Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.12.96 Planning Packet . . . AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR NOVEMBER 12, 1996 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVE MINUTES a) October 8, 1996 - Regular 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) 7:00 P.M. - Cameron Woods Planned Unit Development b) 7:30 P.M. - pine Ridge Forest Planned Unit Development c) 8:00 P.M. - Variance for Driveway Access - Lexington Standard d) Continue Hearing - Wireless Telecommunication Services Ordinance 4. DISCUSSION a) Proposed Ordinance - Credit Common Open Space to Lots b) Draft MUSA Expansion Comprehensive Plan Amendment c) Informal Request for Front Yard Fence Variance 5 . ADJOURN . . . AGENDA REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR NOVEMBER 12, 1996 1. Call to Order 2. Approve Minutes 3. Public Hearings . 7:00 P.M. - Planned Unit Development - Cameron Woods Cameron Woods is a proposed 62 unit neighborhood adjoining the west side of County Road 3l in the NE l/4 of Section l4. Jack Benedict, the developer, initially explored the possibility of business uses with frontage adjoining County Road 3l followed by a single family neighborhood proposal. The former was not practical since there would be no direct opening to County Road 3l and the second failed because it would require regrading the entire hillside and eliminating existing tree cover. The proposal being discussed at this hearing is one that will provide for a housing cluster of 62 townhouse units in the eastern one-half of this property and a 6.29 acre wooded hillside that will become part of the City open space system. There have been extensive discussions between adjoining residents and members of the Planning Commission and City Council. People are dismayed that townhouse units can be built in the R-l Low Density Residential District. Essentially, the Zoning Ordinance was designed specifically for property like Cameron Woods, which includes wooded steep slopes. All residential districts include the possibility of single, two and multi family dwellings, plus townhouses involving various lot sizes and a modest density increase for planned unit development projects. The advantage this offers is that housing units may be clustered to save existing natural features. At l3.65 acres and PUD density of 4.5 units per acre, the site can handle 6l.4 housing units. Because of the double stacking of units, 62 townhouses are proposed. The principal concern of neighbors is that the units are close enough to both the north and south property line that many of the larger fence line trees will be destroyed during construction. The Developer has indicated that he would prefer to save those trees as well and has ordered his engineer to revise the site plan to maintain this tree line buffer. The City Engineer has some concerns about on site grading because of the 25 foot drop in topography across the townhouse site and the need to protect the City well from storm water runoff. Another concern is the construction cost of the 80 foot wide City right of way which separates Endeavor Avenue in Cameron Woods with Nelsen Hills Farm 3rd Addition. It is recommended this construction be the responsibility of the Developer. The setback on the existing right of way of Pilot Knob Road is 80 feet which means that all units will be at least 55 feet from the right of way after it has expanded. It is recommended that Endeavor Avenue should become Euclid Street . . since the name change will affect only two addresses in Nelsen Hills Farm 3rd Addition, whereas a name change in Terra Addition will affect seven addresses. Recommendation Recommend Council approval of the schematic PUD plan and authorize drafting the formal PUD plan and submittal of the preliminary plat. 7:30 P.M. - Planned Unit Development of pine Ridge Forest Pine Ridge Forest is a proposed 68 lot single family neighborhood situated between Hillview Addition and Nelsen Hills Farm 5th Addition. It does not include a complete submission of necessary information and once opened, the PUD hearing should be continued to either a special meeting on November 26th or the regular meeting of December lOth. It should be noted that the Developer, Tim Giles, has dropped his request to cut the top of the hill. He will instead dedicate 5.45 acres for parkland and regrade housing sites west of the ridge line in order to provide adequate separation between housing and the lowest level of water in the tower adjoining the south edge of the plat. This PUD has also had some objections from adjoining property owners because of the proposed direct link between Everest Path and Upper l83rd Street. This connection may be a relatively short term problem in as much as Everest is recommended to connect with l80th Street, the east/west collector street in Deer Meadow, and an east/west street in Lakeville that is included in the long range thoroughfare plan. Recommendation Continue the public hearing until a time when all documentation has been received. . 8:00 P.M. - Variance Request by Lexington Standard for 45 Foot Wide Driveway Access The plan for Lexington Standard expansion included a 45 foot wide access from Edmonton Street. This was a variance of only l3 feet from existing City code. Since the request was filed, however, the contractor made a mistake in the placement of wall panels which will now require a 60 foot wide access from Edmonton Street. It is tempting to ask for a separation in the access drives, but as a practical matter, the larger turn radii necessary for truck turning movements make such separations useless. Staff has discussed this with Lexington Standard and believes that the contractor error is justification for granting the 28 foot variance. The Commission previously granted a similar variance for JIT Powder Coatings in the Industrial Park. It may be time to consider a change in the ordinance that will eliminate the frequency of these variance requests. . Recommendation Approve the variance request as amended. . . . · Continued Hearing - Wireless Telecommunication Services Ordinance Deb Garross from SBA, Inc. submitted some wording substitutions that the Commission may wish to consider. The first is a section dealing with co- location requirements. It would involve substitution of Section lO-6-20 Bl as follows: Co-Location Requirements. l. A proposal for a new personal wireless communication service tower shall not be approved unless it can be documented by the applicant that the communications equipment planned for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved tower or building within a one-half mile radius of the proposed tower due to one or more the following reasons: a) The planned equipment would exceed the structural capacity of the existing or approved tower or building, as documented by a qualified and licensed professional engineer, and the existing or approved tower cannot be reinforced or modified to accommodate planned equipment at a reasonable cost. b) The planned equipment would cause interference with other existing or planned equipment at the tower or building as documented by a qualified and licensed professional engineer, and the interference cannot be prevented at a reasonable cost. c) No existing or approved towers or commercial/industrial buildings within a half mile radius meet the radio frequency (RF) design criteria. d) Existing or approved towers and commercial/industrial buildings within a one-half mile radius cannot accommodate the planned equipment at a height necessary to function reasonably as documented by a qualified and licensed professional radio frequency (RF) engineer. e) The applicant must demonstrate that a good faith effort to co-locate on existing towers and structures within a one-half mile radius was made, but an agreement could not be reached. Section lO-6-20 B2 would remain as is. The second proposal would change lO-6-20 (9) as follows: 9. Tower Lighting Towers and their antennas shall not be illuminated by artificial means, except for camouflage purposes (designed as a lighted tower for a parking lot or a ballfield) or the illumination is specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration or other authority. ,. - 4. Discussion . · Proposed Ordinance to Credit Common Open Space to Lots This amendment has been designed to provide small lot single family developments with common open space the same flexibility townhome developments have with respect to the relationship between lot size and building coverage. · Draft Comprehensive Plan Amendment on MUSA Expansion The preliminary draft being forwarded to the Metropolitan Council staff is enclosed for a recommendation to the City Council. . Informal Request for Front Yard Fence Variance - 5264 186th Street The attached letter to Leonard and Kimberly Lee produced a request for variance which has been directed to the Commission for a response without a public hearing since two earlier requests were denied. &~ If} ~~ Charles Tooker . City Planner .