ)()=-
..... rn .-
Q)_Q)g":"l
..... o'c ...
Q) .....:J:c::
0..>-00,C
E~ UJ() .
OC"CQ)~
" Q) Q),C ~
~-O"C+'O
._Q)cco
~Q)~OQ)
- c... -
c UJ~.c
o Q).-.c co
C)e::ma.
en~o=o
0) Q)'_ m Q)
g'i;cuiUij)
.!.cE~"C
oo.Em~
t>>.c.5 UJ .....
.5 g.!!l ~ ~
t>>:;:;.c m'-
cl-.....1i)
a Q) c:i 0) Q)
..EN~"C
o::Jo,Ce::
ONI-CO
coo -
o-o.....ui~
'ii) oi UJ E'w
cC)~Q)16
[ffi:J0"C
.c - ~
.n O.~ UJ 1i5
C) 'E 1ii e::
<CQ)C -
tn ,- "C 0 en
.... C).-.- Q)
_coUJO)....
:ECi)~~~
LO
('l)
I
Q
Q
Q
N
"0 "c,
0)
....:",.,;;
g ,.y,;....
b:ii
en.,
cT"
00, IC~rNMMMMMMVVV~~~
" 00000000000000
~!~'f~1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0) "
e<
~M;f,ik;1(: .? 1'0' c: ~ -g
~ 1;,;:'{\I:"': "0 l'i ~ :> ~ -g -g -g ~
sRi:, ~ 0) ~ "0 lQ N .!!! N "::"' I::
o ~ ~ 1::"08 W~~UJ 3::N
,~ 10 15 UJ~ ~~ UJE;i-g O)~!e
e ,i'~ ~ z "OUJO)UJO~ 03::0NO I::I::~~
~ - C02~0)~CO ~-~ i~~o
~,....ca_ >,'" 5 .l<: ~ ~ 0.... 0) ~ ~ m E c3 ~ ~ io ~ ~ ~<(-~.... ~ ~
> ....OCOOI::~OW~~~~I::~~z"O o~~
c, ci>:,2~~~ZcoUu3::~l::m~~~l::c~ 1::<(1::1::
0) ~~ UJ~_ O)UJCO....~<I::COCOcn COUJcoco~
"0 c cD :J I:: ?- ~ ~ 'S; -I:: ~ U U Ul co ~ Ul .c - .c.c 0<(
':: .'.51 ,ie''. co I:: ~ Q)> 0) UJ 0) 0):0:; ~ 0) 0) 0) :c: ~ CU 1;) g.~ UJ UJ ~
VI .,., 0)0'" -::;;:-~Ul 001::-::= o)O)"O:J~""""
0) :':;'" _ .... 0) co CU ,I;. = co :J CO._ ._ :J .~ co ~ :>"0 co I:: co co 0
a:::: . ."" U CJ) U 0:: Z U ~ ...J ., ~ 0:: 0:: ...., Z ~ ~ :> <( > <( ~ :E I-
I; :':',',;,.'
mmm~~~mO~~O~ONmmo
N~MNN~~Mcici~N~~~ciN
-~v-m~m~V~Nv~~vm_
N~mN oN
"Or:::"OECIJ'Q)CIJ
r:::O),sOet:Jle
~O)O~(,) (,)
.;coQ ~ ctl.e~
a5C1J..... - ~
Q,ctloQ .s
.t::~ .e
~ ~.S ()
~~~~
.....O::J
i58
,~~~-OONO~OON~OO~O
:
:'.'
...
,'.... ...
OO~Nmv~~V~Nmm~v_~
v~mN CON ~ ~
o
(':',
ii',>.,':;: .
...
...
C
0)
en
f
'..
oomOONNOOONOO~~OO
N ~ -N
- -
v~~mv~o~~vOO~OO~N
~ON~_ _ 0
....-
..
~~~
000
000
NNN
....
o
1'-;000001/)
~N~NC"iO)
0.
o
en
0.
0)
2
I/)
0)
I::
'5
:J
15
5:
u)
"0
IV
e
~~
ci
~ON
~~~
...:
2
~
OO~~M-g
o o:t CU
.... Ul
...."0
I::
CU
l
~1O~~IO....
o~~cciO)
10"0
M I::
:J
jg
+'
OOOOMO
o N I::
M Ul
0)
o
"0
+'
CU
~
+'
~~NON
N....
~
~~IO~
0000
0000
NNNN
N
....
m
C
~
CU
....
o
Ul
~
....
CU
0.
Q
:c
:J
0.
"0
I::
.!!!
"0
0)
0.
o
Q)
>
0)
"0"":
1::1::
:J 0)
.... E
0)0.
..r=o
+' -
00)
>,>
1::0)
cu"O
O)m
0)'-
cue
0.0)
O)E
~E
IV 0
0.0
0) ....
Ul 0
co ~
I::.a
0,2
0)....
..00
'C -
o Ul
Ul-
O).Q
0'5
... 0
In
Q
Q
N
..
CU
.a
E
CU
..,
C.
CU
en
""
pt
U)
o CD '0'0
mE CD CD
.... 8 s::: s:::
to NIi:Ii:
CD CD CD('t) ....CDCD
c...c - '0 '0
U).....Q s::: s:::
~CD..!!! ::J::J
s::: ;=.-
::J CD ~
('t)U)m
'0 '0
CD CD
s::: s:::
('t) Ii: Ii:
to CD CD
'0"0
s::: s:::
::J ::J
N V mLOLOLO
LO 0 ~N .....
to co
....
~
e
OCDC!>
.....:5 ~"O"'C
e "OCDI::;Jg
CD CD '-(1)1::;
~ o'~,~:'::: E:
!I)"Oe!E~~~
~e:QJgCD~8
~ ia iil ~ ~ "'C .~
.... co CO....('t)o
co m co
N co
('t) N ,,"tOCOLO
('t) 0 ('t)N .....
m "" LO
N
U)
"0 "'C
......
l!? "0 >.
~ l!? .0 1ft
CD LO 0
CD ;= 0 0
U) - N
s::: CD ......
=> en N ...
~-~- ...... GI
.- m'- m "'C .Cl
U) ,- U):;:l E
S:::'ES:::s::: CD
CD CD CD CD .... GI
m
0"00"0 c.. ...,
;='ii) ;='ii) .CD C.
OCDOCD .... GI
...JC:::...JC::: a. In
Figure 1
Site Location I
41 SITE
September 2005
14
Fi u ra 2
EXISTING LAND USE PLAN (DETAIL)
LINO LAKES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
September 2005
lS
Fi u re 3
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO lAND USE PLAN
(DETAil)
llNO LAKES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
September 2005
16
Proposed Text Amendments
· Tllefollowing text is to be added to tlte comprellensive plan, at tile end of tile Land Use Plan
cllapter, on page 97:
MIXED USE
The Proposed Land Use Map designates several areas for "Mixed Use". The
Mixed Use designation is intended to accommodate development that includes a
variety of land uses. This could be a development that integrates uses in the
same building, such as residential units above commercial space. It also might
include different uses in separate locations as elements of a larger development,
as part of a master plan. While it is possible that an appropriate development
project in a Mixed Use area could include only one type of land use, other land
use designations are available for development with only one type of land use.
Development in areas guided Mixed Use typically will take advantage of the
flexibility available with the use of a planned unit development. The City does not
require a PUD for development in a Mixed Use area. However, it is the preferred
design tool because development that includes a variety of uses typically will
pose challenges best addressed with the flexibility available with a PUD.
Amending the comprehensive plan to guide new areas for Mixed Use should be
reserved for areas that have undergone significant environmental review.
Commercial development typically will require more impervious surface than
residential development, which raises stormwater management design
challenges. Traffic generation differs between different land uses. The Mixed
Use land use designation envisions varied land uses, and recognizes the
possibility of design challenges, including environmental impact issues. These
can best be addressed with extensive environmental review.
Amending the comprehensive plan to guide new areas for Mixed Use and
development with these areas should be reserved for development that promotes
clearly identified public purposes. Such purposes may include but are not limited
to:
a) provision of housing unit variety that contributes toward meeting housing
goals, such as medium density, high-density, and mixed-use developments in
locations designated for them in the comprehensive plan
b) provision of infrastructure that will provide benefits beyond the project site, in
accordance with City transportation, sewer, or water plans, that is not
financially feasible without the project
c) preservation of environmental features that would not occur without the
project
d) provision of economic benefits to the City that would not occur without the
project
September 2005
17
Development in areas guided Mixed Use must comply with the following
performance standards:
1. The land use and site design must be sensitive to the surrounding land uses
in the area, including but not limited to building height, exterior composition,
landscaping, and site access.
2. The road network within new development shall promote the safe and
convenient traffic movement. The project design must incorporate access
management design elements for access to arterial and collector roadways.
3. Municipal water and sanitary sewer service must be available.
4. All development shall address environmental concems with regard to site
planning, landscaping, impervious surfacing, open space, and storm water
management. Stormwater management must incorporate methods to protect
and improve water quality such as infiltration, buffering of water bodies, and
other natural methods whenever feasible.
5. Commercial site designs shall emphasize pedestrian accessibility,
connections to residential neighborhoods, shared parking, and green space
to create a customer friendly environment and promote a high level of
interaction among local businesses and between businesses and residents.
6. Architectural and site standards shall be applied to establish aesthetically
pleasing, high quality buildings and streetscapes.
West Side of 1-35E
A 370-acre development site is located ~ mile north of Main St., between 1-35E
and CSAH 21 (20th Ave.). This site is to be developed with commercial and
residential uses. The concept plan for the development includes 500,000 to
600,000 square feet of commercial space on 55 to 70 acres of the site. A variety
of single family and multi-family residential development will include
approximately 1200 dwelling units. The net residential density is to be
approximately 4.5 units per acre, when including all land not within the
commercial area. While these are the approximate use parameters, the specifics
of the development are to be part of a master plan using a planned unit
development approach.
In the northeast comer of the site, a triangle is formed by 1-35E, a pipeline, and
the property boundary. This area could be designed to accommodate an office
campus type use, which could be a suitable land use along the freeway. This
would reduce the amount of residential land noted above and increase the
commercial land. Such flexibility is appropriate to accommodate what will be
determined as the best use of the triangle area.
September 2005
18
I '
This site is included in the 1-35E Corridor Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR) environmental analysis. Development must comply with the mitigation
plan that forms a part of the AUAR, which includes the Conservation
Development Framework as the fundamental precept for all development within
the AUAR area.
This area was guided Mixed Use with an amendment to the comprehensive plan
in 2005. This amendment was intended to fulfill the City's growth management
policy requirement that amendment of the comprehensive plan shall be required
if, in order to accommodate a specific development project, the annual target for
new growth (units/year) would be exceeded.
· TIle following text is to be added to the comprehensive plan in the Planning District 6 section, on
page 153:
West Side of 1-35E
A 370-acre development site is located X mile north of Main St., between 1-35E and
CSAH 21 (20th Ave.). This site is to be developed with commercial and residential
uses. This site is described in the Mixed Use section of the Land Use Plan chapter.
The specifics of the development are to be part of a master plan using a planned- unJt
development approach. _ _. :'"
. ...:~. f '.
· The policy on page 27 of the comprehensive plan is to be amended to read as follows:
9. Limit residential growth to an average of 147 units per year, carrying a three year
supply lot inventory. Specific projects that are found to fulfill specified public
purposes can justify amending this comprehensive plan to exceed this limit. The
City Council shall consider such an amendment only if the specific development
project will promote a clearly identified public purpose. The public purpose may
include but is not limited to:
a) provision of housing unit variety that contributes toward meeting housing
goals, such as medium density, high-density, and mixed-use developments in
locations designated for them in the comprehensive plan
b) provision of infrastructure that will provide benefits beyond the project site, in
accordance with City transportation, sewer, or water plans, that is not
financially feasible without exceeding the target
c) preservation of environmental features that would not occur without
exceeding the target
d) provision of economic benefits to the City that would not occur without
exceeding the target
September 2005
19
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
DECE~ER6,2005
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held their regularly
scheduled meeting on December 6, 2005, at 6:30 p. m.
PRESENT:
Brian Hanson
Jennefer Klennert Hunt
JeffHanzal
~o;k";=~ll. t AP
D. Love N
Tom Wood
None
. ABSENT:
COUNCIL:
Council Member Terway
STAFF:
City Administrator, Mr. Larson
I. CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m.
ll. APPEARANCES
None.
ID. PUBLIC BEARING(S)
1. Ordinance Codification Chapters 153. 154 & 155
Chair' Hanson opened the public hearing.
City Administrator Larson explained that Staff is working on the codification of
ordinances and this is the public hearing and discussion of Chapters 153, 154 & 155
which are the Chapters that involve the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Hunt asked for clarification in Chapter 153 on Page 7 as to whether the
language suggests the City is discouraging the use of sidewalks within the City.
Page 1 of6
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
December 6, 2005
City Administrator Larson explained that the language is meant to govern middle of the
block or rear yard pedestrian pathways not front yard sidewalks.
Commissioner Wright pointed out a typographical error on Page 13.
Commissioner Wright asked for clarification of a cross reference on Page 55.
City Administrator Larson indicated it was an error due to the combining and rearranging
of the language in the Ordinance and Staff will insert the correct reference.
City Administrator Larson indicated he was approached by a resident who asked that the
City consider amending the language concerning shoreland vegetative clearing to allow
clearing of existing vegetation and replanting of new vegetation. He then read some
suggested language to add to the Ordinance.
Chair Hanson asked whether there were any species that should be protected and not just
allow blanket removal.
City Administrator Larson indicated that the City could ask for an inventory of existing
species to be removed when the permit is requested.
Chair Hanson indicated that he did not have an issue with adding the language suggested
by Staff.
Commissioner Hanzal suggested requiring residents to replant 50% of what is removed.
Commissioner Wood indicated he would like to have 60% or more.
Commissioner Hanzal said that he could agree to 60% and the resident would need to
strategically landscape to allow them a screened view of the lake from the home.
The Commission agreed to the language with the 60% requirement.
Motion bv Commissioner HanzaL seconded bv Commissioner Panf!eU to close the
oublic hearinf!. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.
Chair Hanson closed the public hearing at 6:58 p.m.
Motion bv Commissioner Klennert Hunt. seconded bv Commissioner Wood. to
recommend aooroval of Chaoters 153. 154 and 155 with the noted chanf!es~ All in
favor. Motion carried unanimouslv.
2. Proposed Ordinance #4 Amendment Division #65
. Chair Hanson opened the public hearing at 6:59 p.m.
Page 2 of6
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
December 6, 2005
City Administrator Larson reviewed the proposed Ordinance amendment with the
Commission. He then said that the language was not amended to exempt bridges and
asked whether the Commission would like to do so.
The Commission agreed and asked Staff to do so to make it clear that only bridges are
allowed by permit approved by Council.
Commissioner Love asked whether the permit is permanent or renewable.
Commissioner Larson indicated that the City would need to determine the details for the
permit and they may have to be renewed annually to ensure that insurance requirements
continue to be met.
Motion bv Commissioner K1ennert Bunt. seconded bv CollllDiSsioner BanzaI.. to
close the Dublic hearine:. All in favor. Motion carried unanimousIv.
. Chair Hanson closed the public hearing at 7:03 p.m.
Chair Hanson said he feels the bridges should be inspected and renew permits every year.
Commissioner Love indicated he does not think the City needs to do this yearly for
inspections but should require the insurance be provided on a regular basis.
City Administrator Larson said that instead of a bridge the City could have residents do a
culvert and fill to allow driving on or crossing and water can flow over that culvert rather
than under a bridge.
Commissioner HanzaI said he is concerned with bringing in fill because that could cause
water issues.
City Administrator Larson indicated that it would require engineering. approval.
Commissioner Love said that from an insurance standpoint the bridge seems less
dangerous than the suggested culvert.
City Administrator Larson indicated that it would be a dry crossing most of the time.
Commissioner Klennert Hunt asked what the watershed district would think of the
suggested culvert.
City Administrator Larson said that he does not think that the waterShed would have an:
issue with it. He then said that Staff would need to research the pros and cons and
discuss the matter with the City Engineer.
Chair Hanson asked if the flow is impeded could the City force them to remove it.
Page 3 of6
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes .
December 6, 2005
City Administrator Larson indicated the City always has control over easements and can
have anything removed if water is impeded.
Council Liaison Terway indicated he would have an issue with the width of the culvert as
the bridge would be narrower and he would not want the culvert to be much wider than a
bridge would have been.
City Administrator Larson indicated he would run the idea by Council Members and the
engineering staff.
Commissioner Love indicated he would prefer the bridge as he feels it is safer because
you have invited crossing if you put something there to allow it and a bridge would have
sides for safety.
Motion bv Commissioner Pan2ell. seconded bv Commissioner BanzaI to table. All
in favor. Motion carried unanimouslv.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
None.
.V. NEW BUSINESS
1. Arcade Concrete. 2016 Gateway Circle Landscape Redesign
The Applicant. explained that the engineer filled in the landscape and had no input into it
and now they have had a landscape person redesign it to meet the needs of the building as
it is built. He then said that the other thing being done is adding more rock than sod to
limit maintenance requirements.
Chair Hanson asked whether the landscaping rock would fall into the definition of
greenspace or if grasses are required.
City Administrator Larson indicated that this is an industrial area and that is why the City
may want to allow it but the City would not want to see it in other areas.
The Applicant indicated that there is still grass in the back and on the County Road 14
side.
The Applicant indicated they have 11 trees along the east side where you drive in as they
felt it would be a better buffer between buildings than to screen parking lot to parking lot
in the back.i
Chair Hanson asked whether the fabric underneath the rock was water permeable to allow
water to infiltrate rather than run off.
Page 4 of6
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
December 6. 2005
The Applicant indicated that the fabric is water permeable.
Chair Hanson asked whether the total tree number is up or down.
The Applicant indicated it is up three to five and with the plants there are 75 across the
~m. .
Chair Hanson asked whether the green space requirement is met and noted that 10% of
green space is required.
The Applicant indicated they have a large area in the back that is all natural and there is a
strip of sod done by the neighboring property.
Commissioner Klennert Hunt indicated that she would not have. an issue with this plan as
long as it meets the requirements. .
The Applicant indicated that the watershed district representative haS approved the
landscaping as planned.
The Commission agreed that the plan looks nice and asked that any future deviations
from an approved plan be brought to the City for approval.
Motion bv Commissioner Klennert Hunt.. seconded bv Commissioner Love to
aoorove the amended IandsC80e redesitm for 2016 Gatewav Circle as oresented. AD
in favor. Motion carried unanimouslv.
2. Ordinance #6 Nuisance - 6A Nuisance Abatement & #39 Signage
City Administrator Larson indicated that Staff continues to research how to handle this
situation and will report back. He then said that the City may be able to regulate the size
and number of signs but regulating the content is not as easy to do.
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS
1. Downtown Redevelopment
City Administrator Larson showed a drawing of the proposed downtown area He then
indicated that they are working with the library on having a resource library in town.
Commissioner Klennert Hunt suggested Commissioners attend the next public meeting if
possible as she really got a lot of information and felt it was very ben~ficial.
Council Liaison Terway indicated Council has been telling people that this will be
developer driven.
Page 5 of6
~....
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
December 6, 2005
Vll. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. November 1. 2005 Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes
Motion bv Commissioner Love. seconded bv Commissioner Wood to annrove the
Minutes of November 1. 2005. as nresented. All in favor. Motion carried
unanimouslv.
vm.. ADJOURNMENT
Motion bv Commissioner Wood. seconded bv Commissioner Love to Adiourn the
December 6. 2005 Plannin!! Commission Meetin!! at 8:14 n.m. All in favor. Motion
carried unanimouslv.
Transcribed by:
Joan Lenzmeier, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
Page 6 of6
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
PLANNING AND WNING COMMISSION MEETING
DECEMBER 6, 2005
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof; the Planning and Zoning Commission held their regularly
scheduled meeting on December 6, 2005, at 6:30 p. m.
ABSENT:
Brian Hanson
Jennefer Klennert Hunt
JeffHanzal
Bob Wright
Mark pangell ~'
D. Love ..... ........ ...i
TomWood ~@ t
None
PRESENT:
COUNCIL:
Council Member Terway
STAFF:
city Administrator, Mr. Larson
L CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m.
IL APPEARANCES
None.
m. PUBLIC HEARING(S)
1. Ordinance C..odification Chapters 153. 154 & 155
Chair Hanson opened the public hearing.
City Administrator Larson explained that Staff is working on the codification of
ordinances and this is the public hearing and discussion of Chapters 153, 154 & 155
which are the Chapters that involve the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Hunt asked for clarification in Chapter 153 on Page 7 as to whether the
language suggests the City is discouraging the use of sidewalks within the City.
Page 1 of6
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
December 6, 200S
City Administrator Larson explained that the language is meant to govern middle of the
block or rear yard pedestrian pathways not front yard sidewalks.
Commissioner Wright pointed out a typographical error on Page 13.
Commissioner Wright asked for clarification of a cross reference on Page 55.
City Administrator Larson indicated it was an error due to the combining and rearranging
of the language in the Ordinance and Staffwill insert the correct reference.
City Administrator Larson indicated he was approached by a resident who asked that the
City consider amending the language concerning shoreland vegetative clearing to allow
clearing of existing vegetation and replanting of new vegetation. He then read some
suggested language to add to the Ordinance.
Chair Hanson asked whether there were any species that should be protected and not just
allow blanket removal.
City Administrator Larson indicated that the City could ask for an inventory of existing
species to be removed when the permit is requested.
Chair Hanson indicated that he did not have an issue with adding the language suggested
by Staff.
.
Commissioner Hanzal suggested requiring residents to replant 5001'0 of what is removed.
Commissioner Wood indicated he would like to have 60% or more.
Commissioner Hanzal said that he could agree to 6001'0 and the resident would need to
strategically landscape to allow them a screened view of the lake from the home.
The Commission agreed to the language with the 6001'0 requirement.
Motion bv Commissioner RAD7.B1. seconded bv Commissioner Panl!eU to close the
public: hearinl!. AD in favor. Motion c:arried unAnimouslv.
Chair Hanson closed the public hearing at 6:58 p.m.
Motion bv Commissioner Klennert Hunt. seconded bv Commissioner Wood. to
recommend annroval of Chanters 153.. 154 and IS! with the noted c:hanl!es. AU in
favor. Motion c:arried IInADimouslv.
2. Proposed Ordinance #4 Amendment Division #65
Chair Hanson opened the public hearing at 6:59 p.rn.
Page2of6
Planning & Zoning CnmmiRon
Meeting Minutes
December 6, 2005
City Administrator Larson reviewed the proposed Ordinance amendment with the
Commission. He then said that the language was not amended to exempt bridges and
asked whether the Commission would like to do so.
The Commission agreed and asked Staff to do so to make it clear that only bridges are
allowed by permit approved by Council.
Commissioner Love asked whether the permit is permanent or renewable.
Commissioner Larson indicated that the City would need to determine the details for the
permit and they may have to be renewed annually to ensure that insurance requirements
continue to be met.
Motion bv Commissioner K1ennert Hunt. seconded bv Commiqioner Hao7.aJ.. to
dose the DubHe hearinl!. AD in favor. Motion earri~ unanimousIv.
Chair Hanson closed the public hearing at 7:03 p.m.
Chair Hanson said he feels the bridges should be inspected and renew permits every year.
Commissioner Love indicated he does not think the City needs to do this yearly for
inspections but should require the insurance be provided on a regular basis.
City Administrator Larson said that instead of a bridge the City could have residents do a
culvert and fill to allow driving on or crossing and water can flow over that culvert rather
than under a bridge.
Commissioner Hanzal said he is concerned with bringing in fill because that could cause
water issues.
City Administrator Larson indicated that it would require engineering approval.
Commissioner Love said that from an insurance standpoint the bridge seems less
dangerous than the suggested culvert.
City Administrator Larson indicated that it would be a dry crossing most of the time.
Commissioner Klennert Hunt asked what the watershed district would think of the
suggested culvert.
City Administrator Larson said that he does not think that the watershed would have an
issue with it. He then said that Staff would need to research the pros and cons and
discuss the matter with the City Engineer.
Chair Hanson asked if the flow is impeded could the City force them to remove it.
Page 3 of6
Plamring & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
December 6. 200S
City Administrator Larson indicated the City always has control over easements and can
have anything removed if water is impeded.
Council Liaison Terway indicated he would have an issue with the width of the culvert as
the bridge would be narrower and he would not want the culvert to be much wider than a
bridge would have been.
City Administrator Larson indicated he would run the idea by Council Members and the
engineering staff.
Commissioner Love indicated he would prefer the bridge as he feels it is safer because
you have invited crossing if you put something there to allow it and a bridge would have
sides for safety.
Motion bv Commissioner Pant!ell. seconded bv Commissioner Han7Jd to table. All
in favor. Motion carried 1Jnanimouslv.
IV. OLD BUSINESS
None.
v. NEW BUSINESS
1. First Class Concrete. 2016 Gateway Circle Landscape Redesign
The Applicant explained that the engineer filled in the landscape and had no input into it
and now they have had a landscape person redesign it to meet the needs of the building as
it is built. He then said that the other thing being done is adding more rock than sod to
limit maintenance requirements.
Chair Hanson asked whether the landscaping rock would fall into the definition of
greenspace or if grasses are required.
City Administrator Larson indicated that this is an industrial area and that is why the City
may want to allow it but the City would not want to see it in other areas.
The Applicant indicated that there is still grass in the back and on the County Road 14
side.
The Applicant indicated they have 11 trees along the east side where you drive in as they
felt it would be a better buffer between buildings than to screen parking lot to parking lot
in the back.
Chair Hanson asked whether the fabric underneath the rock was water permeable to allow
water to infiltrate rather than run off.
Page 4 of6
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
December 6. 2005
The Applicant indicated that the fabric is water permeable.
Chair Hanson asked whether the total tree number is up or down.
The Applicant indicated it is up three to five and with the plants there are 75 across the
front.
Chair Hanson asked whether the green space requirement is met and noted that l00fc. of
green space is required.
The Applicant indicated they have a large area in the back that is all natural and there is a
~p of sod done by the neighboring property.
Commissioner Klennert Hunt indicated that she would not have an issue with this plan as
long as it meets the requirements.
The Applicant indicated that the watershed district representative has approved the
landscaping as planned.
The Commission agreed that the plan looks nice and asked that any future deviations
from an approved plan be brought to the City for approval.
Motion bv Commissioner K1ennert Hunt. seconded bv Commissioner Love to
aoorove the amend'" IJllndscaoe redes. for 2016 Gatewav Circle as oresented. All
in favor. Motion carried unanimouslv.
2. Ordinance #6 Nuisance - 6A Nuisance Abatement & #39 Si81'S\Be
City Administrator Larson indicated that Staff continues to research how to handle this
situation and will report back. He then said that the City may be able to regulate the size
and number of signs but regulating the content is not as easy to do.
VL DISCUSSION ITEMS
1. Downtown Redevelopment
City Administrator Larson showed a drawing of the proposed downtown area. He then
indicated that they are working with the library on having a resource h'brary in town.
Commissioner Klennert Hunt suggested Commissioners attend the next public meeting if
possible as she really got a lot of information and felt it was very beneficial.
Council Liaison Terway indicated Council has been telling people that this will be
developer driven.
Page 5 of6
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
December 6, 200S
VB. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
1. November 1. 2005 Planninlf and Zoning Meeting Minutes
Motion by Commissioner Love. seconded by Commissioner Wood to aoorove the
Minutes of November 1.. 2005.. as oresented. AD in favor. Motion carried
unanimouslY.
vm. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Wood.. seconded bv Commissioner Love to Adiourn the
December 6.. 2005 planninS! Commission Meetins! at 8:14 o.m.. All in favor. Motion
carried uoanimouslY.
Transcribed by:
Joan Lenzmeier, Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
Page 6 of6