Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 1-26-21Planning Commission Minutes Special Meeting January 26, 2021 1. Call to Order Chair Rotty called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Rotty, Franceschelli, Lehto, Tesky, Windschitl Members Absent: None Also Present: Tony Wippler, Planning Manager 2. Public Hearings – Chair Rotty opened the public hearings a. Whispering Fields Preliminary Plat and PUD Jay and Patricia Christensen and ISD 192, owners, and Summergate Companies, developer, have jointly submitted an application for a Preliminary Plat and PUD for Whispering Fields located directly south of the Farmington High School off of Flagstaff Avenue. The proposal consists of 119 single-family lots on 47.89 acres. On May 18, 2020, the City Council approved putting this property into MUSA. It was also re-zoned from A-1 (Agriculture) to R-3 (Medium Density Residential) Planned Unit Development. There are two access points for the development. Street B will connect with Flagstaff Avenue midway through the property. Fleming Avenue will be extended north through the center of the development from Regetta Fields to the south. Streets C and B will eventually be extended to the west upon development of the adjacent property. The developer proposed to construct a temporary 20-foot wide bituminous mat between Streets B and C to provide a temporary turnaround until the streets are extended. Streets E and C will end with temporary turnarounds near the southeast corner of the development as the developer does not own the adjacent residential property at that location. Street E will end with a temporary hammer head and Street C will end with a temporary cul-de-sac. There will be a 1.5-acre park in the southwest corner (Outlot C). It is adjacent to city park property within Regetta Fields to the south. Trails and sidewalks are being provided throughout the development. Trails are being provided along Flagstaff Avenue and along the northern boundary of the plat through the school district property. The deviations that are proposed with this planned unit development are: - Allowing single-family dwellings within the R-3 zoning district. - Reducing the minimum lot area to 6,500 square feet. - Reducing the minimum lot width to 45 feet. - Increasing the minimum front yard setback to 25 feet. - Reducing he minimum side yard setback to 7.5 feet. - Increasing the maximum lot coverage to 35 percent. Contingencies that need to be met before review of the final plat are: Special Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 2021 Page 2 1. The satisfaction of all engineering comments/requirements including construction plans for grading, storm water and utilities. 2. Continue to work with the city on the design of the temporary turnaround between Streets B and C. Mrs. Christopherson asked where the location of the walkway will be on the west side. Staff stated it will start on the north boundary of your property and go north. The sidewalk along Fleming will connect to the trail. Staff received two emails with questions from the Sayers family as follows: Question #1: How much rain fall is required to have the Whispering Fields holding pond exceed its capacity and overflow when the pond is filled to its normal water level? The approximately 3.5 acre pond is designed to City standards such that it will be able to manage a 100-yr storm (7.41 inches of rain within a 24-hr period). It will contain the 100 year storm event and release the water through an outlet structure at a controlled rate. The overall capacity of the pond between the normal water level and high water level is 447,000 cubic feet, or 10.25 ac -ft. Question #2: If it is over topped, where does the water go? If the water level raises above the 100 year high water level, it will first overflow into the top of the outlet structure. If the water level continues to rise it will exit the pond via a designed emergency overflow on the south side of the basin. It will be conveyed over land through the City Park area to the Regetta Fields pond. Question #3: Does over topping put homes in Regetta Fields in jeopardy of flooding? No, Regetta Fields homes are all set at an elevation above emergency overflows per City Standards. Water will overflow at these points making its way to the Regetta Fields pond, which in turn has an overflow to the ditch. Question #4: The outflow from the Whispering Fields Pond flows to the Regetta Fields Pond; is this correct? Yes. Question #5: Does the Regetta Fields pond have the capacity to accept the increased flow? City standard is that basement floors of houses must be 2 feet above the 100 year high water level of an adjacent pond. While the Whispering Fields pond is discharging into the Regetta Fields pond, the outlet structure for the Regetta Fields pond will be adjusted such that this 2 ft. separation requirement will not be violated. Questions #6: With the increase in water being sent to the Regetta Fields pond, how much rain is needed before it is filled to capacity starting from its normal water level? The available storage in the existing Regetta Fields pond is 250,000 cubic feet between the normal water level and high water level or about 5.8 ac-ft. Again, the outlet control structure is proposed to be modified to accept the additional flow from the Whispering Fields pond, thus the 100 year high water level of the Regetta Fields pond is only anticipated to rise by 0.15 feet. If the water level raises above the 100 year high water level, it will first overflow into the top of the outlet structure. If the water level continues to rise it will exit the pond via a designed emergency overflow on the west side of the basin near the outlet structure to the existing ditch. Special Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 2021 Page 3 Question #7: What is the plan to protect homes in Regetta Fields that are at the bottom end of Fleming Street during heavy rain falls or snow melt with rain when street drains are plugged or overrun by the amount of water? Drainage through Regetta Fields, in the event of heavy events and / or plugged catch basins, is designed to drain over a series of overland emergency overflows. These EOF’s are designed per City standards with houses set above those elevations. Question #8: What water drainage agreements exist for these properties being developed and who is responsible for maintaining the drainage ditch that all this water will dump into? If such agreements exist, can you please provide a copy or reference to such documents? In the current pre-development condition, an estimated 75% of the site drains toward the adjacent property to the west. After development, 75% percent of the property will drain through the Whispering Fields pond, then into the Regetta Fields pond and ultimately through a controlled outlet into the ditch. The ditch north of the Regetta Fields outlet structure will receive significantly less runoff in the 2, 10 and 100 year storm events. The Regetta Fields pond outlet will control the rate of discharge to a level below the existing condition rate in the 100 year storm event. The outlet control structure, though modified, will remain in its current location. Therefore, since the location is the same and the discharge to be reduced, no additional agreement should be needed. Question #9: Have the Vermillion River environmental group signed off? No contact has been made. Question #10: Are all the ponds used for run off control (Regetta Fields, Whispering Fields and the High School) all clay lined? The Regetta Fields pond is not clay lined. The filtration portion of the Whispering Fields pond is proposed to be clay lined due to native soil types and separation to groundwater, however the “wet” portion of the Whispering Fields pond is not proposed to be clay lined. Both ponds are charged by ground water. We suspect the high school pond is clay lined. This will be verified during expansion of that pond. The clay lined status of that pond will be applied to the expansion of the pond as well. Question #11: Will the east pond at the High School be drained and repaired as part of the Whispering Fields reconstruction of the pond? It has to be drained in order to be expanded. Question #12: Who is responsible for the maintenance of all these ponds to make sure they operate as advertised, including sediment removal, vegetation control and liner integrity if clay lined? Ponds will become part of the City’s Storm Water Management System. Question #13: Who absorbs the cost of drainage problems when they occur? Who is responsible for correcting any issues when they occur for water drainage? The ponds, the outlets and the emergency overflows are designed to City standards. Question #14: Will there be some kind of backflow preventer to prevent backflow from the High School pond into Whispering Fields during high water levels through the stor m drains? No. Question #1: The boring tests have been completed, correct? What are the results of those tests? Soil borings were completed. Elevated ground water levels were encountered along with some wet soils. Some soil samples were overly wet and will likely require drying to allow the soil compaction levels to be achieved. If Mr. Sayers would like more information, please contact Casey at Summergate at 952-239-2293. Question #2: Road extensions to the west look to service future development, correct? Yes Special Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 2021 Page 4 Question #3: Are applicable utilities stubbed to the west for future development, like we had left for the Christensen property? Yes Question #4: I don’t see the sewer and water loops that the City required in previous developments? Sanitary Sewer is never looped. Watermain is stubbed to the west and will need to be looped once extended in the future development in the Sayers property. Question #5: Where are turn lanes or collector streets shown? There are no collector streets. One southbound right-turn lane will be constructed with the project. Member Franceschelli noted staff did a good job with this review. The storm water questions and answers are appropriate. He had no issues. Member Tesky confirmed the trail to the north along Flagstaff will not connect by the Christopherson property. Member Windschitl noted the temporary turnaround is a concern. He asked if they can make it a street at the end of the block and will there be a temporary lock? Staff stated that will be discussed with the developer during the final plat review. For fire regulations the street is at the minimum width. We may want to widen it. Member Lehto had no concerns. A resident asked if there will be a turn lane on Flagstaff Avenue. Staff stated there will be a southbound right turn lane. There will not be a northbound left turn lane. Chair Rotty asked if there will be more turn lanes as houses are added? Staff replied yes. Chair Rotty noted the property is in MUSA, it does not deviate from the comp plan, it meets the transportation plan and a traffic analysis has been done for turn lanes. He asked about timing of construction. Staff stated they want to start construction this year. Chair Rotty noted the next steps are the final plat and PUD. MOTION by Windschitl, second by Tesky to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Franceschelli, second by Windschitl to recommend approval to the City Council with the above contingencies. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 3. Discussion a. Vita Attiva Schematic PUD The developer is Paul Whiteman of Vita Attiva Developers. The property is currently owned by the Donald Peterson Family Limited Partnership and is located south of County Road 50 and to the southwest of the Vermillion River Crossings development. This is proposed as a 55+ development. The schematic plan shows 198 units split between 134 detached villa units and 8-unit rowhomes, for a total of 64 units. There will be a private pool, amenities building, tennis and pickleball courts. These would be located on the east side of the development adjacent to the stormwater facility. Special Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 2021 Page 5 The villa lots are proposed to be 6500 square feet with a lot width of 42 feet. The proposed setbacks are 15 feet from the front lot line, 5 feet from the side lot lines and 20 feet from the rear lot line. The property is a mixture of zoning districts including Business/Commercial Flex, Mixed Use, R-3 (Medium Density Residential), R-5 (High Density Residential) and P/OS (Park/Open Space). The property will need to be rezoned as a Planned Unit Development to allow the requested uses and to address the reduced front and side yard setbacks. The property is located south of County Road 50 and would be situated between Eaton Avenue to the east and Pilot Knob to the west (if both were to be extended south of County Road 50). Eaton Avenue will be extended south through adjacent property owned by the Peterson family to provide the only means of access from an existing roadway that the applicant is proposing for the site. Eaton Avenue would then intersect with a portion of Spruce Street at a T-intersection and would then continue east and then turn south to where two accesses in the development are proposed (Superior Street and Vermillion Street). The applicant does not propose to construct the remaining portion of Spruce Street west of the Eaton Avenue intersection. Eaton Avenue is a collector and needs to be built to a minimum standard of 36 feet of road width and 70 feet of right-of- way. The schematic plan shows the right-of-way of Eaton Avenue as 80 feet. The applicant would be required to dedicate the necessary right-of-way for Eaton Avenue south of the development through/over the river, wetland and floodplain to the southerly extent of the property. This portion of Eaton Avenue would not be constructed with this development. Staff does not support how Eaton Avenue intersects with Spruce Street and how the far eastern leg of Eaton is offset in the schematic. It should be constructed as a more continuous roadway as it is a residential collector. Interior roads are proposed as 32 feet wide within 66-foot rights-of-way and will be public roads. As the property is adjacent to the future County Road 31 (Pilot Knob) it is subject to the county’s contiguous plat ordinance. The County Plat Commission met on January 6, 2021, and will require that the plat dedicate 60 feet of half right-of-way along with a 15 foot trail, drainage and utility easement along the west border of the property. The schematic plan accommodates this requirement. The applicant does not intend to construct any portion of Pilot Knob with this development. The Pilot Knob right-of-way dedication is shared with half on the Peterson property and half on the Devney property. Staff has concerns regarding the schematic plan and how the transportation network will function as presently laid out especially from an emergency services standpoint. A couple additional options to improve the connectivity and accessibility of this development are: 1. Spruce Street (at a minimum half right-of-way) constructed to the west from Eaton Avenue to connect to the north/south stub proposed near the northwest corner of the development. Special Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 2021 Page 6 2. Extend Spruce Street to the east from Eaton Avenue to connect into where it terminates within the Vermillion River Crossings development. 3. The construction of Pilot Knob Road from County Road 50 south to Spruce Street and then construct Sprue Street to the east to the north/south stub located near the northwest corner of the development. Because this property is “leap frogging” adjacent vacant land, it is self-creating many of these issues and needs for road connections that previously didn’t exist. The Planning Commission should discuss whether this development is premature as providing the necessary road system needed to support this development is substantial and the responsibility to construct these roads would fall to the applicant. Mr. Paul Whiteman, developer, stated he didn’t know the Eaton Avenue extension would not be acceptable until just before the meeting. The owner has agreed to bring Eaton all the way through the development and push the design to the west to connect to both streets for two accesses. Member Tesky noted this type of development is needed. However, she had concerns with Eaton Avenue. She appreciated the option to align Eaton. Member Windschitl asked if the amenities will be private. They will be private. He asked why not construct Spruce Street. The developer stated because of the cost. Member Windschilt would like to see a Spruce Street access. Member Lehto had no issues. Member Franceschelli stated there are too many red flags. Only two access points will cause a bottleneck. He asked the developer to work more with staff to resolve these concerns. It’s unsafe and unreasonable. Chair Rotty liked the development and it provides another housing option that is needed. He does not want to see it go away, but there are several concerns with transportation. Having one ingress and egress for 200 families is a safety concern. The burden of constructing roadways is left open and moving the burden of Spruce and Pilot Knob to the future. He is concerned it would put the burden on the taxpayers to construct the roads. If there was commercial development to the north, the two developers could work together to share the costs. This is premature. He encouraged the developer to continue to work with staff. Staff noted the schematic plan is going to the February 8 City Council work session for discussion. Mr. Whiteman noted Mr. Peterson has buyers looking at the northern area. That will bring roads in quickly. If we start the process it will bring activity to the area. Chair Rotty encouraged him to work with City staff. Staff stated depending on the City Council, we may need to revise the preliminary plat. In that case, it would come back to the Planning Commission. Special Planning Commission Minutes January 26, 2021 Page 7 The next Planning Commission meeting is February 9, 2021. 4. Adjourn MOTION by Windschitl, second by Tesky to adjourn at 8:03 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Muller Cynthia Muller Administrative Assistant