2011-03-02_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, March 02, 2011 Page 18 meeting, she would make sure that information was included for City Council information 868 and future analysis. 869 Member Wozniak questioned staff on the role of the City in whether homes are built for 870 speculation or are presold. 871 City Planner Paschke advised that the City did not have a policy or ordinance to address 872 whether a developer bought land for home construction or for speculation. However, Mr. 873 Paschke questioned how prudent it would be for a developer, given current market 874 conditions, to build homes and leave them vacant. Mr. Paschke expressed his confidence 875 that Pulte Homes intended to use good business practices in developing the site and 876 given their reputation, expressed faith in them being knowledgeable of their market. Mr. 877 Paschke noted that it was the City’s concern that the developer meets City Code 878 requirements for design of the site and construction of the homes, not whether they were 879 building model of spec homes that may remain vacant for a certain period of time. 880 Member Wozniak questioned if the City Code provided for affordable housing standards 881 for new developments. 882 Member Gottfried questioned whether the Metropolitan Council had expectations that a 883 community’s total housing stock met certain percentages for affordable housing criteria. 884 Mr. Paschke advised that City Code did not address such requirements in the City’s 885 Zoning Ordinance. However, Mr. Paschke noted that the City’s Housing Code spoke to 886 provision of more affordable housing in various classes, but there was no requirement 887 that developments have to provide their share. Mr. Paschke advised that, if the City or 888 Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) were a partner in such a development, 889 they would specify that a certain percentage of affordable housing was included. Mr. 890 Paschke noted that the City was held to a certain threshold by the Metropolitan Council to 891 provide a fair share of affordable housing in many sectors, and that the City was 892 cognizant of that criterion. However, Mr. Paschke noted that with current home values, 893 many homes in the community had hit the affordable category when they may not have 894 qualified five (5) years ago. Mr. Paschke advised that those affordable housing levels 895 were monitored continuously and were part of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, but were 896 not part of this consideration. 897 Member Gottfried opined that the site required a fair amount of drainage mitigation and 898 tree preservation, potentially adding significant dollar costs to the development that could 899 serve to drive the market; and expressed his interest in a longer usable life expectancy 900 for ponds beyond the twenty (20) year limit. 901 Mr. Bloom advised that Mr. Wicklund would ultimately not probably be in the picture 902 twenty (20) years from now, but that the City would remain responsible for its 903 infrastructure, with all drainage ponds being part of that public infrastructure. Ms. Bloom 904 advised that the City currently managed over one hundred and twenty (120) basins; and 905 reviewed the City’s process in identifying, inventorying them every five (5) years, rating, 906 and maintaining each of those ponds. Ms. Bloom advised that part of that maintenance 907 was removing sediment at inlets and outlets, based on a variety of regulations. Ms. 908 Bloom advised that this process was a requirement of the Minnesota Pollution Control 909 Agency (MPCA) and their permitting for the City to operate a separate storm water 910 system. Ms. Bloom advised that the City prioritized maintenance based on various 911 issues, including their capacity, sediment deltas, and the frequency of that required 912 maintenance based on various data and analysis of sediment. 913 Member Gottfried questioned if those capital costs were picked up by those purchasing 914 the property. 915 Ms. Bloom advised that every quarterly utility bill’s fee was structured to fund that 916 maintenance for the City’s sanitary, water and storm water infrastructures, an expense 917 that was shared across the board by all residents. Ms. Bloom estimated that every single- 918