Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-11-03 Planning Commission Agenda PacketCITY OF CORCORAN *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. Corcoran Planning Commission Agenda November 3, 2022 - 7:00 pm 1.Call to Order / Roll Call 2.Pledge of Allegiance 3.Commissioner Appointment – Jon Horn 4.Agenda Approval 5.Open Forum 6.Minutes a.October 6, 2022 Regular Meeting Minutes* 7.New Business - Public Comment Opportunity a.Public Hearing. Vollrath Agricultural Accessory Structure Conditional Use Permit (PID 20-119-23-22-0003) (City File No. 22-038) i.Staff Report ii.Open Public Hearing iii.Close Hearing iv.Commission Discussion & Recommendation b.Public Hearing. Park Dedication Subdivision Ordinance Amendment (City File No. 22-065) i.Staff Report ii.Open Public Hearing iii.Close Hearing iv.Commission Discussion & Recommendation 8.Reports/Information a.Planning Project Update* b.City Council Report* – Council Liaison Vehrenkamp c.Other Business – 2023 Priority Setting Discussion* 9.Commissioner Liaison Calendar City Council Meetings 11/10/2022 11/21/2022 (M) 12/8/2022 12/21/2022 1/12/2023 1/26/2023 Horn Shoulak Van Den Einde Brummond Horn Lanterman 10. Adjournment HYBRID MEETING OPTION AVAILABLE The public is invited to attend the regular Council meetings at City Hall. Meeting Via Telephone/Other Electronic Means Call-in Instructions: +1 312 626 6799 US Enter Meeting ID: 832 0701 1109 Press *9 to speak during the Public Comment sections in the meeting. Video Link and Instructions: https:// us02web.zoom.us/ j/83207011109 Or visit http:// www.zoom.us and enter Meeting ID: 832 0701 1109 Participants can utilize the Raise Hand function to be recognized to speak during the Public Comment sections in the meeting. Participant video feeds will be muted. In-person comments will be received first, with the hybrid electronic means option following. www.corcoranmn.gov CITY OF CORCORAN *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. Corcoran Planning Commission Minutes October 6, 2022 - 7:00 pm The Corcoran Planning Commission met on October 6, 2022, in Corcoran, Minnesota. Three Planning Commissioners were present in the Council Chambers, but members of the public were able to participate in-person as well as through electronic means using the audio and video conferencing platform Zoom. Present: Commissioners Lanterman, Brummond, and Van Den Einde. Absent: Commissioners Horn and Shoulak. Also present: City Planner Davis McKeown, City Planner Lindahl, and Council Liaison Vehrenkamp 1.Call to Order / Roll Call 2.Pledge of Allegiance 3.Agenda Approval Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Van Den Einde, to approve the October 6, 2022 agenda. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) 4.Open Forum 5.Minutes a. Minutes – June 2, 2022, Regular Meeting* b. Minutes – September 1, 2022, Regular Meeting* Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Van Den Einde, to approve the June 2, 2022 and September 1, 2022 Meeting Minutes. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) 6. New Business - Public Comment Opportunity a.Public Hearing. Corcoran Farms Business Park Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) Plan at 20130 Larkin Road (City File No. 22-044). i.Staff Report – Planner Lindahl presented the staff report. ii.Open Public Hearing 1. George May, 20020 Larkin Road, stated concerns of traffic impacts and lack of benefit to the citizens. 2.Tom Feehan, 20410 Larkin Road, stated concerns that the developer was the only party receiving a benefit; the lack of a proven hardship in complying with the underlying zoning district; the re-guiding of the land to light industrial; the proposed building sizes; turnaround time for public comment; and lack of screening. 3.Dan Dixon, 20129 Larkin Road, provided concerns about the impact to the view from his house; lack of buffer; proposed extending 75th Street; scale of the proposed light industrial buildings in comparison to the existing light industrial buildings to the east; and previous flooding along Larkin Road. Item 6a. *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. 4.Ryan Richter, 7225 Buckskin Trail, expressed similar concerns as stated previously including increased traffic, lack of landscaping and sound buffer, building size, safety risk, and current infrastructure conditions. 5.Linda Benson, 20205 Larkin Road, didn’t believe this development fit in with the rest of the city and shared similar concerns as previously stated. 6.Lee Sunram, 20305 County Road 50, supported the idea of development but had concerns of traffic impacts onto Larkin Road. 7.Phil Bongaarts, 19949 Larkin Road, spoke about the previous zoning change to light industrial; lack of PUD benefits; traffic impact concerns; existing condition of Larkin Road; drainage; and architectural design. 8.Gail Waldorf, 20117 Larkin Road, stated concerns of the impact to the view from her home; safety; traffic impacts on Larkin Road; use of 75th Avenue as an alternative; potential light-pollution; using the land for a school instead of light industrial; and other locations for light industrial throughout the City. iii.Close Hearing Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Van Den Einde, to close the public hearing. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) iv.Commission Discussion & Recommendation- Commission discussion included the viability of 75th Avenue for access to the site; appropriate usage of a PUD; the lack of screening for loading docks; the lack of proposed landscaping; requested flexibility not clearly defined by the applicant; one-sided benefits of the PUD; the existing light industrial zoning for the subject property; clarification of grading elevations and building height; the proposed impervious surface area; buffer area; desire to scale down building sizes; traffic impacts; looking out of place with the surrounding area; the PUD standards; potential for the land to be developed under straight zoning that meets the light industrial district standards; a desire to have no setback flexibility along Larkin Road; relocation of the proposed Three Rivers regional trail; traffic feasibility study completed with the Environmental Assessment Worksheet; and lighting standards. Motion made by Lanterman, seconded by Van Den Einde, to recommend denial of the draft ordinance approving rezoning, and resolutions approving the preliminary PUD and preliminary plat for Corcoran Farms Business Park. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) b.Slabaugh Variance at 9925 Ebert Road (City File No. 22-054) i.Staff Report – Staff Report presented by Planner Davis McKeown. ii.Public Comment: The applicant, Gideon Slabaugh, spoke about the fire that damaged his house, the reason for their request, the existing deck, and the new property improvements included in the proposal. iii.Commission Discussion & Recommendation – Commission discussion included the restrictive language regarding expansion of a nonconforming structing in the city code; the extent of compliance with the extended porch; the definition of expansion; and whether staff should be able to administratively approve this type of expansion. Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Van Den Einde, to recommend approval of draft Resolution 2022-A approving the variance for a covered porch to encroach within the side and front yard setbacks at 9925 Ebert Road. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) c.Public Hearing. Tharp Accessory Structure Conditional Use Permit at 20420 Duffney Circle (City File No. 22-055) i.Staff Report – The staff report was presented by Planner Davis McKeown ii.Open Public Hearing 1.Michael Pattison, 20400 Duffney Circle, asked about the total height of the structure and noted that his house overlooks the structure. *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. 2.Sherri Bergs and Michael Catlette, 9530 Duffney Circle, stated concerns about the size and height of the structure as well as the wetland impact. They also spoke about the aesthetic of the current neighborhood compared to the structure iii.Close Hearing Motion made by Lanterman, seconded by Van Den Einde, to close the public hearing. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) iv.Commission Discussion & Recommendation- Shawn Tharp, 20420 Duffney Circle, spoke about the size of the structure to accommodate storage of personal recreational vehicles; the constraint of the power lines to the north of the structure restricting screening capabilities; and the uncertainty of being able to finish building the structure within two years. Commission discussion included questions about the structure height; restricting the building so it cannot be used for commercial rental space; clarification of what the Commission should be looking at when reviewing requests similar to this one; consideration of landscaping requirements for a project this size; reduce the approval period from 5 years to 2 or 3 years; and the potential financial costs to the applicant if the application expires prior to completion of phase 2 of the structure. Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Van Den Einde, to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the property located at 20420 Duffney Circle, with a requirement that finished landscaping be provided along Duffney Drive as a condition of approval and a 3- year approval period with a single 1-year extension. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) d.Public Hearing. Corcoran Water Tower Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, Site Plan and Variance at 19951 Oswald Farm Road (City File No. 22-057) i.Staff Report – The staff report was presented by Planner Lindahl. ii.Open Public Hearing 1.Peter Cmiel, 20041 Hunters Ridge, questioned the attractiveness of the water tower and potential effect on property values. 2.John Kothrade, 20140 County Road 30, stated concerns about the property being developed; addressing existing and future water drainage problems on the property; and the previous water tower site proposal. 3.Ryan Lother, 19951 Oswald Farm Road, spoke about the cell tower on the neighboring property, development generated from construction of a water tower, the existing tree line screening the tower for the residents north of Hope Church; and willingness to complete grading to prevent water drainage onto the Kothrade property. iii.Close Public Hearing Motion made by Lanterman, seconded by Brummond, to close the public hearing. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) iv.Commission Discussion & Recommendation – The Commission discussion included the installation of a bioretention swale; the previous water tower site proposal in Bellwether; question of curb and gutter around the bituminous drive; the potential for a larger development surrounding the tower in the future; agreement that the practical difficulty standard was met for reduced lot size, the overhead door, and drive lane variances. Motion made by Lanterman, seconded by Van Den Einde, to approve draft resolution approving the preliminary plat, final plat, site plan, and variance for “Hope Place Second Addition” at 19951 Oswald Farm Road. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, and Van Den Einde. *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. (Motion passed 3:0) e.Public Hearing. Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the Northeast District Plan (City File No. 22-060) i.Staff Report – The staff report was presented by Planner Davis McKeown ii.Open Public Hearing No one spoke during the public hearing. iii.Close Hearing Motion made by Lanterman, seconded by Brummond, to close the Public Hearing. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) iv.Commission Discussion & Recommendation- Commission discussion included critiquing the Northeast District Standards; vagueness of proposed verbiage change to overhead door requirements; using landscaping as screening; adding language that requires fencing to be 4 to 6 feet tall; streamlining the application process; and relating the NE District standards to the Corcoran Farms Business Park. Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Van Den Einde, to recommend approval of the draft ordinance and draft resolution with finds of fact, for the Zoning Ordinance Amendment to the Northeast District Plan. Voting Aye: Brummond and Van Den Einde. Voting Nay: Lanterman. (Motion passed 2:1) 7.Reports/Information a.Planning Project Update* b.City Council Report* – Council Liaison Vehrenkamp spoke about the previous water tower site on Bellwether and proposed well site on the proposed Corcoran Farms Business Park site. Chair Lanterman requested that the Council provide a detailed explanation when they vote against the Commission’s recommendation going forward. c.Other Business 8.Commissioner Liaison Calendar City Council Meetings 10/13/2022 10/27/2022 11/10/2022 11/21/2022 (M) 12/8/2022 12/21/2022 Brummond Lanterman Horn Shoulak Van Den Einde Brummond 9. Adjournment Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Van Den Einde, to adjourn the October 6, 2022 Planning Commission Meeting. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 3:0) Meeting adjourned at 10:31 pm. Page 1 of 10 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7a. Planning Commission Meeting: November 3, 2022 Prepared By: Natalie Davis McKeown Topic: Vollrath Agricultural Building Conditional Use Permit (City File 22-038) (PID 20-119-23-22-0003) Action Required: Recommendation Review Deadline: November 28, 2022 1. Application Request Trent Vollrath requests a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow an agricultural building as a principal use at a property adjacent to the active farmstead at 22903 Strehler Road under the same ownership. Jerald Vollrath has an ownership interest in both PID 20-119-23- 22-0003 (the subject property) and 22903 Strehler Road, and the applicant is Jerald’s grandson. 2. Context Zoning and Land Use The property is zoned Rural Residential (RR), and the Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Rural/Ag Residential. The property is not located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). The property is used as agricultural land. There is one existing agricultural building on the property that pre- dates the Zoning Ordinance per aerial views on Hennepin County’s Property Map. The building does not have a CUP and does not meet the required setbacks but is protected as a legal nonconforming structure. Surrounding Properties The immediate surrounding properties are zoned RR, guided for Rural/Ag Residential, and located within the MUSA. The adjacent property to the northeast under the ownership of Jerald Vollrath includes a single-family home and numerous agricultural 22903 Strehler Rd PID 20-119-23-22-0003 Proposed Building Site Page 2 of 10 buildings. The other surrounding properties appear to be used for farming as well as single-family residences. Natural Characteristics of The Site The Comprehensive Plan Natural Resource Inventory (NRI) does not identify any natural plant communities on the subject property. The applicant is undergoing certification of a wetland report with the City. The submitted report indicates wetlands within the northwest and southeast portions of the site (see left). The proposed location of the accessory structure doesn’t require grading within the identified wetland boundary. However, Hennepin County’s Natural Resources Map (attached to this report) identifies floodplain throughout the site that will be impacted by the proposed location of the structure. This is discussed further in the Analysis section of this report and the attached Engineering Memo. 3. Analysis Staff reviewed the application for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, City Code requirements, as well as City policies. The City Engineer’s comments are incorporated into this staff report, and the Engineering Memo is attached. A. Level of City Discretion in Decision-Making The City’s discretion in approving or denying a CUP is limited to whether the proposed plan is in substantial conformance with the standards outlined in the City Code. If it meets those standards, the City must approve the CUP. B. Consistency with Ordinance Standards Time of Construction Per Section 1030.020, Subd. 2, accessory structures (including agricultural buildings) typically cannot be constructed on a lot prior to the construction of a principal building (e.g., a residence). The subject property does not have a principal building. However, an allowance is made in Section 1030.020, Subd. 4(J) when a parcel is actively farmed, adjacent to a farmstead with a principal building, and under the same ownership as the farmstead (or the landowners are in a recognized legal relationship). In such a scenario, a CUP is required. The subject property is actively farmed and adjacent to a farmstead owned by Jerald Vollrath who also has an ownership interest in the subject property. Page 3 of 10 Therefore, a CUP can be approved to circumvent the requirement that an accessory structure must be built after the construction of a principal building. This CUP is discussed in more detail later in this report. Location Section 1030.020, Subd. 3 provides the location requirements for accessory structures. Agricultural buildings must be setback at least 100’ from all property lines. The submitted survey (see right) reflects that the proposed building location meets or exceeds the setback requirements with the building setback 100’ from the nearest lot line to the east. Since this property was platted prior to the existing Zoning Ordinance, the property is not required to have wetland buffers, so there is no applicable setback from the wetland boundary. Size The submitted plans show a building size of 95’ x 80’ or 7,600 square feet. The existing legal nonconforming agricultural building appears to be roughly 80’ x 39.5’ or 3,160 square feet. The size is consistent with standards provided in Section 1030.020, Subd. 4 of the Zoning Ordinance. The property is 68.6 acres in size. Parcels of 10 acres or more are allowed an accessory structure footprint of 3,969 square feet by right. When the property is actively farmed, an agricultural building can exceed the footprint limitation with the issuance of a Certificate of Compliance. A Certificate of Complaince can be issued if the following standards are satisfied: 1. The proposed use shall be in conformance with all City regulations. 2. A certificate of survey shall be required that identified all existing structures on site, including buildings, septic sites, and wells. In addition, the survey shall include the proposed structure, floodplain, wetlands, and any recorded easements. 3. The building materials standards required by this Section have been met. 4. The agricultural building is used for agricultural purposes only. The submitted survey does not include floodplain but does include all other requirements. A condition of approval for the Certificate of Compliance and CUP includes the revision of the survey to include the floodplain. Additionally, the applicant will be required to sign an affidavit confirming the building will only be used for agricultural purposes. With these conditions of approval, the standards for the Certificate of Compliance are met. Page 4 of 10 Building Height The plans for the accessory structure reflect a sidewall height of 18’ (as shown below). Typically, accessory structures in the front yard are not allowed to exceed a sidewall height limit of 10’. However, agricultural buildings can surpass this rule with a Certificate of Compliance as long as the building does not exceed the building height limit of the underlying zoning district. The building height limit in the Rural Residential district is 35’. The tallest point of the roof is roughly 32’. Therefore, the plans satisfy the standard for the Certificate of Compliance. Buildings with a sidewall height of more than 12’ require a minimum eave of 12” and minimum overhang of 24”. The City Code does not specifically define eave or overhang, and often these terms are used interchangeably. Historically, staff interpreted eave to mean the underside, or soffit, of the roof along the side of the building. Overhangs are interpreted to mean the edge of the roof overhanging the front and rear elevations. The plans do not clearly dimension the eaves and overhangs, but the eaves and overhangs measure at 24” based on the provided scale in the building plans. This performance standard is satisfied. Architectural Standards The building plans do not clearly identify the proposed building materials. The applicant provided verbal confirmation that the building will have a metal roof with metal siding. These materials comply with the standards for accessory structures outlined in Section 1030.020, Subd. 6 and Section 1060.050, Subd. 1(D). Metal siding and roofing is allowed via a Certificate of Compliance if the materials meet the standards in the MN State Building Code and are treated with a factory applied color coating system to protect against fading. The applicant’s buildings plans show the metal will be coated Page 5 of 10 with white and brown. The materials comply, but a condition of approval in the draft resolution requires the plans to be updated to label the proposed building material. The building includes 2 overhead garage doors, 1 window, and 1 door on the front façade. The left elevation includes 1 overhead garage door, 4 windows, and 1 door. The rear façade consists of 3 windows. The right façade includes 1 overhead garage door, 1 door, and 2 windows. The roofline includes 2 small cupolas to add rural-inspired architecture to the structure. The front façade of the structure may be visible from Strehler Road, but it will be setback 150’ to soften the impact. Landscaping A landscape plan is not required with this application type. There do not appear to be any existing trees in the vicinity of the proposed building location (see image below). No screening is proposed. The Planning Commission should discuss whether they believe landscaping is necessary to address the impact of granting the CUP. Approx. Building Location Page 6 of 10 Grading The applicant submitted grading information within the submitted survey as part of the application. Per the wetland delineation report submitted for certification, the wetland boundary is much further west of the proposed building location than what is shown on the survey. Therefore, the wetlands are not anticipated to be impacted by the proposed grading. Either way, the survey needs to be revised to show the certified wetland boundary. The proposed building location and grading appears to be within a floodplain per data from Hennepin County (see image below). The Engineering Memo requires the following to address the proposed impact to the floodplain: - The plans must be revised to identify the flood protection elevation to ensure the building is constructed above the elevation in accordance with regulatory standards. - If fill is placed below the floodplain elevation, then compensatory storage (e.g., mitigation) should be provided onsite or the building should be placed in a location without any impacts on the floodplain. - Watershed review and approval is required due to the proposed work in the floodplain. This feedback is incorporated as conditions of approval in the draft Resolution. Driveway Page 7 of 10 There is an existing driveway on the property that will be utilized to access the building. It is assumed that the driveway will be extended to reach the doors on three sides of the building. The Engineering Memo states that the plans must be revised to reflect where the driveway will be extended. This is included as a conditional of approval in the draft Resolution. Conditional Use Permit Specific CUP standards are provided for agricultural buildings as principal uses in Section 1030.020, Subd. 4(J). Additionally, Section 1070.020 provides general standards for CUPs. All of these standards were used in evaluating the CUP request. Specific standards: 1. The proposed use shall be in conformance with all City Regulations. Agricultural accessory buildings are a permitted use in the RR district. As discussed previously in this report, the proposed plans significantly comply with the accessory structure standards provided in Section 1030.020 of the Zoning Ordinance. The outstanding concerns can be addressed with conditions of approval that are included in the enclosed draft Resolution. 2. A certificate of survey shall be required that identifies all existing structures on site, including buildings, septic sites, and wells. In addition, the survey shall include the proposed structure, flood plain, wetlands, and any recorded easements. The applicant submitted materials to start the formal wetland delineation process on September 29, 2022. Finalization of the wetland delineation with the City is included as a condition of approval. If the City were to determine the wetland boundary is further east than shown in the submitted wetland report, then the applicant must ensure the grading and building stay out of the wetland and revise their plans as necessary. A certificate of survey was submitted, but it does not reflect the delineated wetland boundary per the applicant’s wetland report nor the floodplain on the property. The Engineering Memo requires the applicant to revise the survey to show the delineated wetland boundary as well as the flood protection elevation to address the anticipated impact to the floodplain on the property. 3. The building materials standards required by this Section have been met. As discussed earlier in this report, the proposed metal siding and metal roof are permitted building materials when approved via a Certificate of Compliance. Page 8 of 10 4. The applicant provides proof of ownership as required above. Hennepin County’s Property Map reflects Jerald Vollrath’s ownership of 22903 Strehler Road. On the same resource, Trent Vollrath is the listed owner of the subject property (PID 20-119-23-22-0003), but the applicant submitted paperwork reflecting that Jerald Vollrath continues to have an ownership interest in the subject property. This documentation is attached to this report. Since this is a CUP and not an Interim Use Permit (IUP), a typical sunset clause cannot be added to address what happens when there is a change of ownership. In discussing this topic with the City Attorney, he advises a condition in the CUP that ties the approvals back to the use of the structure and/or property. Staff attempts to address this limitation with a condition of approval in the draft Resolution requiring the continued agricultural use of the subject property in tandem with the farmstead at 22903 Strehler Road. 5. The agricultural building is used for agricultural purposes only. In speaking with the applicant, the building is expected to house farming equipment as well as livestock. The applicant will be required to sign an affidavit that the building will only be used for agricultural purposes as a condition of approval. General standards: A. Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. The Future Land Use Map within the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural/Ag Residential. This land use designation is defined by natural areas, planted fields, pastureland, hobby farms, and large residential lots. The proposed agricultural building is compatible with the anticipated uses within this area of the City as contemplated by the Comprehensive Plan. There are no believed conflicts to public facilities or capital improvement plans. B. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. The establishment of the conditional use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the community. The building will be used to house equipment and livestock. The orderly containment of equipment and livestock will promote and enhance the general public welfare. Page 9 of 10 C. The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of the property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, not substantially diminish and impact property values within the neighborhood. The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of nearby properties, nor substantially impact property values within the neighborhood. Farming and necessary agricultural buildings exist on the two involved properties today and are an expected use within the district. The agricultural building will provide a containable space for the applicant to keep farming equipment and livestock, which will minimize any injurious impacts to the use and enjoyment of the properties within the immediate area. It is unlikely that the agricultural building will diminish property values in the neighborhood. D. The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property uses permitted in the district. The establishment of the conditional use does not cause an impediment to development and improvement of surrounding properties for permitted uses within the RR. E. Adequate public facilities and services are available or can be reasonably provided to accommodate the proposed use. Municipal sewer and water are not available to the site and are not required to accommodate the proposed use. F. The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. The conditional use, in all other respects, conforms to the applicable regulations within the RR District. G. The conditional use and site conform to the performance standards as specified by this Chapter. The conditional use and site conform to the performance standards as specified by the Zoning Ordinance. Any outstanding concerns are addressed as conditions of approval in the draft Resolution. 4. Conclusion Staff reviewed the plans with the applicable standards outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance and finds that the standards for a CUP are satisfied. The proposed use is consistent with the type of use existing and anticipated within the RR. Any outstanding issues that must be addressed are included as a condition of approval in the attached draft Resolution. Page 10 of 10 5.Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the draft Resolution approving the CUP for an agricultural accessory building as a principal use on the subject property. Attachments: 1.Draft Resolution 2022- 2.Survey 3.Building Plans 4.Proof of Ownership 5. Delineated Features Exhibit from Wetland Report 6.Hennepin County Natural Resources Map 7.Engineering Memo City of Corcoran November 21, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022- Page 1 of 5 Motion By: Seconded By: APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO 22903 STREHLER ROAD (PID 20-119-23-22-0003) (CITY FILE NO. 22-038) WHEREAS, Trent Vollrath, the applicant, requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow for construction of an agricultural accessory building as a principal use on the subject property legal described as follows: SEE ATTACHMENT A WHEREAS, the applicant also requests Certificates of Compliance for the following features: a. A total accumulated accessory structure footprint of 10,760 square feet. b. A sidewall height of 18 feet for an accessory structure built in the front yard. c. Use of metal roofing and metal siding as building materials. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the conditional use permit at a duly called public hearing; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request, subject to the following findings and conditions; 1. A Conditional Use Permit is approved to allow for the construction of an agricultural accessory structure as shown on the building plans received July 13, 2022, the survey received on August 24, 2022, and as otherwise amended in this Resolution. 2. The applicant must comply with the Engineering Memo dated October 24, 2022. 3. A Certificate of Compliance to allow an accessory structure footprint of 10,760 square feet is approved as part of the Conditional Use Permit subject to the following conditions: a. The certificate of survey must be revised to reflect the certified wetland boundary after completion of the wetland delineation application with the City. b. The applicant must sign an affidavit testifying the building will be used for agricultural purposes only. 4. A Certificate of Compliance to allow an accessory structure sidewall height of 18 feet in the front yard is approved as part of the Conditional Use Permit. The total building height cannot exceed 35 feet. 5. A Certificate of Compliance to allow metal siding and a metal roof on this accessory building is approved as part of the Conditional Use Permit. The building materials must comply with Section 1060.050, Subd. 1(D)(3) of the Zoning Ordinance. City of Corcoran November 21, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022- Page 2 of 5 6. A Conditional Use Permit to allow an agricultural accessory building as a principal use is approved, subject to the following findings outlined as specific criteria in Section 1030.020, Subd. 4(J): a. The proposed accessory structure is in conformance with all City Regulations. Accessory structures and agriculture are permitted uses in the Rural Residential District, and the proposed plans significantly comply with standards for accessory structures as outlined in Section 1030.020 of the Zoning Ordinance. b. The applicant submitted a certificate of survey and wetland delineation application that provide most of the necessary information to evaluate his request. A condition of approval is included in this Resolution to require a revised survey that incorporates the newly delineated wetland boundary and the floodplain in order to satisfy this standard. c. The building materials meet the standards required in Section 1070.020 with the approval of a Certificate of Compliance. d. The applicant provided proof of ownership reflecting an ownership interest in the subject property as well as the adjacent farmstead at 22903 Strehler Road. e. The agricultural building will be used for agricultural purposes only. The applicant is required to sign an affidavit that testifies the building will only be used for agricultural purposes. 7. A Conditional Use Permit to allow an agricultural accessory building as a principal use is approved, subject to the following findings outlined as general criteria in Section 1070.020 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Corcoran Zoning Ordinance: a. The proposed use complies with the Comprehensive Plan. The structure is consistent with the Rural/Ag Residential land use designation and maintains the desired rural character of the area. b. The establishment of the conditional use will promote and enhance the general public welfare. Granting the Conditional Use Permit for the new structure will allow for the orderly containment of the applicant’s farm equipment and livestock. c. The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity. The structure meets or exceeds a large setback of 100’ from all property lines to soften the impact of the structure to surrounding properties. Containment of farming equipment and livestock is necessary to the enjoyment of surrounding properties, and the accessory structure is unlikely to lead to an injurious impact or diminish property values. d. The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development of surrounding property uses permitted in the district. e. Municipal sewer and water are not available to the site and are not required to accommodate the proposed use. City of Corcoran November 21, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022- Page 3 of 5 f. The conditional use conforms to the applicable regulations of the Rural Residential district. g. Conditions in this resolution will ensure the conditional use and site conform to the accessory structure ordinance. Staff found that the building conforms to all other performance standards specified in the Zoning Ordinance and City Code as required by Section 1070.020. 8. The accessory structure cannot be used for personal storage or commercial purposes other than agriculture. 9. The building must be constructed above the flood protection elevation in accordance with regulatory standards. a. If fill is placed below the floodplain elevation, compensatory storage must be provided onsite, or the building must be placed in a location without any impacts to the floodplain. 10. The subject property must continue to be used for agriculture in tandem with the farmstead at 22903 Strehler Road. 11. FURTHER, the following conditions must be met prior to commencing construction of the building and release of the escrow account on file with the City: a. A revised survey must be submitted that addresses the following: i. The final wetland boundary as approved by BWSR. ii. Floodplain must be indicated on the survey. iii. Identification of the flood protection elevation. iv. The intended driveway expansion to serve the proposed overhead doors of the building. b. Revised building plans must be submitted that reflect the proposed building materials. c. The applicant must sign an affidavit testifying that the building will only be used for agricultural purposes. d. The formal wetland delineation process must be complete. i. If the location of the certified wetland boundary differs from the submitted site plans, the site plan and grading plan must be modified to ensure grading remains outside of the wetland. e. Work completed within the floodplain as reflected on the proposed plans must be reviewed and approved by the Watershed Management Organization. f. The applicant/landowner must record the approving resolution at Hennepin County and provide proof of recording to the City. City of Corcoran November 21, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022- Page 4 of 5 12. Approval shall expire within one year of the date of approval unless the applicant commences the authorized use and the required improvements. The applicant can apply for an additional time extension of up to one year as allowed by Section 1070.020, Subd.7(A) of the Zoning Ordinance. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 21st day of November 2022. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Jessica Beise – Administrative Services Director City of Corcoran November 21, 2022 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2022- Page 5 of 5 Attachment A That part of the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 20, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying South of the North 700.00 feet thereof. AND That part of the North 700.00 feet of the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 20, lying West of the East 660.00 feet thereof. DRAWN BY Nate Lysne Company Name Berg Companies 5145 Industrial Street Suite #1 Maple Plain, MN 55359 A0. DRAWN BY Nate Lysne Company Name Berg Companies 5145 Industrial Street Suite #1 Maple Plain, MN 55359 A0.1 Front Elevation - 1/4" = 1'-0"18'-0" DRAWN BY Nate Lysne Company Name Berg Companies 5145 Industrial Street Suite #1 Maple Plain, MN 55359 A0.2 Left Elevation - 1/4" = 1'-0" DRAWN BY Nate Lysne Company Name Berg Companies 5145 Industrial Street Suite #1 Maple Plain, MN 55359 A0.3 Back Elevation - 1/4" = 1'-0" DRAWN BY Nate Lysne Company Name Berg Companies 5145 Industrial Street Suite #1 Maple Plain, MN 55359 A0.4 Right Elevation - 1/4" = 1'-0" DRAWN BY Nate Lysne Company Name Berg Companies 5145 Industrial Street Suite #1 Maple Plain, MN 55359 A0.5 Floor Plan - 3/16" = 1'-0" 80'-0"95'-0"30'-0" 20'-0"30'-0"14'x14' Overhead Door 3'x7' Man Door (typical) 16'x16' Overhead Door 16'x16' Overhead Door 2 Story Office Stairs to Upper Level 16'x35' Sliding Door 16'x35' Flip Up Door Wetland 1 PEM1Bd 14.706 ac. Wetland 2 PEM1Af 2.583 ac.10061002 101010281020 1010 100410061008 1010 1014 1016101810121016 1020100810121 0 1 41010 1 0 1 6 10241020 101810101 0 2 2 102210141030 102010181012 1032102210161012 102010061020 10181014103010 2 0 102810261022 10241 0 0 81010 1018 1026 102810 2 4 1020 10101022 IP-1a IP-1b wet1-wet IP-2 IP-3 PP-1 PP-2 PP-4 PP-5 PP-6 IP-1 Offsite Area 3 Wetland 1 PP-7 PP-8PP-9 PP-10 Wetland 1 IP-2 IP-3 0 300150 Feet Created By: meaghan.dietrich Date Exported: 9/13/2022 1:21 PM T:\Projects\22700\22791 Bursch_Bros\10_ArcPro\BurschBrosDelineation.aprxClient: Bursch Brothers Delineated Features Figure 6 Vollrath Aquatic Resources Delineation Project Area Sample Point Photo Point Delineated Wetlands Hennepin County N atural Resources Map Date: 10/27/2022 Comments: This data (i) is furnished 'AS IS' with no representation as to completeness or accuracy; (ii) is furnished with no warranty of any kind; and (iii) is notsuitable for legal, engineering or surveying purposes. Hennepin County shall not be liable for any damage, injury or loss resulting from this data. COPYRIGHT © HENNEPIN COUNTY 2022 1 inch = 400 feet Legend FEMA Floodplains - 100 Year A AE FLOODPLAIN AH AO AE FLOODWAY PID: 2011923220003Address: 52 Address Unassigned, Corcoran 00000 Owner: Trent E Vollrath Acres: 68.6 ¯ Memo To: Kevin Mattson, City of Corcoran From: Kent Torve, City Engineer Steve Hegland, PE Project: Vollrath Ag Building Date: 10/24/2022 Exhibits: This Memorandum is based on a review of the following documents: 1. Certificate of Survey for Jerald Vollrath by Otto Associates Dated 7-13-22 2. Building plans by Berg Exteriors Company, no date Comments: General: 1. Consistent with the review process, a comment response letter shall be provided in response to the following comments provided in this Memorandum in which the applicant provides a written response to each item. 2. In addition to engineering related comments per these plans, the proposed plans are subject to addition planning, zoning, land-use, and other applicable codes of the City of Corcoran. 3. No additional access is proposed with the site plan as the existing drive access from Strehler Road will be utilized. October 24, 2022 Vollrath Ag Building Kevin Mattson Page 2 of 2 Site Improvements: 4. A wetland delineation has been completed for the site. The survey should be updated to show the final wetland boundaries as approved by BWSR instead of the Hennepin County GIS information. 5. The site plan shows the building and proposed grading. It is assumed that driveways will be constructed to the doors of the building. If so, these should be shown on the site plan at the time of the building permit. 6. The proposed building location is located within a FEMA zone A as shown below from the Hennepin County GIS website. The plans shall identify the flood protection elevation and ensure the building is constructed above the elevation on accordance with regulatory standards. If fill is placed below the floodplain elevation compensatory storage should be provided onsite or building should be placed in a location without any impacts on floodplain. o Due to proposed work in floodplain, a WMO review is required. End of Comments Agenda Item: 7b. Page 1 of 3 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288 email: general@corcoranmn.gov / website: www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO To: Planning Commission From: Jessica Beise, City Administrator Date: November 3, 2022 RE: Park Dedication Subdivision Ordinance Amendment ( City File 22-065) ______________________________________________________________________________ Staff have been working diligently to update the City’s Park Dedication Ordinance. Staff has been working with the City Assessor’s office to get updated valuation information to finalize the percentage of land needed. Staff was hoping to have the information prior to the meeting on November 3rd. In order to hold the public hearing staff needs to have the information provided to the commission by October 31st. If we do not have the needed information, we would table the hearing one month. Due to the increases in costs for the park system, staff is hoping to update the fees as timely as possible to allow for the City to capture adequate fees for the park system. Below is a nearly completed draft staff report, if additional information is received it will be update for consideration along with a draft ordinance and findings of fact. 1. Application Request Review and comment on an update to the park dedication requirements of the Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 9 of the City Code. 2. Background Corcoran’s current park dedication standards were developed in 2011 based on the park and trail system needs identified by the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan. In December 2014, the City made several amendments to address specific concerns about the method for calculating density, how park dedication credit would be given for trails and what trail improvements developers must make. Language was also added to clarify that “park dedication is not due for parcels that have previously paid park dedication (land or cash-in-lieu)”. In April of 2016, more significant amendments were made to address concerns with the Agenda Item: 7b. Page 2 of 3 residential dedication formula and ensure that the cash dedications were adequate to meet the City’s needs. In April of 2020, a review of land and cash dedications took place and fees were amended to ensure the land and cash dedications met the needs outlined in the 2040 Comprehensive plan. 3. Analysis MN Statute §462.358 requires that park dedication requirements be based on the adopted comprehensive plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan update was recently adopted by the City of Corcoran. The Comprehensive Plan provides the anticipated future parks and trails based on the growth forecast for the City. The parks and trails planned for in the Comprehensive Plan are different from the previous comprehensive plan. Park dedication is the City’s tool to fund the necessary park and trail improvements and is being updated to be consistent with the planned improvements from the updated comprehensive plan. The fair market value of land is required to be based on the annual tax valuations or other relevant data determined annually by the municipality. We contacted the City Assessor for the current land values that are used in the park dedication calculations. As part of the update the cost assumptions for land value, trail construction and park improvements were updated to the current values in the market. The table below shows the previous park dedication and updated park dedication. Park Dedication 2016 Park Dedication 2020 Park Dedication 2022 Park Dedication Change Single Family $3,970 $4,628 Multi-Family $2,694 $3,141 Commercial and Industrial $4,135 $4,498 The fee increases would be amended by City Council meeting as part of the 2023 fee schedule. The increase is a result of several factors: • the total population expected has decreased from the growth forecast in the 2030 plan; • the land value has increased since the last update; • a portion of boardwalk has been included for the total off road trail length increasing the overall cost; • The planned overpass/underpass crossings have been added to the trail costs. Staff recommends regular review of the park dedication calculations to update the land values and construction costs and ensure that the park dedication fees keep pace with development costs. The fee schedule update does not require Planning Commission review but is Agenda Item: 7b. Page 3 of 3 provided for informational purposes. Ordinance Amendment In addition to the fee schedule updates, staff is recommending minor changes to the Subdivision Ordinance to implement these changes. The changes update the code to be consistent with the density for each land use identified in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and update the percentage of dedication to be consistent with the updated fees. The code revisions are shown below. Land Dedication Requirements: Land Use Category based on the Comprehensive Plan Units per acre (Density, Net – Pre-Development) Percentage of land Proposed Changes Rural/Ag Residential Less than 3 4% Low Density Residential 3-5 15% Medium-Density Residential 5-8 17% Mixed Residential 8-10 28% High-Density Residential and Mixed-Use 10+-30 24% Mixed-Use 8-30 19% Commercial and Industrial N/A 3% 4. Recommendation Move to recommend approval of new park dedication fees and the ordinance modifying Section 955 of the City Code. Attachments To Be Provided Agenda Item 8a. Page 1 of 4 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288 email: general@corcoranmn.gov / website: www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO Meeting Date: To: From: Re: October 27, 2022 City Council Natalie Davis McKeown, Planner Active Corcoran Planning Applications The following is a status summary of active planning projects: 1.Lots, Fences, and Walls ZOA (City File No. 22-033). Staff received direction at the June 9th Council meeting on potential solutions for additional fence flexibility within front yards as well as identifying a primary front yard for lots with multiple frontages. The City Council reviewed a draft ordinance at the August 11th meeting and directed staff to limit the focus of the amendment to reduce the setback for fences to 25’. This item was identified as a Top 4 priority for staff to focus efforts in 2022 and was scheduled for a public hearing at the September 1st Planning Commission meeting. The Commission forwarded a recommendation to approve with some changes to the proposed amendment. The City Council approved the ordinance as recommended by staff at the September 22nd meeting with the Summary Publication Ordinance approved on October 13th. 2.Transition/Buffer Zones ZOA (City File 22-034). At the July 14th City Council confirmed, this item was confirmed as a Top 4 priority for staff to focus efforts on in the remainder of 2022. Staff is working on preparing a draft based on feedback provided at the May 12th work session. A working draft is on the agenda for the October 27th City Council work session to provide feedback and is expected to be sent to the Planning Commission for a public hearing as early as December. 3.MS4 Update (City File 22-035). Public Works proposed a code update to incorporate new MS4 permit requirements. The City Code amendment was approved by the City Council at the October 13th regular meeting. 4.Vollrath Ag Shop CUP (PID 20-119-23-22-0003) (City File No. 22-038). Trent Vollrath submitted an application for a conditional use permit to allow an agricultural building as the primary structure on an otherwise vacant lot that is actively farmed. The application is complete and is scheduled for a public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting on November 3rd and the City Council on November 21st. 5.Pioneer Trail Industrial Park, Rezoning and Preliminary Plat and PUD (PID 32-119-23-34- 0013, 32-119-23-34-0007, 32-119-23-43-0005 and 32-119-23-43-0006) (City File No. 22- Page 2 of 4 039). An application was submitted to move forward with the preliminary approvals for the Pioneer Trail Industrial Park off Highway 55. The item is still incomplete as of this memo and is not yet scheduled for Planning Commission or City Council. It is possible a complete submittal will be received in time for the December meetings. 6. Corcoran Farms Business Park Rezoning and Preliminary Plat and PUD at 20130 Larkin Road (PID 26-119-23-13-0006) (City File No. 22-044). The City received a second industrial PUD application. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 6th and recommended denial of the application. The item will be reviewed at the City Council on October 27th. 7. PUD Standards Zoning Ordinance Amendment (City File No. 22-045). At their July 14th meeting, the City Council identified updating the PUD ordinance as a Top 4 priority for staff to focus efforts on in the remainder of 2022. The Council held a work session on July 28th to establish further direction on the desired updates to the PUD ordinance. Staff will take this feedback to establish a first draft for further review by the Council at an upcoming meeting. Review of a working draft is tentatively scheduled for the City Council work session on October 27th. This item may be forwarded to the Planning Commission for a public hearing as soon as the December 1st meeting. 8. Rental Ordinance (City File No. 22-046). At their July 14th meeting, the City Council identified establishing a rental ordinance as a Top 4 priority for staff to focus efforts on in the remainder of 2022. City Council reviewed a first draft of the rental ordinance at the September 22nd work session. Staff is currently refining the draft based on Council feedback, and a second draft is tentatively scheduled for a City Council work session on November 21st. 9. Brown Riding Arena CUP (PID 05-119-23-13-0008) (City File No. 22-047). An application was submitted to allow a horse-riding arena on a ten-acre parcel as the structure, in conjunction with the necessary horse barn, will be in excess of the accessory structure footprint permitted by right. The public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on September 1st, and the Commission unanimously recommended approval of the CUP. Council approved the CUP at the September 22nd meeting. 10. Pro-Tech Site Plan, CUP, and Variance (PID 26-119-23-11-0020) (City File No. 22-048). An application was submitted to move forward with the site plan, two CUPs, and three variances for an expansion of Pro-Tech Auto. The public hearing was held at the September 1st Planning Commission meeting, and all variances were recommended for approval. The Council approved the project at the September 22nd meeting. 11. O’Brien Sketch Plan (PID 32-119-23-44-0003) (City File No. 22-049). A sketch plan application was submitted for corporate offices of Crystal Distribution Inc (CDI) spanning 15,000 square feet at 22320 Highway 55. The item was reviewed by Council at the August 25th Council meeting. The feasibility study for the project wrapped up this past week. Staff and the applicant are discussing next steps based on the results of the feasibility study. 12. Water Treatment Plan Site Plan and Variances (PID 12-119-23-22-0010) (City File No. 22- 052). A site plan application was submitted by Stantec to move forward with the site for the City’s water treatment plant located at 10120 County Road 116 in the Northeast District. The submitted site plan would require three variances related to screening and an accessory structure within the front yard. The item was reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 1st with a recommendation to approve the application except for one of the proposed screening-related variances. The City Council approved the Planning Commission’s recommendation at the September 22nd meeting. 13. St. Therese Site Plan Amendment (PID 24-119-23-23-0001) (City File No. 22-053). St. Therese submitted a request to modify their building plan. These changes will allow for the Page 3 of 4 Skilled Nursing portion of the project to be added as a future phase and will expand the Memory Care component from 17 units to 20 units. Additionally, the changes request allowance of a pitched roof. The change involves less than 10% of the total existing site area and qualifies as a minor change that will be approved administratively. Staff expects to provide Council an informational staff report with updated plans at the November 10th meeting. 14. Slabaugh Variance (PID 10-119-23-21-0014) (City File No. 22-054). Gideon and Heather Slabaugh submitted a variance request to allow a covered porch to encroach within the front setback of their property at 9925 Ebert Road. This item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at the October 6th meeting and unanimously recommended approval. The City Council is expected to take final action at the October 27th meeting. 15. Tharp Accessory Structure CUP (PID 11-119-23-31-0011) (City File No. 22-055). Shawn Tharp applied to allow for an accessory structure that will exceed a footprint of 3,969 square feet. The structure would be located at 20420 Duffney Circle which is over 10 acres in size, so the property owner can exceed the allowable footprint through a CUP. This item was reviewed at a public hearing held at the October 6th Planning Commission meeting. The CUP was recommended for approval unanimously with a condition for landscaping along Duffney Drive and a 3-year approval period. The City Council is expected to take final action at the October 27th Council meeting. 16. Water Tower Preliminary Plat, Site Plan, Variance (PID 11-119-23-14-0004) (City File No. 22-057). An application to move forward with the water tower at 19951 Oswald Farm Road was submitted. Variances are required from the lot size standards as well as from screening requirements for the overhead door. This item was reviewed at a public hearing held by the Planning Commission on October 6th. The application was recommended for approval unanimously. The City Council is expected to take final action at the October 27th meeting. 17. Kariniemi Meadows Final Plat (PID 18-119-23-11-0002) (City File No. 22-059). An application for the final plat of Kariniemi Meadows was received by the City. The application was deemed complete and will be reviewed by the City Council at the October 27th regular meeting. 18. Northeast District Zoning Ordinance Amendment (City File No. 22-060). Staff proposes a couple of verbiage changes to the screening and landscaping requirements in the NE District Plan and Design Guidelines. These changes will address logistics in applying the plan that became evident while reviewing the proposed water tower and water treatment plant sites. The proposed changes will still require a high standard for development in the NE District while building in some flexibility to reduce reliance on variances and planned unit development (PUD) flexibility. The item was reviewed at a public hearing by the Planning Commission at the October 6th meeting. The proposed amendment was recommended for approval on a 2-1 vote. The City Council is expected to review and take final action on the amendment at the October 27th meeting. 19. Keefe Minor Subdivision (PID 33-119-23-12-0007) (City File No. 22-063). An application for a two-lot subdivision at 6801 Willow Drive was submitted. The application was determined to be incomplete for City review and is not currently scheduled for review by the City Council. This type of application does not require review by the Planning Commission. 20. Liberty Dog Grooming Special Home Occupation Administrative Permit (PID 06-119-23- 13-0002) (City File No. 22-064). An application for a special home occupation was submitted by Michelle Borowicz to operate a small-scale dog grooming business at 23360 Oakdale Drive. This application type requires notification to properties within 350 feet of the proposed home to allow submittal of written comments. The comment period is currently open through October 28th. Notices were mailed out with detailed information available on the website. This is Page 4 of 4 expected to be reviewed administratively with a final decision made in early November. 21. Park Dedication Fees Update (City File No. 22-065). Staff and Council are evaluating park dedication fees which will require an update to the Subdivision Ordinance. A public hearing notice was published for the November 3rd Planning Commission meeting. It is possible that this will need to be tabled to the December 1st meeting. 22. Dish Tower Site Plan Amendment (PID 25-119-23-44-0005) (City File No. 22-066). A minor site plan amendment application was submitted for installation of new ground equipment at an existing telecommunications tower at 7205 County Road 101. This application is currently under review for completeness and will be approved administratively. 23. Paulsen Building Rights Appeal (PID 09-119-23-32-0002) (City File No. 22-067). Gerald Paulsen submitted a building rights appeal application for his property at 22101 County Road 30. This application is currently under review for completeness and is not yet scheduled for review by the City Council. If complete, the item would likely be scheduled for the December 22nd Council meeting. This type of application is not reviewed by the Planning Commission. 24. Tavera 5th Addition Final Plat and Final Planned Unit Development Plan (PID 35-119-23- 43-0001) (City File No. 22-068). Lennar submitted an application this week for the final plat and final PUD plan for Tavera 5th Addition. This item is under review for completeness. The earliest this would be reviewed by Council is the November 21st meeting. Agenda Item: 8b. Page 1 of 2 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288 email: general@corcoranmn.gov / website: www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO Meeting Date: To: From: Re: November 3, 2022 Planning Commission Jessica Beise, City Administrator City Council Report The Planning Commission last met on October 6, 2022. The following is a recap of some of the items discussed at City Council meetings since that time. A full recap can be found by reviewing the approved City Council minutes on the website. October 13, 2022, Work Session Meeting • 2022 Financial Management Plan o Reviewed the draft and provided feedback to staff. October 13, 2022, Council Meeting • Gateway Signage Discussion o Discussed gateway signage and provided feedback on design elements. • Cook Lake Highlands – Street and Utility Construction Ordinance Update o Received an update. • Water Treatment Plan – Accept Plans and Specs/Authorize Bids o Accepted the Plans and authorized bids. • Conduit Debt Policy o Approved the policy as presented. • Draft 2023 Water and Sewer Budgets o Approved the water and sewer budgets as presented. • 2022-2023 Capital Improvements o Approved the capital improvement plan amendments as presented. October 27, 2022, Work Session Meeting • Code Amendment Update o Reviewed the draft ordinances for a new buffer yard transition ordinance and a PUD ordinance amendment and provided feedback to staff. Page 2 of 2 October 27, 2022, Council Meeting • Recognizing the Fire Officer for the Year – Jeff Leuer o Recognized Loretto Fire Chief Leuer for his years for his statewide award. • Slabaugh Variance (City File 22-054) o Approved the variance as presented. • Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, Site Plan, Variance “Water Tower” (City File 22-057) o Approved plat as presented. • Final Plat “Kariniemi Meadows” (City File 22-059) o Approved plat as presented. • Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, Preliminary PUD Development Plan “Corcoran Farms Business Park” (City File 22-044) o Reviewed the request and tabled the discussion to November 21. • Northeast District Plan Zoning Amendment (City File 22-060) o Amended the language to clarify utility services information and approved the ordinance. • Tharp Accessory Structure CUP (City File 22-055) o Approved the CUP with additional landscaping requirements. • Council Feedback – Potential Development for 19905 County Road 10 (Previous Napa Site)* o Provided feedback on the site. • Hackamore Road Improvements Update o Heard an update on Hackamore Road. • Trail Haven Bridge Update o Approved providing signage for a required road closure. • Public Works Maintenance Worker Appointment o Authorized staff to move forward with a hire pending required preemployment physical and background. • Water Tower – Accept Plans and Specs/Authorize Bids o Accepted the plans and specifications and authorized the city to receive bids. • 2023 Fee Schedule Direction o Received direction on potential fee changes. • 2023A Bond Discussion o Moved forward with notices to include all proposed projects. • 2023 Benefits Summary o Approved the Benefits Summary and authorized staff to implement the benefits as proposed. • St. Therese Conduit Bond Host Approval o Authorized host approval for a portion of the bonds. • City Administrator Performance Evaluation – Six Months o Conducted the performance evaluation. • Water Tower Land Purchase o Authorized the City Administrator and Mayor to execute a purchase agreement to the acquisition of the water tower land purchase. Agenda Item 8C. Page 1 of 2 8200 County Road 116  Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288  www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO Meeting Date: November 3, 2022 To: Planning Commission From: Natalie Davis McKeown, Planner Re: Planning Commission 2023 Priority Setting ____________________________________________________________________ At the November 3rd meeting, staff would like to begin discussing the Planning Commission’s priorities for 2023. In the past, the Planning Commission forwarded the Council a summary of work completed the previous year with priority recommendations for the upcoming year. This was not done in 2022 due to the high turnover with the Planning Commission, but this will be reimplemented going forward. Enclosed to this memo are the Planning Commission reports forwarded to the Council in 2020 and 2021 as examples to consider. This conversation is expected to continue at the December and January Planning Commission meetings, and staff will prepare the summary of work completed in 2022 in time for the Commission’s review at the January meeting as well. While the Planning Commission reports were typically forwarded to Council in March, staff would like to start forwarding priority recommendations in January to align with the Council’s own timeline for yearly priority setting. Please consider issues and ideas that you are interested in working on in 2023. Priorities can include cleaning up known issues within the Code as well as looking at topics not currently addressed in our guiding documents. Based on previous conversations with the Commission, staff believes the following two issues were identified in 2022 that could be included as 2023 priorities: 1. Clean-up of the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADUs) requirements within the Zoning Ordinance. Specifically providing clarity in the requirement for ADU to be attached or above a garage. a. This discussion came up during the Sease ADU Interim Use Permit application. Agenda Item 8C. Page 2 of 2 2. Allowing additional administrative approvals to handle the reasonable expansion of some nonconforming structures. a. This discussion came up during the Slabaugh Variance application. Please feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions. Attachments: 1. March 12, 2020 Planning Commission Annual Report and 2020 Priorities 2. March 11, 2021 Planning Commission Annual report and 2021 Priorities Item 6a. CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 – Office 763.420.6056 – Fax Meeting Date: To: From: Re: E-mail - general@ci.corcoran.mn.us / Web Site - www.ci.corcoran.mn.us MEMO March 12, 2020 City Council Planning Commission Planning Commission Annual Report and 2020 Priorities ______________________________________________________________________ As requested by the City Council, the Planning Commission is to update the Council on activities of the previous year and propose priorities for 2020. The following are some of the activities completed in 2019: •Reviewed a preliminary plat for 20180 Lark Road •Reviewed a preliminary plat for 20702 County Road 50 •Reviewed a preliminary plat and final plat for Ravinia 11th addition, final plat for Ravinia 13th addition •Held a work session for Planning Commissioner training •Reviewed a final plat for Bellwether 2nd addition •Reviewed a rezoning, CUP, site plan, and variance for 23405 County Road 10 •Reviewed a CUP and site plan for 20055 75th Avenue North •Reviewed a preliminary plat and variance for 22505 Strehler Road •Reviewed a preliminary plat for 6730 Rolling Hills Road •Reviewed a proposed sale of City property •Reviewed ordinance updates to the animal ordinance, southeast district design guidelines, development rights program, and open space and preservation In 2020 the Planning Commission has the following proposed priorities: •Process ordinance amendments as required to by the 2040 Comprehensive Plan •Adopt a tree preservation policy •Adopt guidelines for the use of fertilizer The Planning Commission appreciates the support of the City Council and requests feedback on its proposed priorities for 2020. Attachments: N/A 6a. 8200 County Road 116  Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288  www.ci.corcoran.mn.us MEMO Meeting Date: March 11, 2021 To: City Council From: Dean Jacobs, Planning Commission Chair Re: Planning Commission Annual Report ______________________________________________________________________ As requested by the City Council, the Planning Commission is to update the Council on activities from the previous year and proposed priorities for the current year. The following are some of the activities completed by the commission in 2020: • Recommended 2020 priorities to the City Council • Reviewed and recommended approval of Ravinia 14th and 15th additions • Reviewed and recommended approval of Bellwether 4th and 5th additions • Reviewed and recommended approval of a zoning map amendment for consistency with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan • Reviewed and recommended approval a 20 home open space and preservation plat • Recommended approval of an update to the park dedication ordinance • Reviewed and recommended approval of a comprehensive plan amendment, rezoning, and preliminary plat for Tavera • Reviewed and recommended denial of the site plan and conditional use permit for Eagle Brook Church • Reviewed and recommended approval of the site plan, conditional use permit, and variance for Nelson International • Reviewed and recommended approval of a final PUD developm ent plan for Rush Creek Reserve • Completed most of the above business during a pandemic year and had record public participation 6a. The Planning Commission performed extremely well considering the COVID-19 required virtual meetings. Everyone who wanted to participate in a Public Hearing was able to do so without any known limitations. The Commission discussions/questions portion of our review was done in an orderly and time efficient manner, even more so than our meetings in person. The Commission reviewed several significant developments in the past year, and I believe that the workings of the Commission and the recommendations made to the City Council were unaffected by the virtual meetings format. In 2021, the Planning Commission has the following priorities: • Process ordinance amendments as required by the 2040 Comprehensive Plan • Continued discussion and refinement of the PUD ordinance which dominates the development of area serviced by water and sewer utilities • Review Section 1030.020 – Accessory Buildings, Structures, Uses and Equipment, to consider loosening up the agricultural use only provisions so that non-farmer owners of vacant land have the option to build an accessory building for their own personal storage/recreational needs. • Review Section 1040.020 Subd.5 – Accessory Dwelling Units • Review definitions of floor area for buildings. As of now, the definition lacks formal terminology and application to multiple types of building structures. • Continue to discuss changes in our City Code to encourage tree preservation in future development. Or, alternatively, seek to refine our zoning code to limit the type of development in naturally significant designated areas. • Conduct Planning Commission work sessions to address the Commission’s goals in a more proactive manner. Attachments: None