HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-11-21 Council Minutes1.
CITY OF CORCORAN
City Council Minutes
November 21, 2022 — 7:00 pm
The Corcoran City Council met on November 21,
was held in person and the public was present in
audio and video conferencing platform Zoom.
2022, in Corcoran, Minnesota. The City Council meeting
person and remotely through electronic means using the
Mayor McKee, Councilor Nichols, Councilor Schultz, and Councilor Vehrenkamp were present. Councilor
Bottema was absent.
City Administrator Beise, Planner McKeown, Public Works Director Mattson, and City Planner Lindahl were
present.
Call to Order/Roll Call
Mayor McKee called the meeting to order at 7000 pm.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
Mayor McKee invited all i
3. Agenda Approval
n attendance to rise and join in the Pledge of Allegiance.
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Schultz to approve the agenda as presented.
Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carried 4:0)
Commission Representatives
Mayor McKee noted Planning Commissioner Shoulak and Parks and Trails Commissioner Wyffels joined
the meeting remotely.
Open Forum (Public CommentOpportunity)
Mayor McKee invited residents to communicate in
-person or telephonically during Open Forum for items
not included on the agenda. City Administrator Beise explained the instructions to participate in the meeting
via the Zoom video format and reviewed instructions for participation in the meeting through telephone or
computer. No residents participated in the public comment opportunity.
Presentations/Recognitions
Consent Agenda
a. Financial Claims*
b. Vollrath Ag Building CUP*
c. Tavera 5th Final Plat and PUD*
d. Tort Liability Waiver
e. Designating Polling Place Locations for 2023*
f. Schedule Work Session — 2023 Fee Schedule*
Council requested item 7b and 7c, be pulled for further discussion. Council noted 7e and recognized and
thanked Hope Community Church and St. Thomas Church as polling place venues.
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Schultz, to approve agenda items 7a, 7d, 7e, and 7f as
presented.
Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carried 400)
Council discussed wetland and flood plain updated surveys near the west end of the driveway on the 7b
Vollrath Ag Building CUP. Planner McKeown noted the applicant would need to mitigate flood impact
elsewhere on the property and noted there is substantial amounts of land if mitigation is necessary. Public
Works Director Mattson noted applicant can complete a watershed application with a permit fee, or the
applicant can readjust the plans to stay away from the watershed area. Public Works Director Mattson
noted if applicant desires to fill in any portion of the watershed area, a watershed permit would be
I I
necessary and would need to indicate mitigation processes. Council and staff determined a meeting with
applicant would be necessary, and applicant would work with staff on the project.
MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by McKee, to approve agenda items 7c as amended.
Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carried 400)
Council discussed architectural upgrades and tree preservation regarding agenda item 7c. Planner Lindahl
noted the parcels located on the west side of Tamarack have architectural upgrades. Council noted the 32
trees accidentally removed by the developer, and the 32 one-on-one tree replacement for the 32 trees.
Council noted tree preservation was one of the major PUD benefits of the development, and reviewed staff
and developer dialogue regarding the process regarding the mistake. Council requested clarification of how
the tree replacement will be completed, and what process will ensure this situation does not happen again
to adhere to the PUD benefit. City Planner Lindahl outlined the process within the Tavera development for
review of tree preservation areas include as part of the PUD, fencing protection of future areas, and noted
within the area of the accidental tree removal there was a large section of trees that were to be removed.
Council noted the error by the developer Lennar Homes, and requested including the same caliper inch for
replacement trees as the trees that were erroneously removed and to adhere to the tree preservation
benefit included in the PUD. City Planner Lindahl noted options for future tree preservation options
regarding the PUD benefit. Council noted tabling the item until the next Council meeting to allow the
developer time to present a written plan with details regarding preserved tree areas in the remaining
development and adhere to the tree preservation PUD benefit. City Planner Lindahl noted requesting a
written plan for tree preservation areas when Tavera phase 6 begins, and noted though it is likely graded, it
would be a starting point with the application process. Council and staff discussed current grading is almost
complete in the Tavera project, and all tree removal has been completed, but implementing the process
now is good policy for future development PUD applications. City Planner Lindahl noted the developer will
be replacing the 32 trees that were removed. Council noted adding language to include an inch -for -inch tree
caliper for trees erroneously for in future developments, with replacement somewhere within the site, or at
the discretion of Council to a future park area.
MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Nichols, to approve agenda items 7c, with addition of tree
preservation verbiage in Phase 6 of the Tavera development.
Voting Aye: McKee, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp Nay:
(Motion carried 3:0:1)
Planning Business (Public Comment Opportunity)
Mayor McKee noted 8b Public Hearing for Walcott Glen, and noted separate public comment opportunities
on items 8a, 8c, 8d, and 8e, and invited residents to communicate in -person or telephonically during the
public comment opportunity for Planning Business items 8a. City Administrator Beise explained the
instructions to participate in the meeting via the Zoom video format and reviewed instructions for
participation in the meeting through telephone or computer. City Administrator Beise noted several
residents submitted comment cards for 8a. City Administrator Beise noted the 5-minute time limit for each
speaker.
a. Corcoran Farms Industrial Park Preliminary Plat
Tom Feehan, 20410 Larkin Road, opposes the Corcoran Farms Industrial Park Preliminary Plat, and opined
On traffic and PUD as areas of concern regarding Corcoran Farms Industrial Park and opined that an
entrance through the existing commercial district would be a better access, and noted safety concerns with
access off Larkin Road. Mr. Feehan opined on the traffic study completed, the build -to -suit status for
potential renters and future PUD requests Council will have to review.
Brandy Kelly, 20129 Larkin Road, opposes the Corcoran Farms Industrial Park Preliminary Plat, and opined
on the rural area and quietness of the existing neighborhood, and opined Corcoran Farms Industrial Park
will change the rural character of their neighborhood.
Gail Waldorf, 20117 Larkin Road, opposes the Corcoran Farms Industrial Park Preliminary Plat, and opined
on the rezoning of the parcel where Corcoran Industrial Farms is proposed to be located. Ms. Waldorf
opined on traffic increasing on Larkin Road, and loss of home value and equity due to the rezoned parcel to
light industrial across the street where Corcoran Farm Industrial Park is proposed. Ms. Waldorf opined on
the trail proposed through the industrial park and safety issue of a trail running through an industrial park.
Ms. Waldorf opined on alternative locations for the industrial park that are not located near a residential
Abstain: Nichols
2
neighborhood. Ms. Waldorf opined access of County Road 50 rather than Larkin Road would be a safer
access. Ms. Waldorf asked Council to postpone their decision until a full Council was present.
Linda Benson, 20205 Larkin Road, opposes the Corcoran Farms Industrial Park Preliminary Plat, and
opined on the location of Corcoran Farms Industrial Park near a residential neighborhood and asked
Council to not approve the prelimi
Cnary plat.
Ryan Richter, 7225 Buckskin Trail, opposes the Corcoran Farms Industrial Park Preliminary Plat, and
requested Council postpone a decision. Mr. Richter opined on location of the industrial park and impacts to
the safety of the neighborhood, future road enlargements, and how the industrial park will change the
character and tranquility of their neighborhood. Mr. Richter noted if the project is approved, to consider
increasing the buffer towards the Larkin Road properties.
City Administrator Beise answered public comment questions regarding the industrial park access off
County Road 50 and noted the Environmental Assessment Worksheet indicated Hennepin County response
to an access off County Road 50 would not be allowed. City Administrator Beise noted Three Rivers Park
District also commented on the trail running through the industrial park. Council questioned if access could
be granted through 75' from the current industrial park, if applicant were to purchase the vacant lot, could
the applicant petition the City to connect that street and be a developer cost. City Planner Lindahl
responded that a traffic study would need to be completed to review that route access, but indicated the
road could be extended and cross a DNR public waterway and would require DNR permitting. Public Works
Director Mattson noted the process when a project is presented as a development, and noted as there is no
right-ot-way connection with the cul-de-sac, that access is not factored into the EAW. Public Works Director
Mattson noted roads connecting to the property were reviewed and included Larkin Road and a future
County Road 50 connection as an emergency access. Public Works Director Mattson noted a traffic study
on 75t" and County Road 116 intersection was not part of the original study, and noted new studies would
need to be completed, and would likely still result in the connection access off Larkin Road. Council clarified
for public record the property was previously rezoned light industrial in 2018 and present zoning is not part
of the Council discussion tonight. Council noted discussion is centered around whether the project is a PUD
project, as if it was not a PUD, and there were no variance requests presented to Council by the applicant,
the project really wouldn't be presented to Council. City Administrator Beise clarified the project would be
presented to Council as a plat for approval. City Planner Lindahl outlined the background information for the
proposed project and the flexibility request for parking setbacks and loading docks. City Planner Lindahl
added a PUD does offer more flexibility to control what the building looks like, and conditions can be added
as requirement versus standard zoning code. Council and staff discussed a sidewalk or trail improvement
on the north side of Larkin Road. Council asked for discussion on rezoning the proposed parcel to medium
density and rezoning the property east of the substation to light industrial. City Planner Lindahl reviewed the
rezoning process, land use, the Comprehensive Plan, and city's master plan on city development. City
Planner Lindahl reviewed the land use plan designates the Corcoran Farms Industrial Park location as
industrial. City Planner Lindahl noted the change was included with 2040 Comprehensive Plan update in
2018, and changed the parcel from medium -density residential to industrial and went through a public
process, with several meetings related to the change, and noted a similar process would need to be
completed for an amendment to change to rezone the parcel from industrial to something else. City Planner
Lindahl noted the process is not simple, and there are several things needing review, but noted the City can
go through a public process and the Council can make a change, which then needs approval by the Met
Council. City Planner Lindahl added if the land use is approved, both the City Council and the Met Council,
then Council can rezone the property to be consistent with the land use. Council noted the deadline for the
2022, and does not allow for postponement of a Council decision.
current application is December 29,
Council noted questions during the public comment period were answered by Council and staff. Council
requested the presentation for Corcoran Farms Industrial Park proceed.
City Planner Lindahl reviewed the history and background of the preliminary plat, the completed traffic
study, and the EAW with comments by the DNR, County and Three Rivers Park District. City Planner
Lindahl noted the applicant revised their plans and tried to address both the Planning Commission and
Council comments. City Planner Lindahl noted the project square footage was reduce by about 11,00
square feet, and noted the southwest building was reduced in width by 20 feet to allow a retaining wall in
their building to shift east 20 feet and significant landscaping to the area, essentially a triple row of
landscaping with the current revisions. City Planner Lindahl reviewed the height of buildings A and B along
C�
Larkin were reduced from 40 feet to 30 feet in height, and noted the current district allows for 45-foot-high
buildings. City Planner Lindahl noted buildings A and D on the west were increased to 90-feet long, with 30-
and 36400t-high wing walls to screen the loading docks, with drive isles between buildings A and B
removed. City Planner Lindahl noted a 10-foot-high composite fence was added on the west property line to
screen loading docks, and the addition of landscape islands in the parking lot to allow larger trees to be
planted, due to a limit on planted height material located under the overhead power line. Council and staff
discussed tree height and type include deciduous trees that are 2 �/2 inches. City Planner Lindahl noted the
trail was relocated as recommended by the Parks and Trails Commission and Three Rivers Park District.
City Planner Lindahl also noted the revised plans eliminate parking setback to internal lot lines for Building C
and E, and no longer request flexibility. City Planner Lindahl noted additional landscaping was added
specifically to the west property line, with berms along Larkin Road. City Planner Lindahl reviewed Blue
Bonnet will extend north through this project with a temporary cul de sac eventually extends north. City
Planner Lindahl noted Hennepin County has indicated they will not allow access where the current
emergency drive is shown, and where the property touches 50. City Planner Lindahl noted a plan for a
future through street further to the west is necessary and the applicant is providing that future street
connection. City Planner Lindahl noted the feasibility study that was completed as part of the EAW, required
the applicant to make offsite improvements, as well as turn lanes on Larkin and 116, Larkin and Blue
Bonnet, and applicant is responsible for extending the sewer and water to the site. City Planner Lindahl
noted there is a request for flexibility on the landscape requirements to revise the plans to meet the code
requirements, however the plan provides slightly more landscaping than is required by the code. City
Planner Lindahl noted the applicant needs to show on the plan some additional screening within the parking
lots to the screen headlights, and noted the number of trees and shrubs included meets or exceeds code
requirements. City Planner Lindahl reviewed the PUD flexibility requested to allow the loading docks allow
for screening by the wing walls, with additional landscaping and fencing on the west side of the property.
City Planner Lindahl reviewed landscaping along Blue Bonnet provides screening, as well as large
evergreen trees planted on the edge of the building to provide screening along wing wall locations, with
several evergreen trees to provide the screening of the loading area. City Planner Lindahl reviewed the trail
location recommended by the Parks and Trails Commission and Three Rivers Park District and specified the
east -west trail is a private trail that the developer will build and maintain and provides another connection
through the site. City Planner Lindahl noted a sidewalk along the right of way of Blue Bonnet that will extend
all the way up to County Road 50. City Planner Lindahl reviewed Park dedication will be required for this site
and credit will be given for the net area of the trail easement or cash in lieu for anything remaining. Council
and staff discussed trail requirements. City Planner Lindahl noted the applicant will be required to construct
the trail to the Three Rivers Park District standards which is a 10400t-wide trail, and the City's requirement
of an 8-foot-wide trail. Council and staff discussed pedestrian routes along Larkin Road, lighting, height of
light poles noting keeping them as short as possible and turned off at reasonable hour to minimize noise
pollution, and the removal of trees along Larkin Road. Council noted key requirements and expectations
within the PUD is adequate transitions between adjacent zones, and how to rectify the change made due to
power company's restriction on landscaping height. Council noted plantings within the gas line main
easement area. Council and the applicant had a lengthy discussion regarding PUD flexibility versus straight
zoning code requirements and the project, City, and neighborhood impacts. Council discussed the
secondary frontage staff mentioned in the staff report and including as a condition or add in the resolution to
enhance the secondary frontage. Council noted including additional landscaping the applicant mentioned
they would be open to regarding a different type of tree or additional plantings in the parking lot islands.
Council noted higher buffers between buildings and the residential areas and noted a 6- foot fence would
make more sense than a four -foot pads. Council reviewed the likelihood of shrubs growing beyond six feet
to 104eet and considered that more beneficial in the long-term. Council discussed fencing alternatives and
public safety. Council and staff discussed including windows, or faux windows on the buildings to break up
the solid wall and utilizing color changes to mitigate the appearance of the building to appear as an office
building rather than an industrial building.
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Vehrenkamp, to table the item until the December 8 Council
meeting.
Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carried 4:0)
Mayor McKee called for a 5-minute recess at 9:30 pm.
Council reconvened at 9:35 pm.
b. Public Hearing — Vacations for Drainage and Utility Easement — Ravinia 11' Addition
City Planner Lindahl reviewed the vacation for drainage and utility easement for Walcott Glen.
Mayor McKee opened the Public Hearing.
City Administrator Beise explained the instructions to participate in the meeting via the Zoom video format
and reviewed instructions for participation in the meeting through telephone or computer. No persons
participated in the public comment period.
Mayor McKee closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Schultz, to close the Public Hearing.
Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carried 400)
MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Nichols, approving Resolution 2022-140 Vacation of Drainage
and Utility Easement in Ravinia 11 th Addition (PID 36-119-23-44-00301 36-119-23-44-00317 36-119-23-44-
0032) 36-119-23-44-0033 And 36-119-23-44-0024) (City File No. 22-072)
Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carried 4:0)
c. Paulsen Development Rights Appeal
Mayor McKee noted the public comment opportunity on item 8c-e, and invited residents to communicate in -
person or telephonically during the public comment opportunity. City Administrator Beise explained the
instructions to participate in the meeting via the Zoom video format and reviewed instructions for
participation in the meeting through telephone or computer. No persons participated in the public comment
period.
City Planner Lindahl noted the development rights appeal was requested by Gerald Paulson to evaluate
development rights 22101 County Road 30 and noted Mr. Paulson would like to subdivide the property he
owns, and that Mr. Paulson believes there are development rights available. City Planner Lindahl noted the
burden of proof is on the applicant to provide information that the development rights map is incorrect. City
Planner Lindahl noted the 113.5-acre farm was subdivided in 2000, and prior to subdivision there were 11
total development rights assigned with one of the rights assigned to the existing 20+ acre farmstead
property. Council and staff discussed option of buying a development right from the adjacent property.
MOTION: made by Nichols, seconded by Schultz, Denying an Amendment to the Development Rights Map
for Property at 22101 County Road 30 (PI D 09-119-23-32-0002) (City File 22-067)
Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, Schultz, and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carried 4:0)
d. O'Brien Concept Plan
City Planner Lindahl reviewed Council discussion at the August 25 Council meeting, and noted Council
support of the concept, questions surrounding street alignment, and a feasibility study scheduled in October.
Council and staff discussed street infrastructure, recapture agreements, and a future street connection
between Rolling Hills Road and Pioneer Trail. Council and staff discussed turn lanes, and driveway access.
Council provided feedback to applicant and requested applicant to follow up with staff and city attorney.
Mayor McKee allowed late public comment on item 8d.
Jack Kirley, 6220 Rolling Hills Road, commented on the O'Brien concept plan, and opined on the safety of
the proposed road on a hill. Mr. Kirley noted the private drive on the west side. Mr. Turley opined on
additional traffic, turn lanes, wetlands, and utilities.
Jim Lehtola, 6230 Rolling Hills Road, commented on the concept and opined on the road and driveway
location. Mr. Lehtola commented on timelines for the project, traffic, and an alternate industrial access point.
Council and staff discussed future timeline and noted Planning Commission review on December 1, with
Council review on December 22. City Planner Lindahl noted an approved project in 2004 included Rolling
Hills Road and HWY 55, prior to the city's comprehensive plan, showed a connection of HWY 55 frontage
road, between Rolling Hills Road and Pioneer Trail.
Public comment continued.
5
John Reid, 6210 Rolling Hills Road, commented on the intersection of the future Pioneer Trail and Rolling
Hills Road connection. Mr. Reid commented on tractor trailer truck traffic and noted opposition to the
Pioneer Trail and Rolling Hills Road connection.
David Wendel, 6301 Horseshoe Bend Drive, commented on the location of the proposed concept plan in
relation to the distance from his residence of 36 feet from his property line. Mr. Wendel opined on the
location of the grading is where his garage is located and would interfere with the right-of-way according to
the sketch plan.
Jim Dahl, 6300 Rolling Hills Road, agreed with previous comments, and opined on restricted weight limits
on road.
Public Works Director Mattson noted for clarification, there would be no turn lanes off Rolling Hills Road with
the proposed concept plan, however, would be a consideration when the road is extended in the future.
Mayor McKee allowed additional public comment.
Sarah Lehtola, 6230 Rolling Hills Road, opined on Rolling Hills Road narrow and hilly characteristics, and
opined on the increased traffic and safety concerns.
e. Confidential Properties Concept Plan
City Planner Lindahl noted the proposal is for a mix of 49 single family homes, a 300-unit market rate
apartment complex, and 1.8-acre commercial lot. City Planner Lindahl noted the parcel is guided
commercial on the easter third and general mixed use in the central third. City Planner Lindahl noted the
applicant would be requesting a comprehensive plan amendment and noted the northwest corner would
remain commercial, and the central portion where the apartment complex would be located would need to
be re -guided to high -density residential, and the western third to low -density residential. City Planner Lindahl
reviewed the property was guided mixed use in the both the 2030 and the 2040 comprehensive plans and
specifically noted to provide business development opportunities and jobs creation tied specifically to the
development of the Dayton interchange and the extension of highway 610 which is going to connect to
county road 30. City Planner Lindahl outlined the rezoning, and noted applicant request to re -guide with the
commercial section retaining the C-2 zoning and the central portion retain the general mixed -use zoning.
City Planner Lindahl noted the general mixed -use zoning needs to be consistent with the general mixed use
land use, so the applicant would need to rezone to RMF-3 to be compatible with the high -density residential
land use. City Planner Lindahl noted the West portion would be rezone to RSF-3 single and two family
residential. City Planner noted the concept sketch appears to comply with northeast standards and most
setback requirements. City Planner Lindahl noted the wetlands in the north and natural resource area the
northwest corner and identified in the significant natural resource inventory and high -priority wooded area.
City Planner Lindahl reviewed the gated access community for the apartment complex, and noted variances
would be necessary for parking requests.
Jordan Tycon, Continental Properties, reviewed the concept sketch, noted the wetland delineation was
completed indicating the natural resource areas, and reviewed parcel zoning and amending the
comprehensive plan for a future single-family residential development phase on the west side. Mr. Tycon
reviewed the concept sketch parameters of the housing brand and noted the 300 units would be direct
garden style access with 20 units per building. Mr. Tycon noted a mix of surface and covered parking with
attached and detached garages, a clubhouse, a fitness center, and a pool at the clubhouse. Mr. Tycon
reviewed resident demographics and noted about 9 percent of the residents typically are school -aged
children in grades K-12, 40 percent of residents have pets, and the complex would house approximately 637
total residents. Mr. Tycon reviewed the variance request for parking.
ouncil and staff di
Cscussed the Maple Grove water agreement and noted Maple Grove would need to be
contacted and presented with a plan. Council discussed the rezoning, intent of concept sketch within the
district, and the rezoning of 80 acres of mixed use in exchange for a residential subdivision. Council
consensus was that the concept sketch was not the right fit or the right time in the current proposed location.
9. Unfinished business
Mayor McKee noted the public comment opportunity on item 9a, and invited residents to communicate in -
person or telephonically during the public comment opportunity for Unfinished. City Administrator Beise
explained the instructions to participate in the meeting via the Zoom video format and reviewed instructions
for participation in the meeting through telephone or computer. No persons participated in the public
comment period.
a. City Calendar 2022 Review
Council and staff discussed the December 22 Council work session and regular meeting.
10. New Business
a. Council Calendar 2023
City Administrator Beise reviewed the 2023 calendar and noted December 14 for final budget approval,
and December 28 as the last day to submit for the truth and taxation. Council and staff discussed potential
final dates for December Council meeting(s). Council noted scheduling the firearm ordinance into 2023.
MCItaff Reports
a. Active Planning Applications: Council received report.
12. 2022-23 Council Schedule
Council received schedule.
13. Adjournment
MOTION: made by Schultz, seconded by Vehrenkamp to adjourn.
Voting Aye: McKee, Nichols, and Vehrenkamp
(Motion carried 400)
Meeting adjourned at 1114 pm on November 22, 2022.
Michelle Friedrich —City Clerk
7