okay thank you mike all right that's about as good as i can do for a gavel but we'll uh go ahead and get started 7 p.m right on the dot so um acting as chair as dean jacobs has gone roll call here we've got commissioner varenkamp here commissioner wu yeah commissioner shulock here and commissioner dickman and staff so good evening everybody um we'll go ahead now we'll stand for the pledge of allegiance i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all all right so first on the agenda here we've got agenda approval um are there any amendments or changes to the agenda for this evening none from staff mr chair anything else from commissioners none here i will then take a motion to approve agenda also move that second all right i'll go roll call commissioner wu commissioner shulock hi commissioner varenkamp all right and commissioner dickman aye agenda approved okay uh city planner introduction so we have paul with us today brad you wanted to introduce paul and paul if you wanted to say a little bit as you've got a precocious three-year-old running around we'll uh take some background noise as this 2020 in a zoom meeting in 2020 so thanks dickman i appreciate that i'm excited tonight we've talked about adding a planner for quite some time in corcoran has been growing and having uh lots of items taking place we originally had scheduled to hire the position in july of this year but just due to the pandemic we pushed things off little did we know we'd be busier than ever so he kind of scrambled um had a really good search process and actually had many really qualified candidates come along and paul came to the top and we're excited to have him join us so with that i'll turn it to paul to give a brief introduction and then we'll find time for him to spend one-on-one time with each you in the near future too thank you very much uh chair and uh commission it's a pleasure to be here with you today um i come from um before this the city of victoria and before that the city of falcon heights is their planner um i have a background in uh planning and public administration as well from the university of new mexico where i got received my graduate degrees and uh have a very good interest or very deep interest in urban design and i look forward to working with you all thank you great thank you paul excited to have you on the team and i know brad and the rest of the staff is as well okay the next uh next item on the agenda we have is for the open forum this is the public comment opportunity so what we would like to do is ask anyone that is interested to speak at open forum these are designed for items that are not on the agenda so items on the agenda we have 7a 7b7c so this is open forum for anyone that would like to discuss items not on the agenda for this evening mike will make me aware or the planning group aware of anyone that is interested in talking and then mike will unmute the caller if they're on video or dialing star 9 on their phone if they would like you can use the video function or raise your hand for those on video now if you would like to speak at open forum mike do we have anybody raising their hand or looking to speak during open forum sure dickman i do not have anyone at this time okay we'll give it just a little bit in zoom 2020. anyone in the last 30 seconds mike no chair no one oh uh make motion to close the open forum comments and just technically there's no formal need for a motion for that so the chair can just close it as well thank you okay we will close uh open forum next item on the agenda for 0.6 are the minutes from september 3rd we did not have a meeting in october so this was from the september 3rd meeting any changes to or questions updates from the minutes from the september 3rd meeting if not then motion to approve minutes as they appear go move commissioner second shulac all right we'll do roll call uh commissioner dickman aye commissioner varenkamp aye commissioner shulock aye commissioner wu hi okay we will close that portion we do have new business here this is a public comment opportunity so i believe the the procedure that we have done in the past is um we will state what we have for 7a as part of a new business then what we'll do is open it up for public comment after staff presents some questions may or may not be addressed within that and then we will open it up to commissioner comments and questions after the public comment opportunity so the first item we have on the agenda for this evening is request for the final pud development plan for rush creek reserve formerly sawgrass staff kendra if you'd like to do the presentation and then we can go into any public comments after that mr claire just a break in here actually we've changed a little bit so i apologize but we've actually been going to the public comment first and that way staff can answer the questions as part of their presentation versus going back and forth so i apologized on that i think that's that's worked pretty well that way okay we'll do that so let's open that up for the development plan for the rush creek reserve formerly saw grass public comments we'll open those up and then the same process star 9 if you're on your phone raise hand function within the zoom chat or zoom meeting and then mike will unmute or open you up within the waiting room to have that discussion for public comment period we generally like to recommend five minute period for each person that likes to speak just so that we can get through all of the the comments that's that's typically what we've done for that for that comment period mike is there anyone that has raised hand or has dialed star to speak and just so uh folks know if you click on the participants button on the bottom you can then click raise hand if not there's a small enough group that we by visual can potentially do it as well but it's just a little more order if if you do that but mike i'll let you navigate that as best you see fit yes i apologize i'm scrolling to find david on the list david you can go ahead whenever you're ready state your name address make sure are you able to hear me now yes we can hear anybody okay good okay david foy 8115 116 corcoran obviously corcoran ready i don't know when to talk go ahead david okay so i wanted to maybe just do an update this is the first um city zoom call i've done and it's a little awkward i'm not sure the protocol uh if i'm wrong i know you can shut me off so i want to be careful i want to be able to finish um so i read the protocol and obviously we're all adults and want to be courteous um i sent a letter to brad and brad did call me twice today we weren't able to connect i also um i emailed that little by the way then i also talked to john rask m and i and again uh hard to connect but we did connect and we were able to come through some questions that i had myself personally and then i had some with my neighbor karen lyman but she's on somewhere on this screen i've seen her so it came about more of a communication issue wondering one of my neighbors who is not affected by flooding i shouldn't say that he is affected by flooding he's just not afflicted affected by flooding on the parcel that i own adjacent to karen so he saw somebody in on the road and he said what are you doing here because it's private road and he said i'm doing this and that and doing wetland delineation and i said well is that for that pipe that we've been talking about well obviously he said no we're talking about a ditch and a drink and a culvert and i realized now since that time and since karen and i got fired up that um it was it's a vendor for mni but if they don't speak for m and i later john can address that uh they had an idea that had been run by all the people at m i i don't even know staff knew it but virtually we went from a pipe that the neighbor and i agreed to we thought we had agreement not just this time but over the years over the years with the city and three different developers over a long period of time so we were shocked i explained that to john john was surprised also at least at that time so our our concern and karen can speak for herself she's on here is that the city clearly deals with the water issue that we've had since the partial land owner meaning i don't know though they owns all of it uh to the south of us modified the drainage for a significant portion of that farmland and by modifying he drained what was a seasonal pond some years other years was crop that was drained right to our border common border and that was about i want to say eight years ago during the last eight years i've got footage video and still shots of significant water almost like a creek coming out of that trench that was done so what what i'm talking about is nothing new to staff they know about it we've talked i met with staff it's nothing new to kent and engineers and prior city councilmen have been here looked at it uh one right after a flood uh and one long after a flood both have looked at it uh both had to comment how in the same hell did somebody do this without watershed etc coming down them you can't do that you can't drain ponds into your neighbor and pretty much say good luck which is kind of what happened so we're beyond that uh karen can speak for herself like i said but we want to take this opportunity to fix the problem that was completely um uh worse because of that trenching to drain agricultural and to our south so we do have assurances that the city is dealing with it um brad's aware of it kendra's aware of it and uh from prior meetings with prior developers and also m and i that something is being done um i won't speak for karen but i'll speak for myself i just want to see that in writing what is it you want to do if you go from a pipe to a trench now you're crossing two people's property because we know where that is and what it is once once you know and obviously as of today nobody seemed to know exactly what was proposed or even if that would be in louisville pipe but once it once you know i we need to know it's our land secondly a bigger issue is uh and i've got an axe to grind on this like some of my neighbors i want to know who's going to maintain an open ditch or for that matter who's going to maintain a big pipe because karen and i are not prepared to uh take care of beaver problems or other problems with that pipe yet we know we need it so one is maintenance two is if in fact it is a ditch will be mobile because at this time i have ditches and that's the axe i got to grind i begged the city to do something years ago they said there was no money to clean out the minor ditches going to the creek which incidentally kendra or kent or anybody would know it wasn't called rush creek all the time maybe it was but on some older maps it's ditch number something county ditch 40 or something so my grudge is and it's a grudge i paid out of my pocket to clean the ditching to run it to the creek i have a grand baby showing up that's good right she's coming so i paid for it only to be served a cease and desist by the uh dnr guy and i didn't know they did that actually but he did so it took me 11 months to deal with the people at the watershed district to clear my name stop a fine etc so question is what are we going to do who's going to maintain it and at some point with the city have the money to clean the other ditches and clean the creek itself i think i'm done now okay thank you for your comments david uh mike i know we've got other speakers yes next up is karen please state your full name address and get started i think we'll have to there we go mike we just need to mute david and then unmute kieran i'm karen lymangood at 8105 county road 116 a neighbor of david foy a 20-plus year resident and i'd like to defer to my attorney jody and then speak right after her hey thanks karen um and hello everybody my name is jody grabarsky g r a b is in boy a-r-s-k-i um i am an attorney located in white bear lake um i have been um uh i've had a relationship with the lyman goods since karen's husband chuck was alive um i came into this development many years ago when he was alive and and the same issue that you are all uh discussing and these property owners are concerned about now um was existent then um when the development was proposed back then i believe by what peachtree i think they were somehow related to lennar and maybe there's been other developers since um chuck was asking these very questions about drainage onto his property and and yes based on the plat there is a drainage easement reserved on the plat in that lower southwest corner of their property um however i don't think that anyone on when that property was platted believed that the amount of water that sometimes flows into the southwest corner of this property would be the beneficiary of that much water or future development activities and i think that um the use of that easement really can't be relied upon by the city or by mi homes in in this development something else has to be done as we all know once we put this much concrete onto that farmland water is only going to exacerbate off those flow points and so i think it was 2014 when chuck asked for our assistance in what to do in these matters and then at some point this development kind of fell off i don't know what happened but um you know the issue went away for a while and now here we are again um we want to develop this land and ms lyman good is not trying to stand in the way of that but what she is trying to understand and have put in place is proper drainage so that when eventually this entire parcel is developed and runs right up to her south property line um that the magnitude of all of that water and flow is going to have to go somewhere and right now it's flowing towards her and that will probably continue and so it just isn't fair to her to allow this development to go proper go forward without resolving that um each of you also on the city the developer the property owners you're all stewards of that rush creek and what comes off of these properties it appears is headed towards rush creek and i just don't see that anybody has looked at the effects of the water flow going there whether it's filtered or not mr foy makes a good argument a lot of what i deal with are commercial properties where you have broad expanses of concrete and lots of flow that have to go somewhere into detention ponds which are oftentimes filled 365 days of the year but also filled for maybe three weeks out of the year here in minnesota from a spring melt oftentimes those ponds aren't maintained or those drainage areas aren't maintained as mr foy is suggesting they're not mowed they're not kept clear of vegetation whether it be pipe or ditch somehow a plan for maintaining that drainage whatever is decided needs to happen and i'm on i'm here on behalf of karen and my partner as well just to say that this this development we all need to take a pause here and figure out what we're going to do with the water as stewards of the water um and then you know go ahead and move forward with the development but no one has a plan the engineer reports just came out at the end of october they have supported that this is critical area and must be dealt with every year the southwest corner of her property floods and if we don't fix this now and the city lets this go forward then karen's going to be faced with increased problems down the years two years five years 10 years and and what recourse does she have then but to try and and fight this and and pursue protections for her land down the road um but no instead she's she's better off to stand up now and say um you know the planning commission has to do something they have to force the developer to address this um it sounds like there's willingness on their side to do it but let's figure it out she hasn't been provided with any plan for that there's been some suggestions i guess there was maybe a pipe and now it's a ditch whatever it is present it to her and figure it out and and we insist that it be done before this development moves forward it's a it's a crucial step not only for this property owner but it's a crucial step for rash creek and its future and um we have exchanged i guess yesterday we threw in a letter of objection letting you know that we exist and that we are going to represent her and defend her property rights that continues today i know we were invited by mr martens to suggest some language to your proposed resolution i have provided him with that and i'm going to read it into the record now um there is a written record of our requested amendment and i'm going to verbally record it into your record now um and so on behalf of my client karen lyman good i would respectfully request that there be additional two additional sentences added to condition number 40 of your proposed resolution that's in front of you that would read as follows project approval and or issuance of permits for the rush creek reserve development is absolutely conditioned upon and development shall not proceed without a written agreement from karen lyman good concerning off-site drainage or other impacts onto her property from the rush creek development which is attached to this resolution and no developed parcel shall be sold to any homeowner until the agreement is executed any written agreement related to off-site drainage onto the lyman good property shall be the joint and several responsibility of corcoran bay holdings llc a minnesota limited liability company the owner of that rush creek reserve property and mi homes of minneapolis st paul llc a delaware limited liability company and its member mi homes inc a delaware corporation as developer as to payment and performance as a further condition of approval the purpose of that suggested language is twofold um number one as requested we request that the drainage issue be resolved before this pud be issued and second of all we need some kind of backstop as to time as i've said i've been aware of this issue for the lyman goods for six to eight years now and nothing's been done and we sit here at the same point and so i've requested some type of deadline in my proposed language to cause this to happen and then finally because we've had lots of transfer here between developer and the land being in a holding company um i don't want anyone to play a shell game with miss lyman good in terms of whose responsibility it is to solve drainage um like i said she's a cooperative party to this but we have to resolve her issues and recognize she's a long time taxpayer here too and and i just i realized that that counties and cities and townships need to get land on onto a higher tax base but let's also look at the at the duties we hold to our current um landowners as well and their enjoyment of their property and um as karen said she would like to make a few closing remarks so i turn this back over to her and i thank you for your time great thank you um mike i think karen's next great thanks jody it has been 10 years that my late husband and i have been dealing with the drainage problem it's 100 acres of farmland now but soon it will be over 200 houses all draining into my property and i don't think that's right the uh the developer the uh the new citizens they all get to drain their water into my property and it's it's not right my late husband uh was more knowledgeable than i and i actually felt compelled to get an attorney because there is no written plan there is no plan i've talked to john rask he's as personable as can be and all we've ever talked about is a drain pipe which would be acceptable to me but because there is no plan and nobody knows what's going on rumors abound and anybody who walks under a property were asking what's going on and no answer no plan and i felt compelled to get a knowledgeable attorney because obviously it's just me now but it's not right to have over 200 homes drain their water into my property with one person i'm not going to take i'm not going to be dumping ground for new for new development and i asked you to put this on pause or accept you know jody's um her new amendment so that at least i would have some some protection so that i could protect my property and my interests and i really fear that the developers will just push me around because of my status and i need to have a plan and i need some protection and having that amendment that jody suggested would would make everything better so i'm just asking the the present planning commission you know you didn't know my husband but he he was on the city council for four years he's on the charter commission he put a lot of time and effort into promoting and helping corcoran and unfortunately all his knowledge and wisdom is gone but jody's here to help me and i asked that the planning commission do the right thing i think that sums it up great thank you karen mike do we have any other folks in the waiting area are wishing to speak on 7a sure i do not currently have anyone with their hand raised i know um i believe we have a representative from m i here as well um not sure if john wanted to say anything or brad yeah i think we'll do is i believe have kendra go through her presentation and then and try to answer some of the items that came up and then i'll let her i know she's been speaking with the mi team of whether they want to speak or not so let her address that okay great then they'll uh kendra we could have the staff report mike's going to pull up the powerpoint to help walk through it but this is uh the final pud development plan for rush creek reserve formerly known as sawgrass next slide mike on the image you can see the blue outline of this property and directly north those red hash marks are flood plains and wetlands those are the properties of foy and lyman good and you can see the creek that runs north through this site through the wetland up to their property and then there's an east-west um leg of uh the actual creek i'm sorry the ditch goes north and south and then the protected creek goes east and west so water's always been a significant issue since the first time this came in and certainly continues to be next slide some background for the planning commission and any members of the public the first concept plan for saw grass was reviewed in 2014 and given the number of units at that time we did an eaw and environmental assessment worksheet and the commission is familiar with what that does it looks at traffic it looks at storm water it looks at wetlands and so the mitigation plan for that project was adopted by the council in november of 2014 and was the baseline for the preliminary approvals the preliminary approvals for the sawgrass project were granted in december of 14 for 246 homes on the 103 acre site and normally a preliminary plot expires after one year but we were still recovering from the recession and the council granted several extensions to that approval so that preliminary approval is still alive and that's what we're looking at tonight is we're looking at the final approval the final set of plans based on the preliminary approvals in april of this year the mi team formally reached out to the council and presented a new concept plan that showed how they would develop the site consistent with the privilege preliminary approvals with a few edits and the council accepted that those edits were minor enough that they would continue under the approved preliminary pud next slide so this is in the staff report and i'm not going to go through it in detail but i do think it's important to remember that we're not starting from zero here like we were with tavera for example the preliminary approvals already granted a lot of flexibility on this project and those flexibilities remain in place although there are a few where they're asking for some more flexibility and we'll talk that's where we'll spend our time this evening mike next slide so again the discretion in reviewing the preliminary or the final pud is whether it's consistent with the preliminary pud and then we do have some flexibility on the pud amendment components of tonight's request next slide on the left is the approved preliminary plot for sawgrass and on the right is the proposed plan final pud plan for rush creek reserve and you'll note that the bulk of the site looks very much the same but on the far left where there was a little cul-de-sac with some homes that is now an outlot that will be retained by the current landowner and in the far lower right there's a parcel that was shown as town homes that will be acquired by saint thomas church and so the town home shifted a little bit west on the project so very very similar in the body uh the main 90 acres or so of the site but some land is not being developed by mi homs next slide so as i said those portions that are not part of this will be owned by other entities and therefore the rezoning that was approved with the pud preliminary plan includes a condition that says that rezoning to pud becomes final upon approval of the final pud plan and if this final pud plan is approved by the council in november that rezoning will only occur to the portion of the site that's proposed for development by mi the piece to be acquired by st thomas and retained by the landowner will retain their existing rsf2 zoning the one of the pud amendments is to eliminate the 75 foot wide lots and the council was supportive of that idea when the developer agreed to increase the side yard setback from the approved five feet to a new seven and a half foot setback giving 15 feet between those single family homes the elimination of those lots and the addition of some twin homes increase the number of lots on site from 246 to 255 lots this uh increases the townhomes from a very conceptual 20 to 56. at the time this came in there was a very strong push from the council to provide town homes the developer at the time was not completely convinced they could sell those so there was some flexibility in the original approval in terms of the number of town homes and how they would be required this new plan has 22 twin homes and then the bulk remain single family homes some are traditional single family and some are villas which are really single-family homes with maintenance of the exterior yard and driveway similar to what mi is doing in basslight crossings and basslight crossing south they are asking for some additional flexibility now that we have a townhome design from the town home minimum garage size from the garage face limits percentage for the single family and townhomes and some flexibility from the townhouse architecture standards and so that's where the bulk of the discussion tonight will be is on those specific flexibility requests next slide the changes uh to the pud eliminated the 75 foot lot width we've got single family homes detached villas which are really single-family homes uh with maintenance twin homes and townhomes and so this is the requested standards for the new pud that reflects those changes to a lot size and setbacks that the council discussed i did get a question about the front yard setback being 20 feet for most of them 22 feet for the twin homes you'll note in the approvals though that gives them flexibility but they always need to make sure the garage is set back 22 feet in order to accommodate a 22 foot driveway so that 22 foot setback allows them to push the front of the building forward a little bit towards the street but that garage will remain back at the 22-foot setback in fact their concepts show most of those houses at 25 feet but it gives them some room to move on the site next slide uh there was a a big packet for this application um and so this is simply a highlight of what you saw in your packet so we have single-family homes that look similar to the villas a little bit different but very similar to the villas that we've already seen in town that the most popular according to the applicant is the willow which is shown on the left of the screen on the right is an example of a villa this is the graystone very similar to what you've seen in vaseline crossings next slide this is a new product for corcoran these two it's our first twin home project and that's an example of the twin homes that they are proposing and then on the right is an example of the four unit townhome building the project has a mix of three and four unit products for the twin home buildings and as i talk about the staff report i think that the architecture of those excuse me front elevations is very consistent as a general rule with the building materials that we're looking for but we'll talk a little bit more about that on the next slide when we start to talk about the flexibility that's being requested so the the first piece where the mi folks are asking for some flexibility is in the uh garage frontage and so i want to back up the city code limits the front face of single family and twin homes to a maximum 55 percent of that building elevation that code does not apply to townhomes however in the pud the council as part of that pud approval did apply a limit to the townhome buildings again not in the code but specifically from the pud the pud that was approved in 2014 allowed 60 for 60 of the front face of the single family homes to be uh garage and up to 70 percent of the townhomes at the time we didn't have twin homes in the project the current request is to increase that to allow 70 up to 77 percent for the single family homes 70 percent for twin homes and 72 percent uh for town homes and uh the the um flexibility is primarily required when three car garages are requested so most of the two car garage products do comply with the pud approvals of 60 for the single family uh product but the third car garage which we've seen in other products projects does bring them over that limit and and that's why they're asking for that flexibility to allow more of the front face what i would say related to that is similar to what we talked about with bass like crossings they do a nice job of providing the things we look for in the front of a home in terms of material variety building articulation changes to the roof line and the upgraded garage door itself and i think this is one of the things that has been a part of our ordinance that has been a priority for the city to re-look at and now that we have paul we're hopeful that some of our ordinance updates can be prioritized so the flexibility for the garages staff finds that given the architecture of the front of the buildings that's consistent with what we've approved for others and we do recommend approval of that flexibility next slide the flexibility for the architecture on the single family homes is generally for that garage face but i wanted to highlight that they still need to comply with the architectural standards for the side and rear elevations they were able to accommodate that in vast lake crossings i think they'll be able to do that here however they did not provide side and rear elevations as part of the application package for those products so we do need to see those elevations and make sure that the single family homes and the twin homes do provide the mix of materials on the side and rear elevations and there's two standards remember for that for single family homes we do look for the front materials to be continued on all elevations but the elevations face excuse me facing a street or a park need to bring it to a higher level and have two different materials to upgrade that elevation so in this case that relates to the homes that back up against county road 10. we don't have a park here but we do a park across 10. so any of the homes that back up to 10 have a higher threshold for those uh single uh family villas and twin home products and so we feel confident that given the product we have in town already we're going to be able to work with them to bring those elevations in and show compliance uh next slide the town homes are a completely new product uh from mi and a fairly new product in the city we did see a similar um we did see some townhomes come in with tavara so the townhomes have two flexibilities that they're requesting one is for garage area or garage size and the other is some flexibility from the material standards so the code requires a minimum um of 440 square feet of garage space for town homes with basements and 540 square feet for units without and the request is to allow garages that range depending on which unit if it's an end unit or a interior unit 386 to 458 you may recall that we had a similar request from tavara lennar's project on hackamore and the west side of 116. and there the planning commission and council approved a 420 square foot garage in that case we also had smaller garage widths the mi town homes all comply with the minimum 20 foot width so they're a little bit shallower garage stall than what we saw in the tavara project i think a smaller garage is pretty typical for townhomes these days i see it in a lot of my communities i think that the marketplace for townhome dwellers is very different than my house or maybe your house where we have to maintain our yards by mowing them and our driveways by blowing snow here they don't have that so the garages really are to hold your trash container and your vehicle and your bike and so staff is comfortable with the smaller garage it's a different lifestyle choice but the planning commission certainly should have that conversation and the applicants are going to be here to are here tonight and certainly would be able to talk a little bit more about how that works in real life the other flexibility is related to the materials and pardon me if you go to the next slide mike the applicant is requesting some flexibility from the ordinance standards the ordinance says that a minimum of 25 percent of the combined area of all building facades shall have brick stucco or stone and no single building facade shall have more than 75 percent of any one type of exterior finish the townhome dwelling shall not have more than 60 percent of all building facades of one type of exterior finish so in the single family home we got somewhat flexible about type we said um uh color can provide some variety in type so you can have lap siding and if it's different colors we would consider that different you can use shake or board and batten siding still a lap siding type product but looks very different so if we look at these townhome products that are on the screen the front elevation really does a great job of doing what we want these design guidelines to accomplish we've got a lot of building articulation we've got a lot of interest in the roof line it's not a box they've got stone and brick and on the front along with lap siding and a shake but as you turn the corner the one side elevation has some nice shake on the on the top but the other elevation is just lap siding the rear is just lap siding it is broken up by the roof line and by the doors and windows on the back um those sliding glass doors will have decks that will also add some interest but uh we think that some more should be done in particular on the more visible elevations facing uh 10 and the town homes that wrap towards st thomas and so in the staff report we suggested some options for the planning commission i think if we can talk through that i'm confident we can as we've done for the other developments work with the developer to finalize an architectural plan set to move forward the things that we've done on other product types have been to use the wider window trim that you see on the front typically a six inch trim and bring that around to the side and rear elevations that pops those windows a little bit more and adds some more interest we could something we've done in the ravinia development is bring the window grids from the front elevation to the side and rear that adds interest to those elevations adding that shake from the front to the side or rear elevations again they've done that on the one elevation the other elevation is a little bit bigger face and the rear maybe doesn't isn't quite as conducive to adding the shake to it just because the way the architecture is um they could add a trim board to break up in particular the big side and rear elevations that sort of that contrasting color board at the floor level to break up the two floors and they could use more than one color of lab siding so those are some of the common things we've used i did include those things as conditions in condition number 10 f2 but the planning commission should talk about that and provide more direction so that we can work with the applicant and finalize the building elevations for the townhomes mike next slide the landscape plan is a very consistent with the preliminary approvals continues to provide the street trees along the public streets there are some common areas where additional landscaping is being added they're responsible for the common areas including the cul-de-sac median plantings and ponds additionally our code typically requires one tree per single family lot and we have included a condition that requires two trees per single family lot in this in this project the original pud did require three um for the single family homes but some of these lots are smaller and we felt like two might feel more natural on these uh lots but certainly the commission could discuss that next slide public streets will be provided they will be providing a new connection the main entrance will be to county road 10 there will be one entrance into the site off of county road 10. and as part of the project the developers required to deed additional right-of-way to hennepin county they will be required to provide turn lanes for the new entry as well as a trail crossing from the site to the city park on the south side of county road 10 and that will be managed by a city design bid project that the developer will pay for and that design bid of course is in conjunction with hennepin county but our city engineer will lead that process the internal streets are a mix of 50 and 60-foot rights-of-way with 28-foot wide streets future connections are planned uh to the east and west and i have a slide coming up they'll show where those connections are next slide mike the the public streets do allow parking on one side of each side of each street however townhomes are required to provide off-street parking one off street stall for every five units and that is not currently shown on the plans that must be added to the plans for the phase one townhomes and then for the rest of the townhomes in future phases the utilities are a big issue on this project you heard about stormwater but that that's one of the many infrastructure components uh existing sanitary lift station is currently located down on county road 10 just uh southeast of this site and as part of the project that lift station will be removed and a new lift station constructed on the north side of the street north side of the site on the south side of the street and i'll show you that and it may result in a loss of a unit in phase one as that gets final design mike if you go to the next slide so the red star on the bottom right is the existing lift station the green star on the upper right is where the new lift station will be located and we are working with the development team to finalize that design it's right pinched up there with that future road connection you can see that future road will extend out to 116. mike can you show that connection just so everybody can see it yeah that road connection will be planned out to 116. that kind of aligns with the south entry into city hall today which will get readjusted in the future and then there's a second street that will extend west uh i think it's called 79th in in generally that location um that's planned and stubbed to extend uh west and then on the excuse me east and then on the west there is a stub street that could be extended in the future if that adjacent property were to develop so the lift station is working through the wetlands um and the grading plan with engineering to make sure we can get that lift station to fit and as i said it's possible that first lot next to the green star may be eliminated in order to accommodate that that could result in the loss of one lot next slide if you remember back to that first slide there's quite a bit of wetland on site that was the hennepin county map the reality is through the actual wetland delineation there's slightly less wetland than that a little bit different layout but there are significant wetlands on site and there are wetland impacts meaning some small pothole wetlands are being filled and some corners of wetlands are being filled and as a result of that the apple can test and mitigate for that and they plan to do that by banking that is creating new wetland uh credits on-site and that's primarily in that large open area in the center of the site they'll be getting some of those bank credits by simply expanding the buffer zone in there and leaving it in a natural state they are continuing to work with the city uh the lgu for the wetland conservation act to finalize those documents and that must be done before anything can happen on site i showed you on the first screen a flood plain a lot of it most of it is north of us on the adjacent properties but there's a little bit of flood plain that does dip into the site no floodplain impacts are proposed those will not change which is good floodplain manages runoff just like wetlands do shoreline flexibility was approved in 2014 and continues to apply to the site however most of that was in the western portion the creek kind of runs along the north side of the site and then west to that area that's being retained by the landowner there's a tiny bit of wetland that shoreline excuse me that impacts the lots of long county road 10 from the creek that's located in the city park on the other side of 10. so that's where some of that flexibility was granted and applies stormwater has always been a big issue on this project and every single project in the city you guys know that and we are continuing to work with the applicant to finalize the stormwater plans which is very common as we work through the final stages condition 40 in fact i recall working with the adjacent landowners to develop the language in the existing condition 40. and we believe that does provide the city the flexibility to use the existing drainage easements working with the landowners on this property this developer to manage their stormwater and work with the existing landowners to the north to ensure that the system works together the developers required to comply with state watershed and local rules which do not allow us to make the drainage on adjacent properties worse and so we're very much committed as we are on all of our development projects to manage that stormwater then engineer memo talks about stormwater in fact we have a separate stormwater memo to address some of the issues but it is not done it is something that we are continuing to work through with them as the commission is aware we have a 60-day rule so we cannot work on this indefinitely while we hold off on the approvals but we have included conditions to ensure that nothing moves forward until the plans are approved by the proving agencies including our city engineer and the watershed next slide oh it doesn't really look like it shows up very well i put this slide in so you could sort of see the wetland buffers and the floodplain um and the creek on the north side of the site but it looked better on my screen than in this so i apologize for that but you've got this in your slide in your packet um and the intent is just to say they are complying with the wetland buffer and setback requirements they were granted alternative wetland buffers which means they have to do some increased plantings and bmps in those buffer zones next slide the parks and trails plan this was in your slide i like it because the red shows where the sidewalks are and the green shows where the trails are credit for park dedication is granted for the off-road trails so the trail that's along the entry coming off 10 does not get parked dedication credit but they do get credit for the area of the trail easement for the rest of the green trails that are off the roadway and i wanted to note that the far north east trail and mike if you can show that is also an emergency vehicle access coming off that cul-de-sac so that's a wider trail that public safety asked for that's a 12-foot trail so that emergency vehicles could uh get through there as an alternative route if that long cul-de-sac somehow got blocked so uh the park dedication will be a combination of trail easements and cash uh cash will be uh due with the first phase final plat none of the off-road trail is being deeded with the first phase of the development and i mentioned before but important to highlight we know that the safe crossing to the city park is important so we'll continue to work with hennepin county and three rivers on designing that trail connection at the county road 10 entrance next slide this is an updated phasing plan it looks a little different from the one that went in your packet the blue is the phase 1 construction and i can't remember if it's phase 2 is the yellow and and the green is phase 3. so obviously as always these are somewhat dependent on the marketplace but this is their most current version of how the property will develop with twin homes single family and townhomes in phase one and then a mix of the same in phase two and then phase three just rounds out with the single family homes next slide so again this is the phase one plat they'll be plaiting the lots that i was just showing you in phase one and the remainder of the site will be applied as an outlet for future development similar to how we do it on other projects next slide so again the public hearing for this project was held in 2014 and as the staff report notes or the resolution notes all the conditions remain in place as approved in 2014 except we're specifically modified by the attached resolution i did note earlier this week some errors in condition number 10 so you do have a redlined version of 10 to consider this excuse me a redline version of the resolution to consider this evening at the time this was written we had received one letter and and one email um uh i think david summarized his his email but that is in your packet and officially entered into the record we have now received two letters from lyman good and those are both also entered into the record and as i said the concerns about drainage we certainly understand we have conditions requiring the applicant to comply with local state and watershed requirements and we believe that the conditions as drafted protect both the city and the landowners adequately to move forward and as drafted next slide so with that um i do we do recommend approval of the draft resolution uh the redline version of the draft resolution that you received on monday but certainly have identified issues that the planning commission may want further discussion on and the applicant is here if you have questions for them as well happy to answer questions mr chair great thank you kendra thank you staff very thorough job i know this is a tricky one just because it has gone on for a long time i think it predated most of us that are on the commission in fact so appreciate the the background and the full information i think commission what we'll do is we'll go through as as you guys have questions um and we'll kind of do the round robin here uh and have if we have any questions for staff so meredith i'd like to start with uh with you and maybe we'll go in in reverse order if you had any questions or comments for staff um go ahead yeah i wanted to um i'm trying to find it right now but it is the um there's the exhibit that shows um the true removals and um i wanted to understand it a little bit better it shows removals that were proposed and i'm assuming that those were the ones that were proposed by peachtree and then the true removals that are going to take place which one assuming number one is being proposed by homes kendra is that a current understanding of the correct interpretation of that uh exhibit we're breaking up a little bit but what i will say is the proposed tree removal plan in red is amis tree removal plan the approved tree removal in blue was the sawgrass approval that was that was part of the 2014 and the purple is where they overlap and i would note that since 2014 was uh six years ago we did make the applicant do a new tree survey as part of this final pud we believe the landowner had done some tree removal between 2014 and today and we wanted it to accurately reflect uh what was on site what is it i won't shuffle papers around because it may affect the sound quality but is is it my understanding that um um mi homes is retaining more of the original trees than the first developer was proposing to do well that is factually accurate but it's mostly accurate because the blue areas are areas that they're not developing on the east and west side of the site so there's some pretty significant tree removal up in the upper the west side of the site that's being retained by the landowner that was going to be removed with the sawgrass project and down by the land that's going to be obtained by saint thomas there was some pretty significant tree removal that won't be removed by this developer because they won't own the land correct all in all the tree removal uh even within the site um is a little bit less than what was originally approved okay what i'm trying to um well why don't i just jump to the materials because that's kind of the hot point for me um but i am kind of grappling with um the amount of flexibility um that this developer is asking in addition to what was originally granted back in 2014 under which the pud was approved upon i'm trying to see what additional design what what increased levels of design is the city getting in response to being to allowing this flexibility so if i just go back to the materials which is where it seems to be focused on the flexibility um i'm in absolute agreement that the sides and the backs of the buildings um really can't be a hundred percent one material um and i'm thinking about the town homes specifically but uh really as the ordinance as the you know our city ordinance is written the intent is is that you don't have these flat building faces i did a drive around to see how other town home developments are looking i looked at ones from that are 20 years old and then i looked at ones that are very new and i particularly looked at rush creek commons which is lennar's project and their town homes back up to county road 10 and of those design strategies that are listed in the in your letter using wider window trim i don't think they have window grills but maybe they do i didn't notice those adding shapes a trim board more than one color they're using all of those design strategies to help break up that building mass at the back which is actually the front facade to county road 10. and i and in my drive around i did see other town homes but they don't do anything like that and it is indeed really flat and grim looking so in my opinion if we're going to incorporate uh if we're going to have this as part of our conditions i don't want to see them do one thing and call it a day i don't think you can just for example use window grids and say with that's it i think i've you know i've seen some successful methods in adding more design interest to when the the elevation is a flat plane and i think used all of these design strategies to make it work we don't have colors but one thing i noticed about the successful handling of the materials is when you have really strong colors i don't think you can use light gray and beige and say that you've got two different colors it just won't work and i did see that kind of handling of facades on town homes they're about 20 years old probably the ones over in the area around walmart there's quite a few tucked back there and you can see that and it really looks the same from the street and this is going to be so prominent along county road team that i think we need that i do recall because i was part of the planning commission back in 2014 i do recall speaking with peachtree about burns along county road 10 because of the sound and the traffic that's going to be along there and i was looking at the grading plan here and also there's overhead power lines i know they have a lot of trees to go in there i don't know how feasible that is but that is another concern i might have is that you've got all of these buildings backing up to county road 10 and we know from traffic council it's a busy road um and it's not going to be turned back to the city as it was the question back in 2014 um so that's one um let's see if there's anything else i think that's about it for now so commissioner will just a clarifying question that as far as kind of some of your recommendations um it would be in reference to uh number 10 on the uh on the pv recommendation around colors flat space on the on the back and then berms would probably fall in under landscaping and lighting yeah i the one about the burns i think i need more information on that i was i took a magnifying glass to the the grading plan and it's just it's a little hard for me to tell what's going on there um and i know they're going to regrade all of that so driving along there is not going to help but back to the materials yes it would be item number 10. okay and any specific language or point on one of those that you'd want to add anything to as a condition i don't want um i don't want it to be i think it's really important that it's not be understood that you could implement one of these design strategies and that would fulfill the the the meaning of the city's ordinance regarding materials i think based on my own aesthetic experience and seeing how other town home developers have dealt with this it appears that you need to use all of these measures or nearly all of these measures a wider window trim uh shake trim boards and color you need to use all of those to really effectively break up that long elevation especially when the building mass does not go in and out like you would see some of the multi-town homes across from lana the building masses go in and out so there's natural breaks in the form that's not what we're going to have with these townhomes based on what the developer has shown us it is on one flat plane so i would like to see us modify the language such that it's understood that they need to use you know three or more or almost all of these design strategies to do it successfully okay yeah i just want to make sure we're pinpointing the right points within the uh the proposal here so if we have to change some language we can we can reference that anything else commissioner wu um i guess just some clarification on berms and what's happening in that area between the townhomes between homes and county road team you know i couldn't see if they were proposing offense i'm not saying we need offense but i don't know if offense is being proposed there have they thought about sound from traffic um i just like to hear more about that i can speak to part of it and then uh mi may want to speak to part of it about their their final plan you are correct that the old plan did have a berm the old plan because we were going to move 10 only required a 40 foot half right of way the county now because we're not moving it requires a 60 foot half right of way and the addition of that 15 feet eliminated the ability to do a berm and still make the project feasible so what they did in their landscape plan is they did try to beef up the landscaping along county road 10. they we did talk a little bit about i'm not a big fan of fences uh uh i think it's just not the gateway to the community as a as a long line but they talked about doing maybe some segments of fences to provide some sound barrier breaking up that is not on the plans today but it's something that they uh talked about we have not given approval for the final landscape plan yet but the berm was lost because of the additional right-of-way required to preserve county road 10 in its current location okay thank you all right uh commissioner varenkamp thank you uh chair dickman um i've got i i'm gonna do a whole number of things so reign mean if i get a little bit out of uh out of control here guys um my question is in regards to the drainage um that katherine and david have brought in front of us today um it sounds like they're in the same situation i am out here where i have a significant amount of property draining through my my acreage out here and i've gotten no responses back from hennepin county um and they've told me they've turned it over the city and i what are we doing to resolve the issues that they are they are expecting to have from this development i know all of this stuff has to be done and approved and such by the city but why haven't we done anything in the past can i ask that kendra that might not be you that might be brad i think i think two things the nothing's happened in the last seven years because six years because we haven't had a developer specific to this project so relative to this project it's basically been for six years but they've they've had water problems that i assume are the same kind of things that i'm having where people are doing things upstream to drain their properties they talked about the farmer adding drain tile and those kind of things and and dumping more water into these wetlands that are to the north of this property and such so is there anything the city could have done up until this point for that change in the water table in the backyard of david and catherine's property or excuse me karen's property yeah care and numbers i'll try to jump in here a lot of this was probably done before my time as well but essentially there's a lot of exemptions for egg egg properties get away with changes that other developers can't do so as far as the city of corcoran has been it's as development takes place trying to fix whatever we can through the projects making offset improvements wherever feasible we don't have a stormwater fee that some of the communities have but they levy to the property owners and then do projects so it's really been that way and i will say two years ago now maybe just last year the city had to take over the wetland conservation act duties from the watershed and i think we've been much more responsive and higher quality customer service because of that but that's purely forward-looking so that's from brad that's from the rush creek watershed from the elm creek watershed management commission that used to do those duties on on behalf of the city of corcoran now we have those responsibilities ourselves so i think moving forward we're doing a good job of that but there are you know as brought up by um like karen and and david there are a lot of ditches that need work in corcoran um that's that would take a lot of funds to do it so it has become a priority for either the city council um to really raise those funds to take care of them so far it's been as development comes in we'll try to make things better that's not a great answer yeah it's kind of what i got when i was talking with uh the person about the rush creek watershed district and uh how they were going to come up with 80 to 90 percent of the cost to repair the drainage through my property and i was just seeing if it was the same thing there um so to the point of um is it jody is the attorney does all of this stuff have to be eyes dotted and t's crossed for them to pers to resume can can we do we accommodate that or do we just assume that that will be taken care of as a development goes along so it it would be unusual to have every t crossed at this stage of the game but they do have to be crossed before they can move dirt so i have every confidence in our engineering team's ability to review these plans and get it resolved before we move dirt on the site that is how we have dealt with development in the past and that's common in cities across the metro so we attach conditions to ensure it gets done so to that point though their water problems won't be any worse than what they are now or will they be even better than uh they are right now with this development yes i think the point the point is that we don't have a final design yet i think the goal is to work together to improve it but uh the law says it can't be made worse by this development all right all through condition 40 is to try to improve it uh on the adjacent property okay all right i hope that uh helps david karen and obviously jody is the attorney for uh karen i hope that helps you guys but uh please understand you get other uh people out there that are having the same issues with drainage and water on their properties and i'm one of them and i'm not terribly excited about the situation that's going on out here either so another question that i had and that's for you kendra um in your presentation it was saying that it was 255 homes and then the motion that we have in front of us 257 homes yeah that changed last minute last week and did not get updated and my staff report it is 255. 255. so then i want to understand real quick if i remember the numbers in this packet the size of this development has dropped about seven and a half acres is that right from when it originally came in 2014 um it's closer to 10 or 11 acres i think that it got a trunk because the seven and a half acres on the west side is being retained by the existing landowner and there's a piece and then the piece on the south side was purchased by the church yeah or will be so we're going to take 10 acres away roughly but add nine properties possibly eight depending on how much the live station takes up correct roughly yep and that still fits our yeah they come in at about 3.8 units an acre they are required to be between three and five units an acre three and five yep all right um i absolutely love the comments that commissioner wu um talked about um the trees all of the development and those kind of things what i'm concerned about is there has been a tremendous amount of tree removal on the south side of this property between this property and the church and uh is that reflected that that's already been removed there's still a pile of trees sitting there that need to be shredded burnt whatever um i just i see a lot more pro a lot more trees have been removed um and i don't want to i don't want to conflict with you kendra saying that there's a lot less trees being removed on this property but there was a significant amount removed from the southern part of this property over the last year yeah well and again we don't have a tree preservation ordinance right um but we did make them go inventory the existing trees again this year so i don't know i've heard that from multiple sources i believe there's been tree removal and you can look and see there's some downed trees um but i don't have a good way to manage what what happened and when so the the tree removal that they're showing for this plat is what we're following and i think generally um it's consistent with the original approvals and even the tree removal that happened without being part of the plat was generally consistent with where the trees were going to be removed under the sawgrass project all right i love the fact that we've given access to the properties east and west for any future consideration of development there that's great it looks like we're constrained any exits and such to the north is that right because of wetlands and those kind of things there's nothing that can happen up there well i don't think it's possible to extend the street but if you'll note where the street comes up by the lift station it does about that adjacent property the right-of-way comes up the property line okay again i think between the floodplain and the wetland it's not likely there'll be a street connection but it doesn't preclude it okay um a safety concern i have is the pedestrian access to the park across county road 10 is there a possibility to make that uh tunnel under 10 um or is that just all in the works right now well certainly it is something that hennepin county suggested they would like to see um i think it's a financing challenge as much as anything um so it is something that i believe brad is talking with the three rivers and have been telling um so it's still in the works we will have a safe crossing whether it's at grade or grade separated though okay um and then just one just dependent bearing camp but i've been so as far as the we'll call it temporary condition the talks with the county have been with some sort of median on county road 10 with some pedestrian storage so you could cross the northbound lane pause and look at the southbound and cross safely we are trying to incorporate where a tunnel potentially could be this is one of the search areas for the potential diamond lake regional trail corridor okay and and with that there could be funding from three rivers to help support um additional crossings as well we all know how uh how county road 10 bass like road can be and i'm very concerned about that um all right last thing um with our past experience most recently the rivenia project and stuff with this being going in in three phases um will the information be for everybody that's in phase one that phase two and phase three will be coming at some point or are we gonna have the same thing that's happening that uh people are thinking that they move to the edge of town and and we're preserving our uh open spaces i think you guys know what i'm talking about kendra i see a little smirk there um i i i i'm so tired of people saying they didn't know um or this is a surprise or anything like that what are we doing to make sure that everybody that ends up in this this part of town knows that uh there's gonna be very limited open space around them well certainly it's in mi's best interest to make sure that the buyers in phase one know that phase two and three are coming because they don't want to get calls either so i think they're typically their model display model home has the full site plan there um and i think certainly the city has our comprehensive plan available to anyone who's interested in our zoning ordinance and both are posted online but i know mi has a has a compelling interest to make sure those buyers know uh how they're going to develop the rest of their projects so and i think that's generally in their hoa documents okay i just i i'm talking about ravinia and most recently the eaglebrook um a lot of the people in the rivenia area saw that as stubbed in streets for homes and it was a huge surprise when the church came to us um in fact in our packet tonight um i still see a ghost platted for um homes and such and i was hoping to make that go away because that's not owned by lunar and stuff the same people at a remaining but that's a whole nother subject mr chair that's all i have thank you thank you uh commissioner schulack unmute and go there we go all right um i'd love to add my own uh comments as well about the the trees uh i know that that um we don't have a tree ordinance but i'm reminded of joni mitchell's uh prophecy when he said they took all the trees and put him in a tree museum i was shocked by the amount of slash not burned but slashing of the the amount of trees that happened in the last year and also when i look at this map of the red and the blue and the purple i don't know how to estimate this but the purple seems to be to be a a great amount of trees that would be um would be removed and again we've talked about this that these are mature trees these are beneficial for wildlife and for whatever pollination or shade or whatever planting a six or ten foot sapling that's going to take so many more years to grow i'm i'm shocked by this as well and i'm i'm disappointed that we would be losing those trees the only other comments that i have are because i live on county road 10 about a half mile from where this would be or three quarters of a mile um i've lived here for uh since 2007 and in those 13 years we've we've seen a variety of drivers and driving habits folks going north or westbound on county road 10 can't wait to get up to 50 miles an hour usually because they've just come usually gone 30 miles an hour through the city and likewise some of the eastbound or southbound drivers don't want to slow to 30 and as they approach the city right where this development would be is a very particularly potentially dangerous area with people wanting to accelerate or not wanting to decelerate the intersection of 50 and 10 is already a tricky intersection with some of the drivers not yielding properly or cutting off other drivers now people exiting this reserve we'll see drivers going north or westbound on county road 10 but may not be able to tell if they're accelerating as they draw near them people are just by nature creatures of habit and their minds may not treat this uh with any more caution or probably largely because they've always driven this way and they they've lived here for for decades of other particular concern to me is the amount of construction trucks dump trucks cement trucks huge huge trucks uh coming back and forth uh on county road 10 all day long and sometimes till about seven at night so we've already got the industrial traffic and just from my work as a police reserve officer observing traffic i've i've seen um more than my share of heavy-duty construction truck drivers really not adhering to signs uh speed limit signs or caution or yield i don't mean to to cast a wide blanket there but it's just an observation um the 255 homes uh have a potential of adding at least 255 vehicles coming out on to county road 10 and i believe that it increases the risk to the homeowners who are not all that familiar with county road 10 just moving in but also to the regular traffic that goes back and forth um i'm also concerned very concerned about the the children and the families attempting to cross county road 10 to get to the playgrounds and i think that i just i i i'm guessing that it's going to be years before that that crossover is in any way safe for them to do you may have you may have parents walking their smaller children over to the the park but you also might have some some kids whose parents deemed them old enough to do the crossing themselves and so anywhere from 10 to 15 year olds um trying to dodge traffic um so my my objection about this is that uh gosh this this is 250 cars that are going to be added to what i believe is already a corridor that uh is not safe and like i said i've lived here 13 years and i've seen it all last week i was almost hit by a pickup truck who tried to pass a slow-moving dump truck and because the dump truck was in front of the the uh pickup truck the pickup truck couldn't see me coming towards coming towards the the pickup truck until he had already pulled out in front of the dump truck uh they're just a lot of stories and my family can can vouch for those um so i'm i'm just i'm just not happy with the volume of traffic that's it's going to be in i think already contentious area for for traffic so that's about it for me thank you mr chair it's come up a couple times i'd like to just share a little bit of information about trees um i just looked it up in in 2014 there were 8 000 significant trees on site and the tree preservation was 44 of those trees now even with the tree removal when they did their tree survey earlier this year there are ten thousand significant trees on site meaning trees that were too small to be significant back in 2014 have grown so we now have 10 000 trees on significant trees on site and we have 50 tree preservation as shown on sheet g2 so tree preservation is actually slightly better different but because of the trees that have grown in the intervening years it's actually more tree preservation than we had proposed in 2014. mr chair yes sir kendra thank you for looking that up um my concern um and probably the other commissioner's concern who who is going to make sure that that stays there what what's going to happen are we going to inventory after they remove the trees and make sure they do what they say do we we don't have a tree officer or anything like that what what guarantees that that's what'll happen well until development starts it's really as you i mean as you noted on the site it's difficult but before they can start moving dirt they have to put tree protection fencing up around the preserved areas and that's our city engineers review that as they do our soap fence which protects wetlands so that's how we once development's ready to go that's how we ensure that the trees are protected if the project went away there would be nothing to stop the land owner from cutting down the trees but if it moves ahead with the development that's how we protect them thanks okay uh kendra just a few follow-up questions um i know we've got parking spaces related to the townhouses i didn't see anywhere specifically listed if there's anything that has to be marked or donated or notated for snow removal i know that's more maybe perhaps in areas for light industrial but if we've got parking spaces that are dedicated i think 12 or 15 in this case is there a spot that snow has to be identified as where they're going to be dumping snow or is just the assumption that the snow will just be pushed yeah so a couple things normally the snow removal on streets just pushes to the curb we do have sidewalks on one side of all the streets though so there's a snow removal that the hoa and the residents will have to deal with on that side of the street but it will just kind of build up on the side we do have snow storage in the cul-de-sac island and then i think at the dead end streets the public works folks tend to push that um there but they they do not have a snow storage requirement like we do for commercial sites they can work with the applicant to look at the townhouse area in particular and i'll double check with public works how they might manage that and can provide an update to the city council right having having lived in a complex like that in plymouth um a couple of snowy seasons in 2011 and 2012 it the piles got pretty big and especially if we're talking about townhouses that are built on slabs with no basement that could be could be an issue if it all gets pushed into someone's backyard one of the other questions i had i know we talked about smaller garage sizes um i do think just as part of the hoa there still are responsibilities of homeowners for snow removal so while um some of the others i think the hoas covered some of that it does seem like the homeowners here will have more responsibility than say other covenants from what i have seen in previous ones so just something there the one i wanted to focus in on is one that we've had come up is just on garage space and percentage of front i know the original pud allowed for 60 and i know they're asking for additional space i know we've spent exhaustive hours literally hours talking about that both with council and with the uh the commission i guess from my perspective on number 10 number letter c where they're asking for additional flexibility i i guess for me on the single family homes i i'd be comfortable going up to 65 percent and that that covers some of the m i homes garage calculations to give them almost 85 percent of their their units i i think 77 percent for flexibility i mean that's i mean there's welcome to my garage and then there's welcome to my garage and 77 percent of the front-facing being garage seems a step too far for me for a single family home um so i guess for me i would i would want to see some language around i'm fine with 65 percent to cover you know there's several elmwoods some willow the linden models it doesn't do much for some of the magnolia homes that are having at least 76 percent of a three-car garage face um i also would agree with commissioner wu just around and maybe there's tweaking some language on number 10 as well around combination of the three for design standards colors trim windows something of that nature especially as we're talking about no berm or even maybe alternate fencing to to have kind of that design piece um and the other thing i just wanted to bring up which i found interesting because this has been something that we've had um immense discussions around is signage both with another couple of developments that are kind of a gateway or welcoming people into the city i kind of feel like that county road 10 and 50 while it's the middle of our city is something that there's no development signage at all that's currently proposed so i'm not sure if there's something within that with this additional flexibility to talk about signage being developed within this first go-round but i i find it odd that we're not asking for more on signage when it clearly was such a important thing when we talked with a couple of other developments that happened to be between 101 and 116. so i don't know if there's other discussions that we've had with the with the applicant on that or if there's something we would do differently my reference point is number 22 no development signage is currently proposed it would have to comply with preliminary puds in the future but i find it odd that for a first development you wouldn't want to be putting something out there as a landmark for development to attract homeowners the only other thing i wanted to address was number 40 i'm personally not comfortable putting a specific property owner for conditions being met i think that sets a dangerous precedent for water i think commissioner varenkamp was very eloquent and and i think i'll speak for myself where i i've got water issues as well it's welcome to corcoran um i maybe brad would turn that rural character as having water issues if you move to corcoran but i'm not comfortable changing language on number 40 to talk about protections for a specific property owners or one or two property owners with that specific of language i understand the legalese and the time constraints brought up by um the property owner and her her representation but i also know that between elm creek watershed the state hennepin county as brad mentioned what the city has to do in the last two years that condition 40 there's some pretty high hurdles to be reached before we can even put a blade in the ground and then my last comment was is just a comment so for for number 31 maybe this is just a clarifying piece what are the steps karen or brad if i know we talked about parks and trails but there has to be some type of connection on the northeast side is that through easement is that through eminent domain what what would be the process if there can't be an agreement with the current property owner to have access to where that 12-foot trail is going into the northeast property where the trail is actually is owned by this this developer so the trail connects from that long cul-de-sac to the new public street so getting access to 116 would not be it would not be an issue this is just talking about within this project uh separately in the engineers memo we do talk about connecting to 116. that's not um what 31 is though 31 is just talking about the street 80th street that's being built in this project and the trail connecting down to that long cul-de-sac okay so maybe the clarifying question is is 79th avenue sorry would we need to get permission or an easement permission from that property owner that is on 116 in between this parcel of land to to allow for access then for emergency vehicles is that a condition of this moving forward so long-term yes we do want to connect out from 80th avenue to 116. brad do you want to speak to that or the wise of an add-on there there certainly is needs for utilities to access that way but as far as immediate transportation needs can just correct it be but there does need to be some easement of some sorts to get utilities through that corridor um through an existing property owner okay and is there any language that needs to be highlighted with within any of these conditions before we would break ground i my hesitation is that if we only have one ingress egress on county road 10 we don't have permission from a homeowner potentially there's an eminent domain discussion which no one really wants to have but i would imagine not having police fire ambulance service being able to get in a different way if there's an obstruction on ten that could be dicey yeah certainly i mean it's had to be a planned connection for the future um public safety has reviewed this with all three fire departments um as well as our building officials and this is their recommended plan um regarding eminent domain um really it's up to the developer to find a way through it um if they can't that you could ask the city council to do an eminent domain our response to them from the staff level has been that's something that this council is traditionally not like to do at all so there's no guarantees of that okay so just to clarify at this point in the process there it's up to the developer to work with homeowner and staff to find some type of easement situation that would connect 116 into the development that would potentially fit in with the future street stub but at this point would have to work with the current property owner correct that's i believe in the engineers report and the commission the commission has to comply with everything in the engineer's report okay so that has to happen with with uh for lack of a better term easement or right of way that would allow some type of access from 116 before um before we could break ground or no utility access needs to loop through out to 116 but we do not require a emergency vehicle access out to 116. long term we do plan a road connection but that is not required with this phase okay and does that put the city at any risk or is there language we should be adding in as part of that resolution i'm just seeking to understand i'm not i would say again public safety has reviewed it our police department and our three fire departments and they are comfortable with the development as proposed okay um okay that was all i had commissioners any other uh questions that you guys had as we went through um otherwise uh maybe before i do that just the the recap i i think we had some discussions on 40 from one of the citizens um i i brought up 22 in regards to just signage and i don't know if we would change anything with that i just found that odd for number 10 i know commissioner wu brought up some specific language around colors trim boards windows and other things related to materials to potentially have language talking about the usage of all of those in in conjunction um and then we also talked about the garage facing i i talked about 65 that i'm comfortable with and since they're asking for more i i'm not certain about the 77 which is being asked about but i'll that was just kind of my quick recap before if you guys had any other questions or comments i am i do have a question and it's kind of lineage what jim was talking about the speeds on county route 10 and is was it discussed to uh move that thirty miles line further west so that the majority of the speed along county road 10 where the development is is in fact 30 miles an hour so we can at least slow it it would help with the sound but also increase with the you know help with safety kendra do you know was that ever discussed or ever brought up it was not in the hennepin county letter i don't remember it being part of the eaw but certainly i think as part of any new development as the road access changes we would certainly work with the county to uh look at what those where that signage is um i know it's changed brad correct me if i'm wrong i don't think we need state approval anymore i think there's some signage that we can do locally in terms of speed limit but yeah i have to confirm on that's a county road so we obviously have to work with the county i can say a couple years back we tried to do just that on county road 50 so right now the second park entrance on 50 is at a higher speed and we tried to request just simply moving that speed increase to after the park when it stops because people coming out of there for soccer programming and that was through the formal state process and it took i think 13 months to get a no it is based on existing conditions too so maybe after build out that could be something that would be requested it can be smart additionally there'd be a future park access further northwesterly with the phase two or three of that park master planning so i think at some point in the future that would be a really smart request to proceed forward with but i i don't know if can happen timely now i will make a note and reach out to the county regarding what their process is with new state laws yeah i just think jim's comments are just so pertinent um i i really like to hear if the count came back with the no i'd really like to know how they could do that because you know it just seems like such a good idea just epic along that portion of the road there i almost feel like we need it needs to happen soon so people could frequently travel that get used to the idea that it has now moved and i've got to go slower earlier you know if you want to get them into the habit before they actually hit someone that's all i had okay anything else from commissioners on this round robin all right is there specific language that you guys wanted to amend or tweak as we talk about the resolution i know that's going to be the key thing and and again as a as a reminder we've kind of got the the limited discretion with what um what has been proposed but if are there any things that you guys specifically that you wanted to modify language i know meredith you brought something up around the design have you looked at any of the sub bullets or where you think that might fit in or recommendations for staff to adjust i think that the city would consider uh is a little sounds a little lenient to me i think that um and you're talking page three um number 10 f yeah okay i'm sorry let's go back um yeah [Music] f 2 so p d flexibility materials so we're looking at page three about two thirds of the way down in that paragraph it starts with the applicant and then there's a a sentence that says the city would consider the following to address the spirit of the ordinance um the city requires the following to address the spirit of the ordinance it's a little hard because i don't want them to just i think for it to be a successful design i don't think you can implement one of these things but i don't know that we can go to the extensive saying you must do all of them kendra do you have any thoughts on that i mean i want them to i think we want obviously they're the designer and and we can't be too well we can be prescriptive i mean they open this up by asking for the flex you know for wanting to not uh to reduce it to 100 of all on material which is clearly not what the ordinance states but yes a couple things um i did try to provide some flexibility because i'm not the designer and i don't want to say what they should do i want to give them some flexibility but they are on the line and i wonder mr chair if it might be helpful to have mi respond a little bit to what they heard i i have shared the staff report with them so they know we're looking for more from them in terms of architecture so now after hearing your comments they may have some thoughts that they would like to share sure that's good um mr ask if we uh mike if we wanted to give him a chance to to speak as a representative from mi or lauren i'm not sure who's speaking tonight but can you hear me yes we can okay thank you mr chair members of the commission john rask from mi homes and with me tonight is lauren grouse our project manager for this project and appreciate your time and uh consideration here this evening i know this is a project that's been a lot around for a long time and we're excited to to be able to bring it forward you know i think it's a you know it's a it's a large expansive project and the economic conditions are right now for for this to advance and uh we think we've made some nice changes to it in terms of you know the neighborhood is kind of some of the fine tuning to it i know when it was brought forward as peachtree there were no builders that were involved in it so it was you know kind of more um you know proposed and it was real and uh now at this point you know we've got specific uh home designs and that we want to bring forward and have shown you and i think have provided really a nice mix if you saw the full application it was quite extensive but we have 99 different homes so we have a lot of variety of home styles to try to appeal to both the empty nester um the you know young families with school-age kids you know more first-time buyers in the form of a town home but the town market is really more diverse than that because we do have one level townhomes mixed in with the two levels in that particular building design so i think we're appealing to a really broad segment of the home buying market you know and this being in the rockford school district i think it's an opportunity to introduce some new home styles into the rockford district that may be you know lacking in in more recent years and i know the school district is certainly supportive of that you know broader housing choice so uh we did hear comments about the town home designs and uh certainly have no objection to doing more you know when we submit for a project like this and we spent specific you know town home buildings it's one example of one building but if you've seen any of our town home well this project is this particular townhome style is new uh to us in this market we've built it in other markets but we are providing a variety of you know colors and we can certainly provide a variety of architecture enhancements to the side and rears i think it's appropriate that the trim board maybe there's some belly bands in there change of sighting we have no objections to introducing those and as we bring in we have a anti our own anti-monogamy rules if you will where we don't put the same exact you know treatments and colors of a building right next to each other we do vary those for our own interest our buyers prefer that the home buying you know consumers want to see that so we're more than happy to do that we just you know didn't give you all that detail with different buildings these buildings will also either have decks or patios so there are some additional articulation to the rear of those that aren't in those elevations it's up to the property owner that that buys that particular home if if they want to add a patio they can if they want to have a deck they can and so you'll get some interest just because of some of those treatments but um certainly have no objections to the comments that we heard and to the recommendations that were uh in the staff report and then maybe just if i could uh mr chair just a few minutes to touch on the drainage comments and a couple of the others um but maybe well i'm on the the um topic of architecture just real quickly we we did ask for 77 not because we want every home to look that way as as mentioned we have a variety of home styles to appeal to different markets we have 46 lots that are 55 foot feet wide and that's for a two-story home with the three-car garage and again that that's those are the particular homes that would be 77 and there's only 46 of them so if you look at 46 out of 255 total homes that's about 18 of the homes would have that high of a garage percentage and the thing that we kind of struggle with to be honest with your ordinance is when we design these homes we're building out over the top of the garage to try to de-emphasize that and you know if you were to look at the total front facade it is you know it's not 77 it's less than 50 but how your ordinance defines garage percent we're only looking at the main level as i understand it and then there's some carve outs on top of that so i think we've met the the spirit and intent of the ordinance which is to de-emphasize the garage you don't want a grouch dominated streetscape you know we understand that we appreciate it we do a lot of things with our homes to recess the garage to trim them out like you do the home and not you know have an underdeveloped garage if you will we like to build up over the top of the garage so that that mass of the home helps to de-emphasize the garage so i know that's probably a scary number when you see 77 percent but it is really a small percent of the homes that we're offering but it does help to provide some variety and also introduce a particular home style that we couldn't otherwise have and maybe when we're done here kendra could show a few of those if she has examples but i would ask that you give some consideration to that recognizing that you know we have a small percentage of them and then um just a couple of things on drainage because i know that's a hot topic and i've had the opportunity uh you know back in august to meet with mr uh foy and mrs lyman good about their concerns brad and kendra told us the very first time we started looking at this project you know that there were drainage concerns and we're very much aware of them understand the concern you know we understand there's an existing problem today we believe as mentioned with our storm water plan will actually be improving that situation um there is a very large wetland that at some point that was modified and drainage improved as mentioned that often happens in an agricultural environment we're actually restoring that wetland we'll restore the hydrology where we're going to you know hold back more water so that the water levels increase in that wetland we're getting credits for mitigating that and has some substantial work plan for that we've also got infiltration ponds and storm water ponds really control the rate of runoff uh to the north so really the only thing that we have to do is conform with the city requirements and the watershed requirements as you know it relates to discharge off the site and what's the best conveyance uh to you know route down to um i think it's the the branch of the the uh rush creek so we have a very detailed stormwater plan that's been submitted to the city that provides this and as kendra mentions that's a part of the final review that will take place we understand we've we have to comply with the watershed and the city rules and the city has a comprehensive stormwater plan that we have to conform to which has to conform to the watershed plan and we've submitted the data to show how we're going to do that we just have to define the construction of that outlet if you will but certainly look forward to working with mr foy mrs lyman good on that um final design and certainly understand and appreciate their concern and then just a couple of other things i know traffic and access is an issue you know this has been reviewed by hennepin county the sight lines have and the crossings and you know we're certainly have to comply with their permitting requirement to access the roads and that's all gone through their preliminary review process and we believe we can meet all their requirements or will meet all their requirements in terms of access so with that i i think i spoke long enough but just wanted to provide just some input on some of the comments that we heard here this evening and i certainly look forward to getting you know these things addressed prior to council and feel like we can address the concerns uh brought up here uh this evening if you have any questions i'd be happy to try to answer them great thank you very much okay uh commissioners any changes that you'd like to see to the resolution um i think we're kind of nearing the end of discussion i i have one that i would like to make still related to the garages but if there's anyone else that wanted to add something or ask staffs guidance or help with if we wanted to change any language before mr chair yes is there anywhere i i've been trying to read over the 40 five different points in this and i'm i really would like to know what we could do different there it is um looks like number 25 as far as being able to cross county road 30 is there a way to put a little bit more bite into that to get to the park or are we at the mercy of the county on that um i mean it is certainly the county road so they will permit it what are you thinking that you just want to highlight that a podesta a safe pedestrian crossing is provided or what were you thinking is there a way to write it differently or is that the way and then the other concern that i've thought of while we've been sitting here talking is we've got all of those town hills at the point of build out all around all the way along county road 10. how many of those folks are gonna cut across their back row backyard and just cross ten and not go down to the pedestrian crossing and stuff um i really don't like the the looks or the function of like a broken fence with with um with trees and other things in it i did i think commissioner sherlock was talking about kind of the same thing or one of us was about fencing something i don't i don't like a full fence there either that's not very welcoming as commissioner dickman talked about either is is there anything we can do differently um john listening to what you're talking about you are willing to make this uh a premium um place in the city and stuff and uh you want to be a good uh steward of the land and such so i just i is there anything we need to put in here that makes things happen well i would just clarify that 25 what that's trying to say is a little different than i than maybe what you're talking about but related thing is that the county wants a 60-foot half right-of-way for county road 10. right but they will take a 50-foot half right-of-way with a 10-foot easement behind it because they are planning in the future to build a trail that runs parallel to county road 10. okay so that helps in and of itself right if i can get from my front door to a sidewalk to a trail and across i'm more likely to do that or out my back door to a trail i'm more likely to go to the crossing i think okay all right i think that i think that's what i was looking for i'm i'm seeing people not use um the pedestrian walkway along um 19 out here on the west side of town and stuff they're they're still riding bikes and stuff straight down the road and uh it's just disappointing that we build all of these things for public safety and stuff and people not using them so i i don't have anything else commissioner dickman i either chair dickman i think uh i think that's about all we can say about that um kendra the only one i wanted to change and i'm i'm fine if if if no one else feels the same way on the commission i think on 10t this is page three we had listed pd flexibility um to allow the face of the grass to exceed 55 percent on the building face and then allow up to 60 for detached family homes i know they were asking for an addition to what they had already received in 2014. oh did we lose kendra we might have yes sorry sure kendra did step for a moment uh she's logging back in it's okay um my my only uh my only comment was i as i mentioned earlier i'm fine with making a change i just want to make sure we have the percentages correct on that um my change would recommendation would be 65 i'm appreciative of the fact that um with the 55-foot lots and a story which is 46 homes or a little over 20 um that that's challenging my only counter to that is well we eliminated all the 75 foot lots so if we're eliminating the larger lots that kind of make the formula work um and then we're asking for flexibility when we shrink the lot size by 20 feet um you know we've spent so much time with this as a commission and as a council i i i'm okay giving a little bit more flexibility given the inventory of homes that they have to to meet up a majority of what their or three car percentages are um but 77 is is is that's too much for me um given that we've taken out the 75-foot lot and i apologize you might have to repeat some of that again because kendra's just getting back on and i want to make sure she heard everything because she gets to edit the resolutions based upon the conversation yes there i apologize i don't know what happened my internet went down so i'm calling in on my phone now so i'm sorry about that yep so kendra this is this is um commissioner dickman it's it's number 10 page three um letter c i just want to make sure the percentages that were proposed in the pud match um because i know in the presentation from staff we talked about 77 and and here we're talking 60 for detached single family homes i know the 70 even 72 percent were for twin homes and townhomes i'm focusing more in on the single family homes um i'm fine making a 65 adjustment i feel like that's a little bit of a give for the for the applicant it would only be four models that wouldn't um work in that scenario um 77 feels too much especially considering that they've taken out all of the 75-foot lots um i'm happy to hear other feedback if commissioners feel it should stay the same or go with what was requested but i'm willing to give a little on that but i i feel like that's a that's a lot to to ask for even if it is 46 homes um i just wanted to add i haven't run the numbers since they've now increased the side yards to seven and a half feet does that can you did that impact the design of the home such that the living area that fronts the front that fronts the the front elevation is smaller so that the percentage of the garage area is larger because you can't make the garage smaller does that make sense um i'm not sure i did follow that um if the last yeah if the side yard setbacks are seven and a half feet each that means that the width that you have for your building is narrower correct you can't take it away from the garage because that needs to be a certain dimension to work as a garage so are they rearranging the living space at all such that now the garage is present on that elevation is even greater is yeah is this somehow tied to the increase in the side yard setback obviously it's tied to the elimination of the 75 foot lots i didn't run the numbers on the exhibits to see if the building width fits even with the seven and a half foot side yard setbacks because if it's just the way that where that the you know the applicants stated that they had issue with the way the garage area is calculated so i'm trying to figure out you know if we don't if we go if we scale it back to 65 how does that actually impact the final selection of homes to people coming to this to buy or doesn't it well i mean it impacts the selection in that you eliminate those 46 lot options with the three-car garage again it's really related to the three-car garage scenario it would be four meredith it was it's i did the numbers and that's why i'm recommending 65 percent because there's several that are 62 60.6 if if you if you say 65 you're eliminating four home styles because they're they're in that 77 percent range it's it's lindenstone d as in or sorry i'm i'm trying to read here it's london magnolias magnolia a stone magnolia b stone and magnolia d stone so it's there's only four twices that are eliminated four total styles will be eliminated with three car garage percentage so that leaves i think like 15 or 16 that you still have to choose from i'm fine with that i'm fine with it i think i think that they they presented all of these stuff they have plenty to choose from i think we've narrowed that size down we're increa even more visibility of these varieties on the street i think i support reducing it down to 65 percent yeah and i think kendra the question the question to you is just making sure that the resolution and i don't i apologize i don't have the red line in front of me so if it did come out on monday i don't have that but see at least in the copy i was looking at said building facing up to 60 but i believe in the staff report it was 77. yeah that was the red line i sent out um did change that so what we've what the um red line would would modify that from the from it matched the staff report and so we would if if the commission chooses to modify that it would be revised from that 77 percent to 65 percent as the recommendation to the council okay i also agree with the 65 percent okay any other changes that you guys wanted to to make i know good discussion here and it's you know it's been a few years and definitely appreciate m and i being here as well as jody and the property owners it makes a big difference when we have that feedback chair dickman what did we need to do i think brad said he was going to give us something to change for the drainage for the the wetlands or for the issue that we started talking about on this property is that in this writing or it's covered as far as the concerns for uh david and karen's properties we believe that's covered under condition 40. 4-0 all right the the um property owners had asked um if we would consider additional language which was stated for the record that listed specifically the property owner themselves um staff believes that 40 covers that um my personal view is that that is true and i think it's a slippery slope if we start putting individual property owners on on resolutions like that or like this one specifically yeah i agree with that too if there's a if there's a property change or something it's it's i'd rather have it a little bit more vague with the adjacent property owners chair dickman commissioners we do have someone with their hand up right now if you'd like to take a public comment at this point i didn't hear that what was that miss lyman good does ever hand up right now if you'd like to take a public comment at this point i'm sure we'll uh i know we had five minutes for for each individual so we would just ask that you keep it to less than that [Music] go ahead thank you very much i feel like 40 needs to be tightened up i appreciate uh dean and jeff who acknowledged corcoran has a problem and i'd like to defer to uh jody and ask if there's something simple that we could put in that would protect my interests in addition to what's in 40. it's up to you i will say you know the we have been in contact um one of the changes can be considered by the city council after this as well um it's up to you if you want this to keep going tonight or if you want to request that they submit any preferred language to us to review after the meeting it's up to you thanks brad um and karen i i appreciate everything and and jody as well as council i i think i would follow brad's recommendation for tonight and that you guys continue to engage um not only yourself but uh with your neighbors knowing from a planning commission standpoint we've we've kind of got limited purview here uh and we are putting our faith in and 40 and what that means from a state local watershed county and city municipality um also we know that this ends up going to the city council so as as kind of volunteers we can take it to this point um but but i think probably the best thing for for tonight is to continue what we're doing as the as the commission and then have you continue the dialogue with city staff and then work with mayor and council as as it goes as well as continued dialogue with the developer is kind of my recommendation for the for the medium proposal tonight okay that'd be a great thing to put in writing but you just said that that's helpful it'll be in the notes yes and it's and it's on video forever in perpetuity okay thank you thank you um okay any other specific language that you guys wanted to tackle or adjust i think the only thing that we have discussed so far is 65 on 10 c and i would just say uh on my end having some technical difficulties so i can't actually read the redline version but the redline version again on 10c did reflect their request and so we would modify that red line related to the single family but keep the twin home and townhome language uh as requested is that correct uh i'm i'm comfortable with that knowing that uh what what the design of those homes are and what the intent and spirit is of those and knowing that the town home ordinance that we have is light if any on that direction something that could be addressed but we're if we're trying to follow what the ordinance and the requirements are i think that's within within reason thank you for the clarification i think 10 related to the townhome was the other issue that you spoke a fair amount about tonight mr chair i don't know if there was specific language you'd like to change or just leave it to staff to work with the developer and provide more information for the council um i don't believe so kendra i think it was just ten see i know we talked flexibility is that what you're saying with the with the the design portion yes yes are you comfortable as that's drafted i know you talked a little bit about it yeah meredith i'll i'll open that to you i i'm in agreement with you i think most of us agree with the spirit of what you're saying you're comfortable with what kendra just laid out yeah i think that it you know you you kind of straight on the line between being overly prescriptive but also not wanting to get the bare minimum after hearing the applicant speak i don't think their intent is to design the bare minimum here um i think that there's they're going to make a good faith effort to to for this the ordinance and also looking at the designs that i'm seeing um they really just need to carry it around the building and i think they're planning to do that so i'm comfortable with the language now that i've heard the applicant speak okay um any other questions comments from commissioners if not i would entertain a motion to recommend the resolution approving final pud plan for m i homes with 10c redline version being modified to have single family homes as 65 percent um and leaving twin homes and townhomes at the stated amount do i have a motion from any of the commissioners um i'll second it baron kim okay commissioner wu roll call commissioner shulock nay commissioner varenkamp all right commissioner dickman yes okay thank you everybody for your comments very appreciative thank you to the residents and thank you for the applicant for discussion and staff as always thank you very very much okay again public comment opportunity for 7b this is the request for final pud development plan for u.s home corps corporation lennar for ravinia 15th edition and mike i'll rely on you if there are any public comments specific to 7b chair commissioners we do not currently have anyone with their hand raised okay give it one more chance here as i pull up our notes all right mike anyone else either raise their hand through zoom or via phone chair we do not have anyone with their hand raised or via phone okay all right we will go to staff report thank you mr chair uh this is and michael pull up the screen um the ravinia 15th final pud plan the final phase of ravinia next slide the applicant is requesting approval for this final pud plan and it is for 44 single-family homes this is consistent with the original ravinia approval with two modifications they are proposing to remove a cul-de-sac which staff supports and that allows them to add one additional lot and then i think they're proposing to remove the landscape media and at the entry and uh we had that in our staff report and i'm happy to talk through that here as we go through the slides next slide this arial shows the location the this is the west boundary of the subdivision to the north is a couple of lots in raviniya and then the large open space park that was donated as part of the ravinia development 30 plus acres i think to the south is gleason parkway which ultimately extends through the existing neighborhood to the west and out to 116. next slide this image shows the phasing plan for the entire development so we are in the purple area that final phase of the project next slide the homes do extend the existing roads down to gleason parkway in a loop road from the existing streets there is one small cul-de-sac in the southwest corner and in the the east side there's a cul-de-sac that was eliminated next slide so you can see there was this little tiny cul-de-sac those are kind of a pain for public works so staff was more than happy to support the modification to remove that cul-de-sac it allowed lennar to move the lots around and still provide the same lot sizes that were approved for the 15th edition down at the entry you can see on the left originally there was a landscape median as you came off of gleason into this neighborhood the plans at the right show the wide right of way to accommodate that but no island and so what we've done is we've put a condition in the staff report that says excuse me in the resolution that says either provide the landscape island and you'll maintain it or narrow the right of way which simply gives those two adjacent lots a little more space next slide the landscaping as shown does exceed the ordinance requirements this is one of the neighborhoods where we do have sub-monument sign that will be added at that entry off of gleason uh per the original approvals next slide so i put this in here there's some questions so there have been 15 phases a total of 485 units phases 8 and 11 were not in the original concept that were added part way through the project and with the addition of those we added 11 and a half acres roughly and through a number of modifications to the project adding those units adjusting some of the lot types the total development went from the original 426 to 485 units in ravinia next slide this image shows partially the project so the image on the left is the 2014 approved plan and the image on the right is the final plan but i do want to highlight that this image from lennar does cut off the park on the north end the park's still there as shown here that large uh parkland uh but the uh couple of additions that were added um were the eighth and the eleventh uh along 101. uh and that's the major change from the original approvals next slide so with that we do recommend approval of the draft resolution approving the final pud development plan for raviniya 15th i believe the applicant is here this evening if you have questions as well mr chair okay thank you kendra i mean do we we need to play europe little final countdown 15th yes it is i would mention this originally was intended to be a 10-year build out but as we always say phasing plans are dependent on the market so this did move forward more quickly than i think when i originally anticipated all right okay we'll go for any um commissioner comments or questions um commissioner varengam um i mention it thank you um vice chair dickman um i mention it on uh the other thing that we just got in dealing with is there any way we can stop the ghost plot on our drawings to prevent any confusion in the future or is there something in the works um for that eagle brook church is there something coming um i i see a lot of a lot of comments in in the public side on facebook and stuff about all of the things that was done wrong in that area and i just was wondering is there a way to uh change that and then i also see we've got a ghost plotted south of uh the 15th phase of ravinia that's all goals plotted i'm assume that's not owned by rivenia either is there anything we can do on that yeah we require people to provide a ghost flat to primarily to see that we're stubbing streets and utilities to adjacent property but there's no reason that it needs to continue to stay on these plans is the final phase so i don't know that we're ever going to see another plan from them but certainly we would not need to show that and we could cover it up and then the last question i have is when does gleason parkway finish over to 116 uh it is in the design phases right now um [Music] uh i don't know that we're i think the plan is to go out to bed uh next year and brad will jump in if i'm completely wrong about that but um i think we are moving forward with design hoping to do that next year yeah i know there's tremendous concerns about traffic and stuff going through ravinia um i've experienced going through recently with everything going on i see uh pedestrians walking the road instead of using the sidewalks um i i i just i am very very concerned about public safety in there the roads are roads they are not sidewalks they are not uh pedestrian right-of-ways and i i just see full disregard there so adding 40 more 40 more units into this i know it was the overall design and such and these are the 44 people or the 44 units of the deepest into romania they get to drive through all the rest of this so i just i'm severely concerned about public safety in virginia and and how the people that live there are using the streets and stuff as sidewalks and those kind of things yeah that's interesting every street in the development has a sidewalk on one side there are lots of trails so um with with with what we've done here in the past i've stopped and i've actually asked some of them um and they've noticed me or they know who i am and i tell them i'm a planning commissioner and i ask them why they're walking down the road and not the sidewalk and the comments back is this is our neighborhood we can do what we want and i just i'd really appreciate if the folks there would use the sidewalks appropriately and such because i do care about public safety so thanks you for letting me go off on that but no real concerns about rivenia 15th edition we got to do something for this there's got to be something this is big okay commissioner schulack no comments at this time commissioner wu i don't have any other comments okay um none from me specifically on the the 15th i guess the only riff i'd have is i know there's a lot going on with city and staff this was a big one you know we preliminarily talked about 426 homes and ended up being 485 a lot of reduction again in the 75 foot lot and homes some struggles i know as we went through with different editions and um maybe some consistency between eighth and and some of the latter ones as it as it came to uh design again garages came up not a surprise um so i i'm wondering if it's worth some type of specific debrief on on this this one in general of kind of things that went well other things that we need to learn um obviously we've got you know uh mayor locked and and council locked coming in and be curious to see um if there's some things we can learn before we get into the nitty-gritty of some of these like tavara and other developments which are likely going to come our way i think there's some things in our ordinances that might be a little light and some other things around setbacks with dax and adjacent properties and things that went through pud that maybe we could be doing more on a council side so i'll be curious to see what that looks like and hopefully council can do something as far as a debrief specifically on things that went well and opportunity areas going forward with with this one but no concerns with the specific thing for me okay um i'll entertain a a motion to recommend approval of the resolution uh approving the final pud for ravinia 15th edition i'll make the motion i'll second that motion shulock okay roll call um commissioner dickman yes commissioner varenkamp yes commissioner wu i'm commissioner shulock aye okay all right 7c this is also a public hearing so if anyone is interested to speak on this one you can either dial star 9 on your phone raise your hand using the zoom function under participants or also if you're on video i guess you could raise your hand too that seemed to have worked earlier tonight um if anyone's interested in talking mike will unmute you and we'll go forward from there um this is in discussion of the preliminary plat for the tessemer edition [Music] and if anyone is open to doing the public hearing we can entertain that mike do we have anybody here to speak our commissioners we do not currently have anyone with their hand raised oh kendra just raised her hand all right we'll give it a little bit here anyone mike before we go into staff report sure we do not nothing mike chair we do not have anyone at this time all right i'll take a motion to close the public hearing all right public hearing is closed okay kendra staff report please mr chair uh mike you'll pull up the slide show this is a preliminary plat for two properties at the corner of 19 and tesma road on the west side of the city so the next slide the applicant is requesting the plot to create three lots and one outlet from two existing lots both are guided and zoned rural residential and there's a large wetland on the south part of the property next slide so this image shows the existing lot of record it was drawn sort of oddly in order to provide the existing farmstead on the west side of the property with frontage onto county road 9 teen because at the time our development rights varied depending on whether you had access to a paved road or a frontage on a paved road or a gravel road this subdivision now will redraw those lot lines the testers own the farm that exists today and there's another landowner for the farm field on the east side of the property and they're working together on the subdivision next slide so the new platt redraws the lot lines to expand the farm field uh that farm field outlot a will come all the way up to tessmer road now and the lot will shift a little bit further to the west and then there are two new lots kind of in the middle those would have single family homes on them and the farmstead on the west side would remain the um staff report uh notes that there is a note on one of the plan sheets that said the barn that's on this lot line between lot 1 and lot 2 will be removed and so we have included a condition that they either um on condition 5a either remove the structure or adjust the lot line so that the structure meets the setback requirements we don't want the plat to create a non-conformity next slide all of the lots will have access off of tesma road the lots do comply with the rural residential zoning standards for lot size and front engine setbacks there are wetlands on the site the applicant has submitted wetland delineation for approval and we've included conditions requiring compliance with the wetland buffer and setback requirements they will be required to install wetland buffer monument signs in accordance with the ordinance for the three platted lots the out lot is continuing to be farmed and therefore they got a wetland delineation waiver and are exempt from the wetland buffer requirements until such time as that property might develop it is the rural part of the city so all lots are served by well and septic the applicant is required to get a preliminary approval from hennepin county for the septic design prior to coming in with a final plat that's a fairly new process at the county in the last year or so landscaping the ordinance simply requires one new tree for each new lot so that's included as a condition next slide the testmer and weber properties have a combined total of eight development rights and we've talked a lot about this um there seems to be some confusion about how land gets planted and transfer of development rights transfer there's no transfer of development rights happening what's happening is there's two parcels each with four development rights they're getting combined through this plating process to create three lots and one outlet and so there there are three development rights that will be used for the structures and there will be five uh four development rights uh remaining one gets assigned to the outlot and then there's four development rights remaining so we've simply said that the applicant needs to confirm that those all get applied to the outlet or determine where where those extra building rights would be assigned so again it's not a transfer it happens as part of the plot and it happens in almost every rural subdivision we do next slide uh there is a public hearing and normally i'm out of sorts i'm doing it the old way where we take the public hearing now we did that there were no comments and so we do recommend that you move to recommend approval of the preliminary plot with the conditions outlined in the draft resolution sorry kendra i didn't mean to throw you a curveball there no you did it right i was confused okay okay um commissioner wu [Music] i don't have any questions commissioner shulock um no questions just a comment that uh uh mr mrs tessmer must have been an original founding family to have a road named after them but then i noticed that it only goes to the end of their property before the harps named that part of the road after themselves so i think that's pretty cool i i'd like to entertain a motion to to call the uh the road in front of my house sherlock road but no no comments uh looks looks good commissioner baron camp i'm good very good okay yeah i mean i think kendra you guys touched on they have to figure out how those development rights get applied and then obviously with the county road 19 access there's there's that and then we also all know with ag is that is it a fair assumption that that egg plot then is kind of like considered now the outlawed as they've kind of combined that that's what that designation is going to end up being yeah that'll be outlet a and that land owner intends to continue to farm okay and so what will have to happen though is the between the four properties the three lots and the out lot that has to be determined with the city how the development rates are split amongst said properties correct okay okay um i'll uh let's see entertain a uh emotion on this one to approve the uh preliminary plot for the testament edition i'll make a motion to approve the preliminary plot as written i'll second it shulac okay uh roll call commissioner dickman yay commissioner of erin camp commissioner shulock yay commissioner wu yay sorry jim we didn't put a condition in there to name the road for you if you play your cards right maybe that crosswalk across 10 between tells me okay um that ends new business there number seven number eight reports and information eight a uh planning project update um there was a couple highlighted blue i know brad had to jump off um kendra i know i was just kind of curious we spent a lot of time on the karen nimi piece as could you give us just a quick update on that one unmute off mute please sorry i thought i was done yes thank you uh kieran did get uh the preliminary plot approved it was a challenging project and some confusion about transfer of development rights but it was really no different than the test for one you just approved except that it felt different for a lot of different reasons but they have submitted a final plat application it is incomplete awaiting the wetland delineation and so the delineation is under review it is possible that that could get completed uh yet this year um december january uh council review is possible but at this point it's incomplete and the delineations to the county is that right we are now at the city is now the lgu okay wetland conservation act we uh consult with wank for that and west bowl from link leads that process for the city but the city of corcoran is actually the lgu okay and then i'll wait to have commissioner or uh councilman schultz talk about a couple things that i know we probably are interested in so any other things that the commissioners wanted to touch on on the uh planning project update no okay city council report councilman schultz thank you for being here thank you thank you mr chair you're doing a great job tonight vice chair i'm i i don't have a hat i don't own horses it's not a chairman dean's not here so we'll go with that no diet coke either i've got the diet coke in his honor here so um so yeah we have no no october meeting so there's we've had a few council meetings in between our last session when we've gotten together um primary planning related the only things that really came up was related to eagle brook church as noted in the staff report eagle brook church was denied uh nelson international was approved with some additional conditions um can you share what some of those conditions were i know we had talked a lot about that as a planning group just wanted to know what um memory serves me right we had conditions of uh hours of operation where they could leave their doors open and then the lighting of the sign uh it was it was asked to be dimmed after uh business hours so the light the big international sign on the side of the building that faced the koa wouldn't be bright uh when the business is not in operation okay so those were those were the the two conditions um yeah and the rest of its um basic city city items that have that have come up we're in the middle of a budget cycle right now so we've approved a preliminary levy we'll prove a final levy um in the next few weeks so if you have any specific things you want to ask me feel free i'll try to address what i can and go from there right allen did brook church um what was their response from the outcome from the city council meeting i the the city council has not been given any response i don't know if if brad or kendra had heard from the applicant at all after maybe they could comment on it i have not heard anything from them since the council meeting okay anything else from the commissioners um okay so before we go to see um mayor elect and councilman elect thomas and councilman elect nichols and mayor elect mr mckee thanks for showing up tonight nobody's turning on their mics that's okay tom's been smiling the whole time thank you glad to be here good job guys and gals um okay any other business uh commissioners commissioner schulack yes sir um just just for my own curiosity with this uh with this new development rush creek reserve do we have a i don't know if i missed it but a price range for what these homes and townhomes would be selling for let me tell you they never go for what the original range is given so you can ask the question especially when it's got five-year development plans on everything isn't it that's right yeah that's a good question jim i'm i'm curious you know a lot of what we've had developed has all been in rockford maple grove buffalo school district and i'm going to be very curious to see with this being in rockford what the you know if there's there's a lot of usage you know that with the twin homes townhomes single family so it's it's an interesting mix it'll be interesting to see that and then also with tavara which will be across two school districts what that looks like as the growth continues to move east to west within the city yes i was just wondering because i i wonder if there's if we're having enough if we have enough affordable housing for young people it just seems to me demographically and and we'll get the census results probably before we get the presidential election results but um it just seems like the big demographic demographic that we're we're slowly losing or we've lost over time is is young people um and uh i'm just wondering if there was if there was anything affordable in corcoran you know for for maybe a single young adult or a young married couple jim um the the um the town homes that are in maple grove near hyvee that lana has done they range in price too you know if you if you get a town home that you have a town hall either side of you that's going to be cheaper and they're running around i think 330 000 i think for the town home and of course there's all kinds of upgrades that you can do that raise the price um yes and then i know that the townhome design that they're showing that mi homes is showing for corcoran is something that they've actually built in woodbury if you go onto their website mi homes website you can see they've got some a lot of photo a lot of virtual tours of the of the town homes i thought i saw 400 000 for those but i think based on that price i think it must have been a mistake but maybe not but if you wanted to see the level of finish that these townhomes if they're basing it on those ones in woodbury if you go on my homes you can see it and then you could see the prices but of course that's for woodbury so you know that that might be a way to find out some information okay what's what is identified as affordable nowadays what is the affordable price well it's going to be typically hud describes it as 60 of the area median income okay and so and that's going to vary based on your location but um you know we do have affordable housing in corker and it actually exists at the mobile home park yeah um and then of course you know there's plenty of affordable housing in corcoran if you're looking at existing housing i won't say plenty but there is some existing housing the issue is the cost of new housing i think most a lot of home builders will tell you they can't do it for less than 300 000 yeah question i had if if kendra you can help i don't see anybody from public works when do we run out of sewer and water capacity well uh when we did the comprehensive plan a couple things um we started that in 2017 so numbers have changed but at that time the met council defined an affordable home as one with a price point of 236 thousand dollars that's affordable to households at 80 percent of the median income is it any business kendra katie for the met council purposes um and you cannot house for that no it's a great point that townhomes are the most affordable of the new products of a new home product but it's certainly not affordable by many people's measure but our 2040 plan allows us to grow to meet our population forecast our 2030 um population forecast increases from trying to look at the number here for you but uh we certainly can accommodate the growth we're not in any danger of running out of space you've seen our comprehensive plan don't let me let me ask it a little differently with the current sewer and water capacity that we have when do we need to get our sewer and water treatment facility up and going when do we run out of capacity from sewer and water side or is that just not a concern sewer is not a concern because sewer flows to the met council system we may need to build some more pipes uh trunks i should say but um we have capacity the issue of water is an issue we are currently uh looking at and uh when the folks can provide more detail we're looking at a water treatment site in the northeast part of corcoran we uh buy are currently buying water from maple grove and so great in our own so we'll continue to ask them for water service until um they say we're working to get our own built in the next couple of years here to get that online oh thank you that's what i was wondering thanks jim to your earlier comment about younger people just from the people that i've mentored from a carlson standpoint at the at the business school a lot of them that are new grads or or even folks that are going into trades a lot of them will have roommates so if you think about what a mortgage would look like at today's interest rates for anywhere in that 280 to 380 range a lot of them are you know if you think about it it's kind of a two income even if they're not married a lot of people are picking up roommates for those town homes so it just kind of depends um you know even now i've seen a lot of people even if they're a married couple and have an extra room they could be subleasing that room um for cheap just to cover the cost of the mortgage so i i think it's it just depends on where people are working and who knows how long this work from home or how many days work from home is going to look like those townhouses are now offices too so you're right it's kind of interesting how it's shaking out well then i think i'm going to stay put on sherlock boulevard here and okay i rest my case all right we'll just have to find a nice frontage road for you to name yeah i got water problems too okay um all right calendar um next week i've got council meeting um 11 23 that's before thanks the week before thanksgiving it looks like any conflicts for the rest of uh 2020 and as we get into 2021 nope okay anything else from the gang nope all right well i appreciate you guys bearing with me uh first meeting i've had to run well thanks well done next time i'll wear a ball cap so it'll make it feel authentic okay i'll make a motion to uh to adjourn that one all right all those uh let's say uh commissioner dickman in favor yes commissioner varying camp yes shoelock yes woo yes all right good discussion tonight thanks team appreciate you guys insight as always meeting good night