Right. I will call the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Please stand for the pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Are there any changes to the agenda? There are no changes. Okay. Anyone want to make a motion to approve the agenda as written? >> So moved. Anyone want a second? >> Oh. All in favor? >> I. >> I. >> All right. Um, public comment. So, this is the opportunity to comment on anything that is not listed on the agenda. So, if anyone has anything that's not listed on the agenda, this is your time to step to the podium, state your name and address for the record, um, and share your information. No. Okay. Announcements? >> None. >> Okay. Um, approval of the uh, April 29th, 2025 meeting minutes. I thought they looked good. I didn't know if anybody else noticed anything. >> I didn't have anything. Um, I found nothing. I'll move. >> All right. Anyone want a second? >> I'll second. >> All right. All in favor? >> I. >> I. >> All right. Public hearings. Um, so the first one, Boulder Point 8 edition 8th edition KJ Walk Inc. um applicant consider application for prime preliminary if I can say that and final plat approval. All right. Thank you madam chair. Uh KJ Walk, the applicant, has now approached the city regarding possible development of a parcel they own located within city limits located south of Glenboroough Drive just between Hickory Ridge Drive and Glenmore Court in the Boulder Point development. The property is known as the former Boulder Point Recreation Center or the swimming pool lot. The owner operator of Boulderpoint Golf Club were obligated by the HOA uh to construct a recreation center for the residents of the Boulder Point HOA at time of construction. After construction of the pool and the restrooms, the HOA then voted to eliminate the association dues required for the use of the facility. Sorry, future construction was paused after several years of trying to operate the pool facility on a subscription basis. And it was determined that it was losing too much money and it made more sense to close it down permanently. The owner and developer has indicated that over the last 15 years, the HOA has not financially contributed toward the rec center, nor entered any sort of good faith negotiations with the owner about the issue. Per the HOA documents, the owner's obligation would be terminated after 15 years, and they have now elected to do so. The HOA management was notified in writing by certified letter in accordance with the requirements of the documents. No response was received by the owners. The property is no longer encumbered by the recreation center requirements uh from the HOA documents. The owner's intent is to split the site into two buildable lots, residential buildable lots, and rework the pool deck, fence, and equipment to fit onto just one of those lots with the second lot being clear of any pool related equipment or facilities. The total property is 4.58 59 acres. Official applications have now been um applied for resoning which has since been withdrawn and we'll get to the reasoning why later and also official applications for preliminary and final plat for Boulderpoint 8th edition. The application for preliminary plat approval contains three lots on 4.59 acres and the application for final plat approval will go to the city council after the preliminary plat if the preliminary plat is approved. Uh to the south of the subject property is the Boulderpoint Golf Course property. To the east is the Boulderpoint Golf Course itself proper. To the north of the subject property is single family detached housing, part of the Boulder Point Homeowners Association. And to the west of the subject property is more single family detached housing, also part of the same HOA. The land is guided to a lowdensity residential use and that district is characterized by low residential densities that provide opportunities for a variety of detached single family residential housing options. Those are the city's R1 and R2 zoning districts which have a density of 2 and a half to five units per net acre. The pro the proposed residential portion of the development is three and a just over three and a half units per net acre at two proposed residential units on 0.57 netacres. Therefore, the proposed residential detached single family homes meet the intent and density requirements of the land use for this area. Currently, the property is located inside city limits and is zoned PUD or planned unit development. Uh the purpose of the PUD development is uh many. It varies. Um as you can see there A through G. I'm not going to list them all. Uh but those are the kind of what you look for in a PUD. Um so for example, preserve and enhance natural features and open spaces. Um that was done as part of the original PUD with the incorporation of the golf course. All permitted uses, permitted accessory uses, conditional uses, interim uses, and uses allowed by administrative permit are allowed under the PUD zoning district, provided that they would be allowed on the site under the comp plan. >> Um Rene, do you want to take this slide real quick? >> Sure. >> Um the zoning uh ordinance also identifies criteria that is to be considered as part of a request for a zoning amendment. Um the uh resoning has to be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan, has to be compatible with adjacent land uses. Um has to u should meet all the performance standards contained in the zoning ordinance. Um the proposed use of the property can be accommodated with uh existing public utilities that are available to the property um and will not overburden the city's service capacity and traffic generated from uh pro the proposed uses within the capabilities of the streets serving um the property. Um the applicants have applied to reszone the residential portion of uh the property to R1 um low density residential but have since withdrawn that application um because they couldn't quite meet the minimum um lot width requirement although they could meet the lot size. Um so they're resubmitting application to reszone it to PUD which will be um placed on the next agenda. Um so that is the portion of this application that was withdrawn. We decided to we had already sent out the notices when we realized that. So I decided to go ahead and hold the public hearing related to the plat preliminary plat um again. So based on the plan submitted the two residential units um they do meet the minimum lot area um but they're just slightly shy of the required minimum lot width. One is proposed at 80 feet uh one at uh 73.83 feet. Um so that is why a PUB um is necessary. Go ahead. >> Thank you Renee. Uh so yeah the total property is 4.59 acres. Uh measures approximately 556 feet wide by approximately 286 feet deep. Based on the R1 zoning district, the minimum lot area size is 12,000 square feet and the minimum required unit width is 85 ft. So based on the plan submitted, the two residential units u do not achieve this. Therefore, the proposed lots do not meet the minimum required lot area widths as Renee said. So PUD approval would be necessary. Uh the applicant is intending to apply to reszone the property to a new a new PUD zoning district at a future planning commission meeting. uh the timelines work where it could be at the next one if everything is in on time. Another public hearing notice would be sent to property owners 350 ft adjacent from the property. Um so there will be another notification if there is another public hearing. Setbacks are required in the R1 zoning district as follows. 30 feet in the front yard, 10 feet in the side. If it's corner lot, 20 feet, 25 feet, uh rear yard 30 feet. Based on the plans, the proposed development appears to meet the setback requirements and the height requirements are 35 ft in the R1 zoning district. Based on the submitted plans, it does not appear to exceed the height requirements for one and two family residences. Uh 440 foot square foot attached garage shall be constructed at the time of the house. And then for all newly created lots, a location for a three stall attached garage must be possible whether or not construction is intended. Uh the city subdivision ordinance contains tree preservation and replacement regulations requires that 40% of significant trees must be protected as part of the development. Significant trees are defined as follows. Hardwood deciduous 6 in or greater in diameter. Softwood deciduous 12 in or greater in diameter. or any coniferous tree that's 36 inches in height or greater. Based on the plans provided, there are 10 significant trees on the property which were identified as coniferous trees exceeding six feet in height. Four of the trees are proposed to be relocated to different locations on the existing site. The proposed plan meets the regulations of the city's tree preservation and replacement requirements. Uh here's a little diagram showing you the two residential lots. I know it's hard to see. And the trees. Um, these plans are available on the city's website as well. If you can get a little closer look, if you're interested after the meeting, I can email you directly if you'd like. As well, in addition to the developer obligations, two trees must also be planted upon each lot at the time of building permit. Sod placed in the front and side yards. The rear yards must either be seated, hydro-seated, or sided. Requirements are placed upon the builder at the time of home building permit. Uh the city subdivision ordinance also requires that 10 foot wide perimeter easements and 5 foot wide interior easements be dedicated along all lot lines. The plans have shown this. Um also in areas where public infrastructure such as sewer water or storm water is placed, the easement w must be increased as recommended by the city engineer and public works director who have reviewed the plans. Additionally, in areas where grading and drainage swelles may be needed to accommodate overland drainage flow. Additional easement width may be needed to cover the entire width of the soil. The city engineer has uh reviewed and submitted grading reviewed the submitted grading and erosion control plan dated 52 and is not recommended any additional easement widths. The plat depicts easements as required by city code. Sanitary sewer is available to the property at Glenborough Drive where existing Gravity Main is located in the street. Uh the homes are proposed to be served by two existing sewer stubs as shown on the preliminary plat drawing. Once Dub serves the current existing pool, staff have no concerns with the sanitary sewer access into the property. Um, everything will flow east into Glenboro Drive via the existing 8- in sanitary sewer man into the existing lift station as depicted on the city's 2040 comp plan. Water uh service is also available on Glenboroough Drive, also 8 in water man. Uh staff have no concerns with water access to the property. City engineers rever uh reviewed the plan set submitted for the proposed development and it is their opinion that it may be preferable to seek permission to disturb and restore a small amount of the lot one neighbors yard and pick up the services services at their existing terminations rather than dig and backfill under existing utilities located in the boulevard and then abandon those service lines in place. The services appear to be located within the city's drainage and utility easement. At a minimum, the existing curb stop box for lot one and all piping exposed in excavations will need to be fully removed if the lines are to be abandoned as proposed. The subject property lies entirely within the Canon River wershed district. The applicants must survey and show existing topography in the abuing easement areas of adjacent houses to the west so that drainage impacts to those properties can be evaluated. The storm water plan will need to be approved by the city's engineer. uh original wetland delineation was prepared as part of the original plat in 2000. Although the delineation has expired, there is no indication that wetlands are present on the proposed development. Therefore, the city will not require another wetland delineation prior to platting uh due to there being no previously identified wetlands. Um FEMA designated flood planes or DNR protected waters located on the property. Proposed development borders Glenboroough Drive on the north side of the development. Glenboroough Drive is an existing minor collector roadway. The purpose of which is to collect local traffic and convey it to major collectors and minor arterials. Minor collectors serve relatively short trips at relatively low speeds and their emphasis is focused on access rather than mobility. The purpose of a minor collector is to provide the balance of mobility and land use access function. They serve trips that are entirely within the city and connect neighborhoods in smaller commercial areas to the larger network. Minor collectors are shorter in length with lower volumes and lower speeds than major collectors. City's adopted street section for a minor collector is 80 ft rightway, 32 feet wide road with two 16 ft travel lanes and two 5-ft sidewalks, one on each side. Typical section is shown here. Um the expanded rightway allows for future expansion of the road if needed as shown on the typical section below. City code requires that B618 curb and gutter be constructed with new development. However, that is inconsistent with the existing curbing along Gleno Drive. So the city is saying the existing curbing may remain if it is in fair or better condition as determined by the public works director. Concrete aprons to the ride ofway are required by city code. The concrete aprons must be called out on the plans with a note that the final location is to be shown on certificates submitted with building permits. Code compliant curb with driveway openings and aprons must be provided if the existing curbing is in less than fair condition. The city's transportation plan recommends that sidewalks or trails be constructed along all minor collectors, major collectors, and minor arterial roadways. There's an existing trail along the north side of Glenboroough Drive and the city's parks and trail plan does not identify any additional trail or sidewalk corridors on the property other than those already existing. No additional trails or sidewalks are required or proposed uh based on city code. The city subdivision ordinance requires that 8% of the land be dedicated for purposes of public parks or playgrounds. This was originally platted in 2000 and the park dedication was previously satisfied for the development. State statute therefore does not allow the city to require park dedication um for what has already been received for the same property. Therefore, no park dedication will be required for the proposed replat. It is noted that the closest city park is Boulder Heights Park, which is classified as a neighborhood park. Neighborhood Park serves specific neighborhoods within the city. Boulder Heights Park is the newest park in the city and it's approximately half a mile from the proposed development and is separated by 275th Street East, an existing local road. Other nearby parks include Pets Hill Park and open space and historic Elco Park and Big Windross Park. Additional comments from the city's engineer, public works director, uh, police chief, fire chief, building official, city attorney, and the relevant school district are included with the presentation here tonight. Staff's recommendation is for the applicant to apply to reszone the property from PUD to a new uh, PUD district due to the following reasons. Development of the property is R1 is generally compatible with the surrounding land uses. The proposed development containing two residential lots on 0.57 acres meets the intent of the city's comprehensive land use plan which guides the property's lowdensity residential. The required density is 2 and a half to 10 units per netacre. 3.51 units per net acre are proposed and noting that Boulder 8 will be subject to the R1 suburban single family residential district except as follows. Uh those variations in minimum lot width and minimum lot size are listed here. Um, so from the R185 minimum lot width down to 73.83 feet at the smallest and minimum lot size 12,000 ft down to 11,177 1/2q ft. Uh, the plat should also be developed in accordance with the following plans received by the city subject to the conditions noted on the redline plans dated May 20th and subject to the recommendations of the city engineer as contained in his memorandum dated May 20th. staff recommend the following conditions for the preliminary and final plat approval of Boulder 8th edition containing three lots on 4.59 five 4.59 acres. Uh first, the property would be required to be reszoned PUD due to the proposed lots not achieving the city city's minimum lot size and width. The applicants must indicate how they intend to achieve the intent of the city's PUD zoning district. The city council must then approve the PUD zoning conditions. Thirdly, perimeter drainage easements must be dedicated on the final plat along with easements covering the sanitary sewer and water mains serving the development. Grading and utility plans will also need to be approved by the city engineer and public works director and the requirements of city code pertaining to essential services must be satisfactorily met. A developer shall also work with the postmaster to find an acceptable location for mailboxes. Approval is subject to the city engineer comments and staff redline plans. Also subject to recommendations of the city attorney. The developer must enter into a development contract with the city of Elco New Market at the time of final plat approval. Construction plans must be revised to include include a yearround drain tile system and tile connection stubs that can be used for sump pump connections. At a minimum, the existing curb stopbox for lot one and all piping exposed and excavations will need to be fully removed if the lines are to be abandoned as proposed. The sideyard and perimeter grades must be detailed with spot elevations at property corners and high low points as well as drainage arrows and percent grades to facil to facilitate building permit review and final lot grading approvals. Finish grades at key points on the perimeters of the house and pads must also be provided. Survey and show existing topography and the abuing easement areas uh so that drainage impacts to those properties can be evaluated. And lastly, existing curbing may remain if in fair or better condition as determined by the public works director. Uh notices of the hearing were mailed to all properties within 350 ft of this property. Notice of the hearing was also published in the newspaper, on the city's website, and on social media. Staff encouraged the public to submit comments prior to the meeting. Um so at this point, staff will recommend that we open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to address the commission via Zoom may raise your hand using the Zoom feature. Staff will individually call on those waiting to address the commission and you will be unmuted. Uh those in person will be called on first. Once unmuted, please state your name and address for the record prior to the addressing the commission. State your name and address. Sorry. Once you have finished addressing the commission, you will again be muted. When all questions and comments have been received, the public hearing will be continued to a future meeting for the updated um reasonzoning application. Okay, I'm sure. >> All right. Thank you, Jake. Thank you, Nate. All right. Um I'd also like to make the comment like to be mindful of people's time. Um you know, keep track of like two minutes if you could keep your comments so we can keep everybody on track and hear everybody out. Um, so I will open the public hearing at 7:22 p.m. Please come up to the podium and state your name and address for the record if you'd like to comment on the Boulder Point 8th edition. Hi, I'm Terara Rder, 27035 Hickory Ridge Drive. Most of you know me. Uh I just want to take a few minutes. Um I guess my biggest question is the presentation stated that the association was notified. Um I am the vice president of the association and we have the president of the association both present today. We have not been notified or received such letter. I did reach out to our to the company that helps with the association. I have not gotten an email back yet, but I appreciate some time to look into it. We'd also like to better understand um how this additional addition is going to come into being when we as a master have not given any approval. Uh so we need to be notified if we need to seek any legal counsel regarding that. Um where this house is being placed, we do have bylaws and standards for the buildings that we put in. we would like to have the authority over the size and and the general aesthetic of those because we do hold our houses to a similar standard. And so um I think that's the biggest concern for us is we we had no idea until this public announcement came out and uh we would have appreciated or would now appreciate time to understand better how this is going to fit into our association. Um, also from a historic standpoint, uh, the pool has never been really well managed. I know there are people within the neighborhood that would like to participate in using the pool. Um, I think some of those people are probably here today, but I don't believe it was ever ever very wellmaintained. I know there's a lot of history behind the pool, so there's things there as well. Uh, but that's my two biggest points. Thank you. >> Thank you. Good evening. My name is Nick Zach, uh 9471 Glenboro Drive. Um as Tara stated, I'm the president of the association. Um my biggest concern is the majority of the lots in our neighborhood are a third of an acre or larger. Now that one lot, lot two um is plotted out to be uh quarter acre. How does that affect everything that we've already started in that neighborhood? Um I understand plot one should fall within those guidelines. Um but with that pool being there, does that also are any setback issues because they plan on keeping the pool there. Correct? Do I understand? Okay. Okay. So, when you decide to put a home on there following our covenants, um will those setbacks still be followed? Because our again like Terara said, if we're absorbing this as the eighth edition, um that house has to be a certain size and to follow our covenants. So, that's those are my two major concerns is with the plotting, the way that's set up. I don't know how you'd be able to put a house um to follow our covenants on plot two. That's all I had. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> My name is Kyle Clark, 27011 Hickory Ridge Drive. Uh my concern is the hill that you guys would be tearing out for plot one. Um drainage issues and stuff like that. um and everything they said. I just want to voice my opinion. >> Thank you. Is anyone else going to speak on this? >> My name is Lucas Wilson. I'm with KJ Walk. Our office address is 6001 Egan Drive, Sweet 100 in Savage, Minnesota. Um, we did notify the management company. Um, we worked with an attorney to go through the whole process to try to make sure that everything was handled properly. Um, we sent a few emails. We sent certified letters to the registered address for the management company, um, which is by extension also the registered address for the association. So, we tried our best to do everything uh we could to make sure that we were following all the appropriate rules and everything with notification. Um yeah, I think you know the the plan is to make sure that both lots are at least 12,000 square feet. There's little misunderstanding on our part uh with the R1 zoning. We we can definitely get to the 12,000 square feet for each lot. Just the the width is a little bit of an issue. Uh there's a lot of existing utilities, some electrical boxes, communication boxes, stuff like that. A fire hydrant and and everything else. So, um going with a PUD to keep the lots just a little bit narrower is is going to make things fit in there better, but we will be at least at 12,000 square feet per lot when it's all said and done. Um the pool will be held on to one lot and so the other lot would be be clear of the pool. The plan or my understanding is is because the property was initially part of the association documents, we would be obligated to the to join the association and we would fall under all of the rules that that go with the association. And so the architectural review committee, anything like that that's applicable, we we fully intend to make sure that we're we're following all of those rules and and standards. Um we decided to go two single family lots because there's already two services in there. So we were trying to do something minimum disruption, trying not to need to go out and dig up Glenboro Drive to to access utilities. I know the sewer is pretty deep out there. So you'd end up with a pretty big hole if we were trying to add a new service. So utilizing the two existing services made it made it uh the most logical way to move forward. And then I think, you know, being able to clean up the pool and have it be part of a a single family home is is the long-term solution to to solving that without just going out and tearing it out or filling it in. So, we'd like to see if we can get a little bit of the value out of what was put in there when we constructed the pool. >> I think that's all I got. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> All right. I will ask another time. Anyone want to comment on the Boulder Point 8th edition? Please step forward. State your name and address for the record. And I will ask one last time, anyone want to comment on the Boulderpoint 8th edition? Um, please step forward, state your name and address for the record. Okay. Okay. At this point, um, staff would recommend that we deny the application for resoning and wait for the new application for resoning. Uh, adjacent homeowners will be notified when that public hearing is going to take place with updated plans for review. Um, and then we'll continue the public hearing on the preliminary and final plat. >> Okay. I don't think we need to um deny the application if they've withdrawn it. Is that your understanding? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, just continue the public hearing. >> Yeah, they could you could keep the public hearing on the plat open. >> Okay. >> And maybe you want to do that. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> All right. I'll make the recommendation to continue the public hearing. >> All in favor? >> A second. >> Okay. Do you know for how long? >> Next meeting. >> I think they're hoping for the next June meeting. >> We're going to request the applicants grant us a 60-day extension. Um likely it'll only take 30 days but just to be safe. >> Okay. I think if we are going to continue it, we do need to know the date that it's going to be continued to. >> Um it would be contingent on when we get the application in. So >> So uh Luke, that would be contingent upon um getting the application for the resoning and any amendments before the deadline for the next meeting. >> Yeah, we can get them in either tail end of this week or next week. >> Okay. So the June planning commission meeting. >> Okay. >> We just need enough time to get everything to the newspaper. >> Okay. So making the recommendation to continue this public hearing to June 24th, right? >> Yep. The next meeting. >> All right. Brad second. All in favor? >> I. >> I. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you. All right. So we'll move on to Dakota Acre second edition True North Development LLC applicant consider application for reser zoning from highdensity residential to planned unit development and then also consider application for peri uh and final plat approval. >> So a little background on this property. It was originally acquired by the city in 2006 when the original default developer defaulted on the assessments. It was later sold to Global Properties in 2018 and reszoned to R4 Highdensity Residential as a condition of that sale. It was recently sold to True North Development LLC in 2024. True North has submitted previous concept development plans of town homes on the site, which was reviewed by the planning commission at their December 17th meeting. The planning commission was supportive of the overall town home development concept, but requested that amendments to the previously submitted concept plans uh be added to make room for additional guest parking, provide additional open space area calculations, provide landscaping area calculations, provide details regarding emergency vehicle turnarounds, and um provide detailed information regarding how they intended to meet the purpose and intent of the city's PUD zoning district. True North Development submitted their most recent revised concept plan containing one sheet dated to uh February 8th, 2025 and that was presented to the planning commission for feedback at their um March 25th, 2025 meeting. The sheet submitted for review lacked information related to utilities and required easements. However, it did address much of the missing information from the previous concept plan. The intent of the project is to create a 40 unit town home development. Uh here is the current proposal. So they have official applications now in for reszoning preliminary plat and final plat approval for Dakota acres second edition. Uh it's R4 highdensity residential uh reszone to PUD planned unit development. Application is also in for preliminary plat containing the 40 residential lots on 3.19 acres and the application for final plat. uh as neighborhood conditions here. To the north uh we have large uh rural agricultural property. To the west uh we have more rural residential property. To the south is uh multifamily oldtown apartments and uh the old town um strip mall. Below that and to the east of the property is the existing Dakota acres first edition and uh residential single family detached housing. The comp plan currently guides this area to R4 high density residential which contains a density of 10 to 30 units per net acre. Uh there's 12.54 units per net acre proposed which doesn't meet the density for this land use district. Uh the zoning district allows apartments and town homes with more than eight attached units. Uh the density here as stated needs to fall between 32 to 96 units for the property and there are 40 units proposed. As mentioned in the first presentation, the uh purpose of the PUB zoning district is various. Um there's varying things the city can look at for providing a PUD as long as it meets the intent. For example, allowing the mixing of land uses within a development when such mixing of land uses could not otherwise be accomplished under this title. Uh there are some town homes in the southern portion of what has been submitted that do not meet the required eight or more attached units. Uh so PUB zoning is required for those units. Also those units not achieving minimum width or parking as we'll get into later. Uh at the December 17th planning commission meeting, the applicants uh were met with support supportive feedback from the planning commission supporting the reduction in attached units through PUD zoning. The applicants have indicated to staff that they intend to achieve the intent of the city's PUD zoning ordinance by including landscaping above the city standards to offset the effect of any variations granted. The plan submitted show a total area of 38% of landscape space which exceeds the city standards by 8%. In addition, other requirements that will be imposed on the PUD are garbage receptacles, which shall be stored within garages or fully screened from view. The developer shall work with the postmaster to find an acceptable location within the development for mailboxes. Ground level patio shall be provided for all town home units with privacy fences constructed of vinyl, brick, and or consistent design um provided between all adjacent rear yard patio areas. City review and approval of the proposed play equipment is required and an ingground irrigation system will also be required for the entire property. The site meets the minimum lot size requirements for the R4 zoning district and the minimum lot width. It also meets all building setbacks and parking curb cuts are located within five 5T from all property lines. The minimum unit width of town homes in the R4 zoning district is 25 ft. Uh the southern town homes do not achieve this width. Um they're just around 20 as we'll get to later. Um as you can see the circled units in the south do not achieve the eight or more attached units which the PUD zoning will also be needed for. You see the the ones on the east are six units and the ones on the west are five units. unlikely to exceed the maximum height of 35 ft in R4 zoning district based on the plans submitted. Uh the residential uses for exterior finishes shall consist of class one, class 2, class 3, or class 4 materials which are listed here. For town homes, 25% of the front facade shall be composed of class one materials, at least 25%. It is unknown based on the plan submitted if these requirements are being met. So more information will be needed uh so that we can ensure that those requirements are met. Staff notes that the planning commission does not review building designs but that the above requirements are also going to be imposed on the builder. Uh 36% of the area minimum was to be landscaped due to the PUD zoning approval. The plan submitted indicate 38% of the site being landscaped which exceeds that. Uh wetland delineation will not be required. There was a previous delineation that has since expired similar to the other property which showed no indication of wetlands present on the site. Sewer and water are available via stubs at James Parkway. Any looping with the existing town home development to the east will require private agreement with that town home development. 10 foot wide perimeter ements, 5 foot wide interior easements are required and additional easements may also be required um by the city engineer. In his review, he noted that no additional easements will be required. Storm water pond is located on the north side of James Parkway and will likely need to be expanded based on the plan submitted. Uh the plan submitted do show that pond being expanded. The developer is responsible for the pond expansion. The proposed development contains 40 town home units which require a total of 180 parking spaces based on city code. Of the 180 required spaces, at least 80 must be enclosed and 80 must be driveway spaces and there must be 20 spaces provided for guest parking. The breakdown of the requirements are shown on this table. So 22 of the 40 proposed town home units are proposed to be single stall garages with single parking space in the front of each garage. The planning commission provided the applicants with feedback indicating support for this idea and reduction in required parking spaces at their December 17th meeting. The proposed development is still lacking one guest park uh guest parking space compared to the previous concept plans reviewed by staff. Access to the property is located off of James Parkway which is a minor collector. A traffic study will be required based on the projected traffic generation of the final layout. Identified area for snow storage has been depict depicted on the concept plan. uh access and transportation. There is an unnamed private street running north and south through the development. Uh the city requires PUD zoning for any uh private streets proposed. The unnamed private ste street street will be required to and is shown to have a width of 24 ft to accommodate two-way traffic throughout the site. Ownership over all the common elements of the development, especially the private road and the play area, um shall be under the ownership of just one association. No additional sidewalks or trails are required for the proposed project. Existing trail is located along the north side of James Parkway. No identified sidewalk or trail corridors are identified throughout the subject property on the city's 2040 parks and trail plan. Land dedication of 8% or cash contribution of 8% of the undeveloped property value are required at time of development. uh for the purposes of public parks. Input will be sought from the parks commission uh regarding whether they will seek cash in lie of park dedication for this property. Staff does note that they did review an apartment plan for this site in 2016 and recommended cash in lie of land dedication. Nearby nearby parks include Wagner, which is the city's largest park, uh Whispering Creek, and the Eagle View School facilities, which are not city-owned. 10% of the site shall be uh usable open space. Either active or passive uses count towards this requirement. So the developer must identify 13,896 square feet within the development to f fulfill the requirement. Square footage of the play area depicted is unknown based on the plan submitted. Any proposed playground equipment, as mentioned earlier, uh will require city approval for safety and durability. The city engineer has responded to staff's requests for review and his comments have been incorporated with this presentation um and his city engineer memorandum dated May 20th. The public works director has also responded to staff's request and his comments are included in the memorandum. The building inspection department recommends no less than 7 foot setbacks between buildings which is achieved in the proposed plans. No comments from the public safety um at this time and the fire chief has not yet responded for review at this time. Staff notes the following general comments associated with the applications. Uh development of the property is R4 highdensity residential is generally compatible with the surrounding land uses. The proposed development containing 40 units on 3.1 acres meets the intent of the 2040 comp land use plan which guides the property's highdensity residential requiring a density of 10 to 30 units per net acre. 12.54 units per net acre is proposed. Town homes and condominiums containing more than eight attached units are permitted use in this zoning district. PUD zoning will be required for the town homes containing eight or less attached units and also those town homes that do not achieve the city's minimum requirements. Further input will be sought from the city's parks commission regarding the desire for land versus cash in lie of land dedication at their 61125 meeting. The landscaping for Dakota acres second uh must exceed the minimum city landscaping requirements by no less than 6% shown at 8%. Garbage receptacles shall be stored within garages or fully screened from view. The developer shall work with the postmaster to find an acceptable location for mailboxes. Ground level patios with privacy fences shall be constructed on all adjacent rear yard patio areas and an ingground irrigation system is require required for the entire property. Staff notes the following conditions um related to the preliminary plat. The exterior of town home dwelling unit shall be composed of a minimum of 25% class one materials on the front facades. A lighting plan is required. Perimeter drainage and utility easements must be dedicated on the final plat along with easements covering sanitary sewer and water mains serving the development. Grading and utility plans will also need to be approved by the city engineer and public works director. Parking shall be provided based on the feedback received from the planning commission uh regarding the PUD zoning at the December 17th meeting. The plan submitted depicted a total of 135 spaces of which 58 are enclosed. The plan submitted lacks one required guest parking space. Additional support is required for the reduction of the additional guest parking space. Ownership over all the common ele elements of the development specifically the private road and play area shall be under the ownership of just one association. Any connection between the proposed private drive oral street to the adjacent town home development although not currently proposed will would require an agreement and cross easements with the adjacent homeowners association. Uh the developer also must identify a minimum of 13,896 square feet for open space within the development. The plan submitted depicts an outdoor play area in the middle of the proposed development with unknown dimensions. So staff are asking the planning commission to hold a public hearing for resoning in the preliminary plat um as required by Minnesota state statute. Following that public hearing, staff will be seeking a recommendation from the planning commission regarding the official applications for reszoning. Preliminary plat approval submitted as follows. Proposed to be platted is to codeacre second edition. Um, so I don't have the Zoom stuff on here, but if there's anyone who would like to ask a question on Zoom, please raise your hand. You will be uh called upon after everybody in person has had a chance to speak. We'll open the public hearing. >> Yes. Uh, yes. I'll open the public hearing at 7:46 p.m. Thank you. So, if anyone would like to state their name and address, step up to the podium, state their name name and address for the record um to speak on this, that'd be great. >> James Miner 25955. I just want to make sure the same building builder is not building these town homes as built last. Um, I just did about $6,000 in repairs to my unit. Sorry, I'm a little emotional because it's a little irritating. And just about every unit in that uh complex has had to have a fix of over $1,000 in damages. Um, when we went after the builders to have them come through for a one-year walkthrough, we were ignored. It It's almost got to a point where a military lady moved in. Um, CO took her out of the military and the government is actually seeking action against them. Um, we're trying to see how far it goes before we actually do anything. It is wrong. They screwed a lot of people. Um, a lot of pissed-off people there. Excuse my language. But we didn't deserve it. We've been left in the dark. You guys have heard a lot of our calls. I know we've talked to you a lot. the our land isn't even finished yet. They haven't done what they said they were going to do with ours and you guys I would force them to sell the property and not allow Larry to build anything. um because he's already proven his partners aren't worthy and the roof damages that are coming up on most of the buildings that I mean I had yeah $6,000 in water damages on my house and it was built in 2022. It's not right and there's nothing that I can do. My insurance is looking into it to see if I can go after them, but I don't even know who to go after. Bear Construction doesn't exist. Dave doesn't answer his calls. Larry doesn't answer his phone. Joe, good luck. We took the HOA from a negative place and we actually have a surplus now. We did it right. Um, we had to raise the dues that they refuse to because well, you can sell a house a lot cheaper and or a lot better with low dues. They weren't enough to actually cover costs of the HOA. Uh we're going to be raising them again to replace driveways, fix the roads that they put in. Um honestly, any conjunction of the new build and us, yeah, you pay us $100,000 to build every or to fix every unit in that HOA, then yeah, we'd consider it. Other than that, there's not a chance that they will have any access to that road. That's it. Thank you, guys. >> Thank you. Maria Frigas, 25490 Texas Avenue. Um, I have a question that was it was stated for the Dakota Acre second edition that a wetland deline there was a previous wetland delineation that showed no existing wetlands on site um but is considered expired. I was curious if the LGU local government unit or the soil and water conser conservation district made the decision to not need another wetland delineation um or if that was done administratively. >> Uh the city is the LG LGU so it was done in consultation with our wetland advisors. >> Okay. Just curious because there is a fiveyear expiration date on those decisions because wetlands can change over time. So, I just was curious if that was made by the LG or not. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else like to comment on Dakota Acres, second edition? Please come forward, step to the podium, state your name and address for the record. >> Anyone online? >> No. Okay. I will ask a third time. Anyone want to comment on Dakota Acres second edition. Okay. >> Developers are here if they wanted to add anything. Uh, my name is Alyssa Cheeky, 3250 90th Avenue Northfield, and I'm one of the partners in True North Development. Um, he left. I wanted to kind of answer some of his concerns that he had, but uh, I just want to make it clear that none of the previous owners from the first development are involved in this one. And also um in regards to the association dues too that will be handled on the third party with a third party company. So we won't have that same issue that happened last time to them. And I'm happy to answer any other questions anyone else has. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. I will close the public hearing at 7:52 p.m. >> Um, at this point, uh, we're asking the planning commission to recommend the applications for reszoning from highdensity residential to planned unit planned unit development and consider the application for preliminary and final plat approval uh, for Dakota acres second edition. >> So moved. Are we going to have a discussion on anything? >> Well, don't we have vote and then have a discussion and then >> uh no >> no discussion first. >> Discussion first. Okay. >> Um I appreciate the fact that this is a different housing style and option that we currently don't have in the city. Um housing um housing is a struggle for many people right now and um affordability is a is a crisis and I do appreciate that we have a different housing style that isn't a huge single family home that doesn't have a a threecar garage. Um, I I do appreciate the the the developer coming forward and explaining that the original um developers of the town homes directly to the east of this proposed development isn't a part of the equation anymore. um because in hearing what was going on um did raise a lot of concerns for me. So, I appreciate that that was clarified. >> Well, I like that they uh reserved some area for turnaround of the garbage, drugs, or whatever coming in out of there. I hope that they paint those areas as no parking because I could just envision people wanting to park. Oh, they see a big open spot. But I don't know. Is there a reason in the northwest corner that they can't add those one or two more spots there or >> that was actually the the one they subtracted was in the southwest corner so they could more easily add one in the south that >> I mean the northwest corner or the southwest corner. Yeah. >> Same parking area. >> Yeah. >> They notch this out. What is that for? >> Oh, that's so they can get the snow. So that's the old plan. That was the one they presented. So, they have a more recent plan. >> I'm a little confused. I don't know if I was on the commission at the time. So, the developer that has the existing town homes is the same person. >> There's three different property owners at one or of the other development that this was a portion of, I believe. and first builder built two houses then went out of business and then developers bought it from the city years ago and developed part of it. Yeah, the in um I'm not going to remember the exact year, but >> 2018 19 >> um uh the most recent town homes that were built. The city is still holding uh performance securities because they haven't um graded the site appropriately. And um yeah, there's been some just completion issues um that we're aware of with the development itself. I didn't I this was the first time I had heard anything about the buildings. Um the contractor that constructed the buildings was licensed by uh the state. The buildings were inspected. This is the first time that I I've heard anything about the buildings um the construction of the townous the plat itself which um I guess we're acting on the plat. >> The city takes securities to try to ensure performance of uh things that are required like landscaping, grading, the playground um things like that. >> Any other comments or questions? Okay. So, you're looking for both to reszone it and then the plat >> preliminary plat. >> Yeah. approval and the city council. >> Okay, >> I'll make a motion for resoning. >> I'll second. All in favor? >> I >> I and then motion for >> preliminary plat approval. Anyone want to make a motion on that? Is it open? >> So moved. >> Okay. I'll second. All in favor? >> I >> I >> Okay. And can I just confirm that the um the motions included the um conditions included by >> staff? Listed. Yes. >> Recommended by staff. >> Yes. >> Do you want me to list them all? >> No. Okay. Thank you. >> All 19. All right, I will um now we're on to P Highlands at Eagle View uh Tamarack Land Development LLC applicant consider application for reszoning and to planned PUD. Um and then also consider application for preliminary plat approval. Okay. So, I will open the public hearing at 7:58 p.m. on that. >> Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Um, thank you everybody for being here. >> Um, so right now we're discussing the proposed development at Highlands at Eagle View. Um, staff is um asking the planning commission to approve uh preliminary plat and resoning. Uh, so this property is just short of 51 gross acres. Um, you guys reviewed it and so did the city council late last year and early this year. Um it's already zoned PUB um due to the 2005 um development for the school and um the agreement states that the underlying zoning is R1. Uh as you see here, this graphic shows an aerial overview of the city. Um so this parcel in question is on the northwest edge of town. As you can see, they're outlined in pink. Um here's a snapshot of the preliminary development plan. Um just to give you guys an idea of what I'm talking about as I go through the presentation. uh neighborhood conditions. To the south there's the school uh the new elementary school. Um to the east is a development. Um to to the east is roughly 30acre parcel. Uh north there's a 39 acre agricultural parcel also owned by the same company and a large lot residential a few large lot residential properties with single family detached constructed homes. Um to the west of the proposed development is a primarily agricultural property. Uh the land as you see here is guided to low density residential which means um it would have underlying zoning district of R1 or R2 zoning um which would mean units per net acre would have to be two and a half to five based on the metropolitan council. Um this proposed development falls within that. It's 3.46 units per net acre. Um and residential detached single family homes meet the intents of the currently guided land use for the area. Uh just short of 51 acres is currently zoned PUB. Uh the property must be reszoned to a zoning district consistent with the purpose and intent of the comprehensive plan prior to the development. Uh so the developer is proposing a new PUD zoning for the entirety of the property. Um so as Jake stated earlier in uh one of the earlier public hearings, um the intent of the PUD varies, but um for this particular development, ACD and F are relevant. Um so provide for the establishment of a planned unit development zoning district in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that complies with the comprehensive plan. Uh provide for variations to the strict application of land use regulations uh to improve site design and operation while at the same time incorporating design elements such as um construction materials, landscaping and lighting that exceed the city's standards. Uh promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the city and maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities. Um so this PUD proposed is to allow for a slight reduction in lot width and setbacks within the development. Um other examples that have been used and other PUDs approved by the city um are those different options there. But like I said in the last slide, this one is primarily based upon increased housing design standards. Uh so there's the current zoning map in the bottom left which shows the R1 R2 zoning and the again the proposed PUD. Um so section 1138 of the zoning ordinance also identifies criteria to be considered as part of the request um as follows. So the proposed action has been considered in relation to specific policies and pro provisions of and is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Uh the proposed use is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained in this title. Uh the propo proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the city service capacity and traffic generation by the proposed use is within capabilities of streets serving the property. Um thus staff believes that the request to reszone the property to new new PUD meets the above stated criteria. Uh so this slide is showing a table um just of the on the left it shows the R2 district requirements and on the right it shows the request for Highlands at Eagle View. So the highlighted numbers are what you see the variables or the variances on. So the uh it's a five foot um difference in minimum lot width, five foot front setback. Uh they actually have half a foot more side setback than required. Um and then the side corner setback would be reduced by five feet as well. So again, there are tree preservation requirements with this. Um a tree inventory was completed which identified six trees and they're all going to be saved. Uh so the landscaping requirements um lot depth and lot width. Uh so the double fronted residential lots shall have an additional depth of at least 20 ft designated as an additional drainage and utility ement to the city. Uh lots which border a major collector or arterial street on a sideyard shall have an additional 10 feet designated as drainage and utility ements. Uh the preliminary SHA plat shows um both of these things which is required. Um, so staff recommend the following. The landscape plan be revised to show landscape buffers and screening for lots that abut Texas Avenue on the west. Um, and that deviations from the screening requirements not be approved as part of the PUD. The landscape plan be revised to show a minimum of two trees on each lot as required by the code and that deviations from the builder tree requirements not be approved again as part of the PUD. And then on the landscape plan, they would just need to differentiate developer and builder tree obligations more clearly. Um, easements. So, the subdivision ordinance requires that 10 foot wide perimeter easements and five foot wide interior easements be dedicated along all lot lines. Um, and 10- foot easements are acquired along property lines that above undeveloped properties. Uh, the plat depicts drainage utility easements as required. Um, greater easements are also shown in areas where drainage swils or utilities exist on the proposed lots. Sewer. Um, it is available in the southeast side of the property along Nevada Avenue via six inch PVC sewer force man. There's a proposed lift station out lot A which is at the very northeast of this proposed development. Um a proposed force main will need to be constructed connecting that lift station to the existing force main and then the sewer must be extended north um in proposed street E which is the north south road shown east of the proposed park um to the northern boundary of the plat. Water is also available. Um it's on the east side of the property along Nevada Avenue via 12inch ductile iron pipe. Um, a 12-in water mane must be um extended through the development consisted with the water plan. Uh, it must be extended north in proposed E as well to the northern boundary of the plat. Storm water is a little bit unique on this property. So, the entirety of the property um lies within the Scott waterershed management district and service flows towards the west northwest. Uh, the plan depicted five storm water basins on the property. Uh both a 10-ft vegetated buffer and 35 foot building setback should be clearly identified in the plans. Um two HDPA lines exist along the eastern side of the property and it flows north under 250th Street which is north of this development and even further north a little bit which it discharges to the surface. Uh the rear guard drainage for lots along Texas Avenue should be directed to the proposed storm uh basin in the southwest corner of the site. Uh city staff are aware that there's an extensive drain tile system throughout the property uh which provided and still provides agricultural drainage. Um this existing drainage pattern must be perpetuated in the new development. A wetland delineation um has been completed and application for wetland boundary and type concurrence has been submitted to the city. Uh the application is currently under review by the technical evaluation panel and a decision regarding any formal wetland boundaries is expected soon. Um if any wetland is identified on the site, developer has indicated they would be submitting a replacement plan for it. So that being said, any potential recommendations regarding the plat by the commission tonight must be conditioned on approval of wetland applications. Uh transportation. So um this proposed development borders three existing streets. Nevada Avenue to the east, 255th to the south, and Texas Avenue to the west. The city's transportation plan identifies Nevada and 255th as major collector streets and Texas Avenue as a minor arterial roadway. Um so the purpose of a major collector is to link neighborhoods together within a city or link neighborhoods to a business. Um there are two collectors that have bought this property. Nevada on the east and 255th on the south. Um so access to collector roadways should be made via local streets as you see depicted in that picture on the right. um and prohibit access or private access should not be allowed on that road. Um public street connections to major collector streets should be spaced at least 660 feet apart. Um so Nevada Avenue um a partial 35 ft rideway is platted along the entire east side of the property, but only a small section of the road is constructed near the southeast corner. Um city code would require that avada Nevada Avenue con be constructed to the northern property line at the plat. Um however the street lacks the full rightway needed to construct the full street. Um the current standard for a major collector is 100 feet of rightway. The developer is proposing 15 feet of additional rightway dedication to meet the standard. The city will seek the additional 50 uh feet during the platting of the S Sullivan property directly to the east. Uh 255th borders the entire property to the south as I said. Um it's major collector street. Um there's currently an existing trail along the north side of 255th and they will um they said they will the trail will be extended from currently the current westerly termini. Um as that picture on the bottom right shows that highlighted area is where it ends and where that will be the new construction as the highlighted area. Uh Texas Avenue borders to the west. This is a Scott County road and is identified as a minor arterial roadway. Uh, Scott County seeks a total rightway of 150 ft for minor arterial roadways and they already have it. So, no additional rightaway is anticipated. There are no street connections proposed from this development to Texas Avenue. Um, they did ask that a trail bench be graded for a future trail along Texas Avenue. Um, if the trail bench does not fit within the county right, the bench could be graded at the back of the individual lots um, by use of a trail easement. Um, so as you saw, several local streets are depicted on the preliminary plat. Um, in instances where a street is terminated pending future extension into a future subdivision, um, a temporary culde-sac must be constructed if the street is longer than 150 ft. And future road extension signs will also be required. Um, the maximum length of a culde-sac is 500 ft measured from the center line of the street origin to the end of the rideway. And as always, concrete driver shall be constructed from the curb to the property line. Uh, so sidewalks and trails. So, um, based on city code in the 2040 comp plan, the following side, uh, sidewalk and trail improvements are recommended within the plat. Um, construct 5 foot sidewalks on all local streets, 10 foot trail on the north side of 255th, and a 10-ft trail on the east side of Texas Avenue. Um, the they're all shown here. So, it's kind of a small picture. It's hard to see, but all the dark gray lines are either sidewalks, and then the thicker gray lines are trails. Um so parks uh the city subdivision ordinance requires 8% of the land to be dedicated for parks. Um playgrounds, public open space or trails or the developer shall make a cash contribution to the city's park and trail fund roughly related to the anticipated effect of the plat on the park and trail system. If no landation is required, the park fee has been established 8% of the fair market value. Um the city's 2040 park and trail plan does not identify any park search areas on the subject. Um although a concept plan was presented to the parks commission in October of last year. Um and the recommendation was to require full land dedication rather than cash. Um the city council then heard the recommendation during their concept plan review. Um and they are to require a combination of parkland dedication and cash. The city council requested that the parkland be of sufficient size to place a playground, park, shelter, sport court, and trails within the park and that be centrally located within the development. All these things have been done. Uh the preliminary plat drawing incorporates a park within the development as recommended by the city council. Uh the location of the propos proposed park as I said is centrally located and will provide adequate access to the proposed development as you can see here in that red circle. U miscellaneous items. So neighborhood meeting. The city did request that the developer hold a neighborhood meeting prior to this meeting um to introduce the project to the neighborhood. It was held last Wednesday at the library. Some city staff members attended the meeting which was hosted by Tamar Land Development. Um and residential questions or resident questions at the meeting related mostly to drainage, the ghost plat showing the adjacent properties to the north, screening traffic, and the location of a planned roadway connection to the north. Um and the county wanted to point out that any work done within the county will require a permit from Scott County. So the ghost plat um the preliminary plat shows a conceptual layout of the approximate 80 acres to the north of this parcel. A ghost plat is an additional requirement that we have laid out in our city code which is submitted with each proposed development we get for the purpose of ensuring proper roadway alignments in the event of a future development but it does not indicate city support or approval. The concept development plan showing properties to the north does not indicate approval or support of the specific layout, but rather shows the potential uh for future development based on planned roadway and utility alignments within this pro proposed development. Staff recommended and city code requires that the developer provide this ghost plat to demonstrate that cohesive development between the parcels could occur. City growth only occurs when a willing seller sells land to a willing buyer. The timing when a land owner wants to sell is not controlled by the city. the city plans for and prepares for growth in order to promote orderly development. Um, so moving on the traffic, uh, per land use code 210, a single family detached house is anticipated to with 148 of them is anticipated to, uh, generate roughly 1500 total day trips in the roadway network with 106 in the AM, 144 in the PM. And if you just check out that table right there, it kind of shows breaks it down a little bit for you. Leave it up there for a second. Uh, continuing on with traffic, staff has no knowledge of major operational issues at the existing County Road 27 or County Road 2 intersections. Uh, the police chief indicated that they do not see a lot of accidents there. Um, and there is an existing north northbound right turn lane and a southbound bypass lane on County Road 27 at the intersection with 255th. Um, and turn lanes allow vehicles to safely decelerate before turning without obstructing traffic. Bypass lanes allow vehicles to bypass other vehicles that are slowing down or stopping prior to turning. And the Scott County Highway Transportation Services was notified of the proposed development and has provided comments. Uh traffic generation or impacts to the county road system were not identified as an issue. Um so staff consulted with the city's traffic engineer regarding impacts of the development and the f the following feedbacks were provided after running the anticipated traffic through a traffic traffic modeling software. Uh with the 2024 traffic volumes and anticipated traffic to be added to the intersection, they did not see a concern with the capacity of county road 27 or at the intersection. Um acceptable intersection levels of service are anticipated during peak hours. The modeling assumed all traffic from the development would go to and from the intersection in order to be conservative and assume none would go out for the east in or out through to the east. Um Scott Countyy's 2040 comp plan shows their capabilities capacities for a two-lane highway is well above what this development would add. uh which aligns with the county not having any comments or concerns on this. Um additional comments, city engineer, he provided us a memo and there comments are in there. Uh public works director incorporated in here. City attorney didn't have any comments right now. Uh the police chief did want to add um just another caveat on that intersection to keep the view unobstructed at the corner of 27 255th to ensure proper sight lines sight lines for traffic. Um, if any traffic control devices are needed in the neighborhood, specifically at the intersections of street A and C, which is kind of to the south near 255th, use yield signs in favor of stop signs. Um, fire chief didn't have any comments. Building official didn't have any comments on the school district. So, this is anticipated to add roughly 81 students to the school system once it's fully developed, which is great for New Prague. Um, New Market Township board members were notified of the application and have not submitted any comments to the city. And all of Scott County's um comments were included in a letter and they are attached to this report. Um so the actual request to the planning commission tonight is um an application to reszone 50.87 acres to PUB zoning and an application for preliminary plat approval of Highlands at Eagle View containing 148 lots on 50.86 gross acres. Um so staff recommended recommendation bear with me here. Um staff uh reszone to the property to PUD. Um it is consistent with the comprehensive plan which guides to lowdensity residential. Uh the proposed use of the property for single family residential development is compatible with present and future uses of the land area. The proposed use and development of the property complies with uh performance centers contains in the subdivision ordinance and zoning except as specifically identified in the PUD. The proposed residential use of the property can be accommodated with existing public services and will not over uh overburden the city service capacity at all and traffic generation by the proposed development is within the capabilities of the existing infrastructure. Uh related to the request for preliminary plat approval staff would also recommend approval of this um for the following reasons. Development of the property for single family residential homes is consistent with the land use plan um and it meets the density. The proposed plat is consistent with the purpose and intent of the 2040 comp plan and standards contained in the city's zoning and subdivision ordinance again except for the deviations as specifically approved through the PUD and development of the property as single family residential is compatible with adjacent land uses. So staff recommend approval of the request for preliminary plat uh with the following conditions. So the preliminary plat approval is subject to the approval of all wetland applications like I stated including wetland boundary and type concurrence and approval of the wetland replacement plan if that's required. Uh the developer must enter into devel development contract with the city at the time of final plat. Uh the preliminary plat is issued for a period of one year and shall become null and void without further action from the planning commission or city council unless the final plat is filed within one year of the date of a city council granting preliminary plat approval. Preliminary plan approval is granted in accordance with the Highlanded Eagle Views preliminary development plans dated 52 containing 23 sheets, the storm water pollution prevention plan and the storm water management plan. Uh prelim preliminary plat approval is subject to conditions contained in the commission report for tonight conditions noted on the redline plans dated 521 and subject to the recommendation of the city engineer as contained in memorandum dated 51625. Uh the landscape plan shall be amended to include landscape across screening along Texas Avenue to the west and Nevada Avenue to the east. Um to in to include two builder installed trees on each lot and to differentiate between developer and builder tree requirements. A sanitary sewer lift station must be installed on proposed lot A out lot A and sewer force main constructed connecting the proposed lift station to the existing force main um in Nevada Avenue. The city engineer will design the lift station in force main to be installed by the developer. 12-in water man must be extended throughout the development. Water and sewer must be extended north and proposed street E to the northern boundary of the plat. 10 foot wide veget uh vegetative buffer and 35 foot building setback from the ordinary high water level of all ponds must be clearly depicted on the plans. A trail bench should be graded for a future trail along Texas Avenue. If it can't, it should be uh graded at the back of individual lots of the trail easement. A combination of parkland dedication and cash contribution will be required to satisfy the park dedication requirements. Um and this one I'll add a little context to. So 13, a fence to be constructed on the northern boundary of street E to mitigate concerns of headlights for uh for the neighbors to the north. So this was an item that came up quite a bit at the neighborhood meeting last week. Um so I just wanted to that is staff's recommendation is to construct a fence so it's immediate. you don't have to wait years for the trees to grow. Um, and it won't cause a problem to the neighbors to the north. Um, so as Jake said earlier for this one, if there's anybody online, please raise your hand and we will get to you after everybody in person speaks. We're ready to open the public hearing. >> All right. Thank you. I'll open the public hearing at 8:19 p.m. Please step up to the podium, state your name and address for the record if you have anything to comment regarding Highlands at Eagle View. >> Hi, my name is Cheryl Fridges, 25490 Texas Avenue. Can I walk up to that quick? >> Absolutely. >> Thank you. >> Sorry. >> I know you guys were there, correct? talk to you about this is where it's coming out. That's Texas Avenue. So, my house is right there. You want to put a fence up for the bikes that come there too. And then I asked you about right here. You see? You said there was going to be something for shed there. The water runs there. I have his question. Thanks. Um, you have the house right through there. So, how does that how does that work? It goes down. Help me out, Darren. How deep is that ditch there? I >> mean, is that all getting down level? >> Is that ditch going to stay like that along Texas Avenue? >> So, I want to make sure I'm hearing your questions correctly. So, >> Texasvenue. >> Yep. >> The ditch. I mean, it's steep. >> Yes, it is steep. Yes. >> Come down. The hill comes down. >> Um, cattle pass underneath there which was water drainage not like it was cattle >> recently. Um you had said that that was still going to be in place. Water would still be draining there. But what I see here though is yet you have a house right to the back end. Is that correct? >> Looks like there was a buffer. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, I just want to be clear on that because most of the concerns the other night were for watershed and where >> Yeah, absolutely. Um, I guess just a quick introduction, my name is Reed Schultz. I'm with Tamarak Land Development. With me this evening is Nate Herman. He's our civil engineer working on the project. Um, first, uh, to answer the questions directly, um, the cattle crossing we are proposing to remain in place. We have no plans at this point or nobody has indicated otherwise that we need to remove that cattle crossing. Um we are working with uh the city engineer um to ensure that all those utilities and everything are are in place um some of that storm sewer crossings and and whatnot through there. Did you want to speak to that? >> Oh yeah, Rich, you can clarify, but I believe that cattle crossing I think back in 20 2005 was actually filled in. >> Yep. And um to to address the question, there is a 24 inch uh corrugated metal pipe that goes underneath uh Texas Avenue right now. And that's what provides uh the drainage that heads heads westward and provides provides runoff a way to get from the east side of um Texas across the street to the west side. And that is all within the when you look at when you look at the plans and the in the topography she mentions it is it's a you know fairly steep fairly steep uh rightway or ditch ditch system there and um there's that existing 24 in CMP uh is going to be remain untouched. We're really you know doing everything just to stay out of the out of the county right away with any with any grading. So, um we are maintaining drainage flows and um just to match existing existing conditions and um not proposing to do any work within the county right away. >> Well, my my name is Nate. Yeah, thank you guys. I'm the >> the engineer for the project. >> There was a bench that I think they talked about, right? Or >> Yeah, the trail grading the trail. We'll work with city staff on on the the appropriate place of where that trail connection is. So, there could be some additional grading needed in that rightway to accommodate the uh county's comment on that potential future trail. >> As far as lot sizes, the lot sizes that are abuing 255th as well as Texas Avenue are uh extra deep lots. So, there is uh the landscape buffer that's has been mentioned a few times uh by city staff. Uh so those homes along Texas as well as those homes along 255th are actually further set back from those major collector roadways. Um so all those homes will have appropriate backyard uh appropriate building pad uh and and plenty of buffer um through there. So these lot sizes are very traditional lot sizes um for national home builders. We're not proposing anything that's um smaller or unique um than what what they build on. And your property is what 30 ft at least from the Texas. >> So we we are providing a 25 foot landscape buffer. So that'll be a landscaped heavily landscaped buffer along Texas and 255th. Uh and then from there um we have our traditional 130 foot. So I think total in those um I guess double frontage lots would be the appropriate term to use when they have right away in the back and the rightway in the front um or at least 150 and then as they come around that curve and stuff they they get extra extra deep through there. Awesome. >> A question for the developer. >> Reed and Nate, could you describe just a little bit more for the crowd the location of that southwesterly pond relative to that primary culvert that goes there's actually two culverts there, but the one you're using is the deepest and the furthest north. >> Correct. >> Where that pond is relative to that pipe crossing just to help them understand. I don't think there'll be a up against that where that culprit is. >> Yeah, I think as Nate goes up there and kind of points to the the very far north where his fingers pointing there is >> Go ahead. >> Right right here. I know it's pretty hard to see from back there, but there's a a little brown a brown. What that's representing here's here's here's our proposed pond for the pond and that's basically elevating right in line with the existing uh that goes underneath Texas. So this there is a rip bed that's down at that base of pipe and we are connecting system. >> Oh, sorry. I >> Yeah, I wanted to get the >> zoom in >> the view of the room for the audience, but um then it took your picture down. So we can put the picture back up if you want to reference it. >> Let me know if you want back up. Go ahead. >> So, Rich, does that kind of answer the question a little bit? >> Yeah, I think just to give a little idea where that actually is on that map was probably helpful. That >> right here's alluding to there's another just south of here. That's actually probably real close to the old cattle crossing. >> Yep. About 10 ft away. >> Thank you. >> I will ask again if anyone has comments related to this, please step up to the podium, state your name and address for the record. Thank Hi, I'm I'm Mary Wattry and we're at 7371 250th Street East. Um I think that you guys all need to know we are part of the township. So, you know, we don't have voting rights. Um and your future plan um with this road goes right through my property and my neighbor's property. Um they were unable to be here tonight. They've got their their kids um baseball games. When we had started talking about it at the last meeting with the developer, um we had asked for the road to potentially um end and become a house there or be a green space. Um when you look at the signs that are by Nevada where it stops now, they've been there for 20 plus years. It's kind of an eyesore to look at. Um we've enjoyed living out in the country. We knew development was coming, but we would enjoy country life. Um, and having all of those headlights coming into our property and then to see the city proposing basically a culde-sac, two culde-sacs in our property in the concept E plan. Um, and when you look at this road that is proposed, that north south road, it literally goes to a culdeac. I don't know why you can't just have the road that's on the west and you can still have your development. It's within I believe about 200 feet for your ordinance of the city street being 1,200 ft because you have access to the east of Nevada and then you would have that road stubbed on the west. um a fence was kind of a compromise for us or you know some some trees if you are maintaining that that has to be there for the road stub but ideally I know myself and my neighbors would prefer that that's eliminated and the developer could put a house there. It's extra money for taxes for the developer as well. Um and the other question that came up tonight was the wetlands. So, what's the timeline for that to be to come back from the county? >> The city um is the authority on the wetland. So, we're the um the city council is the deciding authority. Uh input is from several different agencies. There's the Scott soil and water conservation district, the Army Corps Engineers. There's a number of wetland specialists that get together, go out to the site. They've been out to the site multiple times already. Um they've asked the developers um wetland um specialists to revised boundaries based on fieldwork they've observed. Um so they are I'm expect I actually thought it would be done last week um that the decisions would be made. Uh it's been back and forth. So, I would expect sometime this week actually >> because >> when the drain tile has been plugged in the past, >> um, we get flooding to the north in our yard and if you look at the Google Maps view and I think there was even one of your slides that showed where that field gets very wet and even up to our property. And when we built our shed, Scott County almost denied our permit because they were saying, "Well, you have wetland." >> Well, we don't. it >> when that drain tile gets plugged, we get a a lake at times. >> So, you know, lots of concerns with the grading of the the property. When you look at the existing housing, they're way up on the hill. And even that northwest corner, that vacant 40, that's way up on the hill. So, we're going to have to really watch grading for that or we are going to get flooding again. Would you like a response? >> I certainly am aware of your concern and I have been for 20 years since I started working. There's drain tile everywhere >> and the developer is also pretty well aware that any drain tile that's draining into their site has to be maintained uh continuity to another system so that it's not plugged. It can keep flowing uh to drain any properties off the site that are depending on that tile. It may not be that exact drain tile going through. They might connect into a pond. They might connect into a storm sewer system, but continuity has to be maintained. So, especially when they're doing any excavation at the perimeters, not only are we going to be looking for the tiles that we have on the map, we'll also be watching the excavation for any that are found. >> Okay? >> And I would add for the crowd, if you know of any tiles that were not in, we can put that map back up. It'd be extremely helpful if you point them out to us now so we can at least make a scratch mark on the map and be you know looking for those who has who's driving the if that's not inconvenient put that tile map I mean we might as well see if that were missing we got that map from actually I think it was years ago >> so >> okay thank you thank Can you make it bigger? >> Not really. >> Um, we can make a we can find the actual PDF of that. >> A little tough to see, but I see um basically two of them coming onto the property and the rest appear to be leaving the property. But if there's any from the north especially coming in, >> sing out. Let us know or or call city hall tomorrow or something. >> Yeah. >> Darren, is there not one on running straight north and south on the west side of my property? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. And there's there's one on arms as well that runs >> it would be. And so um Scott uh somewhere along on the map. >> Does it flow south to the >> Yeah, everything does, I believe. >> And that's why we did the CRP. That's because we're getting flooding. >> Everything from up here is flowing down. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Half of that property is flowing to the south and the other half flows to the north to the gravel road. >> But I think this line right here is probably halfway. Correct. >> Yep. And so similar to all your houses that go down that gravel road, your front yards go to the north. >> Correct. >> But I mean like some of your property that those little fields that I used to farm >> that that all did go to the north, but >> you know when you guys built houses years ago, not saying >> the previous or the previous homeowner that built the houses, they kind of screwed up the tiling and stuff. And we noticed that farming your little parcels over the years, it just slowly got worse. But all that water used to go to the north over underneath the gravel road and then hooked into that creek where this main storm sewer that you see on the school road goes. But that creek is not being maintained anymore. So on the north side of my grandpa's farm, that's all marsh now because the can't take it. And unfortunately, that's where your tile is running. So you're you're slowly getting backed up from miles and miles north. >> Yeah. But we're getting it from this, you know, we're we actually had to add drain tile in to the new um ditch and drainage to the north because we're getting so much coming from the south >> to just be able to shoot it out because it won't go the other way. >> So, you're probably changing the elevation to make the tile work and still flowing to the north. So, yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And that's the only way you can fix it because right >> the old tile it can't take it because gr is totally backed up. So, that's the the way you're going to solve your problem, >> right? And so those houses that are right next to that creek are going to wind up with potential flooding issues if you're going to have stuff more going to the north. >> We're not actually it's um designed to not increase the rates of flow because of the ponds will be holding it. Anyway, that's kind of went off on a tangent, but I think it's important to to people to understand what we're aware of, what we're not, and we do plan to watch as any excavation happens and that pick up any tile coming into the site so we can keep it going. >> Were you also putting the tile I think that in the on that north border to go to that eastern pond? >> It'll either be storm sewer or tile. >> Yeah, something. You're adding something in there. Yes, sir. >> Thank you. I will ask again, anyone like to comment on Highlands at Eagle View, please step forward and state your name and address for the >> Jody Wagner, 25226 Texas Avenue. Related topic because I'm very concerned about the storm water management. So the plat and the grading plan that we saw last week show on the northern 40 acres that we currently farm that there is a storm water basin there. And so I'm seeking clarification because that hasn't been addressed with the property owners and then we farm that land. So I'm wondering what the plan is given that the grading plan in the map and the plat show that storm water basin. pull up the >> 95 >> maybe the grading plan. >> 95. >> Sorry. Uh the grading, do you have a the grading plan? If you go into the development plans and the ghost >> you're not sharing to me. >> Oh, you're not showing. Good one, Brandon. >> 100. >> Yeah, I think there's probably something a little better than that, but that I mean that shows the location. >> Yeah. So, to answer the question that I think it's that ellipse, that half moon there that we're talking about. So again, back to the comment earlier, about half of that site, 40 acres drains through this this development here. Um, and so we're picking up that drainage. The proposed conditions, the plans show that we're picking up that drainage and currently it's being routed into our storm sewer system. Um we're working through with city staff to work through um the correct routing of that storm to pick up that water, whether we bypass our storm sewer and our detention basins and and bring it out to Nevada, which is the ultimate discharge location or pick that water up and drain it into our storm water basins and detention basins. So that ellipse is just identifying that's the low spot that we're picking up that water. Um there has been discussions, preliminary discussions with city staff that um maybe that needs to be in some sort of drainage utility easement. We acquire that area and that becomes a dry detention basin, just a more of a retention so it just kind of holds back on those high events and and drains through. Um none of that's been figured out to my knowledge yet. Um, and so when we find out, I think the best solution is to to route that water away and keep it flowing off. Um, and so it minimizes impacts on on that north 40. Um, but still a little bit more that needs to come from that. So that's just >> Can I recap that to see if >> Absolutely. Go ahead. >> You kind of got two options. you capture, slow it down, release it into your system, or you run a pipe all the way over to Nevada that bypasses everything but may have more downstream. Well, it's kind of existing flows >> and it's just whether we bypass our site or we capture it and and deal with the water on our site and and make it all work. There's there's some complexities to it. Um, city staff have been has been wonderful to work with. Um this all is predicated on the future. This isn't the first um first half that we're developing. The 25 acres is on the the east side. That can be a standalone. We can get the drainage storm water to function just fine. This would be next year's problem. Phase 2's problem um that we're just trying to work through the best solution that appeases uh the neighbors and um makes it work for the city and and everybody. So that's just identifying that that low spot that we're picking that water up. So >> So just to clarify for the commission, we reviewed it as though it was going to capture and release slowly into their system. I haven't thought about the implications. I certainly there's a cost implication to run it due uh east to Nevada, but they're probably long-term impacts that may not be um attractive that I I just haven't thought through. So, our review assumed that that water would be captured and brought into their system, slowed down, >> captured in that basin. >> Captured in that basin. Yeah. >> Which bas? >> Well, and there's kind of a low spot there, but it, you know, this appears to show some reshaping. Um, >> but there the the other option still remains too. >> So, that already is a wet area. >> Say that again. Sorry. >> It already is a wet area. >> I don't know. >> It's I don't I'm not sure it's really wet. They they farm it. Darren um farms it. It's just that that's the drain drainage area that drains through there. It's also the location of where that drain tile we believe that's where that drain tile is. Um so it's kind of that natural low spot that we're just we're picking up. And and I think Rich probably said it better than I did is is we're we're evaluating the best option of of handling that that water to get it out of there. Um there's also some complexities that if it does remain in the township and it is that water, how do we deal with um the ownership maintenance and all of that? If that's ultimately what we what we need to do um in the beyond the future when that 40 acres ever develops, there likely would be a need for a storm water pond somewhere in that area because it is the low one. in that 40 acres, whoever develops it would need to handle their own storm water management system being it's the low spot. They're going to have to do a storm water pond detention and treatment pond in that location in the future. So, >> I want to respond to what you just said to make it clear um that if this um basin, it sounds like this might be the option that it is chosen. Um, if this is the option that's chosen, a drainage and utility easement will need to be granted to the city and the city would be responsible for maintenance of that basin going forward even though it is located in the township. We do have other situations where we do that. >> So, long story short, there's there's some stuff that needs to be figured out. Uh, I believe we have full confidence that that we can get there. Um and whatever the outcome is um we'll certainly work with uh the appropriate entities to make that work. So >> I would agree both options are viable >> within. >> Are those detailed plans available publicly or electronically? Are they on the website? >> They are. Yeah. >> Might want to email staff directly for >> Yeah. >> website if you have trouble reading it. >> Yeah. So, right now it's in the planning commission packet. It's uploaded to the website, which included everything that's on the agenda tonight. If you contact any one of us, city staff, we can email you just the packet of information for this development. >> And so, you guys are in discussion right now, but when do you expect a decision to be made on that? >> It really will be what they uh pursue. We approve but they they suggest >> so they propose it based on the plans what they've proposed includes the basin today or on that on that 40 >> it's kind of hard to make a I shouldn't talk to I'm Darren Wagner I Jody Cody's husband. Um, how can people start making decisions or even talk about something when the property owners haven't even been included on the discussion? It's I don't know. How can we look to somebody else or pass the the shovel and expect them to deal with it when all parties aren't involved yet? How can we answer the questions when not everybody's here to answer? I guess I'm just wondering >> I would just in response approval tonight doesn't mean approval of the final plans and we would require those easements and that the numbers work uh not dollars but the flows and everything work um if they carry forward with this plan into their final plan set. So this is it's not a concept. This is demonstrating that things work. They've got two working options. They either catch the water in that low spot, slow it down into their system, or they build a bypass system that carries it over to the east. Um, both of those would work within the rules. >> But they'll have to come to us with that what they'd want to do final and we won't approve it until we get an easement and they won't get an easement until they talk with you. So, if that helps. >> So, that'd be a conditional approval tonight. Yeah, that would we I was going to mention to Brandon, we would have to add that as a condition um that if the Northerly pond is constructed on the northerly 40 acres, an easement would be required. A drainage and utility easement in favor of the city would be required. Hello again, Maria Fidas, 25490 Texas Avenue. Um, if you mind me asking, could we pull up that last kind of map that was showing some of the the grading? >> Um, I had a few questions. >> It's okay. Maybe I'll start with an easier one. When with the traffic study, um, were there any counts done on County Road 27 on Texas Avenue? um you know heading >> current counts from MDOT's 2024 counts on on their website. >> Okay. >> In this in the city and um in the rural areas we have 2024 counts. I can report those to you momentum or Brandon may have them memorized. Uh the 2024 count on Texas adjacent to the site um is 1,95 vehicles per day. >> Okay. >> ADT. And on um 255th a 2024 count is 443 vehicles. >> Okay. >> ADT. >> And with the development it was 1, 1,47 additional daily travel counts, >> I think. bring up the >> I'm sorry. >> I was going to say in the morning and afternoon, I think those numbers didn't quite match up with the daily counts. I'm just trying to figure out with the sheer amount of people hours. Okay. >> Okay. >> So, yeah. >> So, it's like 86 for the peak uh PM hour. So, that's the most obviously. So, that's 80 plus the other hours of the day, which would be higher. So, you'd get to that total. different PM um different roads might have a different peak hour like >> uh you know a lot of roads will have like a 7 am to 8 am peak hour you know maybe near the school the peak hour is different uh later towards 9 but >> no that's yeah that's understandable I know yeah in the morning a lot of school buses a lot of people dropping off their kids as as well as people heading um sometimes they bypass county road too with that stop sign now and go to 8 to go to 35 or 169. So, just want to make sure you guys are taking into account the sheer volume of people that are going to be because even I mean Nevada Avenue essentially all those people are either going to go somehow north and east to 35 or again with that stop sign they're probably going to bypass and go down Texas Avenue again and all those roads essentially are going to end up on on Texas. So, just making sure you're aware of that's it. Might be a little bit more than that for the counts, but I I appreciate you guys looking at them and providing those those numbers. Thank you. Um I did have a couple questions on the ponds. Uh specifically again with living on off of Texas Avenue. Um, again, I can't really tell, but I'm guessing that road that goes from north to south and kind of curves. That's probably the dividing factor between the drainage area that's going to the north versus to the west >> generally or east to the west in that area. >> Okay. >> Um, was Thank you. for that storm water basin to the southwest. Is that proposing to be is that I mean it's obviously different color so I'm guessing the two blue ones are probably wet ponds or detention basins versus the orangish yellow ones are dry basins or infiltration basins >> filtration >> filtration okay >> so they're not dry they'll be wet but they have a filtration feature right if I'm understanding what I looked at >> yeah yeah they're designed They're a basin with like a sand bottom that has a submerged drain pipe and um you know so water water will fill up and then it's designed to you know in a larger event it'll it'll it'll go out out the outer structure but you know for the smaller smaller events you know allowing that water to filtrate through the through the sand the drain tile. >> Okay. So essentially with that side with it again being the drain tile because I'm guessing some of that might be routed to that basin as well but then essentially going down and outletting to those two kind of culverts that we we talked about already. >> Yep. >> Okay. And does it outlet to essentially that drain and utility easement or to the right of way along the county road or is it going I can't remember if there was rip wrap um right at the out the culvert outlet. There's a rip wrap right at the >> I guess in going >> from flowing from east east to west. >> Okay. >> And then our our proposed pipe is you know basically connecting right into where that rip wrap is. >> Okay. >> So there'd be a gap but out of one and into the next one. >> Yep. With that rip wrap is that going to extend to connect the two just to prevent any scour or any erosion from kind of happening right between the two? >> Yes. >> Okay. We haven't seen the final plans, but uh that's always required. >> Okay. >> Unless the existing, but I was down there today and I'm guessing there'll be some modifications. So, there's a continuous protection. >> Okay. >> Are you talking about the drain tile, I mean, from the whole thing could either connect to storm sewer or potentially to the basins directly. With that being such a low area, are you is the idea just to leave that as is or again potentially route it up the hill then to that basin. >> So, as far as preserving drain tile on this site that flows off of it, yep, >> we don't worry about that because there will be a new drainage system. We're concerned about drainage coming onto our site. Okay. >> That we have to pick up. >> Okay. >> So, there might not be any. There'll be some >> tiles for uh backyard drainage and some pumps, things like that, >> but as far as the existing tile on the site, I would guess that'll mostly be obliterated. >> Okay. Um, do you mind me asking I guess what? Because I'm guessing that pond will outlet at the hundredyear event. Maybe >> it'll outlet at every event, >> but at different rates. Yep. Small rain, a little outlet. Big rain, more outlet. But in all cases, it's designed to be less than the existing flows at those same storms. Do you mind me asking what the storage capacity is proposed versus the volume of runoff that's going to be going out during each of those events? It's okay if you don't know off the top of your head. I just want to >> I don't I just look at the numbers and they're all smaller on the proposed column and I turn the page. >> Nate might be able to pull them up or we could look them up or we can take that up um tomorrow or something if you want to email. >> Yep. I can definitely reach out directly. I'm just again curious with um again things outletting and making sure that >> apply at different points. So um basically >> three points uh and in all cases where water's leaving this site >> it's meeting those criteria and we can get you those. >> Okay. Um because I don't know, I guess, and you might find out more with the wetland delineation army corps. Um did they I know they're really looking at on-site, but are they happening to look at off-site impacts, potential bounces to that? I mean, it's a it's it is a creek. Um that leads into then the Vermillion and South Creek and everything like that. >> Um I'm not a wetland specialist. I've been on site with them for only one uh meeting. I did I didn't hear them talk about that. >> Okay. >> Um but I >> if and I think the presumption because this is farmed. It's probably not a approve or not. It's how big meaning how much restoration and replacement? >> That probably the key question. How many credits would they have to buy to replace this? >> Okay. And with that, is that pretty much the plan? You're not planning on preserving any of those wetlands on. I mean, there's probably maybe not the best quality because it has been farmed for many years, but I know they do provide some sort of habitat. So, just curious if there was any plans for restoration or if it was mostly wetland banking credits. >> I guess it depends on how you look at those two wet basins. >> I would think they're maybe more attractive than what's been out there, but they may not have the same wildlife um benefits like existing although I don't know how great those were either with with being farmed for all these years. So >> potentially but once in a while if you if you walk around enough you see sand hill cranes and a couple eagles actually stopping probably getting some roadkill that wandered off into the fields but something there. >> Yeah I think the rationale under the law for allowing off-site replacement is that those can be better quality wetlands. You get more wetland bang for your buck by buying credits from a large complex with a lot of variation and and wellestablished wetlands. Um, in fact, most agencies now encourage that because it's notoriously difficult to create wetlands. >> Yeah. And my our understanding based on these plans is that they would not be proposing any replacement on site. >> Okay. So no matter kind of what the decision is for the wetland determination, it'll likely be if there's wetlands on site and whatever that boundary is, they'll likely be >> impact because we won't approve this till that's done >> and >> and they have to then apply for the second application which is the wetland replacement plan >> and they'll have to um submit the criteria um required under them. >> Okay. >> They still have to meet the law, but based on what we've seen thus far, it's probably more a matter of magnitude. >> Okay. >> And from your Sorry to keep going on this. From your conversations, the other T members did not have significant comments or were there some concerns with the site? >> I think it's largely extents. >> Okay. >> Yeah, I didn't see significant comments from my observation. just really trying to decide where that boundary was. >> Okay. >> And um it's bit difficult when it's in the middle of a farm field. >> Nope. I appreciate it. Um again, follow Do you mind if I then reach out to staff directly to kind of walk through some of these things if I have additional questions I want to look at? Again, some of these are very small numbers as well. I can't see that far. >> Absolutely. Um please contact us. We will put you right in touch with our wetland specialist at Bolton and Bank that represents the city. >> Um Dan Donaire actually Jake's going to grab a card for you. >> Thank you very much. >> And then we can send these plans to you too so you can see the basins and the elevation. Can I ask if you have specific concerns or is it just you're kind of just looking for information to decide if you have concerns or >> I'm looking more I I do have some specific concerns. Um again with those basins and the the drainage that's being directed towards them, how they're outletting um especially again with the existing drainage and drain tile. again our concerns on just with past experience of watersheds changing and then and I know development changes the land use anyways >> y >> um but really making sure that the downstream impacts are addressed um if for example all the drain again not sure how all the drain tile is routed right now where it all goes um can't see that on >> the app again. But if for example that southwest basin is taking a lot more of the drainage, taking the storm water from all the you know from the streets from the runoff and collecting and I know it's a filtration basin so it is it will outlet at different rates during different storms. Hopefully a lot of it will infiltrate back through the soil potentially back through the drain tile. Um but again all that goes into the creek goes into the wetlands into the you know slew that's further west >> and if there's less water being directed towards that then that automatically changes how that wetland how that land how that slew >> lives um how the hydraology of that so that's a big concern I have >> you want more water >> I I wouldn't say more water I wanted I mean I I want to make sure I mean I know we we want to it's tie it's going to tie into the rest of the city's storm sur it's going to go further east and north but I want to make sure that if it is water is being held it's not just going to completely cut away everything which it sounds like it's not again things are being directed to it I just want to make sure that the hydraology between all these waterheds isn't changing drast again I know land use changes but it's it's >> it's certainly our intention to maintain drainage pattern s not increase rates and u do the best we can with volume but these tight soils you can't soak much into the ground that's why the filtration at least slows it down improves the quality uh doesn't increase the temperature so there's benefits to filtration even if it's still leaving the site >> and I think you'll be satisfied through the storm water report and talking to the wetland inspection probably more the storm water report >> okay >> yeah we'll get that to you the the actual storm water uh report is very lengthy and it's a lot of text. It's not included in the packet. So, we'll get that to you. >> Sorry. >> The first three pages are off. >> It's all good. >> Awesome. Thank you very much. I really appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Anyone else like to comment on Highlands at Eagle View? Please come to the podium. State your name and address for the record. All right, I'll ask one more time. Anyone want to comment on Eagles, if I can say it, Highlands and Eagle View? Um, please step to the podium, state your name and address for the record. All right, I will close the public hearing at 9:01 p.m. Thank you. All right, questions, comments? the commissioners >> seen a plan probably what Renee probably what 15 years ago this came >> uh 2005 >> 2005 >> okay 20 years ago then so I I don't know if a lot of the homeowners were the same ones that were here before but I remember it was a devel development back then it was going to happen but it never did because of markets changing so it's not new I don't believe and so so to me it's it was when it was going to come I guess so I'm not I just wondered about the road to the east I guess that's not on the property that they're leaving easement for it and then the next property will develop that road or what? >> We have had discussions uh with the city administrator and city attorney on that. There's had already been kind of pre-established that in in 2005 that it would be centered on the property line. Um we wouldn't do that today. We would have it all on one side, all on the other. Um yes. So it would be constructed either by this adjacent property owner in conjunction with the city at the time of that they develop. And I will note that we have been contacted again by uh that property owner to the east that uh will likely be moving forward with concept again um on that property. So it might be sooner uh than later. So, is this development leaving money in the city's hand for their portion of the road or >> um No, not at this time. >> Is that not going to be part of it? >> Uh, that's likely not. That's correct. >> With a PUD even. >> Um, that's not currently part of the conversation. >> Okay. Should it be? Uh we will bring it up or we will talk with the city um council about that. Um we can bring up your comment on that. >> All right. Are these uh dead ends going to be the um rounded dead ends now or >> they're under 150 ft? So >> there's only one on the west side that will have a temporary turnaround. Uh the one that goes into the old home sites or the existing home sites on the west. >> Oh, I see. >> Um because that's longer than 150 ft. >> Oh, I see. Okay. >> Just living on a dead end. I know it's different. So, >> but I guess these are short short runs. >> There would be no driveways onto it. >> There there are some on that north one. the >> northwest one. >> Northwest one. Yes. But not not the not the middle one. >> Yeah. >> At least not the stub. The rest of it there. >> So if a semi came in, you could get, you know, because that's what I have come down my my road. It's two blocks long and they back in and it's like, you know, >> if he drives in there, it's his own fault. There's nothing in there for him. >> What? Yeah. I have no further comment on myself. >> Any other comments or questions or I don't have any Casey. >> No. >> Okay. Are we ready to make a motion? It's back on page 80, I believe. >> Is that on 80? >> Think so. >> We got We've got two things. So, the zone the 50.86 acres to PUB. That's one item, right? Yes. >> So that's the first one to make a motion on. I'll make a motion. >> Okay. I will second the motion. All in favor? >> I >> I Okay. Are you on that page? I >> It's uh Yeah. 79 now is the other one. It's approval of the request for preliminary plan approval for Highlands at Eagle View >> and with the conditions >> I can see >> and 14 and >> with the addition of that other >> ement with the addition of the easement necessary to the property of the northwest >> and the watershed thing that you talked about >> the wetland >> the wetland wetland. >> Yes, that's number one. That's the very first condition. >> Okay. >> Um >> but then what about when I brought up talk about the road? Oh, yeah. >> I think um >> I think you >> should just add that into the minutes and we'll be sure to add it into the >> um staff report that will go to the city council that the planning commission um suggested participation in Nevada Avenue. >> Yes. Or at least retaining a value it's worth nowadays, I guess, or a portion. So, okay. We don't know when that development will happen, you know. >> That's correct. A good suggestion. >> I'll make that motion. >> All right. Anyone want a second? I'll second. Okay. All in favor? >> I >> I. All right. Thank you. >> All right. And then on to general business. Um, zoning ordinance amendment discussion chapter six accessory building structures and uses height. >> Jake is going to handle this. >> Shorter presentation. Thank you for everyone for attending the meeting tonight. Um, >> I'll give everyone chance to clear out for every minute. All right, we'll get going. I know it's getting late. Uh staff would like to continue discussions related to potential zoning ordinance amendments related to the city's uh detached accessory buildings. This discussion has been ongoing since February of 2024. Staff have held the discussions and received feedback over the months to create a draft amended ordinance. Uh so that amended ordinance incorporated some of these changes. We increased the building height or changed the building height definition amended it as follows. The vertical distance to be measured from the grade of the finished building to the highest point of the roof. For properties 1 acre and under, we increase the maximum allowable floor area to 1,000 square ft. For acres 1 acre and greater, we increase that to 2,000 square ft. um did the two additional or allowed two detached accessory buildings per lot uh rather than just the one and increase the maximum building height to 20 ft and shall not exceed the primary structure. Public hearing was held and this was all approved during the October uh 10th city council meeting. Since then, uh, April 30th, staff were contacted by a property owner stating that they were still having some issues designing a building that would accommodate a 14t high garage door with a 20 foot maximum height uh, limitation. The property owner pointed out to staff that a 14T door requires a 16 ft wall. And once the truss height is factored in between six or seven more feet, um roughly it leaves it at 23 and a half feet for overall height if you want to get that 14 foot garage door. The purpose of the garage door would be to allow the storage of a class A motor home which was pointed out by the property owner. Uh would also allow residents more indoor storage for recreational vehicles. The property owner has requested a revision to city code uh chapter title 11 chapters 6 through nine to allow a higher building height that will allow a 14t high garage door. The property owner has recommended a maximum height of 24 ft to provide this flexibility. Additionally, the property owner also recommended an exemption to the current requirement that accessory structure shall not exceed the height of a primary structure. Um the property owner believes that he himself personally will comply with this requirement. However, it will be close depending on grading and foundation work. If the existing home is a singlestory home, the height of the home will be a limiting factor. Uh, and the homeowner expressed that he would not be able to build an accessory structure with the 14t high door um in a singlestory home. The property owner is requesting this exemption only apply to acreage lots within city limits. So, lots greater than 1 acre. During the research uh for this topic, staff went over the ordinance and found some other things that should be addressed simultane simultaneously with any proposed ordinance amendment. First, uh city code section 116-6 area limitations B2 is no longer needed as the area limitations in all zoning districts were recently increased to 1,000 or 2,000 square feet based on lot size. Staff recommend deleting this section of code in its entirety. uh it's just redundant and it's it adds to confusion. Staff also recommend the deletion of language in city code section 11-6-7 number of structures and the full deletion of section- 11-6-12 conditional use permits. Uh the purpose would be to remove the language related to conditional use permits as discussed in our previous discussions. Also, the recently increased area limitations uh with two structures equaling either 1,000 or 2,000 square feet should be adequate for on-site storage. So, we don't recommend changing any of that. And then the last one is the city's land use table should be amended to reflect the changes related to conditional use and permitted uses within the city and different zoning districts. This is something that was overlooked in our last ordinance amendment. Um, and it's something that's going to require some time for staff to go through and add that language to all the different sections of city code. So, the planning commission is being asked to consider the amendments uh first for height to allow an increased maximum building height of 24 ft uh which would allow for a 14t high garage door and remove language related to accessory structures not exceeding the height of the primary structure for lots greater than 1 acre. So, that was the resident request and he is here tonight. Um, so before we go into the other things, I think if you have any questions or Lars, if you'd want to speak, floor is yours. >> Well, stand up, give my name. >> Sure. No one else wants to talk about garages, I guess. >> Um, my name is Lars Forsman. I live on 26 330 Thomas Avenue in Elco. And we we have a uh a 4 acre um size lot. So, um, you covered pretty much everything I was going to say. Um, just I will say that I think it is a pretty good benefit to the community to have um a garage door of this size so we can get those larger motor vehicles inside a garage rather than sitting, you know, next to the garage or have to pay to store them somewhere else. So, um, that's really all I had to say. Um, I don't plan on exceeding the square foot >> requirement. I'm happy with the size of the shed. Um but yeah, having a 14 ft door is going to be a selling point for the house when I do sell it someday. And um just yeah, just very valuable. Um in particular, I think the the community is would see see kindly upon it as well. So if there's any questions, let me know. >> What was the number before the 24 foot? >> That was 20. >> 20 is the maximum. >> It wouldn't work. Yeah. So the request is to increase that by four feet. >> Yeah. >> To allow for the garage door. Then the second part of the request would be to remove the language say stating that the accessory structure shall not exceed the height of the primary structure for lots greater than one acre. >> And that and that request is more um like if you have a a one-story home, you know, you're going to be really restricted if you have it's I don't think it's really going to apply to me. Mhm. >> Like I say, with the grading and my slab is actually going in tomorrow morning. So, um just depends on where that top of that slab goes, it's I I think I'm going to be shorter than my house, but yeah, I'd like that um I guess flexibility to if I had to go six inches above or whatever it wherever it ends up being. >> That makes sense, too. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, so the second part of that, uh, if the planning commission does agree to go forward with any kind of possible ordinance amendment, staff would request also to delete that language I stated earlier related to conditional use permits and those sections of code that are no longer necessary due to the updated uh, area limitations in all zoning districts. If changes are recommended, staff will incorporate them into a final draft for a future public hearing at an upcoming meeting. questions, comments, anything makes sense. >> I've seen some houses with this even and my development and >> they built a big garage with it, you know. I mean, it was a it was a bigger house, but I mean it just fit in and >> there's one over on that chest over here, I think, or not that something like that. But anyway, that's Mhm. >> Pretty common. So, >> yeah. So, we're good to move forward with those amendments changes. >> Okay. >> Okay. As proposed. >> Make a motion. >> Uh, we don't need a motion at this point. No, we'll just bring it back as a final draft hopefully at the next meeting. Lars will be in touch. Um, if you want to attend the meeting, you're more than welcome to. I'm sure you got better things to do though sometimes. >> No worries. So, >> okay. >> I'm sorry I came in on the tail end of that, but um can we just talk about the process again? Are we going to plan a public hearing at the next meeting or do you want a draft and then a public hearing? >> So, it's kind of up to the commission if you're comfortable with kind of what we talked about just drafting the >> It will it will delay it a month if we bring you a draft and then hold the public hearing the next month. >> I don't know that we need a draft. We need a draft. >> No, I think it's pretty straightforward. So, Okay, >> sounds good. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> Right. Miscellaneous community development updates. >> What was that? No, we can't adjourn yet. I want to know about 2 and 35. Mindot, do we have any any movement forward? I hate I hate that exit. exit. I know I I don't have any updates. Um, >> learn to love it. >> No, it has me cussing for everybody who rolls that damn stop sign because everybody that rolls that then we get backed up on the freeway or on the ramp waiting to turn and then we get all of the Amazon trucks, all of the FedEx trucks, >> guys. >> Yes, it's killing me. >> It's destroying me. Um I will give a few updates. I mean we have been advocating for MDOT to move the interchange up and or just raise awareness to even to our regional partners, the cities to the north of us um legislators and I think that they're hearing us because um there's this I35 solutions um committee that meets every month. It consists of cities that are up and down the 35 corridor and they um they don't I don't know if they advocate for projects but we're on their list of priorities. So um now that County Road 50 is going to be under construction. We've did we did a study that was kind of a surprise to us maybe the amount of traffic that's coming out of the Lakeville Industrial Park. So we were able to share that with the group. I just sub we just submitted comments on there's a new development in Lakeville being proposed and they did a traffic impact study and we just submitted comments on Thursday night um that hey your your traffic does if it it's going south it's coming down to you know a large amount of it's coming here to get on our interchange um it will impact us. Uh we submitted a grant application a couple weeks ago, maybe a month ago to for $1.5 million just to get some engineering started. So, um they've received our application. Now, we're going to get letters of support um like from the Chamber of Commerce and um different agencies that they want us to submit with that. So, I think we have a really good chance at that, but that still is, it's only a million and a half. And um it just allows us to, you know, to start some more engineering on it. But >> might be 2% of the project. >> Yeah. Be huge. >> And Burnsville tore down. >> Yes. And I'm like, are you kidding me? >> I know. It's crazy. >> Yes. And we can't even get our one exit done. And >> again, Lakeville, it's it's grossly unfair that they have the big business that we don't and they're still utilizing our infrastructure, >> you know, and yes, I understand that we kind of have a little bit of that going on here, but >> this is getting egregious. >> Yeah. >> I mean, thank you for listening to me. >> No, I I think the more the public um >> the more the public I think the public contacting Mindot does help. Um, >> she goes to Northfield. >> I know you got >> Northfield going all the way back. Um, >> in a lot of ways to Northfield. >> Oh, I know there are I do, but I just want to get home. I, you know, I like Northfield. I like being there and when I'm done, I'm done. Just want to get home. >> Yeah, >> I take that's the only way I go to Northfield. But originally was it 2027 or 2028 or did we already breeze through because I feel like we had a date at one point but it was so long ago. >> Scott County had given us a range. So it's a part going to have to be a partnership our funding partners between Scott County and Mindot. um the county through their county sales tax uh they thought that they might have some availability for the project in 2028 to 2032 in that kind of time frame. So now we need to have MDOT get it on their program. And I think as Rich mentioned, even if we said go today, even if MDOT said go today, it's a four years out before it's constructed with all the permitting and engineering and >> Well, it's frustrating too that Scott Countyy's efforts went to 169 and that freaking corridor again. It's just it's frustrating to see other communities get redoss where we don't even get the first opportunity, you know. I remember when they fixed our bridge a few years ago. >> I wish they would have. >> No, I know. >> It didn't help us at all. >> They do it the first time, >> right? >> So, in the meeting minutes it will say Melissa expressed great great frustration about the interchange. That's what I said. Should we adjourn quick or >> put something in like a newsletter on the website? It's okay to zip. >> Goodness, right? >> Yes. I see they're developing behind here. So >> they are >> they're grading. >> They're Yeah, >> two model homes to start. >> Start home in three weeks. Start utility in two weeks. >> So how are conversations with Bart going? >> They just planned around him. >> There's no conversations. >> No, he wouldn't sell on uh Well, he would sell for they couldn't come to terms. >> I know. He could still do something with his lots. >> No, they're they need each other. >> They need each other. So, they um they're retaining a little outlot on Sullivan's property so that someday they'll be able to finish those if >> the north side. I'm talking about the south side. >> Oh, the south side. No, >> they can be independent. >> But isn't there a road going part way? The road will get built down the south edge of this property. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So then he could just use the road to access his lot, couldn't he? >> Not exactly because we would make him extend it to the edge of his property just like he's got water and services he's got to put in. >> So >> they aren't already in. >> Where do you put them? >> We don't Yeah, we don't know the layout. >> I know. Well, that's disturbing. >> Yes, >> it is. >> It affects the future of the road, you know, right? >> They'll have to cut it open, put them in >> or drill them in or something. >> Yeah. I'm it would have I mean if I was Bart I would have said hey I'll I'll pay for those stubs if you give me a stub every 65 ft or something you know just for planning >> I think he's got to get that retirement age or he's got to be looking at the future like Tom Sorry, we should have adjourned before. >> So moved.