MINUTESROGERS PLANNING COMMISSIONMAY 15, 2012
CALL TO ORDERThe meeting of the Rogers Planning Commission was held on May 15, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. was called to order with Commissioners Denker, Busch, Martin, Meadows, Knapp, Ende, Noto, Terhaar and Swanson present.
Also present were City Planning Consultant Steve Grittman, Deputy Clerk Splett and Councilmember Ihli.
OPEN FORUMNo one wished to speak.
SET AGENDAThe agenda was set as submitted.
CONSENT AGENDA*A. Approval of the April 17, 2012 Planning Commission MinutesCommissioner Martin moved, Commissioner Knapp seconded a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted.
On the vote, all members voted AYE, with member Ende abstaining. Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGSA. Public Hearing to Consider a Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of Brockton Meadows 4th AdditionPlanning Consultant Grittman provided the background information commenting on the following:• Replat of the townhome portion of Brockton Meadows into single family homes is a compatible land use for this area• Small land swap with the city will increase the park area• Trail easements to be provided along the boundary of Brockton Lake• Additional right of way would be required for Magnolia Lane
Chairman Noto opened the meeting for public comment.
The following comments were registered:Jeff Ridlehoover, 13896 Savanna Dr.: I am a member of the Homeowners Association and the members like that the townhouse area is now going to be single family homes. Concerned with the taking of a triangle piece out of the park area. We have worked hard to get the first phase of the park completed. There is the large island of land in front of these homes, what is going to happen there?Planning Consultant Grittman stated that that piece of land is owned by the developer and would become part of the new plat.Jeff Ridlehoover: If it is not part of the homeowner's association, who is going to maintain that area?Planning Consultant Grittman stated that there would be a homeowner's association for the new single family homes.Brian Tutt, developer, TC Homes: Yes there would be a homeowners association.Jeff Ridlehoover: They would maintain that area then? We have concerns because that area has not been maintained. How will that work?Brian Tutt: With the final plat there would be homeowners association documents drawn up also.Planning Consultant Grittman clarified that these will be two separate documents and that both will be filed at Hennepin County.Jeff Ridlehoover: So this is going to be a separate homeowner's association that the current one?Greg Haakonson, 19777 Harmony Ave.: So this will be an entirely different association than ours. I don't want to see our association get the blame for not maintaining the property.Brian Tutt: When we sell the lots, there will be a mandatory description of how the association is setup and what it all entails.Jeff Ridlehoover: Prior to the lots being sold, who is going to be responsible for the property being maintained? Will the landscaping of that island be done prior to the lots being sold?Greg Haakonson: So the new 11 homes will be responsible for the maintenance of island area.Brian Tutt: Yes, the new homeowners association will be.Jeff Ridlehoover: Maybe the new association could be absorbed into the current homeowner's association and there would be a single association for the entire development.Brian Tutt: The new association would be setup first, then they could possibly merge.Jeff Ridlehoover: Will there be association documents and they will pay dues?Brian Tutt: Yes, it would be like what you have now.Cathy VonLehe, 19766 Harmony Ave.: The western portion of the proposed plat is actually owned by the homeowner's association, not the city. That piece abuts to our property line. Are you going to be taking of that away now as part of the new development?Commissioner Noto stated that she is referring to Outlot D.Cathy VonLehe: Our property is Lot 3, Block 3 and we have been separated from the townhouse portion by this outlot. I am trying to make sure what portion you are talking about as becoming a part of the single family development. Our association pays to have that area mowed. There is an existing easement for access to the wetland area behind our house.Jeff Ridlehoover: I also believe that that outlot belongs to the homeowners association, not the City.Commissioner Martin: Is the outlot part of your property or not?Cathy VonLehe: NoPlanning Consultant Grittman stated that if Outlot D does belong to the homeowners association, they there cannot be a swap with the developer.Cathy Von Lehe: That has been mowed by the homeowners association for years, not the city.Jeff Ridlehoover: I believe a portion of that is a city easement and a portion is owned by the homeowner's association.Greg Haakonson: How will the residents be notified of the final plat? A lot of us did not receive notification on this.Commissioner Noto suggested contacting City Hall. It was explained that the entire development was not notified of this public hearing. Only properties within 350 feet of this property were notified. It was then decided that the management company for the homeowners association would be notified and they could relay the information to the homeowners.Jeff Ridlehoover: We as homeowners here have a big concern for the maintenance that is to be done for the new plat. How will it be enforced?Commissioner Noto stated that the city does have an ordinance for noxious weeds and how tall grass can get. Call the city and they can send the code enforcement officer out. If the property owner does not maintain the property, sometimes the city will cut the grass and access it to their property taxes.
Commissioner Denker moved, Commissioner Ende seconded a motion to close the public hearing.
On the vote, all members voted AYE. Motion carried.
The Planning Commission discussed the following:• Location of stop sign• Possible issues with Met Council regarding the changes in density• Revise with the next Comp Plan – comp plan is required to show the densities, not build those densities
Commissioner Noto moved, Commissioner Martin seconded the motion to recommend approval of the replatting the Brockton Meadows townhouses into an 11 lot single family plat known as Brockton Meadows 4th Addition. This recommendation is made with the following suggested conditions:1. The plat incorporates a trail easement along the east boundary of Lot 3 Block 2, adjacent to Brockton Lane, providing trail access of at least 15 feet in width.2. The City and the applicant execute a land swap providing land for a total of three lots south of Prairieview Drive as shown on the proposed Preliminary Plat.3. The applicant redraws the plat to decrease right of way north of Prairieview Drive, providing a total right of way width that would extend to 14 feet north of the current curb line of Prairieview Drive.4. Finalize landscaping plan details for Outlot A, the "island" area to be owned in common by the future homeowners. This should be prepared and incorporated into the Final Plat application, and constructed as a part of the improvements to Block 1 of the plat.5. Provide detail of the homeowners' association management and ownership of the common portions of the project.6. Incorporate any recommendations of the City Engineer and other staff.7. Revise the Preliminary Plat, consistent with the terms of approval, and submit it as a component of the application for Final Plat of Brockton Meadows 4th Addition.
B. Public Hearing to Consider to Amendment to the Parking Standards for RestaurantsPlanning Consultant Grittman provided the background information commenting on the following:• Sit down restaurant, bar/restaurant vs. drive through restaurants• Parking for kitchen and staff• Additional parking for just the bar/lounge uses
The following comments were registered:Commissioner Noto stated that the drive-in and/or drive through restaurants are referring to places like McDonalds, Burger King, Culvers, etc. A situation like Maynards would be an example for the need for additional parking.
Commissioner Knapp moved, Commissioner Meadows seconded a motion to close the public hearing.
There was a brief discussion by the Planning Commission. It was recommended that the table be revised to express the total parking requirement for each type of restaurant area, rather than the cumulative method shown in the draft ordinance. Planning Consultant Grittman agreed that this approach would be acceptable, and would revise the ordinance for the City Council's review.
Commissioner Martin moved, Commissioner Noto seconded the motion to recommend adoption of the amendment to create a better standard of parking requirements for the various types of eating and drinking establishments, incorporating the changes discussed above.
NEW BUSINESSA. Bedrock Motors – Site Plan ApprovalPlanning Consultant Grittman provided the background information commenting on the following:• Expanded parking area• What impact will it have on the drainage in the area• Sight line reduction – cars turning in and out is the biggest issue
The Planning Commission discussed the following:• Drainage under the parking lot• Maintenance agreement• Trimming the trees for the sight line – he would like to keep them, not remove them• Mr. Maas requested a new access off of Northdale Blvd. on the west side of the property. There is a large overhead door on that end of the building. He has a trucking company and the trucks are at this site sometimes. It would make it easier for them to enter through the overhead door if there was another driveway.• Parking and paving on top of the storm sewer area• Scott Dahlke stated that there would be modifications taken to prevent damaging that area• Concerns were expressed for having another curb cut so close to the existing one.
Commissioner Martin moved, Commissioner Noto seconded a motion to recommend approval of the Site Plan for Bedrock Motors as requested, with the notations made by the City Engineer, and removal of three existing trees in the southwest corner of the property to improve visibility around the corner of Northdale Boulevard. Also that the applicant submit another application for the additional curb cut for review by staff.
B. (tabled) Zoning Ordinance Amendment – B-C DistrictPlanning Consultant Grittman provided the background information commenting on the following:• Property owner has asked to have this item reconsidered – change the zoning to B-3 or at least expand what is allowed in the B-C district• Should changes to the zoning map be a part of adopting this zoning district or should the property owner go through the process of making application to have his property rezoned
The Planning Commission discussed the following:• Property owner Bob Cote was present and commented that having his property zoned as B-C will make it very hard to market. He would like to have either the language in the B-C district amended to expand the allowed uses or have it rezoned to the B-3 District• Primary access to this property is down Northdale Blvd., the access from Hwy 101 was changed by Hennepin County• This property was zoned in the Hassan Comp Plan as B-C – this has been in the works for years.• Not going to spot zone to what the property owners would like, the rezoning process should be followed• B-C district is too restrictive, won't get the type of businesses in there that the City would like to have. May get a small office complex.• Mr. Cote would like the property zoned the same as James Road and Northdale Blvd. – B-3 to allow for the manufacturing/distribution centers, machine shops. He suggested to incorporate some architectural standards so that the buildings are not all metal buildings.• The Joint Planning Board and the Planning Commission have done extensive work on the developing of this district.• Consensus of the Planning Commission was that Mr. Cote follow the process for requesting that his property be rezoned.
Commissioner Noto moved, Commissioner Denker seconded a motion to recommend adoption of the proposed zoning ordinance amendment as written. The motion was based on a finding that the proper route for changes relating to a specific parcel would be for the property owner to submit a separate application for a zoning amendment.
C. Sign Ordinance ReviewPlanning Consultant Grittman provided the background information commenting on the following:• Signage heights along the freeway corridor from Brooklyn Park through Rogers vary in height from 12 – 50 feet• Signage area within the same corridor varies from 60-250 sq. ft.
The Planning Commission discussed the following:• Commissioner Meadows had spoken with three sign companies that all felt that what is allowed by Rogers is fairly small• Commissioner Meadows suggested that staff look at the cities of Hudson and Blaine and a few others as they have just revised their sign ordinances• 30 foot tall signs are not out of line along the I94 corridor
Consensus of the Planning Commission was to research the cities of Hudson and Blaine and provide the information at the next meeting.
No action taken.
OTHER BUSINESSA. Change of Planning Commission Meeting DayPlanning Consultant Grittman provided the background information commenting on the following:• Changing the meeting day to the last Thursday of the month• June will be the first month for the new day• Packets will be available the Friday before as they are now
ADJOURNCommissioner Noto moved, Commissioner Ende seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:48 p.m.