Please stand also. Okay. Anyone want to make a motion to approve the agenda as written? >> Motion to approve it. Second. >> All right. All in favor? >> I >> I. >> All right. Public comment. So, this is the opportunity for anyone in the public to comment on items that are not listed on the agenda. Okay. Announcements. Approval of the amendments. Um, so approval of the June 24th, 2025 meeting minutes. I thought they looked good. I didn't see anything. I don't know about others. >> Okay, I'll make a motion to approve them. Anyone want a second? >> I'll second. >> All right. All in favor? >> I. >> All right. Public hearings. So, consider application for conditional use permit to allow secondary driveway access. Ryan and Elena Alana Kiple. >> Y I'll be handling the presentation on this conditional use permit application. Um applicants have applied for a conditional use permit to allow a secondary um curb cut at 10368 Windows Curb. Um so staff uh learned earlier um this summer uh of a second gravel driveway at 10386 Windows curve. Um the city code states that single family homes shall be limited to one uh single family driveway access unless a conditional use permit is approved to allow the second access. Um all driveways also must be surfaced with conc concrete uh vuminous or pavers. Um the property owner was notified of the violations and did elect to proceed with applying for a conditional use permit to request the legalization of the existing driveway um rather than remove it. Um so the subject property is a corner lot um on Windrose Curve and Meadow Road. the existing um there's an existing driveway off a Windows curve that leads to the uh applicant's attached garage and the second access is um proposed or is existing on the south side of the lot um off of Meadow Road. Uh so this what showing on the screen here is a copy of the survey highlighted in yellow um on Windrose curve is that existing driveway and then um the shed and driveway are shown as um proposed. Uh the existing shed I believe will have to be moved um slightly to comply with setback requirements and um so no work has been done until after this process is completed. Um this is just a aerial photograph showing the subject property. Um just neighborhood conditions basically to the north, west, and south are existing detached single family homes. Um to the east, the city does own um an outlot. There is a stormwater pond located to the northnortheast of the home and there's also a storm sewer pipe um located in that strip of land leading between the pond and Meadow Road. Um the proposed driveway is um uh proposed off of Meadow Road, which is identified as a minor collector street in the city's 2040 transportation plan. Um it currently dead ends, but it will extend uh to the east when the property to the east develops. There are no immediate plans to develop the property to the east, but it is within the city's planned uh growth boundary. Um so section 113-2 of the city code has basic criteria that must be evaluated uh when um considering conditional use permits. And those criteria are um the proposed action has been considered in relation to specific policies and provisions of and been found to be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Um the proposed use will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. Uh the proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in the code. The use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city's service capacity and traffic generation by the proposed use is within the capabilities of the streets serving the property. So those are basic to every conditional use permit. And then in addition, the um section 11-9-8 has two additional criteria that are specific to secondary driveway accesses. Um and they state the additional access is necessary to provide on-site circulation, adequate on-site circulation and the additional access shall create a minimum number of conflicts with through traffic movements and shall comply with the requirements of this chapter. Um meaning has to be paved uh there's with the requirements um and such. So, it's really staff's opinion that the guidance that's in the current um zoning ordinance doesn't adequ ad adequately provide guidance for the secondary driveway access um specific that there's just a lack of clarity. Um specifically the term circulation in you know one could um determine that the term circulation implies uh that the secondary driveway access should only be allowed uh when they connect to the original driveway access and therefore providing circulation through the site. Um this would generally not be something that is typically found in single family developments. Um uh further if a person on a corner lot were to construct a detached garage that fronts on a corner uh on that corner or side um street, the proposed driveway to serve it. Um that even wouldn't meet circulation criteria if that's how you define circulation. Um while it is not typical to construct a driveway leading to a shed, um as proposed in this application, uh the zoning ordinance does not explicitly state that a driveway must lead to a garage or a shed. So that is um kind of throughout through reviewing this application. We do think this is uh something we should review in the future as a planning commission and add more clarification here and then um determine if we will require um a driveway to detach garages or or sheds. Um so zoning ordinance modifications may be appropriate in the future. Um the applicant did submit a letter with his application. It was included in the packet and related to this particular topic of ident or satisfying these two criteria. Um he uh the applicant who is present today uh did offer um the following justifications for on-site circulation. That the additional driveway is essent essential for effective and practical use of my property. It provides direct access to the rear shed for storing equipment and supplies. Without it, moving items, especially in the spring and fall when the ground is typically soft and saturated, would be impractical and potentially damaging to the yard. Um, states that there is no conflict with the through traffic, which is the second criteria. Uh, the shed is located off of me lane, a substrate with minimal traffic and no current through traffic. The driveway does not obstruct visibility, pedestrian flow, or vehicle operations. It is safely located with clear separation from the intersection or heavy traffic areas. While they understand that future development may eventually extend metal lane, the spacing of this access in relation to the near the newly constructed uh residence, the nearest newly constructed residence would remain um practical and non-disruptive. And then also states that pending the outcome of um your and the city council's action related to the application um the driveway uh would be paved and once paved the access would comply with surface and dimensional standards outlined in uh city code. Uh its design will remain consistent with the neighborhood aesthetics and not adversely impact adjacent properties. Um so in the event um you know typically staff does have a clear recommendation regarding applications but because um the criteria could be interpreted different ways um we have uh developed findings for recommendation for approval um or um a recommendation for denial. I have my slides uh orders swip uh I'm sorry I meant to have this one before here but um I think in a nutshell uh you can see that you could argue that it is really not does not meet the current code necessarily for on-site circulation or you could argue that it is needed for access to the shed and um whatever you uh recommend Um the city or the planning commission is being asked to hold a public hearing regarding the request for conditional use permit to allow the secondary curb cut um and make a recommendation to the city council. This is the first um application since I've been employed with the city for a secondary driveway access. So we don't have any history that since I've been here. >> There is one built an additional garage, a piece of property adjacent to his >> can't remember his name. He used to be in the planning a long time ago and then he >> must be more than 10 years ago. >> Oh, it was >> Oh, thank you for that. >> Thank you, Renee. All right, so I will open the public hearing at 7:11 p.m. Um, if you wish to comment on application for conditional use permit to allow secondary driveway access. Um, please step up to the podium. State your name and address for the record. >> You may. >> Uh, my name is Ryan Kifel. I live at 10368 Winrose Curve. Um, I have the secondary access. I'm I'll be honest with you. I'm not trying to skirt the rules. I just I want to have a quality property. I want to maintain it nicely, make it look like the rest of everybody's else's, and I'd rather not track material out onto the metal lane when I'm accessing it in the spring and the fall when I mean, I'm going to be ringing it up because I back my truck right up to the shed, get my four-wheeler, you know, all the different stuff out of there. So, again, I'll do whatever you guys want. I'm not trying to skirt the rules. I have the equipment to move it to where it is in compliance with the easements and whatnot. Um, and I do plan on paving it if this does go through. So appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Is there anyone online? No. Okay. Thank you. >> All right. I will ask again if anyone wants to comment on the application for conditional use permit to allow secondary driveway access. Please step up to the podium, state your name and address for the record. And I'll ask one last time. Um, if you'd like to comment on the application for conditional use permit to allow secondary access drive secondary driveway access, please step up to the podium, state your name and address for the record. >> Okay, I will close the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. >> Thoughts, questions, remarks? I think we've done it before, like I say like maybe 15 years ago with a guy that had a big enough lot where he could add a garage in the front and then he had house garage and then a garage on the other side of a little wood. It's your neighbor down the road street. >> Parker Street. Yeah. >> So it was paved, I believe. >> Yes. >> I think it was a a garage, not a shed, but I mean it was >> it's a big garage. >> Yeah, that was the only one I can think of. So um And I understand the um accessing sheds. I have a garage in my backyard that I have trouble accessing sometimes of the year, but this is a different situation. He's on a corner lot. So, I don't know. I don't have a real issue with it myself other than moving it where it needs to be, I guess, and paving it. So, >> right. >> I agree with you on that. I think as long as he does those things be fine by me as well. >> Sure. It's hard to foresight like any through traffic with the future development. >> Yeah, >> that's the only thing that comes to my mind, but it's hard to picture that. So, or know what it would look like >> not going to be a conflict even >> okay >> when it's currently in >> the township. would have to be on. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um I personally don't have any concerns either. Um it does sound like we need to look at that ordinance again. Um just clarify that language. But you know, if it's no public safety concerns, then >> So the easement is for drainage or storm sewer pipe through there. >> Oh, okay. >> I mean, it's not a ditch in there. It's not. >> Yeah. So, the outlet adjacent to his lot is for a storm sewer pipe. And then um there's just the standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of the lot. >> Sure. Yeah. >> So, we just ask that the um shed meet setback requirements to that east east lot line and and south lot line which is the right ofway um and be outside of any easements. >> Yeah, I agree. >> The shed >> and that circulation piece just means like travel through through the property. Is that what that means? like >> it's a regular that >> okay >> it's yeah it's up to your interpretation >> um even when we talked about it internally it's two people thought this and two people thought that so I we just think the code needs to be more clear >> confusing language >> what do we need recommendation >> we need a motion and a second and a recommendation. Um, okay. >> I'll make a motion to do what was recommended with the move into the shed and the pavement or the asphalt or cement or whatever he was going to do to it >> for access. >> I'll second and then make a recommend or all in favor >> I >> and then we make a recommendation. >> You just did it. Okay. >> Yeah. All right. All in one. Got it. >> Okay. >> All right. >> That's good news. >> Thank you. >> Yes. To the city council now. >> Yeah. This will move down to the city council as soon as we can get it on the agenda. >> Sound good. >> Okay. >> All right. Um public hearing. Consider application for preliminary plat approval of Oldtown Apartments. Second edition Oldtown Apartments applicant. >> Excuse me. Okay, the applicant is not here tonight and um this is the second phase of an existing apartment building. There are a lot of slides and I'm going to kind of cruise through them because you have technically seen this in the past. Um it's an application for preliminary plat approval of Oldtown Apartments, second edition. The developers um acquired this 4acre property in October of 2022. It's zoned high density residential. Uh they de developed a plan to construct 72 apartment units contained in two separate buildings. Uh 72 detached garage stalls are garage stalls and 84 atgrade parking spaces. The first phase was started in 2023 and completed in the summer of 2024. Um that building is fully leased up. I understand it has a waiting list for some unit types. Uh the second and final phase is now being proposed. Oops. Forgot to start the show. This is one of Jake's old flyin that used to drive me crazy. Um they have also submitted a request for final plat approval uh that is will be considered directly by the city council. Uh they do hope to start construction yet this year. So this is u the copy of the final plat. This is the basically site plan preliminary plat drawing that was submitted. Uh these are the exterior building elevations um of all sides. It's going to be an exact replica of the existing building. Um these are the detached garages. Um kind of that long bank of detached garages. Um I zoomed in on the front um exterior just a clip of it because the top uh renderings were a bit difficult to to visualize. So you can see the front and the back and the south and north side there. Um these are pictures of the existing building so it would be duplicated. Um the comprehensive plan guides the property to um highdensity residential. Uh surrounding um the neighborhood conditions are basically high high density residential to the north, to the west, to the south is commercial, to the east is low density residential and commercial. My gosh, this is going to drive me crazy. Sorry. Um, apartments containing more than eight units are permitted use in the zoning district. Um, the lot is 2.3 acres. Um the density required by our comprehensive plan is 10 to 30 units per net acre. Um with this overall the overall development achieves 17.7 units per acre. This particular phase is 15.5 units per acre just because they had this lot is a little bigger than the first lot that was platted. Um the proposed building does meet all setbacks from all property lines. um and a little more. If you recall, there was a conditional use permit issued for increased building height. Uh approximately three feet higher than um the 35 foot height that is allowed. So they increased the setback slightly to account for that maximum building height that previous conditional use permit in the uh adopting or approving documents approved by the council. It already approved that for this lot. Um decks are uh the code also regulates a number of other things related to multifamily or high density uh related to decks or porches, exterior building finishes, utilities um and screening um driveways. Uh need to allow for snow storage area. Um there's open space and uh requirement for the project residents. There will be an open space area between the two buildings. um that is at least 10% of the gross development area so that the residents will have um some usable open space. Um and then the site must contain at least 30% of landscaping or uh the site must contain um 30% landscaped area and foundation plantings are required around the buildings. um 68 parking stalls are required for um the 36 unit building. 77 stalls are proposed. So there's uh over there's 17 um garages in the main apartment building. They're kind of that tuck under or on the first floor of the building. There's 19 detached garages and 41 at grade spaces. Um the parking lot will be paved and curbed and striped. Uh tree inventory was conducted. Um, there are five significant trees on the property which will be removed and replaced uh on the site through their new landscaping plan. This is their landscaping plan. that's may be a bit hard to read, but there'll be um a healthy amount of um landscaping along the east side of the site particularly. Um in addition, the uh to a 20- foot wide landscape buffer where lots of but major collector streets um those that landscaping buffer uh to be in two um staggered rows of plantings and a 4ft um burm is required unless determined by the city engineer. that is not feasible. Uh they have incorporated um a burm into their grading plan. It's not quite four feet high. I think threeish >> three part. >> Okay. >> Okay. Um there are ease pins that exist along the south and east property line that were taken with the original plat. Um there is not currently easement on the west or on the west property line. And then the north property line there's a big gas easement. Um we are recommending easement on that west property line of 10 ft. There are no wetlands or flood planes on the property. Um sanitary sewer will serve the building from an existing uh stub off of Oldtown Road. Uh as will water. Um storm sewer. Uh this is kind of the main storm sewer. Um things will kind of be funneled in that parking lot to the center of the parking lot. Um, in addition, there's some roof drains and uh from both the garage and the building that will also feed into the storm sewer system, um, which will then connect to an existing pipes with and catch basins within Oldtown Road, uh, which discharge to the storm water pond next to the New Market Bank or next to the strip mall on the east side. Um access to the site will be from the existing curb cut. Uh Dakota Avenue is major collector street and Oldtown Road is a local roadway. Um there's just the one curb cut already in place. There's an existing 8ft trail along Dakota Avenue. Um the city does maintain and plow that trail. Uh there's a a planned five- foot sidewalk on the south side of the site. Um and the parks commission has recommended cash in lie of land for this apartment building site. Um the city uh no um there were no comments from anybody other than the city engineer. We provided some um redline plans today that weren't uh available when the packet was sent out, but um comments are minimal. >> Very important, >> but very important. I agree. Just uh adding a drain tile in a shallow >> and a catch basin. That's correct. >> Um so staff recommend approval of um the preliminary plat. Uh there were uh oops sorry I don't know what I did there. >> Is that in the yard between the two buildings? >> I'm suggesting they put a catch on the north side of that sidewalk. >> I can point that out too if you want to see it on a larger plan but I have to switch plans. So, um, the one thing that we didn't catch and I want to point out, and it was a complete oversight of just probably lack of communication or lack lack of clarification with the first building. Um, the utility meters, there was nothing in the plan that indicated all of the utility meters were going to be on that street facing side of and uh of the building. And that won't happen in the second phase. The code just did not allow that. So, it's specifically listed as a condition here because it was um an oversight on the first one. So, no real comments, but the planning commission is required um under statute to hold a public hearing regarding the application for preliminary plat and provide a recommendation to the city council. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. I will open the public hearing at 7:28 p.m. Um for consider application for preliminary plat approval of old Oldtown Apartment second edition. Um if anyone wishes to state or comment on this um please step forward to the podium, state your name and address for the record and there's still no one online. >> Okay. All right. I will ask again um if anyone wishes to comment on the application for promary plat approval of Oldtown Apartment second edition please step forward to the podium state your name and address for the record and I'll ask a third time um if anyone wishes to comment on the application for familiar plat approval of Oldtown Apartments second edition please step forward to the podium and state your name and address for the record I will close the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. >> Right. Comments, questions. >> No, I'm fine with it. >> Yeah. >> Was planned a long time ago. >> Thanks for clarifying on the utility thing because when I read that I was like, why is that in there? That makes sense now. >> Yeah. >> Was it facing the north? >> Yeah. >> On the existing. Well, that will be up to them, but I assume it will face the north. >> I think that's the only >> and they could put it on the front. Uh, which but >> yeah, I >> do have a question. Are they going to grade that northeast corner into that lot that no one claims other than the utility or the gas easement? Or >> they will confine their grading operations to their >> So, what are we going to do with that? Isn't that going to look out of place still and not contiguous to anything? >> I can bring up the grading plan if you want to see it. >> Do you have a street view of that area? >> I do. Yeah, I'll bring it up. >> I just don't know if no one maintains it. If no one does anything with it, it'll just be a blight. the owner of the property >> gas company. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Didn't they get rid of everything and made it below grade their ground? No. >> Think all the equipment's been removed. >> It's been removed. [Music] Okay. So, this is >> Dakota. >> Those trees are going. >> Oh, yeah. Everything will be cleared and it'll be leveled. It's where the weeds are. >> Yeah. All right. So, it is right here. >> That's not what it looks like now. I don't >> sure >> those pipes are right. Are they? >> I think that they are. >> Uh, yeah. This is a 2023 photo. So, And I also noticed um when I was looking at the aerial photo that um where am I? When I was out at the site taking some pictures, I noticed that there's some land kind of between the town houses and the apartment site that just isn't really being taken care of or, you know, and it looks like there is a bit on the on the townhouse side that's not being mowed. So, you can see the new the first apartment building here, they did landscape all the way up to their property line and they're mowing. Um, but on the town houses, there's an area where they're not mowing. Um, so when this site develops, we'll keep eye on that. >> What will the grade be? I mean, is that going to be So, that's what I'm wondering is is who's responsible for that corner piece in the future and what's it going to look like? I mean, it's just going to be something that trees will grow up in and people will be like, "What? What's there?" You know, >> an undevelopable piece of property too, right? >> It's no one owned it. I mean, other than the They actually own it. >> But I would like maybe the parks to talk to them. That's parks park and trails people. Is there a trail went around >> maybe the city moment sometime? >> I'm sure that >> Yeah. Okay. >> Any other comments or questions? >> No, I don't have anything. >> Okay. >> What do we need? >> Uh, we need So, you opened and closed the public hearing and now we need them. >> I opened and closed it already. >> Yep. >> That's done. So, you just need a motion from us. >> Yeah, we need a motion. >> Okay. I'll make a motion to >> recommend approval of the preliminary P plat of Oldtown Apartment second edition. >> Okay. I will make a motion to approve the application for preliminary plat approval for Oldtown Apartments second edition. >> Okay. All in favor >> with conditions as contained in the staff report. >> Yes. >> Correct. >> Nicole. And who seconded that? Okay. >> All right. On to general business. >> Uh, review concept plan for Eagle View Meadows. Joe Sullivan, applicant. All right. Um, so tonight you guys will be reviewing um a concept plan from Joe Sullivan and there we're calling it Eagle View Meadows. Um, so the property is owned by Joe Sullivan and it's approximately 80 acres. Um, it's located in the northwestern portion of the community. Um, a concept plan was submitted in 2021 and reviewed by staff, but it did not make it in front of the parks commission, planning commission, or city council. Um, an updated concept plan was recently submitted to the city for review. And tonight, the owners are interested in receiving feedback from you guys. Um, so as you see here, this is the location of the proposed development as indicated by the red boxes and yellow arrow. Uh this is the concept plan that was reviewed by city staff in 2021. Um kind of the same layout but also a lot of changes um as you'll see. So this is the this is the current concept plan that we're discussing tonight. Um like I said essentially similar layouts but less culde-sacs um a little bit more conducive to better movement throughout uh the neighborhood conditions. To the south of the proposed development is two rural properties. Uh, one of those is vacant and one of those contains a single family residence. Um, both of those properties are located outside of the city limits but are within the 2040 growth area. Um, to the east of the proposed development are large lot rural residential properties that are approximately 10 acres in size with single family uh, homes on them. Uh, the properties to the east are located outside of the city limits but within the 2040 growth area. To the north of the proposed development are large lot rural residential properties that are approximately 10 acres in size. um all with single family detached homes constructed on them. Um the properties to the north are located outside of the city limits outside of the growth area um but within the su the city's ultimate sewer service boundary. And to the west of the proposed development is the proposed Highlands at Eagle View development that we recently reviewed um and the new Prague Eagle View Elementary School both located within the city limits. So the proposed use of the property for single family residential homes meets the intent of the 2040 comprehensive plan. Uh the 2040 comp plan calls out a preferred residential density of 2 and a half to five dwelling units per acre. And this concept plan contains 194 lots on 72 acres which equates to 2.7 units per acre. So we're within the range. Uh this slide just shows the ultimate sewer ser uh ultimate sewer service area boundary for the city. Um, as indicated by the red box, this property is within our service area. Uh, the current zoning authority is Scott County and it is currently zoned urban expansion reserve. The property would be automatically zoned to urban reserve if it's annexed into the city. Uh the future zoning must be consistent with the 2040 comp plan, thus requiring it to be residential, at least two and a half units per net acre and would require a PUD unless the city amends the minimum lot size standards before preliminary plat application is received. Uh this slide shows the proposed lot width, area, and setbacks for the development. U based on this information, the development uh would require PUD zoning, but as I alluded to a little bit in the last slide, staff notes that the planning commission intends to review these minimum loss standards in the upcoming months. Um so depending on the outcome of that review, straight zoning may be an option for this development. Uh the tree preservation requirements state that 40% of significant trees must be preserved and a tree inventory will need to be completed. Uh this property has been predominantly a agricultural so there's a few trees on site. Um the landscaping so 20 ft of additional lot depth must be provided where lots back up to major collector streets uh for a landscape buffer. Uh 10 ft of additional lot width must be provided where lots are adjacent to major collector streets uh which in this development is Nevada 255th and Dakota Avenue. The typical minimum lot depth is 120 ft. um but it'll have to be 140 um planned along those collector streets. The landscape buffer will must meet a designated easement area and a landscaping plan will be required. This slide depicts the sanitary sewer plan with the majority of the property falling into the W5 area. Um sanitary sewer service is available on this southwest side of this property along Nevada Avenue via six um 6 inch PVC sewer force man. Uh there's a lift station and force main that are proposed in Highlands at Eagle View which will serve this property and sewer service must be extended through the development and two adjacent property boundaries. Uh water service is also available on the west side of the property along Evvada Avenue via 12inch uh ductile iron pipe. Um 12-in water man or an equivalent of that must be extended through development um consistent with the 2040 water plan and water man must be extended to the northern boundary of the plat water service must be extended through development um and two adjacent properties. So this property lies uh within both the Scott and Vermillion wershed management organizations. Uh the area shown in crosshatch has a discharge rate that's more stringent than the existing runoff rate allowed in the other areas of the city. Um extra restrictions were an agreement between the city and township as part of the school development and are meant to protect downstream properties from erosion and from flooding. 36 inch and 48 inch HDP line uh exists along the entire east side of this property and flows uh north under 250 under 250th Street where it discharges to the surface. For storm water, there are five ponds um shown on this concept plan. Ponds will as usual need to be dedicated to the city as an outlot and city must access city access must be provided for. Um if possible, the developers should attempt to minimize the number of ponds. Um a 10- foot vegetative buffer and 35 foot building setback are required for all these ponds. And just based on this concept plan, um the required 35 foot building setback will likely impact some of the lots depicted specifically on that souththeast pond. So, city staff are aware that there is an existing drain tile line that runs through this property which provides agricultural drainage for those subject property and for the property to the south. Um, the existing drainage pattern must be perpetuated. And during a DRT meeting, township representatives also informed city staff that there is more drain tile that's not on this map uh to the northeast that we'll keep an eye out for. There are no DNR protected wetlands or FEMA flood plans located. Um, a wetland delineation was done in 2021 and is valid through November of next year. There's 1.23 acre wetland located along the west side of this parcel. Uh, wetland buffers and wetland sign markers will be required and wetlands will need to be conveyed to the city as an outlot. This property borders on Nevada and Dakota Avenue, which are both identified as major collector streets. Uh the city's transportation plan also identifies 255th Street as a major collector, which is the road that runs east west through this property. Um so the major collector streets, the purpose of a major collector is typically to link neighborhoods together within a city or link businesses to neighborhoods. Um access to collector roadways should be made via local streets and no driveways should be allowed on them. Public street connections to major collector streets should be spaced at least 660 feet apart. And the standard is 100 feet of rightway, 32 foot wide street, B618 curb, 10 foot trail on one side, 5 foot sidewalk on the other. Um so for Nevada Avenue specifically, there's a 35 foot rightway that exists on the west side of this property. Um and then plus 15 for Highlands. >> So 50 feet must be um in accordance with this plat. Um only a small section of the road is constructed near the southeast corner of the property. Um city code would require that Nevada Avenue is constructed to the northerly property line of the plat and the city would request a 33 foot strip of land to the north also platted as rightway with their proposed 80acre plat. Um gravel road for Dakota Avenue is Dakota Avenue is a gravel road that bust the city or that bust this property on the east side. Um it's under the jurisdiction currently of New Market Township. There's currently 33 feet of roadway easements. Um, and a total of 50 rightway, 50 feet of rightway must be dedicated as part of the plat. Um, the city code would also require that Dakota Avenue is constructed is constructed adjacent to the plat. Um, if the gravel section to the south of the property is not paved, the city would consider this development premature. Um, in discussions with the city and the township, um, these are some ideas that we've had regarding Dakota. Um the gravel road to be paved is to be paved from existing pavement terminite to the northern edge of this plat. Um rather than the 32- foot curb and gutter standard, we would allow for the rural section to remain with ditches and pave a minimum 26 foot surface with gravel shoulders. Once paved, the maintenance would be taken over by the city from the township. Uh improvement would be required for any local street connections that are made. Uh we would all instruct them to improve it when approximately twothirds of the development is constructed. So this development start on the west side and you know if they get to twothirds and the road isn't constructed yet we would not allow them to continue until the road is constructed. Um and a pre-development agreement and orderly annexation agreement could document these expectations. uh 255th Street, the east running the street running east west shown here on the concept plan. Um it shows 80 foot of rightway in the notes, but we require 100 feet. Uh a 10 foot trail 10- foot wide trail would be required on one side and a 5 foot wide sidewalk on the other and local street connections we believe do not meet the 660 foot spacing requirements. A couple instances on the northwest, on the northeast, southeast, it looks like they're the roads are a little close together. Um so for all these local roads in this development uh temporary culde-sacs must be constructed if the street stub exceeds 150 ft in length. The local road proposed to be connected to Dakota Avenue at the northeast corner of the plat should instead be extended north south to the northern property line. So um that road east far east and the north to the side of the pond we would ask that it would go straight up rather than connecting over to Dakota. Um, future road extension sides are required. The maximum length of a culde-sac street is 500 feet measured from the center line. Concrete driver aprons shall be constructed from the curb to the property line. And as always, boulevards are be solded or se sided, seated, or blanketed. Uh, based on the city code and the 2040 comp plan, the following sidewalk and trail improvements are recommended within the plat. Construct five foot sidewalks adjacent to all local streets. 10 foot uh trail on the north side of 255th, 5 foot sidewalk on the south side of 255th, 5 foot sidewalk on the east side of Nevada, 10 foot trail on the west side of Dakota. Uh we took this to the parks commission on the 13th. Um so the city subdivision ordinance requires 8% of the land be dedicated for parks, playgrounds, etc. Um, if no land dedication is required, the park fee has been established at 8% of the fair market value and the estimated park dedication for this plat would be 6.3 acres. Um, so the city's 2040 park and trail plan identifies a neighborhood park search area near the southern portion of the property. And here are just some things that you could typically expect within a neighborhood park. Um, such as play equipment, ball fields, tennis, pickle ball, ice rinks, etc. Um so the parks commission recommended full parkland dedication for the proposed Eagle View Meadows development. Um parkland location to be centrally located along the southerntherly edge of the plat so that as the properties to the south develop additional land can be added to the park and create one big nice park. Um the land to be dedicated for park purposes must have topography and configuration conducive to developing the park. um construct the sidewalks and trails as spoke on earlier and the parkland dedication as depicted um would need to be reconfigured to provide more usable space. So, we'll get back to that later, but that big pond right in the middle of there um and just some other topography issues. Um annexation to develop the property as depicted. Annexation is required from the township. The developer and the owner may petition the city for an annexation. Uh the city then works with the township regarding joint resolution for orderly annexation and a pre-development agreement will be required. There's some miscellaneous stuff. Um the developer we would ask that they would hold a neighborhood meeting as we thought that went really well uh with Highlands um at Eagle View. And then Ghost Plat, we just wanted to throw this in there because it's still a requirement and it um was a big topic in our last one. Um, so we just wanted to state and restate that it does not indicate city support or approval and that city growth only occurs when a willing seller sells land to a willing buyer and also a traffic study will probably need need to be happening for this plan. Um, so the requested action from you guys tonight is as follows. So the planning commission is being asked to provide feedback regarding the concept plan and whether annexation of the property into the city would be recommended based on this plan. Um, feedback is also being sought from the planning commission regarding the proposed local roads just in general uh, spacing on 255th. And then does the planning commission concur with 33 staff recommendations as outlined in the staff report? And if not, please specify which ones. Um, so I figure we start with number one and go down the list. I'll put it I'll put this up here and then I can switch back over to the requested action. Whenever you guys want, just let me know. So it looks like the first staff recommendation is the property is currently located in New Market Township um that is adjacent to the city limits of Ela New Market. The property requires annexation prior to the development. A joint resolution orderly annexation which outlines the terms of the annexation must be agreed to the city and the town. >> Right. >> Right. That's what you were going through. >> Okay. So, I guess we could start by just overall high level feedback um and whether or not something that looks like this would be supported and recommended to be annexed into the city. >> Nick, could you bring up um just the concept plan again? Just the overall >> the very last overlay one. >> I was thinking this one. >> I don't have an overlay one. Oh, we don't have it on. This is as This is essentially one. >> Thinking about the ones with the different neighborhoods. >> The ones with all the neighborhoods. Yeah. The one in the very last >> I created a >> fancy. >> Did you? >> I put high. Yeah, I put all the different Highlands and stuff on. >> Was it in the very last on the packet? >> It's um >> you could just bring up the >> or the No, it's he's talking about um one that would show Highlands superimposed. Do you want to just share your screen? >> Yeah, fair enough. >> It looks like everything to the west matches, but not to the south, but I I don't know. >> Yeah. And >> figure out the park area there. >> Y wait. Yeah. Is that the last one in the packet? Okay. So I am going to zoom in a little bit here and I want to clarify that yeah it doesn't so the city provided a high level so a highle concept was submitted back in I don't know 201 18 20 maybe um for this 35 acres to the south and we made our comments and then they never resubmitted but one of our comments was, you know, park dedication would be required >> um here. So, uh that owner is no longer really >> active or may even own the property. But >> so this park that they're talking about is this lower pond and the land around it. Is that the required size that for the acreage or what? >> It it says it is. It's hard. can't me we can't measure it but yes >> oh ice >> six acres or whatever it says >> y but as you see like the pond is right in the middle of it yeah >> so that upper left portion isn't really too usable and so we would need to reconfigure it but that's essentially the amount of land we would need >> and and to be honest we were a little bit unclear if that six acres shown there included the area of the pond or didn't include the area of the pond so that's a Um, anything below the ordinary high water mark does not um count towards park dedication. I think it's a thought out plan. It looks good to me. I think so. I don't know like about that comment on that norththeast exit just going straight. I don't know. Yeah, that was >> Yeah, just to avoid two connections with Dakota and also just to provide >> um future availability for road if those parcels develop. >> Yeah. So, I think that is is one thing um that staff did recommend elimination of that connection to Dakota and just an extension of this as we continue to review it. >> And I like the comment of completing the road. I mean, which you know, this is what I had a question on with the last development was who owns that parcel where the road is partially on and not on. So, >> well, I I did want to make a correction to Brandon's presentation regarding Nevada Avenue because um typically and now there would be there's the full rightway. So, the rightway in Highlands is dedicated. Now the rightway in this plat will be dedicated. Um however there uh the discussion is currently that Nevada Avenue would only be constructed in the future when um it is needed to extend north to 250th Street which is in the township. I'm going to pan north a little bit >> not to the end of the property. >> So these roads >> but would it go to that northerly road? No, but we do recommend those two east west roads be connected across Nevada are connected but that north south piece from 255th to 253rd we can't for service to the right of it and another one just to the left of it so there's adequate access into the neighborhood the neighborhoods are crossed, but building that piece of road we'd rather see the resources go elsewhere. Uh it's a road we would have to maintain for no purpose. It can't go anywhere to the north probably for a very long time. So it becomes kind of a road to nowhere. and we had a spirited discussion about this this issue because normally we do like to acquire those when it's opportunity but at the same time building roads with no purpose doesn't serve anybody >> but what do these people's backyards end up being >> just like trees >> the city m it now and it'll continue to do so >> the city not like But it would be a a rightway. There will be a pond on the one side and then the backyards will back up to a an open rightway. Basically a a field grassy field. >> And someone puts a shed on it accidentally. And >> we could handle that with city property signs we now require at the back of interfaces like that. I guess if there's no maintenance need for it, I guess that other than just like you say, mowing a right ofway just be a an improved alleyway basically, right? >> But a wide >> way is very valable. >> Yeah, wide. It'll be a wide >> more valuable than the road. >> Yeah. So you do want to capture that um for the future for that connection to 255th perhaps someday whether it's a major collector at that point or something less but the road itself at this time and for the foreseeable future we just don't see a need for it. Thanks. >> Um, most likely the city would have had a hand in it, but even if that road was built today, by the time it's needed, you'd probably have to rebuild it at city expense. So, So there's no I don't see a savings to the city in having it built now. In fact, it' be a liability. [Music] >> So um this wasn't talked about and it was like during the development review team meeting and it was also well actually I think it was maybe a bit of an afterthought but Mr. Sullivan also owns a strip of land, I think 33 feet in width that does extend all the way up to 250th Street. And the city would be interested in acquiring that or having that included or acquiring it somehow. >> So that recommendation is included in this >> in the conditions >> the continuation of Nevada. So, it's just to facilitate again this long-term road and utility infrastructure. Um, it's recommended the city acquire the strip of land extending from the proposed development up to 250th Street um as a rightway. And the city does own a rideway at 33 feet on the other side where this existing sto existing storm sewer line is. Yeah. So connecting the streets on the north end but not having it >> connecting two neighborhoods on what would be 253rd I think >> we think makes a lot of sense. >> Yeah, I understand. And I think that we're in a um good point with the township where we all kind of agree that there shouldn't be any road connections made to gravel streets unless >> a portion of them is paved out to a realistic >> arterial arterial road. So, um, >> I think at this point the city has no, you know, intention of constructing that that street. We don't have the money to. We don't think it serves any purpose. And 250th Street is a gravel street. We would never support, we wouldn't support that, nor would the township. >> But in the comments you made that the property the south that they would just pave that area that 30 acres or 40 acres to the south, it would be part of this deal. You're saying >> by the time they would need to Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Right here. So the pavement stops here. Yeah. >> Do you have anything to add that you'd like to add? Madam Chair and Commissioners, Joe Sullivan, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. Uh, nice to be in front of you again. You know, we were here a year or so ago or time flies thereabouts. Got the Parkway Meadows done and that's under construction moving forward. So, appreciate your help with that effort. This is a little bit bigger project, but similar. uh we are uh putting forward a thoughtful uh community that's trying to address a need in the market for you know entry- level homes. Uh trying to create a community and neighborhood in close proximity to the not so new elementary school. It's been waiting 25 years for a neighborhood to surround it and that's finally starting to happen. Um you know the design we put forward uh is thoughtful uh efficient it's an attempt to meet your densory requirements uh and if we change it a lot that becomes more difficult uh so I ask you to keep that in mind uh as you consider feedback and suggestions on what might be done differently uh but it's it's difficult to get to your density requirements Um, if we do a lot a lot of things different, I guess. Uh, I'm available for questions too as you get into more of a conversation or discussion. >> And I understand the center ponding is because the lot itself is low in that area. >> That's the terrain. That's the terrain. >> But the other ones are for the >> for the >> retention. They're all >> Yeah. >> terrain based as well as So look for opportunities where the terrain and the space coincide. >> There may be some room to shift things somewhat, but >> but those are the minimum sizes needed or the >> I think they're largely, you know, they're probably in the ballpark. >> Their engineer has certainly done this before, >> but even Nick says, you know, these are kind of to show >> area >> concept. They're not final designs, >> placeholders. >> Yeah. Yeah. I think it looks planned out very well. So, >> the same >> 65 by 120 >> looks smaller because they have the pads. >> 65 by 140. Um if it's a budding collector street. Um yeah, there's some like these look like they're a little deeper than 120, but that's what these would be here just for Harry's sake. Um I did I looked up the plats for the area to the north >> and um so particularly in this area here they must have identified that drain tile system coming through here when this property was platted. >> Um and there's a drainage and utility easement right here. Um and here and then also uh this property. >> Yeah, this is >> Yeah, there's there could be other private ones um on the eastern part of Joe's property. Um this is a wetland on that Kate's parcel. >> Yes. >> And I can see there's also a drainage and utility ement that goes out to Nevada. So, the county must have required that. Um, I don't know if that's for a drain tile or or what that is for, but I think Kate thinks that there may be some drain tile in this area that um maybe connects somehow. Those are the official plats as they are today. And that may be something that um well Nick uh their engineer Nick Pas yeah he's been good to work with and he has the staff report now so he would have this available to him as well. Do you have a chance to review the step report? We did see what kind of feedback planning commission offered. >> I don't we didn't specifically address Brandon did ask specifically for feedback about the local road layout within the development and then those local roads as they connect to 255th they don't meet the 660 foot spacing requirement. Uh I want to take that back. It's um that is something that's stated as guidance in the city's transportation plan. Uh but it is not in city code and I did I did speak with the city attorney about that. Um she said because it's not hasn't been carried over into city code we can't I mean we can encourage um we can encourage greater spacing if you think it's necessary but it wouldn't be >> typically related to making room for turn lanes >> and so that's probably something you look at to make sure there's a need for a future turn lane as 255th keeps extending and growing. >> Sure. >> That there's space to adequately manage those movements without blocking traffic. >> Well, Rich, do you have concerns then as the as 255th approaches Dakota or Nevada. >> I don't know what the actual spacing is, but really >> this is probably 140 ft. Probably 140 ft. >> Built there unless something changes, but our recommendation is that it not be so you really the it's those two south legs on each side of the park. Um that would appear to be the only questionable ones. Those are just local groups. So >> the internal ones you're not really concerned. >> No no just just on on the east 255th on the major east west. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. We haven't looked at that in detail. >> Okay. >> My hunch is it can be worked out, but we'll have to talk to a traffic engineer about implications of that particular space. If if this intersection needed to be taken out, I think it could be designed around. But >> where is it? >> Here. >> I'm only reacting to Rich's comment about >> move it over there to the other one you're saying comment. just >> something like that. >> Yeah, I don't know that there's anything to solve. I think the feedback is good. I'm sure he'll be asking his engineer to make sure that these work from a traffic standpoint because we will be reviewing it for that, >> right? Is there one other thing that you needed specific feedback on? >> Uh just if they wanted to talk in more detail about any of the staff recommendations specifically. And I I guess like specific feedback on your opinion on that road in the northeast corner whether it should connect to Dakota or go north. I don't know. >> Yeah, I don't think I think it could go north orac out you because there are two other roads going north. That's where the goals could come in handy to inform that better. >> Where's the gas ement? I know you make a mention of the Is there a gas ement on this one? There's a reference to it in the title commitment that was >> the southeast corner. If you look at property >> the diagonal, the reason those lots are diagonal, that's where the line runs from southwest to northeast on his piece and then comes up in Nick's >> piece. And so yeah, that's something we need to illustrate out there for sure. Did you have anything you wanted to talk about? >> Okay. trail. What is that when the 10-ft trail? Is that because there's a start of a trail down on on the end of the pavement? Is that what that for? 10. >> All of our major collectors are Dakota >> to have trails alongside of them. >> Okay. And there's an existing trail on the north side of 255th on the Wignner um Lander Wagner property um in Highlands. It was constructed with the school. Most of it it was constructed to about >> right here. >> Um that was 20 years ago. That existing trail on that development is uh 8 ft. Um but as the new standard for multi-use trails is 10 ft and so the missing segment in Highlands will also be 10 and then >> way down. >> Yeah. >> Only internal link I'm looking at thinking about now would be at the north end. You've got those two streets that go north. If you live in one and you want to walk to your neighbor's house, you got quite a hike >> via the roadway system, something associative across that north. Just linking those two sides together, I think would be sensible. Um, it's not on the plan. It's an ask, but uh that would be something you might consider as feedback. Just connectivity for pedestrians. Good. >> Okay. >> So, you would support the annexation of this property for a residential development >> based on this concept with these comments. >> Okay. We will bring that to the city council. Thank you. Any questions? >> Thank you. >> Um, did we talk about maybe the 25th? Joe, >> I'd have to go back to >> Okay, >> just let us know. >> Yeah, it might be pushing it, but we'll try to move it as soon as we can. >> Let us know what you need from most. >> Thank you all. We've advertised uh for a senior planner. I don't remember if we told you that that at the last meeting. So um somebody that will pro eventually re replace me. I'll kind of take a secondary role. Um we are getting a lot of uh new development uh national builders and things that we can't make public yet. Um but we believe that we're going to be a very the next couple of years is going to be a big a lot of development. So um rather than hiring another entry level planner, we decided to advertise for a senior planner. The posting has closed. Uh we will are hoping to conduct interviews in September and hopefully have somebody on board in October sometime. >> Got enough that we're looking forward to >> interviewing minimum qualifications and >> Jake went to the city of Prair Lake. Yeah. >> Yeah. So his last meeting was in June >> and then we canled the July meeting and >> must have >> Yeah. >> So he owns that. He sold he sold it to MI Homes >> national builder. So Joe entitled it with preliminary plat approval and then MI Homes uh purchased it and got it through final plat approval and they're constructing it. >> Nice. >> It's looking nice. I mean they got a lot of dirt. You can tell where things are going. They already got a house up. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. permits already. >> Really? >> Yeah, we can issue we can issue two model home permits until the streets are done. U but they have all the other permits in just waiting to be issued. They wanted to get them all into >> they said curb and gutter next week. Rich >> after that curb and gutter I was told this week. What are we doing with curb and gutter now? Is it actual surount insurmountable? >> Insurmountable >> cuz then you get people putting up a driveway across it. >> Yeah. >> There's always some burn with those the first five years, but it lasts 50 years. in the long run. So you're not >> Oh, I see. >> I like them. >> I like the way they look. >> So, all right. Well, that's good. >> I'll make a motion.