Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-03-12 Planning Commission Agenda Packet CITY OF CORCORAN *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. Corcoran Planning Commission Agenda March 12, 2024 - 7:00 pm 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Commissioner Appointments – Peter Hargreaves & Cecilia Kozicky 4. Agenda Approval 5. Open Forum 6. Minutes a. February 1, 2024, Regular Meeting Minutes* 7. New Business a. Public Hearing. Khacholing Center Conditional Home Occupation IUP (City File No. 23-029) i. Staff Report ii. Open Public Hearing iii. Close Public Hearing iv. Commission Discussion & Recommendation b. Public Hearing. Woodland Hills of Corcoran Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Preliminary Plat, and Variance (City File No. 23-033) i. Staff Report ii. Open Public Hearing iii. Close Public Hearing iv. Commission Discussion & Recommendation 8. Reports/Information a. Other Business i. Commercial and Industrial Update Discussion Part 2 b. Planning Project Update* c. City Council Report* – Council Liaison Vehrenkamp 9. Commissioner Liaison Calendar City Council Meetings 3/14/2024 3/28/2024 4/11/2024 4/25/2024 5/9/2024 5/23/2024 Brummond Hargreaves Kozicky Lanterman Lind Brummond 10. Adjournment Meeting Via Telephone/Other Electronic Means Call-in Instructions: +1 305 224 1968 US Enter Meeting ID: 813 2340 0618 Video Link and Instructions: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81323400618 visit http://www.zoom.us and enter Meeting ID: 813 2340 0618 MEETING VIEWABLE VIA ZOOM *Please note in-person comments will be taken at the scheduled meeting where noted. Comments received via email to the Planning Technician (dklingbeil@corcoranmn.gov) or via public comment cards will also be accepted. All email and public comment cards must be received by 4PM the day before the meeting. For more information on potions to provide public comment visit: www.corcoranmn.gov Item 6a. Corcoran Planning Commission Minutes February 1, 2024 - 7:00 pm The Corcoran Planning Commission met on February 1, 2024, in Corcoran, Minnesota. Four Planning Commissioners were present in the Council Chambers. Members of the public were able to participate in- person and monitor the meeting through electronic means using the audio and video conferencing platform Zoom. Present: Commissioners Lanterman, Brummond, Lind, and Van Den Einde. Also present: Planner Davis McKeown, Planning Technician Klingbeil, and Council Liaison Vehrenkamp. Absent: Commissioner Horn. 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Lanterman, to approve the agenda for the February 1, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Lind, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 4:0). 4. Open Forum (none) 5. Minutes Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Lanterman, to approve the December 5, 2023, Planning Commission Minutes. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Lind, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 4:0). 6. New Business – Public Comment Opportunity a. Public Hearing. Lister Garage CUP (City File No. 23-031) i. Staff Report – Staff Report was presented by Planning Technician Klingbeil. ii. Public Hearing Motion made by Van Den Einde, seconded by Brummond, to close the Public Hearing. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Lind, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 4:0). iii. Commission Discussion & Recommendation – Commission discussion included a question to staff as to whether there’s been any consideration to changing the sidewall height standards for accessory structures. Motion made by Lanterman, seconded by Lind, to recommend approval of the draft resolution for the Conditional Use Permit to allow an accessory structure with sidewalls that exceed 10 feet in height to be constructed in the front yard at 26315 Julie Ann Drive. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Lind, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 4:0). b. Public Hearing. Hope Community Preliminary Plat, Preliminary PUD, Rezoning & Comprehensive Plan Amendment (City File No. 23-028) i. Staff Report – Staff Report was presented by Planner Davis McKeown. ii. Public Hearing 1. Josh McKinny, Measure Group, provided a brief presentation of the application which included information on the project timeline from 2000 until present day; a recap of the neighborhood meeting; the previous rezoning of the property; efforts made to buffer the development from existing neighborhoods; clarification of right-of-way dedication along County Roads 30 & 116 and Hope Way; and provided a section view of the proposal to illustrate building heights. 2. Ted Schmidt, 20155 County Road 30, had concerns about the increased traffic and potential impacts to land uses on the surrounding properties. 3. Jason Bartels, 19795 Hunters Ridge, had concerns about the increased traffic volume and the timing of additional access points being constructed. 4. Mitch and Carrie Johnson, 10025 County Road 116 outlot B of Serenity Meadows, discussed the current traffic levels on County Road 116, had concerns about impacts to a driveway easement for their outlot, and questioned the future of the existing snowmobile trail along County Road 116. 5. Shawn Tharp, 20420 Duffney Circle, expressed a desire for an increased public notice radius, believed the increased density proposed was excessive, had traffic concerns, suggested the applicant reduces the number of units and reduce the apartment building height from 3 stories to 2 stories, and requested that they be subject to the district standards as much as possible. 6. Phillip and Glen Kothrade, 20140 County Road 30, expressed concerns regarding existing drainage issues and potential impacts after development, and requested that the screening requirement from the Hope cemetery expansion from 2012 be installed. 7. Nicole Alde, 19913 Hillside Drive, expressed frustrations with existing traffic levels, and had fears about an increase in crime. 8. Corey Hickmann, 20081 Hunters Ridge, discussed the potential for future extension of Hunters Ridge, the flooding of the pond on his property, had concerns regarding parking overflow on Hunters Ridge, the current traffic levels on County Road 116 & 30, and wasn’t supportive of the multi-family and commercial development. 9. Peter Cmeil, 20041 Hunters Ridge, reiterated concerns of the increased density and water drainage. 10. Greg Woody, 21040 County Road 10, asked for clarification on the application status and who owns the property, had concerns about the increased density, current traffic conditions of County Road’s 116 & 30, and expressed the desire to not have similar developments to Maple Grove. 11. Cataline Dima, 10599 108th Ave N, Hanover, representing Outlot A of Hope Place, discussed the intention of the LLC’s investment into the property, wanting to make things more accessible for the City and produce a return on investment to the LLC. 12. Diane Padrnos, 19795 Hunters Ridge, discussed that this proposal would make up a sizeable portion of the city’s population, believed that the proposed density was excessive, and concerns regarding traffic impacts. 13. Carrie Johnson, 10025 County Road 116, discussed concerns of future developments being similar to this application if approved. 14. Corey Hickmann, 20081 Hunters Ridge, had a question regarding the impact that the 610 Extension project would have on this proposal. 15. Micke Pattison, 20400 Duffney Circle, asked whether traffic signals would be installed on County Road 30, and concerns about the possibility of placing a stoplight at the top of a hill. 16. Ken Guenthner, 6315 Butterworth Lane, introduced himself as the commissioner of the City of Corcoran’s Elm Creek Watershed Commission, and discussed the functions of the commission. 17. Josh McKinny, Measure Group, was asked by the Chair to respond to a number of questions brought up during the public hearing. McKinny discussed the traffic study conducted during the EAW process, potential signal installation on County Road 116 at a further point, signal warrants not being met until future development comes in, anecdotal experience versus data-driven analysis of traffic studies. Motion made by Van Den Einde, seconded by Lanterman, to close the Public Hearing. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Lind, Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 4:0). iii. Commission Discussion & Recommendation – Commission discussion included a series of questions directed toward the applicant; Josh McKinny, Measure Group, discussed the importance of engineering analysis in development, complying with the EAW process, and the implication of increased density; Commissioner Brummond discussed the Mayor’s discussions with State Representatives regarding County Road improvements; City Administrator Tobin discussed the significant cost of road improvements and the constraints of coopering with Hennepin County; Josh McKinny discussed providing a 50-foot right-of-way to serve outlot B of Serenity Meadows, meeting the minimum density requirements of the Comprehensive Plan with multifamily dwellings, and the history of the development plan that was established in the early 2000; Counciler Vehrenkamp and Administrator Tobin discussed Met Council density requirements and the MUSA boundary; Planner McKeown clarified the process of calculating density; Commissioner Lind pointed out that the density requirement is a range and pointed out that the proposal is at the top of the range; Administrator Tobin discussed increased density in a particular location would allow for lower density elsewhere in the MUSA; Planner McKeown addressed a number of questions that were raised during the public hearing; Mark Anderson, Sambatek Engineering, gave an overview of the grading and drainage design of the project, and planned to take the public’s input into consideration on the revised plan; Commissioner Lind asked for clarification on the resolution voting process; Chair Lanterman asked for clarification on which portion of the site is being re- guided; clarification of re-guiding versus rezoning; Chair Lanterman asked if a single parcel could contain multiple zoning guidance’s; clarification that the subdivision-in-process that is listed on Hennepin County’s property map is a result from the water tower subdivision. Motion made by Brummond, seconded by Lanterman, to recommend approval of the draft resolution approving the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Public Institution (PI) and General Mixed Use (GMU) to Planned Unit Development (PUD). Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Lind, Van Den Einde (Motion passed 4:0). The commission discussion continued with Chair Lanterman adding that the previous recommendation be conditioned on whether or not the property is subdivided; Commissioner Brummond had a question regarding the location of guest parking for the northern most townhome, and discussed the flexibilities being requested from the Northeast District Design Guidelines; Commissioner Lind discussed the amenities geared toward senior residents and had concerns that a sizeable portion of the residents would not be senior citizens; Commissioner Lind also discussed concerns about the lack of transition around this site, and questioned the impact that Met Council’s reorganization would have on the Comprehensive Plan; Administrator Tobin discussed his experience on Met Council’s density expectations; Commissioner Brummond acknowledged the transition efforts made by the developers, and asked for clarification on the garage flexibility request; Commissioner Brummond proposed reducing the townhome units to two sizing options; Commissioner Lind asked for clarification on the buffering around the drive-through areas; Commissioner Brummond asked if the buffer ordinance would apply to this development; Commissioner Brummond requested that the Basswood trees removed be replaced with Basswood plantings; Commissioner Brummond asked for clarification on the park and trail plan for the development; Commissioner Van Den Einde asked about the drive-through standards in the Northeast District plan, and asked for clarification on the reduced setback request; Commissioner Lind discussed the lack of transition for the properties west of Hope, and asked how the increased density would impact the rest of the city; Commissioner Brummond discussed the guidance of the comprehensive plan and the County Road 30 corridor; Commissioner Lind requested clarification on the density requirements; Administrator Tobin discussed managing the growth to prevent abrupt transitions; Chair Lanterman discussed the setback reduction request and believed it was a significant request; clarification was provided on the setback requirements in the GMU district; Commissioner Brummond asked for clarification on the setback requirements after County Road 116 expansion; Commissioner Brummond discussed the screening requirements for drive-throughs from County Roads versus from the residential neighborhoods; Commissioner Lind discussed the differing of opinions regarding traffic impact between the residents and the traffic report, and asked how that would be documented in the resolution, and asked about expanding the public hearing notice radius for PUDs. Motion made by Commissioner Brummond, seconded by Lanterman, to recommend approval of the draft resolutions approving the Rezoning, Preliminary Plat, and the Preliminary Planned Unit Development for Hope Community, with the addition that tree species removed be replaced with the same species under the landscaping plan. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Van Den Einde. Voting Nay: Lind. (Motion passed 3:1) 7. Reports/Information a. Other Business – Commissioner’s Horn & Van Den Einde declined to seek reappointment after their terms expire and will no longer serve on the Planning Commission. Chair Lanterman and Commissioner Lind notified the Commission that they would not be able to attend the March 7, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. Due to a lack of quorum, the March 2024 Planning Commission meeting was rescheduled to Tuesday, March 12, 2024. b. Planning Project Update* - A question was asked regarding the 610 Extension Business Park concept plan. c. City Council Report* – none. 8. Commissioner Liaison Calendar City Council Meetings 2/8/2024 2/22/2024 3/14/2024 3/28/2024 4/11/2024 4/25/2024 Brummond Lanterman Lanterman Lind Lind Brummond 9. Adjournment Motion made by Lanterman, seconded by Van Den Einde, to adjourn the February 1, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. Voting Aye: Lanterman, Brummond, Lind, and Van Den Einde. (Motion passed 4:0). The meeting adjourned at 10:28 pm. Page 1 of 6 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7a. Planning Commission Meeting: March 12, 2024 Prepared By: Natalie Davis McKeown Topic: Khacholing Center Conditional Home Occupation License - Interim Use Permit (IUP) (PID 06-119-23-13-0002) (City File No. 23-029) Action Required: Recommendation 1.Application Request Lobsang Yang and Nga Thi Ngoc Nguyen, the applicants, requests approval of an Interim Use Permit (IUP) for a Conditional Home Occupation License (CHOL) to teach meditation and Buddhism classes out of their home at 23360 Oakdale Drive. 2.Background The City received a code enforcement complaint in 2023 about a potential place of worship operating out of the residential home at 23360 Oakdale Drive. Staff followed up on this concern and met with the applicant to discuss how the regular use of the property fts within the City Code. The applicant immediately stopped holding in-person classes after speaking with staff and moved forward with the application process to receive proper approvals. In working with the City Attorney, it was determined that even Figure 1 Site Location Page 2 of 6 though the applicant is sharing spiritual teachings out of their house, this does not operate as a place of worship since the house and classes are not open to the public. Instead, the classes require pre-registration and would be subject to an attendance cap. This use is more similar to a yoga class than a place of worship. 3. Context Zoning and Land Use The proposed property is guided for Rural/Ag Residential and zoned Rural Residential (RR). The property has an existing single-family home with an attached and detached garage. The property is not within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Surrounding Properties All surrounding properties are guided Rural/Ag Residential and zoned RR. None of the surrounding properties are located within the MUSA. The property is surrounding by single-family residential and agricultural uses. Natural Characteristics of the Site The 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s Natural Resource Inventory Areas map shows disturbed woodland on the property. The natural community is not indicated high-quality on the map. The property contains a portion of a larger wetland complex in the rear yard, but it was determined the proposed location of the structure will not affect this larger complex. A partial wetland delineation was completed for the proposed project area in the front yard of the property. It was determined there is an incidental wetland (i.e., roadside ditch) in the southwest corner of the study area. Due to the incidental nature, this area would not be subject to wetland regulations. Figure 2 Natural Resource Inventory Areas Map Page 3 of 6 4. Analysis Planning staff coordinated review of the request for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, City Code requirements, and City policies. The City Engineer’s comments are incorporated into this staff report, the detailed comments are included in the attached engineering memo and the approval conditions require compliance with the memo. The City’s discretion in approving or denying an IUP for a CHOL is limited to whether the proposed request meets the standards outlined in the City Code. If it meets these standards, the City must approve the permit. The applicant requests approval to allow weekly classes in meditation and Buddhism at his place of residence. Per the applicant’s narrative, classes will be by invitational only, require pre-registration, and be limited to 25 people each week. The applicant also provides one-on-one counseling services throughout the week. Additionally, the narrative calls out the potential for seldom larger group events. Communications with the applicant provide that such events would likely be for 40-50 people and infrequent, but a specific frequency is not provided. It is expected that all classes and events will be primarily held within the meditation room in the house. Should it be needed, the applicant said tents and temporary toilets could be arranged for a larger event, but this is not anticipated at this time. Figure 3 Zoomed In Clip of Site Plan Page 4 of 6 Section 1030.100 establishes three levels of home occupations: Allowed, Special, and Conditional. Any home occupation that requires more than 2 parking stalls for “customer” parking requires a CHO which is processed as an IUP. Since 5-6 cars are expected for the weekly class, this use requires a CHOL. The Planning Commission must consider the following criteria: A. The nature and general character of the geographic area in which the CHOL property is located. The City may consider, in addition to other factors and not by way of limitation, the existing and condition of gravel and paved roads in the area, existence and proximity of CHOL operations to neighboring residences, size of neighboring lots, and use of neighboring properties. The nature and general character of the geographic area is not likely to be negatively affected by the operation of the center. The applicant’s narrative explains the mediation room used for classes is located within the existing house and is far away from the surrounding neighbors. Oakdale Drive is a paved, minor collector road and can support the proposed traffic. Parking of vehicles will be accommodated on site and a condition of approval is that no parking can take place on Oakdale Drive. The applicant provided proof of parking for up to 20 cars should additional parking become necessary to accommodate the IUP approvals on a regular basis. Prior to stopping in-person classes, the applicant states they had at most 6 cars as most attendees carpooled, so staff does not believe it is necessary to require 20 additional parking spaces at this time in addition to the existing driveway. A condition of approval in the draft resolution is that parking does not violate the Parking Nuisance section of City Code (Chapter 82, Subd. 4). In order to comply with the City’s parking nuisance standards, any vehicle parked in the front yard must be parked on a paved, gravel, or otherwise improved parking surface or driveway area. Should the applicant need to accommodate overflow parking for a larger event, parking on an unimproved surface can only occur in the back yard. If the City documents or the applicants find a need to expand the parking on site to prevent parking on Oakdale, the applicant must submit plans for the driveway expansion, which will include a wetland delineation process per the City Engineering memo. Approval of the driveway expansion would be handled administratively. Staff provides language in the draft resolution that would allow for larger events of up to 50 people up to 5 times a year. The Planning Commission should discuss whether this seems an appropriate balance between the applicant’s desire to seldomly host events out of their home and the needs of the surrounding neighborhood. The applicant’s narrative explains the mediation room Page 5 of 6 would still likely be the main location of larger events, but outdoor tents and portable toilets would be arranged for as necessary. B. Consideration shall be made for potential property devaluation of adjacent and surrounding properties. The proposed used seems unlikely to lead to property devaluation of adjacent and surrounding properties. The use is currently about as impactful as a weekly book club or large family gathering. Classes occur within the house. Larger events will be seldom. C. Nuisance factors shall be considered, including but not limited to sight, odor, light, glare, and noise, and any other nuisance factors that may result from issuance of the CHOL. No exterior lighting is proposed. Sight and odor nuisances are not expected. It is possible some activities could generate noise, but no more than other typical residential uses such as gatherings with friends and family. D. Environmental concerns, including but not limited to drainage, wastewater, wells, and wetland issues. The City Engineering memo notes that a wetland delineation will be required before a driveway expansion occurs as the proof of parking could potentially impact a wetland. A wetland delineation will define the boundary of the potential wetlands on the site to determine any wetland impacts. If there are wetland impacts, these will need to go through an approval process, and the applicant may be told to explore alternative options. It is possible a driveway expansion may actually need to be located to the west or north of the existing driveway. However, there appears to be enough space to accommodate the parking in either scenario. The memo also contains a condition to ensure a final grading plan is submitted should the driveway expansion occur in the future, and this will confirm drainage is handled to avoid potential negative consequences. E. Compliance with Section 1030.020 (Accessory Buildings, Structures, Uses, and Equipment) of the Zoning Ordinance and with other relevant Code sections. The standards in Section 1030.020 are not relevant to this request. F. Impact on the neighboring properties shall be considered before issuing a CHOL. Staff finds that the proposed CHOL for meditation and Buddhism classes are unlikely to result in a negative impact to the neighborhood. No parking will be allowed on Oakdale Drive and must be accommodated on site. Classes and Page 6 of 6 events will primarily occur within a large meditation room of the house (previously used as a recreational room). Classes are weekly for a couple of hours. Larger events are expected to be seldom. Staff proposes limiting the frequency of larger events to 5 times a year as a way to mitigate the impact of approving the IUP. 5. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the draft resolution approving the IUP for a CHOL for Khacholing Center to allow weekly meditation and Buddhism classes, one-on-one counseling, and occasional larger member events. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution 2024-xx Approving the IUP 2. Applicant Narrative 3. City Engineering Memo dated January 24, 2024 4. Site Plan City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 1 of 4 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR A CONDITIONAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE FOR LOBSANG YANG AND NGA THI NGOC NGUYEN AT 23360 OAKDALE DRIVE (PID 06-119-23-13-0002) (CITY FILE 23-029) WHEREAS, Lobsang Yang and Nga Thi Ngoc Nguyen, the applicants, request approval of an interim use permit for a conditional home occupation license (CHOL) to allow weekly meditation and Buddhism classes, one-on-one counseling, and occasional larger events under the name “Khacholing Center” on property legally described as follows: See Attachment A WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the interim use permit for a conditional home occupation license at a duly called Public Hearing and recommends approval, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY 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. An interim use permit is approved, in accordance with the application materials received by the City on October 26, 2023, with additional material received January 4, 2024, and January 25, 2024, except as amended by this resolution. 2. The Zoning Ordinance allows Conditional Home Occupation Licenses and the applicant shall comply with all home occupation standards, except as specifically modified per this resolution. 3. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of the City Engineer’s memo dated January 24, 2024. 4. The Interim Use Permit for the Conditional Home Occupation License is issued to Lobsang Yang and Nga Thi Ngoc Nguyen, for the operation of “Khacholing Center.” This permit is non-transferable. The Permit shall terminate upon any one of the following: a. If the applicant ceases operations. b. If property ownership changes. c. If neither individual to whom the license has been issued ceases to live at the subject premises. 5. The Conditional Home Occupation License is approved based on the finding that the standards in Section 1030.100, Subd. 7 and Section 1070.030 have been met. Specifically: a. The applicant requests the conditional home occupation license to provide weekly meditation and Buddhism classes, one-on-one counseling services, and seldom larger events. Classes and events will primarily be held in an existing room of the house. The City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 2 of 4 operation has no employees. The naturel and general character of the geographic area is not likely to be negatively affected by the limited operations of the center that will occur on the property. Oakdale Drive is a paved, minor collector roadway that can support the proposed traffic. Parking will be required to be accommodated on site. b. There is nothing to indicate that the proposed use would devalue adjacent and surrounding properties. c. The proposed use is expected to be primarily held in a room within the home. It is not expected this use will generate any nuisance conditions related to odor, light, or glare. Some noise is expected related to people on the property similar to that of other property owners holding regular gatherings with friends and family. d. There are no environmental concerns, including but not limited to drainage, wastewater, wells and wetland issues related to this project. Should it be determined the driveway must be expanded at a later date to accommodate additional vehicles, a wetland delineation and final grading plan will be reviewed and approved administratively at that time to confirm no environmental impacts. e. The home occupation appears unlikely to have a negative impact on neighboring properties. Parking must be accommodated on site, and a majority of the approved activities will be within a room of the house. Larger events are expected to be seldom. f. The application for a CHOL is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, public facilities, and capital improvement plans. The business will be conducted in an enclosed building and will not generate any nuisance conditions that would endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort of the community nor will it be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity. The operation does not demand any additional public services or facilities and conforms to the performance standards of the Zoning Ordinance. 6. The home occupation must comply with the following standards: a. No new signage for the home occupation is proposed or approved. Any new signage will require an amendment to the Interim Use Permit for the Conditional Home Occupation License. b. Weekly classes must be limited to 25 people. c. One-on-one counseling sessions are permitted. d. Larger events of up to 50 people are allowed up to 5 times a year. e. The proposed driveway expansion of 20 parking stalls shown on the site plan is understood to be proof of parking. Should the City document or the applicant find a regular need for parking capacity beyond the existing driveway, the applicant must submit final plans for the driveway expansion, including completing a wetland delineation. Approval of a potential driveway expansion will be handled administratively. A wetland delineation fee and escrow and grading escrow will be required. City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 3 of 4 f. All parking needs must be accommodated on site. Overflow parking cannot occur on Oakdale Drive. g. Parking must be in compliance with Chapter 82, Subd. 4. Any parking in the front yard must be on a paved, gravel, or otherwise improved parking surface or driveway area. Should the applicant need to accommodate overflow parking for a larger event, parking on an unimproved surface can only occur in the back yard. h. No person shall be employed at or report to the home site location who does not reside in the dwelling unit. i. The operation shall comply with all state, federal, and local regulations. j. The Conditional Home Occupation License shall be issued for 3 years in accordance with the procedures outlined in Section 1030.100 of the Zoning Ordinance. The permit shall be administratively reviewed every 3 years to ensure compliance with conditions of approval and ordinance requirements. k. The City may revoke or modify the CHOL upon a finding that conditions have changed to warrant revocation or modifications of the license. 7. Prior to release of the application escrow account, the applicant must record this Resolution with the Hennepin County Recorder’s Office and provide proof of recording to the City. 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 28th day of March 2024. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 4 of 4 ATTACHEMENT A The East 560.37 feet of the South 264.77 feet of the West 1129 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SW ¼ of NE ¼) of Section Six (6), Township One Hundred Nineteen (119) North, Range Twenty-Three (23) West of the Fifth Principal Merdian, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Background of the applicant: I Lobsang Yeshi (Drupa Rinpoche is my monastic name) am the Buddhist Chaplain of Khacholing Center Minneapolis. Khacholing Center was established over 25 years ago in 1997 and is a registered non-profit organisation. Its activities include classes on Buddhism and meditation. As the Center’s chaplain, I also offer advice and support to persons and families who seek spiritual support and bereavement care. Currently, I am Chaplain intern at North Memorial Hospital, Robbinsdale. The Center has in the past held its activities in various places and was in need of a more stable place to carry out its activities. I am the co-owner of the property 23360 Oakdale Drive, Corcoran, MN 55374 with Madam Nga Ngoc Nguyen who is a friend and benefactor of Khacholing Center and we agreed to permit the Center to carry out its activities there. (a) Nature of request: Conditional Use Permit to Use A Room in an Existing Building for Meditation Classes and Buddhist Studies (By Invitation Only through prior registration and capped at a maximum of 25 persons). (b) Impact on adjoining properties and mitigating measures: I am unable to see any impact on adjoining properties because: (i) the room is within the existing house which is located far from the neighbours; (ii) the need for some car park space (15-20 cars) can be easily accommodated within the 3-acre area of the property. (iii) On typical Sunday morning, we have a maximum of 5-6 cars and they normally park either on the driveway in front of garages or on the lawn next to garage. No one parks outside our own property. (c) Buildings to be constructed or utilised: No additional buildings are planned for. The room to be utilised is a renovated recreation room adjacent to the garage. (d) Intended use of buildings and property: To conduct meditation classes and Buddhism classes on a pre-registration/by invitation only basis and limited to 25 persons. (e) Hours and days of operation: Classes are on Sundays from 10am - 12noon. (f) Number of employees: None (g) Size of operation, including no: of animals: There are no animals kept on the property. Sunday classes average 10-15 persons. (h) Impact on traffic: None because the level of activity is low (average number of cars using the area is 10 cars) and there is ample parking space within the property. No parking on the main road is allowed nor required. (i) Impact on septic system: No anticipated impact as the average number of persons using the premises on Sundays is around 10 persons. (j) Potential environmental impact: None as activities are within the existing house. (k) Proposed measures to provide buffering from proposed use to adjacent properties: None required because activities are within the said building on the 3-acre land. (l) Future expansion plans: There are none planned as the current room/building is sufficient for the activities. (m) Nature of other uses in the neighbourhood: From what we can see from the property, neighbouring land uses are mainly farmland (horse farm and crop farm). Regarding the arrangements for any event that could involve a larger group of persons, the activities will primarily be within the meditation room/hall. Where needed though unlikely, outdoor tents could be put up for refreshment counters and temporary toilets arranged for. Although classes (it will be the same for events) are open to anyone, notices are done via email to listed persons (friends and their families). As such, parking has not been an issue because people tend to car-pool, especially given that Oakdale Drive is a fairly long drive out of the city. Anyway, sudden needs for car parking space can be made temporarily available at the long and wide clear lawn area within the property along the fence. Memo To:Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director From:Kent Torve, PE City Engineer Steve Hegland, PE Project:Khacholing CUP Site Plan Date:January 24, 2024 Exhibits: This review is based on the following documents for a site plan showing 20 parking stalls: Site Plan for Lobsang Yeshi at 23360 Oakdale Drive by Northwestern Surveying and Engineering, dated 1/3/2023. Comments: 8,360 square feet of parking lot would be constructed, no WMO review is required. It is assumed that the site plan was for the purpose of proof of parking, if the parking lot will be installed the City and wetland (WCA) process including wetland delineation and grading plan submittal will be required. End of Memo XXXXXXXXXXX XXXX X X X X X X X X X X XXXX X OAKDALE DR. 560.37 26 4 . 7 7 50 . 0 50 . 0 50 . 0 9.0 24 . 0 9.099 9 . 0 998.4 998.3 998.3 998.2 998.2 99 8 . 3 99 9 . 4 99 8 . 6 -0.95% -0 . 1 6 % -0.18% ’ Page 1 of 23 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 7b. Planning Commission Meeting: March 12, 2024 Prepared By: Natalie Davis McKeown Topic: Woodland Hills Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning Amendment, Preliminary Plat, and Variance (PID 36-119-23-33-0009; 36-119-23-33-0010; 36-119-23-33-0007) (City File No. 23-032) Action Required: Recommendation Review Deadline: April 25, 2024 1. Request The applicant, Woodland Hills of Corcoran, Inc., requests approval of a land use application that includes a preliminary plat to create 60 single-family residential lots, 1 community amenity/recreational lot, and 5 outlots at the northeast corner of County Road 116 and Hackamore Road. 2. Context Background The subject properties include three properties previously used for agriculture. Hackamore Road improvements are underway. A portion of the subject property is being used for construction staging. Zoning and Land Use The subject properties are guided for low density residential and currently zoned RSF-2 (Single-Family Residential 2). Up until this point, the land use has been agricultural. The property is within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and within Phase 1 of the 2040 Staging Plan for municipal services. Figure 1 Project Site NE Corner CR 116 and Hackamore Rd Page 2 of 23 Surrounding Properties The land use, guiding, and zoning of the surrounding properties are provided in the table below: Direction Existing Land Use Guided Land Use in 2040 Comp Plan Zoning District North - Low Density Residential - Existing Residential - RSF-2 - Urban Reserve (UR) Residential East Existing Residential UR Residential South Medina Medina Residential West Low Density Residential Planned Unit Development (PUD) – Tavera Residential Natural Characteristics of The Site The 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s Natural Resource Inventory Areas map does not show any high-quality natural communities on the subject properties. There is an emergent wetland community indicated on the eastern portion of the project site. A wetland delineation was approved by the City in January 2021, which is valid through January 2026. The delineation confirmed 10 wetlands throughout the project site. The Hennepin County Resources Map indicates the larger wetland complex in the southeast portion of the site may be a DNR protected water and is identified as Flood Zone A. Figure 2 Hennepin County Natural Resources Map Page 3 of 23 Prior Review The City Council reviewed a concept plan for this project (previously known as “Hackamore 116” – City File No. 23-017) at their regular meeting on 7/27/2023. Discussion points of the concept plan included rezoning the site from RSF-2 to RSF-3, whether the requested flexibility in how to apply the side setback be handled as a variance or a zoning ordinance amendment, and the potential need for flexibility from the requirement that garages not comprise more than 55% of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage to accommodate 3-car garages. After Council feedback, the applicant and City staff proceeded with an infrastructure feasibility study, which included an evaluation of the transportation network. The Parks and Trails Commission reviewed this item at their meeting on 2/15/2024. They recommended accepting park dedication per the staff recommendation: cash in lieu of land. 3. Analysis Staff reviewed the application for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, other City Code requirements, and City policies. A review of the plans was coordinated with the City’s Engineer and Public Safety team, and their comments are incorporated into this staff report. Detailed comments are attached in the City Engineer’s Memo and Public Safety Memo. The approval conditions require compliance with these memos. A. Level of Discretion in Decision-Making The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying a comprehensive plan amendment. The comprehensive use plan is the City’s long-range planning tool that indicates what type of development should occur on all land within the City. It is the City’s plan for directing future development and growth. The City Council may guide property as it deems necessary to protect and promote the general health, safety, and welfare of the community. The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying Zoning Amendments, both to the Zoning Map and Ordinance text. The proposed zoning for a property must be consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. If the proposed zoning is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, the City must deny the rezoning application. The Zoning Ordinance and Map are the enforcement tools used to implement the goals and standards set in the Comprehensive Plan. The City’s discretion in approving a preliminary plat is limited to whether the proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the City’s subdivision and zoning ordinances. If it meets the standards, the City must approve the preliminary plat. The City has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying a variance. The burden of proof is on the applicant to show the variance standards are satisfied. Page 4 of 23 B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) In order for this application to proceed as proposed, a comprehensive plan amendment will be required to address the density of the project. The applicant submitted a preliminary plat that includes 60 residential lots on 36.74 gross acres. The City uses pre-development density to estimate a project’s ability to meet the density requirements to comply with the Comprehensive Plan. After netting out the wetlands on the project, the estimated net acreage is 29.87 acres. Therefore, the estimated pre-development density is 2.01 units an acre. This number can increase between the preliminary and final plat; however, it is unlikely to increase to 3 units per acre as currently proposed. This density calculation is lower than what was anticipated with the initial concept plan as the concept plan primarily included 65’-wide lots, and now the plan is primarily comprised of 75’-wide lots. In order to accommodate a density of 2-3 units per acre, the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan must be amended to add a new land use designation. The name is up for discussion, but staff currently proposed naming the new land use designation “Very Low Density Residential” to minimize the amount of adjustment that needs to be made to the comprehensive plan. This can be re-evaluated as part of the 2050 Comprehensive Plan update which the City may begin working on as soon as next year (2025). Additionally, the 2040 Future Land Use Map will need to be updated to re-guide these properties as Very Low Density Residential. While at this time the only acreage dedicated to this land designation would be this project, other applicants coming in at densities within this range could request to be re-guided to this new designation per the City’s discretion. It is expected another project will be coming in within the next few months that will have a similar request. The Comprehensive Plan is a living document. When the City finds evidence to support a change to the plan, the City Council has the discretion to make a change. The City should consider the following issues when reviewing a CPA request: • Evidence submitted by the applicant demonstrating the reason(s) that the plan should be changed, including, but not limited to, whether new information has become available since the Comprehensive Plan was adopted that supports re-examination of the plan, or that existing or proposed development offers new opportunities or constraints that were not previously considered by the plan. • Whether or not the change is needed to allow reasonable development of the site. • The relationship of the proposed amendment to the supply and demand for particular land uses within the City and the immediate vicinity of the site. • A demonstration by the applicant that the proposed amendment has merit beyond the interests of the proponent. • The possible impacts of the amendment on all specific elements of the Comprehensive Plan as may be applicable, including but not limited to: Page 5 of 23 o Transportation; o Sanitary sewer, including existing and proposed sanitary sewer flows as compared to the adopted plan; o Housing, including the extent to which the proposal contributes to the City’s adopted housing goals; o Surface water, including compliance with the City’s goals for water quality as well as water quantity management; o Water supply; o Parks and open space; and • Consideration of the impact of the proposed amendment upon current and future special assessments and utility area charges, future property tax assessments or other fiscal impacts upon the City. This is a policy decision for the City. The City should evaluate all of these issues when considering the decision. Staff recommends approval of the CPA as it will allow reasonable development of the site, the amendment will cater to supply and demand for a variety of lot sizes, and the proposed amendment has merit beyond the interests of the proponent as there are other applicants finding it difficult to meet the 3 units per acre minimum density while meeting the City’s lot standards for a “straight” plat. It should be noted that this is not a door to re-guide all of the Low Density Residential land as Very Low Density Residential. The City will need to continue to be mindful of the amount of acreage put in the new “Very Low Density Residential” category in order to maintain an average density of 3 units per acre within the MUSA. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan averages 3.11 units an acre within the MUSA. Re-guiding 36.74 gross acres (29.86 net acres) to the new category is estimated to bring the overall average down to 3.10 units an acre. This is shown in the tables below. Page 6 of 23 2040 Future Land Use Gross Acres Net Acres Minimum Density Range Maximum Density Range Minimum Units Maximum Units Existing Residential 1,586.74 1153.7 0.5 1 577 1154 Very Low Density Residential 36.74 29.86 2 3 60 90 Low Density Residential 3,657.98 2626.7 3 5 7880 13134 Medium Density Residential 84.74 66.04 5 8 330 528 Mixed Residential 522.43 449.88 8 10 3599 4499 High Density Residential 128.75 80.32 10 30 803 2410 Mixed Use 532.42 459.08 8 30 1836 6886 Grand Total 4865.58 15085 Net Density Units Per Acre 3.10 C. Zoning Amendment (Text and Map) Section 1070.010 details the process to handle Zoning Amendment requests, both text and map amendments. The site is currently zoned RSF-2, and the applicant requests the site be rezoned to RSF-3. This will allow for lots as small as 7,500 sq. ft. with a lot width of 65’ where the RSF-2 requires a minimum lot size of 11,000 sq. ft. and an 80’ lot width. In addition to the change in the Zoning Map, the text of the RSF-3 purpose must also be revised as follows should the CPA be approved: Areas zoned RSF-3 are guided Low Density or Very Low Density on the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Development within this district is required based on the land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan. at a minimum density of 32.0 units per net acre up to a maximum of 5.0 units per acre. The Planning Commission should consider the following evaluation criteria for the Zoning Amendment requests: A. The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. Staff finds that should the proposed CPA be approved, the zoning amendment requests are in compliance with the City’s Comprehensive plan. Page 7 of 23 B. The proposed action meets the purpose and intent of this Ordinance, or, in the case of a map amendment, it meets the purpose and intent of the individual district. Staff finds the proposed text amendments do not conflict with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as outlined in Section 1010.020 of the City Code. The proposed map amendment meets the purpose and intent of the RSF-3 district which is intended to be the primary single-family zoning district for new residential development. C. There is adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed action. With the required improvements of this development, there will be adequate infrastructure available to serve the site developed at RSF-3 standards. These improvements will be funded by the developer. The text amendment does not have an effect on infrastructure availability. D. There is an adequate buffer or transition between potentially incompatible districts. The buffer ordinance and wetland buffers required by code will allow for an adequate buffer and transition between lower density districts to the north and east. D. Preliminary Plat The applicant proposes a preliminary plat that will subdivide the northeast corner of Hackamore Road and County Road 116 into 60 residential lots, 1 amenity lot, and 5 outlots containing wetlands and stormwater ponds. The applicant indicated the development will have a homeowner’s association which will be required by the City with the proposed outlots. Lot Size and Setbacks Should the site be rezoned to RSF-3, the following standards would apply to this development: Figure 3 Preliminary Plat Page 8 of 23 Standard RSF-3 Standard for Single- Family Minimum Lot Area 7,500 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 65’ Minimum Principle Structure Setbacks: - Front (Major Roadway) 100’ - Front (Other Streets) 20’ - Front Porch (less than 120 sq. ft.) 15’ - Side (living) 10’ - Side living (garage) 5’ - Rear 30’ The site plan notes that 42 lots will have a lot width of 75’ or greater and 18 lots will have a lot width between 65’-75’. The smallest lot size proposed is 8,600 square feet. The largest residential lot size is 27,462 square feet. The average residential lot size is 13,302 square feet. The lots meet or exceed the minimum lot dimension requirements. The front and rear setbacks comply with the district standards as written. Lots 6-11 are subject to the setback from major roadways (aka County Roads). Lot 6 exceeds the 100’ setback. Lots 7-11 have a 60’ setback from the property line adjacent to County Road 116. This requires compliance with the City’s enhanced landscaping requirement in Section 1060.070, Subd. 2(K). This is discussed further in the landscaping section of this report. The applicant requests a 7.5’ side setback be applied consistently across the development rather than a side setback dependent upon the living or garage side of the house. This is a variance request that is further evaluated subsequently in this report. The submitted site plan complies with the requested 7.5’ side setback. Should the variance not be approved, the applicant will be required to revise the site plan to show compliance with the minimum setbacks per the written zoning district standards. In addition to the 60 residential lots, the plat includes one amenity lot for a community pool and seasonal pool house. This falls under permitted uses in the RSF-3 district as a “parks, playgrounds, trails, other recreational facilities of a non-commercial nature and directly related buildings and structures.” The lot meets minimum size standards. The pool must meet building setbacks as measured from the water’s edge, and the surrounding patio must remain outside of any drainage and utility easements. The pool house is also subject to building setbacks. It appears the lot complies with these standards. The applicant shared with staff that the pool house is not meant to be a rentable space for parties and will be used seasonally. However, staff are concerned about parking for the pool as experience suggests that residents not living on the same Page 9 of 23 street as the amenity lot may choose to drive to the community lot. This will be discussed further subsequently in this report. Design Construction Standards All homes within this subdivision will be expected to meet the architectural design requirements of both Section 1060.050, Subd. 1(B) as well as Section 1040.040, Subd. 8. This includes equal architectural treatment for all facades located on or visible from a street. Each elevation facing a street should use a minimum of 2 different materials and/or styles compatible with the front elevation. The following lots appear to have multiple facades that are oriented or visible to a public street: 1-14, 17, 19, 20, 36, 45, 46, 48, 52, 53. 55, 56, and 60. It is important to note there are several other architectural requirements within Section 1040.040, Subd. 8, and the applicant is responsible for reviewing and complying with this section of code. Building plans will be reviewed with each building permit. The applicant specifically requests a variance from the following requirement in Section 1040.040, Subd. 8(B)(1): The garage shall not comprise more than 55% of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage. This standard is based on the measurement of the entire garage structure and not on a measurement of the garage door or doors only. Corner lots are exempt from this requirement on one street elevation. This variance request is discussed further in the variance section of the report. Wetlands A wetland delineation finalized in 2021 determined there are 10 wetlands currently on site. The applicant submitted a wetland replacement plan indicating their intention to remove two small wetlands of less than a tenth acre (WLA and WL4 in the image below) in addition to a larger wetland in the southwest corner of the project (WL8). The impacts to the two smaller wetlands are likely to be approved; however, the approval is less certain for WL8. Should these impacts not be approved, the plans must be revised to include the required wetland buffer and setback. Page 10 of 23 Figure 4 Delineated Wetlands Most of these wetlands will remain and will be subject to the Wetland Overlay District (Section 1050.010), which includes wetland buffers, wetland buffer monument signs, and an additional 15’ structure setback from the edge of the buffer. The size of the buffer is dependent upon the quality of the wetland. The City’s Natural Resources Community Quality Ranking map is based on the City’s quality assessment of known wetlands within the City. Wetlands not shown on this map are assumed to be of medium quality; however, there is a process to confirm wetland quality through Minnesota Rapid Assessment (MNRAM) methodology should the applicant decide wetland quality on the site needs to be re-evaluated. The City’s map shows WL1 and WL2 located in the southeast portion of the site as low quality. The rest of the wetlands are assumed to be of medium quality. Page 11 of 23 The following requirements will be applied: Medium Low Wetland Buffer Average Width 25’ 15’ Wetland Buffer Width (Min.) 20’ 10’ Wetland Buffer Width (Max.) 40’ 20’ Structure Setback from Buffer 15’ 15’ Total Buffer and Setback (Average)* 40’ 30’ * A 5’ setback is required for roads and parking lots. It appears the buffer width around WL1 and WL2 need to be confirmed and possibly corrected as there are a few areas where the buffer width exceeds 20’. Buffer widths above the 20’ maximum will not count towards the 15’ average width required for low wetlands. Wetland buffer space in excess of what is required by ordinance cannot be “netted out” in the final density calculation. Additionally, adjusting the buffer width will free up additional usable space for the applicant and future residents. It appears the buffer width of WL3, WL6, WL7, WL9 drop below the minimum required width of 20’. This must be corrected as noted in the table above. This may require subsequent revisions to the building pads on nearby lots, specifically lots 13, 53 and 54. WL5 appears to far exceed the required average width of 25’ and the maximum width of 40’ in some areas. This should be revised to identify the required buffer per the City’s ordinance. In order to confirm compliance with the averaging requirements, staff added a condition of approval that the applicant’s engineer provide certification of the average width of each wetland buffer. A permanent wetland buffer monument shall be installed at each lot line where it crosses a wetland buffer, and where to indicate the contour of the buffer, with a Figure 5 Natural Resource Communities Quality Ranking Map Page 12 of 23 maximum spacing of 200 feet of wetland edge. If no buffer is required, the monument shall be at the edge of the wetland. Additional wetland buffer monuments are required on WL3. Further, the wetland signs will need to be revised as wetland buffers widths are revised. The applicant submitted a ground cover plan which includes provisions for establishing wetland buffers. There is a note on the plan that disturbed wetland buffers will be seeded per the plan, and undisturbed buffers will be left in their natural state. The ground cover plan does not indicate which wetlands may or may not be disturbed. As a condition of approval in the draft resolution, the applicant must confirm the existing vegetation will satisfy the buffer requirements with the City’s wetland specialist. Based on the results of this inspection, the applicant must revise the ground cover plan to show which wetland buffers need to be established and which wetland buffers are undisturbed. Landscaping Per Section 1060.070, dwelling units shall provide a minimum of 1 overstory tree. This means 60 overstory trees must be planted with this new development. This is shown on the landscaping plan. The amenity lot is not considered a dwelling unit. This lot will be subject to the landscaping requirements for non-residential uses which require the following: a. One overstory tree per 1,000 square feet of gross building floor area, or one tree per 50 lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is greater. b. One understory shrub per 300 square feet of building or one tree per 30 lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is greater. The amenity lot includes 9 overstory shrubs, but the landscaping plan does not include the calculations to determine the required quantity of overstory trees and shrubs. The landscaping plan must be revised to include the calculations for the amenity lot and to include any additional required plantings based on the above formulas. Lots 7-11 have a setback line as low as 60’ shown from the property line adjacent to County Road 116. This requires compliance with the City’s enhanced landscaping requirement in Section 1060.070, Subd. 2(K): a minimum of 1 overstory deciduous tree, 1 overstory coniferous tree, 2 ornamental trees, and 10 understory shrubs per 100 feet of length of the property line where flexibility is requested. The landscaping plan provides the above calculation using a length of 350’. This does not appear to include Lot 7. The shown building plan is setback 100’; however, the setback line shown on the lot is as low as 60’. The applicant either needs to adjust the setback line on this lot to 100’ consistently, or the length of the west property line adjacent to County Road where the setback line is shown at a distance of less than 100’ must be included in the landscaping calculation. If the setback line is adjusted on lot 7, Page 13 of 23 the landscaping plan mostly complies with the enhanced landscaping standard for major roads, except 1 additional evergreen overstory tree must be added as the City rounds up to the nearest whole number of plantings. Additionally, the City Engineering memo requires that the landscaping plan be revised so that the plantings along County Road 116 to avoid conflicts with sanitary sewer near Manhole 2. In addition to the above landscaping requirements, Section 1060.070, Subd. 2(J) contains the standards for the City’s recently adopted “buffer yard” ordinance. Based on the project site being rezoned to RSF-3 and the surrounding zoning districts, the following buffer yards are required as noted in the table below: - A buffer yard class “B” applies along the north and west project boundaries. - A buffer yard class “A” applies along the east and south borders of the exception piece with frontage on County Road 116 (the northwest corner of the project boundaries). Buffer Yard Class Width Overstory Plantings1 Understory Plantings1 Shrubs1,2 Structures3 A 10’ 1 2 0 None 15’ 1 1.5 0 None 20’ 0.5 1.25 0 None B 10’ 1 4 6 Minimum 4’ fence 20’ 3 6 9 None 20’ 1 2 3 Minimum 4’ fence 30’ 2 4 12 None 30’ 1 2 4 Minimum 4’ berm 1 Per 100 feet of distance 2Requirement must be met by shrubs, tall native prairie plantings, or a combination deemed acceptable by the City 3Fences are subject to requirements in Section 1060.080 The City Council can accept the following as qualifying natural buffers where an additional buffer yard is not required: 1. Existing topographical features on vacant lots such as hills and swales. 2. Wetlands, lakes, rivers, and streams. 3. Major roadways. 4. Local Roads as shown on the 2040 Roadway Functional Classification map in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan may fulfill the Buffer Yard Class A requirement. 5. Existing wooded areas. Additionally, buffer yards are not to be located on any portion of an existing or dedicated public ROW or private street easement. Based on feedback received from the City Council during the concept plan, the landscaping plan does not show a buffer yard along the eastern border of WL2, nor is there a buffer yard applied along the west boundary since this area is separated from Tavera by a major roadway. Page 14 of 23 The landscaping plan also does not show a buffer yard along WL3 or WL5 which may make sense due to the lack of space between the wetland boundary and the property line as well as the existing vegetation of the wetlands. The Planning Commission should discuss whether they agree that these wetlands count as a natural buffer yard. A buffer yard is also not shown on Lot 19, just south of the new half ROW for an eventual street connection. However, this street connection is not shown on the 2040 Roadway Functional Classification map, so a B buffer yard class must be applied to Lot 19 to be in compliance with this ordinance. The buffer yard shown on the landscape plan as “Detail A” along the northern project boundary does not match up with the required calculations called out for this area and should be revised accordingly. The calculations listed on the first page of the landscape plan require 15 overstory trees, 30 understory trees, and 45 shrubs. The plantings called out in Detail A include 12 overstory trees, 24 understory trees, and 36 shrubs. Other than revisions required for Lot 19 and Detail A, the landscaping plan complies with the buffer yard ordinance as drafted. However, the applicant is very concerned that the amount of plantings required, particularly north of WL2, will create a problem with long-term viability. The applicant requested a variance to the buffer yard ordinance to continue this discussion with the Planning Commission and City Council. This is discussed further in the variance portion of this report. Streets/Access The primary and only access into the development for non-emergency vehicles will come off of Hackamore Road. Hennepin County did not approve direct access to County Road 116 due to their spacing guidelines. The County did approve an emergency access with a barricade into the development from County Road 116 that is in the northwest corner of the site. Should the properties to the north develop in the future, an additional access into the development will be possible at that time which is approximately shown in the ghost plat. To facilitate the planning of that future connection, the applicant is required to dedicate a 30’ half right-of-way north of Lot 19. This is shown on the preliminary plat and site plan. The development is served by 4 internal roadways, two of which are cul-de-sacs where a connection cannot be made due to natural features and existing residences. Per the City Engineering memo, the shown ROW for County Road 116 is consistent with the requests of Hennepin County and the City’s guiding documents; however, the County also requests for a 25’x25’ sight triangle in the northeast quadrant of CR 116 and Hackamore Road. The applicant must revise the plat and site plan to include this request. Additionally, the City Engineering memo requires the plat to be revised to dimension existing and proposed ROW for Hackamore Road. Parking Page 15 of 23 Section 1060.060, Subd. 9 requires 2 parking spaces for a single-family home. The applicant’s narrative notes that house plans are anticipated to have 3-car and potentially 4-car garages. Additionally, each house is shown to have a driveway of at least 25’ in length to accommodate two additional vehicles. All 28’-wide local roads shall be signed “no parking” on one side of the roadway. Further, “no parking” signs will be required within all cul-de-sacs and turnarounds (temporary or permanent). Staff, including Public Safety, are concerned about parking for the shown community swimming pool. Street B (the street serving the amenity lot) would have “no parking” on one-side and within the cul-de-sac. The City Engineering memo requires that there be no parking on the south side of Street B. It appears the north side of the street could accommodate roughly 10 cars without conflicting with driveways, but this space may also be utilized as guest parking at times for the residents on this street. When there is no parking, residents within the subdivision will need to walk to the facility. However, the amenity lot is not central to the majority of homes within the subdivision and lacks ease of connectivity for pedestrian access. The City’s off-street parking requirements in Section 1060.060, Subd. 9 do not specifically call out a pre-identified formula for private community swimming pools. The closest uses on the table include the following: - Public Park: 1 space for each 1 acre of park plus 5 spaces per playground facility and 1 space for each picnic table. A minimum of 5 spaces is required. - Commercial Swimming Pool: 20 spaces plus 1 space for each 500 square feet of floor area. - Community Center or Health Club: 1 space per 300 square feet of floor area. None of the above formulas seem particularly appropriate for a community swimming pool for shared but private use of 60 homes. Section 1060.060, Subd. 9 states the following in regard to non-specified uses: For uses not specifically listed above, off-street parking requirements shall be computed by the Zoning Administrator on the same basis as required for the most similar uses. In such cases, the Zoning Administrator shall also consult off- street parking reference materials including, but not limited to, manuals prepared by the American Planning Association and Institute of Transportation Engineers. Per the American Planning Association’s Parking Standards published in 2002, some other potential formulas for swimming pools that seemed the most applicable include the following: - 1 per 100 square feet of pool area o Including the club house space, patio space, and water area this would equate to 9 off-street spots. - 1 space per 50 square feet of water area o This would equate to 5 off-street spaces. Page 16 of 23 - 1 space per 3 persons based on maximum capacity of the site. o Maximum capacity is unknown to staff at this time. In Ravinia, the private community swimming pool has 5 dedicated off-street parking spaces (4 regular and 1 handicapped space) and 7 on-street parking spaces. Ravinia is arguably a much bigger development. Therefore, staff believes it may make sense to require 3 off-street parking spaces, including a handicapped space, for this use in addition to the street parking available and the possibility that some homes will choose to walk. The Planning Commission should discuss whether they believe the nearby off-street parking is sufficient, or if they believe dedicated off-street parking is reasonable. If the Planning Commission finds that off-street parking should be provided, the Commission should provide a recommendation as to what amount and/or formula they find appropriate, and this should be added to the draft resolution. Utilities The City Engineer’s memo provides detailed utility comments. This project will extend municipal sewer and water to the site from the Tavera development to service this site. The City ordinance requires developers to stub sanitary sewer, water, and streets to the property line which means development of this infrastructure makes development or accessibility of municipal services possible for adjacent properties. Grading, Stormwater, and Easements The development is required to provide drainage and utility easements over all outlots, wetlands, wetland buffers, the 100-year floodplain, and at the perimeter lot lines per the City Engineering memo. The memo includes a number of additional items related to grading and stormwater that must be addressed prior to final plat submittal. Trails and Parks The 2040 Parks and Trails Map provides guidance to the City for acquiring land for parks and trails. No parks are shown within the vicinity of this project. An existing on- road trail is shown on County Road 116. The applicant will be required to provide a 60’ half right-of-way (ROW) along County Road 116, and typically the County also requests an additional trail easement of 5’ to allow for future trail upgrades. A proposed on-road trail is shown along Hackamore Road on the 2040 Parks and Trails Plan. This on-road trail is reflected in the proposed site plan and is being constructed with the Hackamore Road project. The applicant will not receive park dedication credit for the on-road trail as it will be located within the City’s ROW. Staff recommend park dedication for this project to be in the form of cash-in-lieu of land. Page 17 of 23 Park Dedication Calculation Based on the current plan, 60 single-family residential lots are proposed. The expected park dedication based on the 2024 Fee Schedule is $357,240 (60 single-family units x $5,954). The final park dedication fee will be based on the adopted fee schedule at the time of final plat approval. The fees will be due prior to releasing the final plat for recording the subdivision with Hennepin County. The Parks and Trails Commission recommended to accept cash-in-lieu of land for park dedication. E. Variance The applicant requests the following three variances: 1. A side setback of 7.5’ applied from all side property lines for a minimum building separation of 15’ instead of 10’ on the living side and 5’ applied to the garage side (Section 1060.050, Subd. 7). 2. A garage maximum of 65% of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage for 3-car garages and 70% for 4-car garages (Section 1040.050, Subd. 8(B)). 3. Flexibility in determining the buffer yard requirements and required plantings along the east and north project boundaries (Section 1060.070, Subd. 2(J)). Section 1070.040 provides the standards to review variance requests. The applicant must show that these standards are satisfied with this request. Each variance request will be compared against these standards individually. Variance #1: Side Setback 7.5’ Figure 6 2040 Parks and Trails Map Page 18 of 23 1. That there are practical difficulties in complying with the Zoning Ordinance. The League of MN Cities defines a three-factor test for the term “practical difficulties”: a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and not created by the landowner; and c. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. Section 1070.040, Subd. 2(B) of the Zoning Ordinance specifically calls out the last two factors as their own standards and will be discussed individually. Therefore, this first standard can focus on evaluating the “reasonableness” of the request. The applicant’s narrative notes the variance request is to provide the most flexibility for a builder to place a home on a lot. It is anticipated the lots will be sold to multiple various local builders for construction of custom homes. A clear side setback will allow for consistency, avoid confusion, while maintaining the 15’ building separation. 2. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and were not created by the landowner. The applicant’s narrative provides that the subdivision is on a 36.74-acre site containing 7 wetlands, bordered on the south by Hackamore Road, and bordered on the west by County Road 116. These constraints result in lot design and house placement restrictions that are unique to the project boundaries. 3. That the granting of the variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. The applicant’s narrative states the current City Ordinance requires a minimum of 15’ between structures on adjacent lots. This will be maintained with a 7.5’ setback applied regardless of the living or garage side of the structure. Based on this, the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. 4. The proposed variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The applicant’s narrative reiterates that the 15’ minimum separation required by the underlying district standards will still be maintained with the proposed 7.5’ setback. 5. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant’s narrative suggests the requested deviation to the side setback does not create a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. 6. The City may impose conditions on the variance to address the impact on the variance. Page 19 of 23 The applicant proposes a 25’ front setback as a way to offset the deviation in side setback. Staff confirms all lots meet a 25’ setback as currently proposed. Staff’s Perspective Staff believes that ultimately, the requested setback is ultimately a distinction without much of a difference since a 15’ building separation will still be accomplished with the proposed setback. Staff would prefer this be handled as a zoning ordinance amendment; however, this variance application is submitted based on feedback received during the concept plan review process. It does seem to make practical sense that a consistent side setback be applied to avoid coordination concerns with multiple builders and property owners looking to create custom houses. Variance #2: Garage Maximum Percentage Standard 1. That there are practical difficulties in complying with the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant’s narrative notes that the target customers will prefer a 3-car garage, and many desire a 4-car garage. The minimum width of a 3-car garage is 30’, and the minimum width of a 4-car garage is 40.5’. However, 65’ wide lots would not be able to have a garage larger than 27.5’ under the current ordinance, and 75-wide lots would not be able to have a garage width larger than 33’. Arguably, a 3- or 4-car garage is a reasonable use of these properties that would not be allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. 2. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and were not created by the landowner. The parcel of land is unique in that the subdivision will be made available to multiple builders for custom built lots. The applicant’s narrative notes that the preference for a 3- car or 4-car garage is based on market demands which are not created by the landowner. 3. That the granting of the variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. The applicant’s narrative notes that should the City add a requirement for a second story on houses that bypass the garage percentage limit, then a larger garage frontage will not alter the essential character of the locality as the second story will result in minimizing the appearance. Staff notes that PUD flexibility has been granted from this standard in multiple nearby developments. Additionally, it is not uncommon for older neighborhoods within the City to have either a larger garage or second garage. 4. The proposed variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Page 20 of 23 The applicant’s narrative notes that conditions can be added to minimize the appearance of the garage which would allow for the variance to be in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance. 5. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant’s narrative suggests that deviation from this standard does not conflict with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 6. The City may impose conditions on the variance to address the impact of the variance. The applicant proposes two standards that could be applied to lots that choose to bypass the 55% maximum garage limit: a requirement that there must be a second story and a 30’ front setback. Figure 7 Example Elevations Staff’s Perspective Again, staff would prefer this deviation to be handled as a Zoning Ordinance Amendment as the hardship standard is hard to meet for a want such as 3-car or 4-car garage. However, the applicant submitted the variance application based on feedback received during the concept plan review process. Staff agrees it may be reasonable to grant the variance considering it has been a common PUD flexibility, and staff prefers that households have the ability to park their vehicles comfortably without relying on Page 21 of 23 street parking, particularly in the winter when overnight street parking is not permitted. Staff agrees with the requirement to require a second story but does not think a 30’ setback is necessary. The draft resolutions reflect this recommendation. Variance #3: Buffer Yard Flexibility 1. That there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. The applicant’s narrative explains the landscape architect’s concerns that the number of trees required by the buffer yard ordinance will result in trees growing together relatively soon after planting and create an unhealthy growth environment. In addition to the required plantings within the buffer yard, the area will be placed beneath existing tree canopies. There is concern that the trees will not reasonably fit into this space and be healthy. Additionally, there is concern that a reputable landscape contractor may not place a warranty on the plantings placed so close together and adjacent to the large number of existing trees. The narrative provides the north and east property lines have natural vegetation that provide an existing natural buffer between the proposed development property and the adjacent properties. The existing vegetation contains overstory trees, understory trees, and low growing vegetation. Additionally, the neighboring properties have existing mature trees that provide an additional buffer and contribute to a substantial tree canopy. The applicant would like to honor best management practices to avoid stunted growth and shorter life spans. 2. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and were not created by the landowner. The applicant’s response is that the project site is adjacent to larger lot single-family neighborhoods in which the owners have, over time, planted trees that have grown to provide a substantial buffer. Additionally, the proposed plan proposes preserving many overstory trees and other low growing plantings along the east and north property lines. The existing mature vegetation creates a unique situation where the new plantings as required will prevent the landscaping from growing properly and remaining in good health. 3. That the granting of the variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. The narrative notes the extensive existing vegetation on the subject development property and on the properties adjacent already provide a substantial buffer. Landscaping added to the level of the ordinance may have a difficult time growing. Granting a variance that will allow for healthy plantings to grow will enhance the essential character of the locality. 4. The proposed variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Page 22 of 23 The narrative again explains the existing substantial buffer in the area. The applicant asks that a landscape architect work with staff to determine a reasonable buffer that would comply with best management practices and would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. 5. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant explains that the variance will still provide a substantial buffer which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 6. The City may impose conditions on the variance to address the impact of the variance. The applicant proposes a condition that their professional landscape architect work with City staff to determine a reasonable buffer that would comply with best management practices that would include appropriate numbers of overstory trees, understory trees, and shrubs. The collaboration would allow for a buffer design that meets the intent and purpose of the ordinance while following best management practices per industry standards. Staff’s Perspective Staff notes that a recent application also requested flexibility which was not met favorably at that time. Staff is concerned about granting a variance to this buffer yard ordinance as this will not be a unique request as there seems to be agreement in concerns regarding the number of trees and best management practices amongst applicants. Additionally, there are multiple options to meet the buffer yard requirements if less plantings are desired. If the Commission and Council agree the tree survey and site photos provided by the applicant show a substantial existing buffer, it would be better for the City to make a finding that these areas constitute existing wooded areas; therefore, an additional buffer is not needed (please note, the site photos do not show which trees will be removed). Should a variance be granted on this standard, staff strongly recommends the City consider amending the buffer yard ordinance to avoid continued requests for flexibility from the standard. 7. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the following: 1. Draft Resolution Approving the Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2. Draft Ordinance Approving the Rezoning to RSF-3 3. Draft Resolution with Findings of Fact Supporting Rezoning 4. Draft Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat Staff prepared a resolution approving the requested variances to the side setback and garage maximum standards and denying the variance to the buffer yard requirements. The Planning Commission is asked to provide a recommendation on whether to Page 23 of 23 approve or deny each variance. Where the Commission disagrees with the prepared resolutions, the Commission should provide findings of fact for staff to include in the resolutions forwarded to the City Council. Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution Approving the Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2. Draft Ordinance Approving the Rezoning to RSF-3 3. Draft Resolution with Findings of Fact Supporting Rezoning 4. Draft Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat 5. Draft Resolution Approving 2 Variances and Denying 1 Variance 6. Applicant Narrative 7. City Engineering Pat Review Memo Dated 2/29/2024. 8. City Engineering Stormwater Review Memo Dated 2/29/2024. 9. Public Safety Memo Dated 2/7/2024. 10. Hennepin County Memo Dated 1/10/2024. 11. Public Comment Received 12. Site Boundary Map and Photos 13. Plan Set City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 1 of 3 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR “WOODLAND HILLS” AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 116 AND HACKAMORE ROAD (PID 36-119-23-33-0003, 36-119-23-33-0007, AND 36-119-23-33-0010) (CITY FILE NO. 23-032) WHEREAS, Woodland Hills of Corcoran, Inc. (“the applicant”) request approval of an amendment to create a new land use designation called “Very Low Density Residential” and a 2040 Future Land Use Map amendment to change the land use designation of approximately 36.74 acres from Low Density Residential to Very Low Density Residential on the property described as follows; See Attachment A. WHEREAS, the “Very Low Density Residential” land use designation will allow for a minimum density of 2 units per acre and a maximum density of 3 units per acre; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the requested amendment at a duly called Public Hearing and recommends approval; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Corcoran City Council approves the request for a comprehensive plan amendment for the above referenced parcel, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed development offers new opportunities that were not previously considered in the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Reclassifying the site is needed to allow reasonable development of the site that responds to current market conditions. 3. The proposed amendment has merit beyond the interests of the proponents as there are other applicants finding it difficult to meet the 3 units per acre minimum density required in low density residential while meeting other City goals such as natural resources and open space preservation. 4. With the planned infrastructure improvements developed with this project, there is adequate public infrastructure planned to serve the site. City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 2 of 3 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 28th day of March 2024. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT A Parcel 1: The East 450.00 feet, as measured along the north and south lines, of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the south line, of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. Parcel 2: The South 933.80 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as measured at right angles to the south line thereof; except the East 450 feet as measured along the north and south lines thereof, and except that part thereof which lies West of a line parallel with and distant 40 feet East of the West line of said section. Abstract property. Parcel 3: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼), of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, lying North of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the South line thereof. Except the West 450.00 feet of the North 200.00 feet as measured at right angles to the North and West lines thereof. Also except the West 40.00 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2024- Page 1 of 2 Motion By: Seconded By: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE X (ZONING ORDINANCE) OF THE CITY CODE TO AMEND THE TEXT OF SECTION 1040.050 AND CLASSIFY CERTAIN LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 116 AND HACKAMORE ROAD (PID 36- 119-23-33-0003, 36-119-23-33-0007, AND 36-119-23-33-0010) (CITY FILE NO. 23-032) THE CITY OF CORCORAN ORDAINS: Section 1. Amendment of the City Code. The text of Section 1040.050, Subd. 1 of the Corcoran City Code is hereby amended by removing the stricken material and adding the underlined material as follows: Areas zoned RSF-3 are guided Low Density or Very Low Density on the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Development within this district is required based on the land use designation in the Comprehensive Plan. at a minimum density of 32.0 units per net acre up to a maximum of 5.0 units per acre. Section 2. Amendment of the City Code. Title X of the City Code of the City of Corcoran, Minnesota, is hereby amended by changing the classification of the City of Corcoran Zoning Map from RSF-2 (Single Family Residential) to RSF-3 (Single and Two-Family Residential) on the property legally described as follows: See Attachment A Section 3. This amendment shall take effect upon its adoption. ADOPTED by the City Council on the 28th day of March 2024. 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 22nd day of February 2024. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota ORDINANCE NO. 2024- Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENT A Parcel 1: The East 450.00 feet, as measured along the north and south lines, of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the south line, of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. Parcel 2: The South 933.80 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as measured at right angles to the south line thereof; except the East 450 feet as measured along the north and south lines thereof, and except that part thereof which lies West of a line parallel with and distant 40 feet East of the West line of said section. Abstract property. Parcel 3: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼), of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, lying North of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the South line thereof. Except the West 450.00 feet of the North 200.00 feet as measured at right angles to the North and West lines thereof. Also except the West 40.00 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 1 of 3 Motion By: Seconded By: APPROVING FINDINGS OF FACT FOR A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT OF SECTION 1040.050 AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 116 AND HACKAMORE ROAD (PID 36-119-23- 33-0003, 36-119-23-33-0007, AND 36-119-23-33-0010) (CITY FILE NO. 23-032) WHEREAS, Woodland Hills of Corcoran, Inc. (the “applicant”) requests approval to rezone 36.74 acres legally described as follows: See Attachment A WHEREAS, the City approved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment that creates a new land use designation called “Very Low Density Residential” to allow for development at a minimum density of 2 units an acre and a maximum density of 3 units an acre. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request at a duly called Public Hearing, and; WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an ordinance that includes a zoning text amendment to clarify the purpose of the RSF-3 district as well as a zoning map amendment rezoning the affected parcels from RSF-2 (Single-Family Residential) to RSF-3 (Single and Two-Family Residential); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does support the request for reclassification of the property, based on the following findings and conditions: 1. The zoning ordinance amendments have been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of, and have been found to be consistent with, the City Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. 2. The zoning text amendment meets the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as it does not conflict with the outlined purpose and intent in Section 1010.020 of the City Code. The zoning map amendment meets the purpose and intent of the RSF-3 district which is intended to be the primary single-family zoning district for new residential development. 3. There is adequate infrastructure available to serve the proposed action. With the required improvements of this development, there will be adequate infrastructure available to serve the site developed at RSF-3 standards. The text amendment does not have an effect on infrastructure availability. 4. There is an adequate buffer or transition between potentially incompatible districts. The buffer yard and wetland buffer requirements of the Zoning Ordinance will allow for an adequate buffer and transition between lower density districts to the north and east. City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 2 of 3 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 28th day of March 2024. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT A Parcel 1: The East 450.00 feet, as measured along the north and south lines, of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the south line, of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. Parcel 2: The South 933.80 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as measured at right angles to the south line thereof; except the East 450 feet as measured along the north and south lines thereof, and except that part thereof which lies West of a line parallel with and distant 40 feet East of the West line of said section. Abstract property. Parcel 3: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼), of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, lying North of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the South line thereof. Except the West 450.00 feet of the North 200.00 feet as measured at right angles to the North and West lines thereof. Also except the West 40.00 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 1 of 6 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR “WOODLAND HILLS OF CORCORAN” ON THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 116 AND HACKAMORE ROAD (PID 36-119-23-33-0003, 36-119-23-33-0007, AND 36-119-23-33-0010) (CITY FILE NO. 23-032) WHEREAS, Woodland Hills of Corcoran, Inc. (“the applicant”) requests approval of a preliminary plat to create 61 lots and 5 outlots from three properties described as follows; See Attachment A. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary plat at a duly called public hearing, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Corcoran City Council approves the request for a preliminary and variance subject to the following findings and conditions: 1. A preliminary plat is approved, in accordance with the plans received by the City on November 30, 2023, with additional material received as of December 27, 2023, January 18, 2024, January 25, 2024, February 9, 2024, and February 14, 2024, except as amended by this resolution. 2. The applicant shall comply with all requirements in the City Engineer Plat Review Memo dated February 29, 2024. 3. The applicant shall comply with all requirements in the City Engineer Stormwater Review Memo dated February 29, 2024. 4. The applicant shall comply with all requirements in the Hennepin County Memo dated January 10, 2024. 5. The applicant shall comply with all requirements in the Public Safety Plan Review comments dated February 7, 2024. 6. Approval is contingent upon approval of the comprehensive plan amendment with the Metropolitan Council. 7. Prior to release of final plat for recording, the applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement to provide a financial guarantee to protect the work. 8. All permanent wetland buffer monument signs must be erected along the wetland buffer line as required by Section 1050.010, Subd. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance. City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 2 of 6 a. Wetland signs must be purchased from the City. b. Wetland signs must be installed on treated 4x4 wooden posts. c. Wetland buffer signs must be installed prior to issuance of building permits. d. The installation of the wetland monument buffer signs according the approved plan must be certified by a registered land surveyor. e. Wetland buffers must be planted and inspected by the City prior to issuance of building permits. f. Where buffer areas are not vegetated or have been disturbed within the last 10 years, such buffer areas shall be replanted and maintained according to the standards in Section 1050.010, Subd. 8(C) of the Zoning Ordinance. i. If existing wetland buffers are proposed to remain, the City’s wetland buffer specialist must inspect and confirm existing buffers are undisturbed and in an acceptable condition prior to submittal of the final plat application. g. Wetland buffers, plantings, seeding areas and monument signs shall be shown on the ground cover plan. 9. Park dedication shall be satisfied by cash-in-lieu of land. Park dedication will be based on the park dedication ordinance in place at the time the final plat is approved. a. Park dedication is required based on the finding that the development will add 60 new single-family homes to the City. b. Residents of the development will need access to nearby existing and future trails and parks that do not exist today as guided by the Comprehensive Plan. c. Cash-in-lieu of land will be used only for the acquisition and development of parks recreational facilities, playground, trails, wetlands, or open space based on the approved park plan in the Comprehensive Plan. d. Park dedication funds will be collected at the time of final plat in accordance with the City Code requirements. Code stipulates a dedication requirement of 5% of land for land guided at a density of less than 3 units an acre or equivalent market value in cash, resulting in estimated park dedication fees of $357,240. 10. The amenity lot containing a swimming pool and pool house will require three off-street parking spaces including 1 handicapped space. 11. Prior to submittal of the final plat, the applicant must complete the following: a. Revise the preliminary plat to show the following: City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 3 of 6 i. Should the proposed wetland impacts to Wetland 8 not be approved, the plans must be revised to include the required wetland buffer and setback. ii. Required wetland buffers must be revised to meet the required minimum and maximum buffer widths as outlined in Section 1050.010. iii. The applicant’s engineer must certify the average width of each wetland buffer. iv. Additional wetland buffer monument signs are required for Wetland 3, and further revisions will be needed based on the final wetland buffer widths. b. Revise the site plan to show the following: i. Should a variance granting a side setback of 7.5’ not be granted, the plan must be revised to show setbacks that comply with the RSF-3 (Single and Two-Family Residential) standards. ii. Required off-street parking for the amenity lot. c. The Ground Cover Plan must be revised to reflect which wetland buffers are pre- established and undisturbed and which wetland buffers will be established. d. Revise the Landscaping plan to show the following: i. The amenity lot is not considered a dwelling unit and is subject to the landscaping requirements for non-residential uses per Section 1060.070. The plan should be revised to provide the necessary calculations and include the required plantings. ii. Lot 7 either needs to be revised to show a 100’ building setback, or the length of the west property line adjacent to County Road 116 with less than a 100’ setback applied must be included in the enhanced landscaping formula and plantings. iii. Each required planting formula must be rounded up to the next whole number of plantings, and the number of plantings provided must be adjusted based on these calculations. iv. Planting locations should be revised along County Road 116 to avoid conflicts with sanitary sewer. v. If a variance to the buffer yard requirements is not granted, the applicant must revise plans to include: 1. A buffer yard on Lot 19. 2. Revise Detail A to meet the required number of plantings per the buffer yard formula. City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 4 of 6 12. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided over all wetlands, wetland buffers, stormwater ponds, floodplain, and outlots. 13. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided along the perimeter of all units. 14. A sidewalk shall be provided on one side of all local public streets. 15. All utility facilities, including but not limited to telephone, CATV, natural gas, and electric power, shall be located underground. Underground service connections to the street property line of each platted lot shall be installed at the subdivider’s expense. 16. Mechanical equipment (including air conditioning units) must be located in the side or rear yard and must be located a minimum of 5’ from the property line. 17. The development shall comply with the City’s requirements regarding fire access, fire protection, and fire flow calculations, the location of fire hydrants, fire department connections, and fire lane signage. 18. The applicant shall provide copies of the final HOA documents/covenants for City review as part of the final plat application. 19. Lawn sprinklers/irrigation systems (if provided) shall all have rain sensors to limit unnecessary watering. 20. All landscaping in rear yards and common areas shall be planted and inspected by the City within one year of issuance of a building permit. 21. Trees in the front yard shall be planted prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 22. Parking shall be permitted on one side of local streets and shall be signed in accordance with City standards. 23. Sign permits will be required prior to construction of any signs. 24. The final plat shall address all conditions of approval. 25. The applicant must enter into a stormwater maintenance agreement prior to release of the final plat. 26. Approval shall expire within one year of the date of approval unless the applicant has filed a complete application for approval of the final plat. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 5 of 6 Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 28th day of March 2024. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk ATTACHMENT A Parcel 1: City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 6 of 6 The East 450.00 feet, as measured along the north and south lines, of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the south line, of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. Parcel 2: The South 933.80 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as measured at right angles to the south line thereof; except the East 450 feet as measured along the north and south lines thereof, and except that part thereof which lies West of a line parallel with and distant 40 feet East of the West line of said section. Abstract property. Parcel 3: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼), of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, lying North of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the South line thereof. Except the West 450.00 feet of the North 200.00 feet as measured at right angles to the North and West lines thereof. Also except the West 40.00 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 1 of 4 Motion By: Seconded By: A RESOLUTION APPROVING TWO VARIANCES AND DENYING ONE VARIANCE FOR “WOODLAND HILLS OF CORCORAN” ON THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 116 AND HACKAMORE ROAD (PID 36-119-23- 33-0003, 36-119-23-33-0007, AND 36-119-23-33-0010) (CITY FILE NO. 23-032) WHEREAS, Woodland Hills of Corcoran, Inc. (“the applicant”) requests approval of a preliminary plat for 60 residential lots, 1 amenity lot, and 5 outlots on property described as follows: See Attachment A WHEREAS, the applicant also requested approval of three variances from underlying district and performance standards; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request at a duly called Public Hearing, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Corcoran City Council approves the request for a preliminary plat subject to the following findings and conditions; 1. The requested variance from Section 1060.050, Subd. 7 to allow a 7.5’ side setback is approved based on the following findings: a. That there are practical difficulties in complying with the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant requests flexibility for builders to locate a home on a lot. It is anticipated the lots will be sold to multiple various local builders for construction of custom homes. A clear side setback will allow for consistency, avoid confusion between builders, landowners, and City staff, while still maintaining a 15’ building separation. b. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the parcels of land for which the variance is sought and were not created by the landowners. The subdivision is on a 36.74-acre site that is bordered on the south by Hackamore Road and to the west by County Road 116. These constraints result in a lot design and house placement restrictions that are unique to the project boundaries. c. That the granting of the variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. The underlying district standards require a minimum 15’ separation between structures on adjacent lots. The requested 7.5’ side setback will maintain this separation which is consistent with the essential character of the locality. d. The proposed variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The underlying district standards require a minimum 15’ separation between structures on adjacent lots. The requested 7.5’ side setback City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 2 of 4 will maintain this separation which is consistent with the purpose and intent of the ordinance. e. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and maintains the Very Low Density Residential land use designation. f. The City may impose conditions on the variance to address the impact on the variance. A 25’ front setback must be applied to offset the impact of granting the deviation in the side setback. 2. The requested variance from Section 1040.050, Subd. 8(B) to allow a garage maximum of 65% of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage for 3-car garages and 70% for 4-car garages is approved based on the following findings: a. That there are practical difficulties in complying with the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance standards. There is market demand for 3-car and 4-car garages which is a reasonable use of these properties. However, it is impractical to meet density requirements while also providing a lot width large enough that can accommodate these different garage options. b. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and were not created by the landowner. The subject properties of the subdivision will be made available to multiple builders for custom built lots. The preference for a 3-car or 4-car garage is based on market demands which are not created by the landowner. Additionally, the City’s ordinances limit and at times prohibit on-street parking, so property owners have an interest in building a home with sufficient garage space for their vehicles. c. That the granting of the variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. A larger garage frontage can be minimized with a second story and/or larger setback from the road. Planned Unit Developments in the area have been granted flexibility from this standard. Additionally, it is not uncommon for older neighborhoods within the City to have either a larger garage or second garage. d. The proposed variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Conditions can be added to minimize the appearance of the garage to ensure harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance. e. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as a deviation does not conflict with the Very Low Density Residential land use guiding. f. The City may impose conditions on the variance to address the impact of the variance. Houses that choose to bypass the 55% maximum garage limit must include a second story as a way to minimize the visual impact of the larger garage. 3. The requested variance for flexibility from the City’s buffer yard requirements in Section 1060.070, Subd. 2(J) is denied based on the following findings: City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 3 of 4 a. That there are no practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. There are multiple options to meet the buffer yard ordinance requirements if a deviation in the number of plantings is desired. b. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are not unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought though not necessarily created by the landowner. Other properties will face similar constraints of neighboring overstory canopies and concerns with the number of required plantings. c. That the granting of the variation will alter the essential character of the locality. The buffer yard ordinance was created intentionally to protect the essential character of existing neighborhoods without placing burden on them to provide their own screening from new development. Deviation from the buffer yard ordinance will not address the City’s concerns with protecting the essential character of the locality. d. The proposed variance would not be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The buffer yard ordinance was created intentionally to provide significant screening for existing neighborhoods without placing burden on them to provide their own screening from new development. Deviation from the buffer yard ordinance will not address the purpose and intent of the ordinance. e. The variance is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as the buffer yard ordinance is a strategy to protect rural character, and deviation from the buffer yard ordinance is less likely to provide the significant screening desired to protect rural character. 4. The applicant is required to record this resolution with the Hennepin County’s Recorder’s Office and provide proof of recording to the City. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY McKee, Tom McKee, Tom Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon Nichols, Jeremy Nichols, Jeremy Schultz, Alan Schultz, Alan, Jeremy Vehrenkamp, Dean Vehrenkamp, Dean Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this 28th day of March 2024. ________________________________ Tom McKee - Mayor ATTEST: ____________________________________ City Seal Michelle Friedrich – City Clerk City of Corcoran March 28, 2024 County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2024- Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT A Parcel 1: The East 450.00 feet, as measured along the north and south lines, of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the south line, of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. Parcel 2: The South 933.80 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as measured at right angles to the south line thereof; except the East 450 feet as measured along the north and south lines thereof, and except that part thereof which lies West of a line parallel with and distant 40 feet East of the West line of said section. Abstract property. Parcel 3: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW ¼ of SW ¼), of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, lying North of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the South line thereof. Except the West 450.00 feet of the North 200.00 feet as measured at right angles to the North and West lines thereof. Also except the West 40.00 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. 1 Woodland Hills of Corcoran Development Narrative Gonyea Company is excited to provide the Preliminary Plat development application for the Woodland Hills of Corcoran neighborhood located in the northeast corner of the Hackamore Road and County Road 116 intersection. Gonyea Company has a strong history of creating quality neighborhoods in the west metro, including many in the cities of Plymouth and Maple Grove, and we plan to build on that history with the creation of Woodland Hills of Corcoran. The Woodland Hills of Corcoran neighborhood as shown includes a total of 60 detached home sites and one amenity lot. The lots will be sold to quality local builders for the construction of custom homes. 2 Development Team Developer/Property Owner: Woodland Hills of Corcoran, Inc. Dave Gonyea Jake Walesch 6885 Sycamore Lane N Suite 110 Maple Grove, Minnesota 55369 Email: jake@jakewalesch.com Environmental: Kjolhaug Environmental Services Melissa Barrett 2500 Shadywood Road, Suite 130 Orono, MN 55331 Telephone: 952-388-3752 Email: melissa@kjolhaugenv.com Project Manager: Steve Juetten 6885 Sycamore Lane N Suite 110 Maple Grove, Minnesota 55369 Telephone: 612-269-2531 Email: steve@gonyeacompany.com Landscape Design: Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Jenni Thompson, PLA, AICP, JD 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120 Telephone: 651-681-1914 Email: jthompson@pioneereng.com Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor: Sathre-Berquist, Inc. Robert S. Molstad, P.E. 14000 25th Avenue North Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Telephone: 952-476-6000 Email: molstad@sathre.com Soil Sciences: Haugo Geo Technical Services Paul Haugo 2825 Cedar Avenue S Minneapolis, Minnesota 55407 Telephone: 612-554-4829 Email: p.haugo@gmail.com Comprehensive Plan and Rezoning To accommodate the proposed preliminary plat, a comprehensive plan amendment and zoning change is necessary that would allow a density of two to three units per acre and change of the current zoning from RSF-2 to RSF-3. The changes will allow for a mix of 65-foot-wide and 75- foot-wide lots that will more efficiently utilize the site which contains several wetlands and boarders Hackamore Road and County Road 116. Comprehensive Plan Current Land use Category: Low Density Residential, which requires a minimum density of 3 dwelling units per acre. Land use categories of adjacent properties: • Land use of property to the east: Existing Residential • Land use of property to the north: Low Density Residential • Land use of property to the west: Low Density Residential • Land use of property to the south (city of Medina): Future Development Proposed Land use category: creation of a new land use category to allow a density of 2-3 units per acre. 3 Zoning Current Zoning: RSF-2 (Single Family Residential 2) Zoning of adjacent properties: • Zoning of property to the east and North: UR (Urban Reserve) • Zoning of property to the west: PUD (Planned Unit Development • Zoning of property to the south (city of Medina): R1 (Single Family Residential) and RR- UR (Rural Residential – Urban Reserve) • Zoning of property to the southwest (city of Medina): SR (Suburban Residential) Proposed Zoning: RSF-3 (Single and Two Family Residential 3) Traffic Based on current traffic prediction methods, a 60-lot neighborhood would generate approximately 600 vehicle trips per day. Hackamore Road, with the upgrades this past construction season, is sized to accommodate the addition of the proposed 600 additional vehicle trips. For emergency vehicle purposes, an emergency vehicle access is proposed from the neighborhood to County Road 116. Environmental Impacts The neighborhood is designed to fill only three small wetlands. The other, larger wetlands will be either preserved or enhanced. With the preservation of the wetlands and the placement of wetland buffers, the environmental impacts will be minimal if not improved. Further discussion on wetlands can be found on pages 4 and 5. Preliminary Plat The home sites are being developed for the construction of 60 single-family detached homes that will be built by quality builders that have built hundreds of homes throughout the Twin Cities market. Each home and lot will be individually owned and maintained. Examples of the house product are shown on page 9 and 10. The site grading and infrastructure construction is expected to occur in 2024 with home construction starting in late summer 2024. Landscaping A landscaping plan has been provided with the development submittal that shows lot landscaping, buffer landscaping, landscaping along County Road 116 and Hackamore Road and additional landscaping throughout the neighborhood. Lot Landscaping Per City Code, each lot will have a minimum of one overstory tree. Many builders and future homeowners will add additional trees as they design and construct the final yard amenities. Buffer Landscaping Per the City Code, buffer landscaping has been included in the rear of lots that abut existing lots to the east and to the north. A variance request is included that discusses the reduction in buffer landscaping in certain areas along the north and east property lines. 4 Adjacent to Hackamore and County Road 116 Landscaping The design has lots that will have reduced setbacks down to 60 feet from either County Road 116. Additional landscaping as required by City Code will be provided on these lots. Landscaping in Southeast Corner To buffer the proposed homes, Street B and the cul-de-sac bubble in the southeast corner of the site from Hackamore Road, 19 Black Hills Spruce and 32 Red Twigged Dogwood are proposed. Amenities Wetland Preservation and Buffers An overriding site design criteria was to preserve as much wetland as possible on the site and to provide the required wetland buffers and structure setbacks. The site currently has ten wetlands, as discussed below in the Wetlands section, the site design contemplates filling three wetlands (approximately 17,198 square feet of wetland (.395 acres)). Five of the remaining wetlands will continue to be classified as medium quality wetlands and two will continue to be classified as low-quality wetlands. Wetland buffers have been shown to meet city buffer standards. The site design allows for the establishment of new buffers after grading is completed. Pool House and Pool (Association Maintained) An amenity lot is proposed in the southeast corner of the site and will include a seasonal pool and pool house (the pool house will only be open when the pool is open and will be winterized for non-use when the pool is not open). The final building design and pool design has not been completed and will meet all city standards. The homeowner’s association will own, operate, and maintain the amenity. Parking for the pool will only be available along Street B and not allowed in the bubble of the cul-de-sac. Parking restrictions will be signed on site and included in the homeowners association documents. Entryway Feature There will be an entrance monument installed in the project. The exact location and design has not been decided at the time of submittal. Proper site and permit approvals will be applied for. The monument will be owned and maintained by the homeowner’s association. Wetlands The preliminary plat design proposes filling three small wetlands and preserving seven larger wetlands. The largest of the small wetlands proposed to be filled, Wetland 8, needs to be filled to accommodate the storm water ponding necessary for Hackamore Road. One of the preserved wetlands, Wetland 9, located in the south-central portion of the site, will be enhanced by lowering the edges and revegetating. A separate wetland replacement application has been submitted to allow for the WCA review and subsequent approval of the wetland filling and modification. 5 Wetlands to be Filled: Wetland A – 3,635 sq. ft. of fill Wetland 4 – 2,112 sq. ft. of fill Wetland 8 – 11,451 sq. ft. of fill Wetland to be Modified: Wetland 9 – existing area 14,518 sq. ft., expanded area 16,429 sq. ft. 6 Variances Variance to Section 1040.050 Subd. 7 City Ordinance: Minimum side yard (living) = 10 feet, Minimum side yard (garage) = 5 feet The variance request is to provide the most flexibility for a builder to place a home on a lot, consideration is being requested for non-street side setbacks to be 7½ feet and 7½ feet rather than 5 feet and 10 feet. This would maintain the desired 15-foot setback between houses on adjacent lots. It should be noted that the proposed neighborhood front yard setback is 25 feet, where City Code allows a minimum front yard setback of 20 feet. Variance Review Criteria (970.030) a) That there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Response: The neighborhood is proposed on a 36.74-acre site with seven preserved wetlands, is bordered on the south by Hackamore Road, and is bordered on the west by County Road 116. These constraints result in lot design and house placement restrictions. Based on this, the stated constraints result in practical difficulties for the flexible placement of detached single-family houses. b) That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and were not created by the landowner. Response: The neighborhood is proposed on a 36.74-acre site with seven wetlands, is bordered on the south by Hackamore Road, and is bordered on the west by County Road 116. These constraints result in lot design and house placement restrictions. Based on this, the conditions upon which a petition for a variance are unique to this parcel. c) That the granting of the variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: Current City Ordinance stipulates a 5-foot garage and a 10-foot living space setback, with a minimum setback of 15 feet between structures on adjacent lots. With 7 ½ feet and 7 ½ feet setbacks, the minimum setback between structures on adjacent lots will continue to be 15 feet. Based on this, the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. d) The proposed variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Response: Current City Ordinance stipulates a 5-foot garage and a 10-foot living space setback, with a minimum setback of 15 feet between structures on adjacent lots. With 7 ½ feet and 7 ½ feet setbacks, the minimum setback between structures on adjacent lots will continue to be 15 feet. Based on this, the variance request would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. e) The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 7 Response: Current City Ordinance stipulates a 5-foot garage and a 10-foot living space setback, with a minimum setback of 15 feet between structures on adjacent lots. With 7 ½ feet and 7 ½ feet setbacks, the minimum setback between structures on adjacent lots will continue to be 15 feet. Based on this, the variance request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. f) The City may impose conditions on the variance to address the impact of the variance. Response: The request for a variance to allow 7 ½ feet and 7 ½ feet side yard setbacks is offset by proposing 25-foot front yard setbacks for all lots. Variance to Section 1040.050 Subd.8 B. (arch standards) City Ordinance: The garage shall not compromise more than 55 percent of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage. This standard is based on the measurement of the entire garage structure and not on a measurement of the garage door or doors only. Corner lots are exempt from this required on one street elevation. The variance request is to provide the most flexibility for a builder to construct houses with desired garage sizes, consideration is being requested to allow houses with three-stall garages to have garages that are no more than 65 percent of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage and allow houses with four-stall garages to have garages that are no more than 70 percent of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage. Variance Review Criteria (970.030) a) That there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Response: The RSF-3 zoning district allows for a minimum lot width of 65-feet. The proposed subdivision includes many 65-foot-wide lots and many 75-foot-wide lots. Today’s buyers prefer a minimum of a three-stall garage, and many buyers desire a four- stall garage. The minimum width of a three-stall garage is 30 feet, and the minimum width of a four-stall garage is 40.5 feet. However, to comply with the current ordinance standard a garage placed on a 65-foot lot with a 50-foot pad (65-foot-wide lot less a 7.5- foot sideyard setback on each side) cannot be larger than 27.5 feet wide if the entire width of the pad is utilized. Which would not accommodate a three-stall garage. Further, to comply with the current ordinance standard a garage placed on a 75-foot-wide lot with a 60-foot pad (75-foot-wide lot less a 7.5-foot sideyard setback on each side) cannot be larger than 33 feet wide if the entire width of the pad is utilized. Which would not accommodate a four-stall garage. Based on this, the current zoning ordinance results in practical difficulties. b) That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and were not created by the landowner. Response: The RSF-3 zoning district allows for a minimum lot width of 65-feet. The proposed subdivision includes many 65-foot-wide lots and many 75-foot-wide lots. Today’s buyers prefer a minimum of a three-stall garage, and many buyers desire a four- 8 stall garage. The minimum width of a three-stall garage is 30 feet, and the minimum width of a four-stall garage is 40.5 feet. However, to comply with the current ordinance standard a garage placed on a 65-foot lot with a 50-foot pad (65-foot-wide lot less a 7.5- foot sideyard setback on each side) cannot be larger than 27.5 feet wide if the entire width of the pad is utilized. Which would not accommodate a three-stall garage. Further, to comply with the current ordinance standard a garage placed on a 75-foot-wide lot with a 60-foot pad (75-foot-wide lot less a 7.5-foot sideyard setback on each side) cannot be larger than 33 feet wide if the entire width of the pad is utilized. Which would not accommodate a four-stall garage. Based on this, the current zoning ordinance results in practical difficulties. c) That the granting of the variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: With the added architectural requirement of all houses must a second story, a larger first floor street-facing linear garage frontage will not alter the essential character of the locality. The second story will result in minimizing the appearance of the garage. Based on this, the granting of the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. d) The proposed variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Response: With the added architectural requirement that all houses must have a second story, a larger first floor street-facing linear garage frontage will not alter the essential character of the locality. The second story will result in minimizing the appearance of the garage. Based on this, the granting of the variance would be in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance. e) The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Response: To increase the land use density as desired by the Comprehensive Plan, 65- foot-wide lots are necessary. To allow quality houses that meet buyer preferences, garages that will be no more than 65 percent, if a three-stall garage, and no more than 70 percent, if a four-stall garage, of the first-floor street-facing frontage are necessary. With the added architectural requirement that all houses must have a second story, a larger first floor street-facing linear garage frontage will not alter the essential character of the locality. The second story will result in minimizing the appearance of the garage. Based on this, the variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. f) The City may impose conditions on the variance to address the impact of the variance. Response: In exchange for allowing single-family detached houses that are constructed in the neighborhood to have garages that comprise no more than 65 percent, if a three- stall garage, and no more than 70 percent if a four-stall garage, of the viewable ground floor street-facing linear building frontage all houses will be two stories and be setback a minimum of 30 feet from the front property line. 9 Variance to Section 1060.070 Subd. 2 City Ordinance: Buffer yard requirements The variance request is to: 1) provide flexibility in determining the buffer yard requirements along the east and north property lines given the existing trees on the development property and on property adjacent to the development property, and 2) allow flexibility to reduce the number of required plantings for better health and growth potential of the new landscaping. The requested flexibility is to: - eliminate the requirement to add new buffer plantings entirely in some areas along the east property line (the submitted landscape plan does not show new buffer landscaping in areas where this flexibility is requested; this may already be allowed per the ordinance) and, - reduce the number of new buffer plantings along the north property line where existing trees and undergrowth on or near the property already provides natural buffer. Variance Review Criteria (970.030) a) That there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. Response: When preparing the landscape plan and placing the required trees along the north and east property lines, the design landscape architect raised the concern that the number of trees required by the buffer ordinance will result in trees growing together relatively soon after planting and create an unhealthy growth environment. In an area 100 feet long by 20 feet deep, the city requires six (6) understory trees which have typical mature canopies of anywhere from 15 feet to 25 feet and three (3) overstory trees with typical mature canopies of 30 feet to 50 feet. In addition to this large number of trees, nine (9) shrubs must also be placed within this 100-foot length beneath the tree canopies. These trees cannot reasonably fit into this space and be healthy. We are also concerned that a reputable landscape contractor may not place a warranty on trees planted so close together and adjacent to the large number of existing trees. Further, the east and north property lines have natural vegetation in varying degrees that provide an existing natural buffer between the proposed development property and the adjacent properties. The existing vegetation consists of overstory trees, understory trees, and low growing vegetation. Also, the adjacent properties east and north of the subject property have extensive mature trees that currently provide additional buffer. Both the existing trees on the property and the trees on the adjacent property provide a substantial tree canopy. It is a concern that planting nine additional trees and nine shrubs every 100 feet under and adjacent to such an existing tree canopy is against best management practices and from the time of planting may result in stunted growth and will likely shorten life spans. The combination of trees planted so close together and the existing vegetation along the property line, both on and directly adjacent to the development property, creates a practical difficulty in complying with the ordinance. b) That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and were not created by the landowner. 10 Response: The Development property is adjacent to larger lot single family neighborhoods in which the owners have, over time, planted trees that have grown to provide a substantial buffer. Further, the proposed development contemplates preserving many overstory trees and other low growing plantings along the east and north property lines that will preserve the existing buffer. The unique situation we have is the existing mature trees planted on the subject property and near the property line on adjacent properties preventing additional landscaping, if planted as stipulated in the buffer ordinance, from growing properly and remaining healthy. Based on this, the conditions are unique and have not been created by the landowner. c) That the granting of the variation will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: The extensive existing vegetation on the subject development property and on the properties adjacent already provide a substantial buffer. Landscaping added to the level of the ordinance may have a difficult time growing. Based on this, the granting of the variance will allow for healthy plant growth and enhance the essential character of the locality. d) The proposed variance would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. Response: The extensive existing vegetation on the subject development property and on the adjacent properties currently provide a substantial buffer. A landscape architect, working with your staff, can determine a reasonable buffer that would comply with best management practices and would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. d) The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Response: The extensive existing vegetation on the subject property and the adjacent properties currently provide a substantial buffer between parcels with varying land use designations. Based on this, the variance request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. e) The City may impose conditions on the variance to address the impact of the variance. Response: We would request allowing our professional landscape architect to work with your staff to determine a reasonable buffer that would comply with best management practices that would include appropriate numbers of overstory trees, understory trees and shrubs. The landscape architect, with your staff, can create a buffer design to meet the intent and purpose of the ordinance while following best management practices as per green industry standards. 11 Housing / Product Currently the builders have not been chosen for the neighborhood. However, based on past neighborhoods development in the west metro, below are examples of the housing expected. The homes shown below are 50’ wide homes. The preliminary plat application is anticipated to have some wider lots that will accommodate 60’ wide homes. 4,414 Finished Sq. Ft. 3,515 – 4,529 Finished Sq. Ft. 5,007-5,259 Finished Sq. Ft. 4,335 Finished Sq. Ft. 2,885 - 4159 Finished Sq. Ft. 2,800 – 4,100 Finished Sq. Ft. 3375 – 4679 Finished Sq. Ft. 3,499 – 4,499 Finished Sq. Ft. 12 4,317 – 4,919 Finished Sq. Ft. 4,317 – 4,919 Finished Sq. Ft. 4,317 – 4,919 Finished Sq. Ft. Most homes come with multiple front elevations and interior room options which allows for a greatly improved street scape. Homeowner’s Association and Restrictive Covenants A Homeowners Association (HOA) will be created for this neighborhood. The Developer will prepare restrictive covenants and standards that will apply to the entire neighborhood. The restrictive covenants will be tailored to the Developer’s vision of the neighborhood. Each house will be required to meet the specifics of building types, varied front elevations, house colors, landscaping, and overall goals of the neighborhood. All amenities: pool house and pool, entryway feature (if constructed), and landscaping not on individual lots will be owned and maintained by the homeowner’s association. Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director From: Kent Torve, City Engineer Steve Hegland, PE Project: Woodland Hills Preliminary Plat Review Date: February 29, 2024 Exhibits: This Memorandum is based on a review of the following documents: 1. Preliminary Plat Woodland Hills of Corcoran, prepared by Sathre-Bernquist, Inc. 02/09/2023. Comments: General: 1. Consistent with the review process, a comment response letter shall be provided in response to the comments provided in this Memorandum. The applicant shall provide a written response to each item. 2. In addition to engineering related comments, the proposed plans are subject to addition planning, zoning, land-use, and other applicable codes of the City of Corcoran. 3. Final approval by the Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission must be attained before any site grading or activity may commence. 4. For any site activity (demo, grading, utilities, etc.) no closures or restrictions of any kind shall be imposed upon the public use of County Road 116 or Hackamore Road without Hennepin County or City permission. 5. An encroachment agreement shall be required for all site improvements or items placed within the City ROW or easements. 6. At time of final plat include all applicable City of Corcoran standard detail plates in the construction plans. Plat: 1. The applicant shall have all drainage and utility easements provided and shown and all platting requirements met per the City Code. Drainage and utility easements (5’ – 10’) shall be provided along property lines, as standard per City requirements. 2. All existing easements shall be vacated upon completion of final plat. Existing 75’ utility easement and 25’ drainage easement show on ALTA survey. 3. Provide easement of sufficient width between lots 10 & 11 to allow for 1:1 slope from all sanitary sewer pipe in easement. 4. The entirety of outlots shall be covered by a drainage & utility easements. 5. Reconfigure easements for lots 60 & 61 to fully encompass 100 yr. HWL. 6. Applicant is showing a 65’ half ROW for County Road 116 which is consistent with Hennepin County requests. Hennepin County shall approve final ROW dedication. 7. Hennepin County may require ROW for sight triangles at the northeast corner of County Road 116 and Hackamore Road. 8. Dimension existing and proposed ROW on Hackamore Road. 9. The watermain alignment should be reviewed with the Hackamore Road plans at the time of final plat to ensure watermain alignment along Hackamore Road is in the reserved utility corridor. February 29, 2024 Woodland Hills Kevin Mattson Page 2 of 4 Erosion Control/SWPPP 1. Preparation of and compliance with a SWPPP shall be required for construction. 2. Final erosion control plan including quantities to be provided for review at time of final plat. Transportation 1. All 28’ roads shall be signed no parking on one side of the roadway with no parking signs required within all cul-de-sacs. 2. A lighting, signage and pavement marking plan shall be provided for review at time of final plat. 3. Construction plans should reference Corcoran standard detail plates for all street, sidewalk, & trail sections. 4. Vertical and horizontal curves will be reviewed at time of final plat for conformity with design speed requirements. 5. Location of B618 and surmountable curb shall be reviewed at final plat. B618 curb is typical for catch basins and along green space, surmountable curb typically installed elsewhere. 6. Retaining wall along Hackamore Road curvature should be parallel from back of curve. Adjust retaining wall to provide space remains between wall and Hackamore Road trail. 7. Temporary turnarounds may be required at end of roadway stubs and are determined at final plat. 8. Emergency access is routed adjacent to wetlands and low areas. The structural section of the emergency access shall be determined at final plat. Subgrade improvements are anticipated to be necessary to ensure it can support emergency vehicle access. 9. No parking has been proposed adjacent to amenity center. Corcoran roadway standards would require no parking within the turnaround or on the south side of Street B as proposed. 10. The trail along Hackamore Road was reviewed vs the pedestrian crosswalk policy and no additional improvements are recommended at this time as it is a crossing of a local roadway and includes pedestrian ramps. Grading /Stormwater 1. Include scale on grading plan sheets. 2. Reroute CB K9 and K8 to drain into pond and not discharge directly into wetland. 3. All pedestrian ramps shall be ADA compliant and detailed designs shall be provided for all landings showing elevations in compliance with those requirements at time of final plat. 4. Revise drainage easements on lot 20 to accommodate storm sewer. 5. Storm sewer structures within roadways should be relocated to lot lines as allowable to reduce conflicts with driveways. 6. Adjust FES A14 to be a catch basin and not rely on FES as inlet structure. 7. Sumps will be required in all storm structures with drops in of 18” or greater as well as the last accessible structures prior to stormwater basins. 8. Rational calculations shall be provided to confirm all pipe sizes and inlet capacity at the time of final plat. 9. All drainage swales shall maintain a minimum of 2% slope and all slopes should be 4:1 or flatter unless approved by the city engineer. There are several slopes including but not limited to north of Street A, the northeast portion of the site and around wetlands/ponds which will need to be adjusted. February 29, 2024 Woodland Hills Kevin Mattson Page 3 of 4 10. All walls higher than 4’ shall be designed by a certified engineer and the design and certification of those walls shall be provided to the city. 11. Provide culvert in county ditch for drainage under emergency access. 12. Shift CBMH A11A to provide sufficient easement width on both sides of pipe run or expand easement. 13. Adjust CBMHs A16 & 15 to the end of the stub street to the north to capture street run-off and minimize drainage to adjacent property. Curb or a berm may be required at end of roadway to ensure roadway drainage is completely captured. 14. SWMP shall identify existing and proposed runoff rates offsite to the NW of lots 19 and 20 to ensure that additional runoff isn’t directed onto adjacent yards. 15. Grading to the east of Street B turnaround shall be adjusted to capture runoff that is currently being trapped on shared lot line. 16. Include and identify on plans the safety bench per Corcoran standard detail in all ponds. 17. All pond accesses to be 12’ wide and shown on plans. Revise access to Pond 2E to remain outside of pond footprint. 18. Provide detail drawings for OCSs. 19. Stormwater management plan is reliant on wetlands to be filled adjacent to Hackamore Road. If wetland impacts are not allowed, applicant will be required to adjust stormwater management plan and site plan to accommodate. 20. Cleanouts and drain pipes for sump connections shall be kept separate from street drain tile. 21. Final street drain tile and drain tile clean-outs to be reviewed at time of final plat. 22. 2x3 CB I2 is not installed and curb is poured. Coordinate with Hackamore Road project. 23. If existing trees along north and east perimeter of development are utilized as a buffer, the grading plan may need to be adjusted to ensure trees are not impacted. 24. Retaining walls should be natural stone if placed in City ROW or easements for overall development plan. 25. The Construction Plans shall identify if any existing vegetation is planned to be utilized with the buffer so they can be reviewed by the City for approval. a. It is assumed that all wetland buffers will be established with the project. b. A buffer establishment plan shall be provided noting the details on how and when the buffer will be planted as well as a plan and schedule for the maintenance to ensure they are properly established. The establishment plan shall identify specific seed mixes with the type and rates at which the mixes shall be applied. Watermain/Sanitary Sewer 1. Plan and profiles for all utilities shall be provided at the time of final plat submittals. 2. Valve locations to be reviewed at time of final plat. Generally, valves shall be located at all intersections as one less valve than the number of legs. Valves should typically be located out from the end radius points unless specific circumstances don’t allow. 3. Hydrant spacing to be reviewed by public safety at time of final plat. 4. Watermain adjacent to lot 27 shall be stubbed north to ensure it is beyond the necessary buffering for development. 5. Adjust location of MH19 south to ensure utilities in the development end with a manhole that is accessible for maintenance. February 29, 2024 Woodland Hills Kevin Mattson Page 4 of 4 6. Install dead-end hydrant at end of stubbed street at north property boundary. Identify on plans where watermain will end with development. 7. Utility stubs shall be extended as far as possible north along Street A. 8. Applicant shall adjust sewer connections to align with recommendations of the utility feasibility study. 9. Sanitary Sewer crossing of CR116 to utilize jacked steel casing and shall be approved by Hennepin County. 10. Any sanitary sewer running parallel to the County Road shall be relocated to the development and out of the County ROW. 11. Storm crossings requiring insulation will be reviewed at time of final plat. 12. Additional details on watermain along Hackamore Road and connection to watermain at Steeple Chase Road shall be reviewed at final plat to clarify connection details and identify if any hydrants would be necessary. 13. Adjust plantings along County Road 116 to avoid conflicts with sanitary sewer near Manhole 2. End of Comments Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE Public Works Director From: Kent Torve, PE, City Engineer Steve Hegland, PE Project: Woodland Hills Preliminary Plat – SWMP Review Date: February 28, 2024 Exhibits: This Memorandum is based on a review of the following documents: 1. Preliminary Plat Woodland Hills of Corcoran, Prepared by Sathre-Bernquist, Inc., 02/08/2024. 2. Stormwater Management Plan, Prepared by AE2S, 02/09/2024. Comments: Plan Review Comments 1. Additional comments will be provided upon review of the information requested below, the already submitted information, and/or other updated information. 2. The SWMP acknowledges the incorporation of the stormwater requirements from the Hackamore Roadway project from this development. As changes to the SWMP are implemented, the project shall continue to incorporate the necessary treatment requirements as identified in the agreement for this development. 3. All draintile from sand filtration shall be connected to OCS or structure and should not discharge directly to ditch or wetland. Grading /Stormwater 4. Identify the EOFs for Wetland 6, 7, and 9. 5. Show the ultimate EOF for the connected system of Wetland 7, Pond 2W, and Wetland 9. 6. Modify Pond 1SW to be a NURP pond with a shelf if feasible for WMC permitting. 7. Remove the isolated backyard sand basin. These basins are difficult for the HOA to maintain and it does not receive pretreated water from a NURP pond. 8. Add OCSs for Pond 2E and Sand Basin 2NE. 9. Revise the low opening for Lot 16 based on the HWL of 997.36 at FES A14. 10. Revise grading around Lots 39 and 40 for the drainage easement to contain the 100-year event. Wetlands 11. Provide additional hydrology to Wetland 1 through rear yard swales for Lots 43, 44, 45, 56, 57, and 58. 12. To prevent dewatering of Wetland 7, modify the NWL of Pond 2W to match the NWL of Wetland 7 (or within 0.5 feet). The existing conditions delineated edge/NWL of Wetland 7 appears to be 992.10 (instead of the 991.6 shown on proposed conditions). 13. The outlet for Wetland 9 should bypass Pond 1SW. February 2024 Woodland Hills Kevin Mattson Page 2 of 2 14. Add stormsewer and an FES at the delineated edge of Wetland 6 to maintain the NWL. Model 15. Revise Existing and Proposed CNs for the following: a. Use “Good” Hydrologic Condition. b. Pasture, grassland, or range CNs are intended to be used for areas that are grazed. It appears like Meadow would be a more accurate representation of the site. 16. Revise the time of concentration calculation for EX-4 and PR-4 to only incorporate drainage within the subcatchement. 17. Update the proposed model for the following: a. PR-17, PR-16 should have time of concentrations based on the proposed model. b. Update all wetland time of concentrations based on the developed condition of the proposed subwatershed. Examples include PR-32 and PR-33. Page 1 of 1 CITY OF CORCORAN 8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340 763.420.2288 E-mail - general@corcoranmn.gov / Web Site – www.corcoranmn.gov Memo To: Planning (Planners Lindahl and Davis McKeown) From: Lieutenant Burns Date: February 7, 2024 Re: City File 23-032 Woodland Hills Preliminary Plat A Public Safety plan review meeting was held on February 7, 2024, to review the submitted industrial concept plans for the Oswald Farm site. The following were in attendance: Lieutenant Burns, Fire Chief Leuer, Fire Chief Farrens, Fire Chief Malewicki, Assistant Fire Chief Kodet, Building Official Geske, Planner Davis McKeown, and Construction Services Supervisor Pritchard. An early rendition of this application was also reviewed on December 6, 2023.The following were in attendance at this earlier meeting: Fire Chief Leuer, Fire Chief Farrens, Building Official Geske, Construction Services Supervisor Pritchard, Police Chief Gottschalk, Sargeant Ekenberg, and Planner Davis McKeown. The comments below are based on the preliminary review of the plans and are intended as initial feedback; further plan review will need to be completed as construction plans are finalized. 1. No parking in cul-de-sacs 2. The lack of parking for the amenity center/pool/pool house is concerning. This does not seem to consider where service staff will park vehicles. 3. The through-street is strongly preferred to the previous plan that showed two western cul- de-sacs as this will allow for looped circulation. 4. Emergency access must be 20’ wide, 9-ton, and pass a roll-test. 5. Approach angle of the elevation change for the entrance to the right of Hackamore Road must meet City specifications. Hennepin County Transportation Project Delivery Public Works Facility, 1600 Prairie Drive, Medina, MN 55340 612-596-0300 | hennepin.us January 10, 2024 Mr. Dwight Klingbeil City of Corcoran 8200 County Road 116 Corcoran, MN 55340 Re: Woodland Hills of Corcoran (Received 1/02/24) Hennepin County Plat Review ID #4065 (Reviewed 12/12/2023) Mr. Klingbeil: Please consider the following county staff comments on the preliminary plat for the development of 60 single family homes in the northeast corner of County Road (CR) 116 and Hackamore Road. Access: A primary access to Hackamore Road as shown in the preliminary plat is supported. A temporary emergency access to CR 116 will also be allowed with a barricade to prohibit access for non- emergency vehicles. No pond access should be directed to the temporary access, and closure of this temporary access will be required when the parcels to the north are developed. Right-of-way: 65 feet half right-of-way is requested along CR 116 to accommodate the potential for future multi-modal, drainage and utility needs. In addition, staff requests a 25x25 sight triangle in the northeast quadrant of CR 116 and Hackamore Road. Storm Water/Drainage: Discharge rates must remain less than existing flow rates. The county storm water system will not take water from new drainage areas. Additional treatments may be needed if flow rates cannot match existing. Also, please update the plans to reflect the following: locate Sand Basin #3SW outside of the county’s proposed ROW, move the outlet for Pond #1SW so that it does not flow into the county ditch and add a culvert under the emergency access. Contact: Jordan Labat at 612-596-0703 or Jordan.Labat@hennepin.us Permits: Please inform the developer that all construction within county right-of-way requires an approved county permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to, driveway and street access, drainage and utility construction, sidewalk/trail development, and landscaping. Contact: Michael Olmstead, Permits Coordinator at 612-596-0336 or michael.olmstead@hennepin.us Please contact Ashley Morello: 612-596-0359, ashley.morello@hennepin.us with any questions. Sincerely, Carla Stueve, PE County Highway Engineer Hennepin County Property Map Date: 12/8/2023 Comments: 1 inch = 800 feet PARCEL ID: 3611 92333 0010 OWNER NAME: La keview Develo pme nt Co Llc PARCEL ADDRESS: 1 9800 H ackamo re Rd,Corcoran MN 55340 PARCEL AREA: 1 7.4 4 acres, 7 59,845 sq ft A-T-B: Abstract SALE PRICE: $1,800 ,000 SALE DATE: 02/2017 SALE CODE: Excluded From Ratio Studies ASSESSED 2022, PAYABLE 2023 PRO PERTY TYPE: Reside ntial H OMESTEAD: No n-Homeste ad MARKET VALU E: $1,7 00,0 00 TAX TOTAL: $25,725 .28 ASSESSED 2023, PAYABLE 2024 PROPERTY TYPE: Re sidential HOMESTEAD: Non-Ho mestead MARKET VALUE: $1,700,400 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 not suitable 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 2023 From:Dwight Klingbeil To:Natalie Davis Subject:Fw: March 12th planning meeting Date:Wednesday, February 28, 2024 1:07:15 PM Attachments:Outlook-o254e2fh.png Natalie, Please see the Public Comment from Sam Kuphal, 6450 Park Trail Road, regarding Woodland Hills. This comment has been save in the project folder in the H:Drive. Thanks, Dwight Klingbeil Planning Technician Direct: 763-338-9290 From: Sam Kuphal <samuelkuphal@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 11:32 AM To: Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: Re: March 12th planning meeting Yes it can be included in public discussion Address is 6450 Park Trail Rd Corcoran MN 55340 Thank you Sent from my iPhone On Feb 27, 2024, at 10:30 AM, Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov> wrote:  Good morning Sam, I'm reaching out to ask if you'd like your comment regarding Woodland Hills to be included in the public record. If so, could you please confirm and provide your address? Thank you, Dwight Klingbeil Planning Technician Direct: 763-338-9290 <Outlook-yjzy2oeb.png> From: Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 9:28 AM To: Sam Kuphal <samuelkuphal@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: March 12th planning meeting Good morning Sam, Thank you for your input on the Woodland Hills application. I will see to it that this information is forwarded to the members of the Planning Commission ahead of the March 12th meeting. Thanks, Dwight Klingbeil Planning Technician Direct: 763-338-9290 <Outlook-ggqkixk0.png> From: Sam Kuphal <samuelkuphal@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 8:51 AM To: Dwight Klingbeil <DKlingbeil@corcoranmn.gov> Subject: March 12th planning meeting This message was sent from outside of the organization. Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the source of this email and know the content is safe. Hello We live at 6450 park trail road and would like to express concern with this project. Cookie cutter developments have popped up on every side of us since moving here about 6 years ago (and this development butts up to the south side of our property). Corcoran is slowly turning from a rural oasis into just another cookie cutter suburb. We understand continued development is inevitable, but at the very least it would be nice to see bigger lot size requirements per house to preserve some of the “Corcoran charm”. Thank you for your consideration. Sam Kuphal 952-393-8628 Sent from my iPhone Bearings are based on the Hennepin County Coordinate System (NAD 83 - 1986 adj.) V I C I N I T Y M A P N O S C A L E NO R T H 0 SCALE IN FEET 20 10 10 20 40 SR R G N NE ENIG E D E S I E NN S US S Y R S O E R E V R P L A CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PREPARED FOR: Lakeview Development Company, LLC NO.BY DATE REVISION 1 CMT 3/3/2023 TOPO, UPDATE SURFACE, REMOVE BARN 2 ERJ 2/8/2023 UPDATE EG FIELD CREW All DRAWN CMT CHECKED DLS DATE 12/28/2020 USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. To: Lakeview Development Company, LLC, Custom Home Builders Title, LLC, and Old Republic National Title Insurance Company: This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2016 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items 1 - 4, 6a, 7a, 8, 9, 11 and 18 of Table A thereof. The field work was completed on December 15th, 2020. Date of Plat or Map: January 11, 2021 ________________________________________________________ Daniel L. Schmidt, PLS Minnesota License No. 26147 Hennepin County TWP:119-RGE.23-SEC.36 1 FILE NO. 3 3120-068 CORCORAN, MINNESOTA 5)Benchmark: Elevations are based on Hennepin County Control Point Name: HACK which has an elevation of: 970.69 feet (NAVD88). 6)Zoning Information: The current Zoning for the subject property is RSF-2 (Single Family Residential 2) per the City of Corcoran's zoning map dated September 2020. The setback, height, and floor space area restrictions for said zoning designation were obtained from the City of Corcoran found on their web site on the date of December 28, 2020 and are as follows: Principal Structure Setbacks - Front: 100 feet (County Road No. 116) Front: 20 feet (Hackamore Road Front Porch (≤ 120 sq. ft.): 15 feet Side (Living): 10 feet Side (Garage): 5 feet Rear: 30 feet Maximum Principal Building Height: 35 feet Please note that the general restrictions for the subject property may have been amended through a city process. We could be unaware of such amendments if they are not in a recorded document provided to us. We recommend that a zoning letter be obtained from the Zoning Administrator for the current restrictions for this site. We have not received the current zoning classification and building setback requirements from the insurer. 11)Utilities: We have shown the location of utilities to the best of our ability based on observed evidence together with evidence from the following sources: plans obtained from utility companies, plans provided by client, markings by utility companies and other appropriate sources. We have used this information to develop a view of the underground utilities for this site. However, lacking excavation, the exact location of underground features cannot be accurately, completely and reliably depicted. Where additional or more detailed information is required, the client is advised that excavation may be necessary. Also, please note that seasonal conditions may inhibit our ability to visibly observe all the utilities located on the subject property. A Gopher State One Call was submitted for this survey. Please reference Ticket No. 203451879 for a list of utility operators in this area. 18) Wetland Delineation: The wetland delineation was preformed by Kjolhaug Environmental Services Company and was flagged on 10/1/2020. Sathre-Bergquist located the wetland flags on 12/15/2020. DETAIL B DETAIL A DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY SURVEYED (Per Schedule A of the herein referenced Title Commitment) Parcel 1: The East 450.00 feet, as measured along the north and south lines, of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the south line, of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4 of SW 14) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. Parcel 2: The South 933.80 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4 of SW 14) of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as measured at right angles to the south line thereof; except the East 450 feet as measured along the north and south lines thereof, and except that part thereof which lies West of a line parallel with and distant 40 feet East of the West line of said section. Abstract Property. Parcel 3: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4 of SW 1/4), of Section 36, Township 119, Range 23, lying North of the South 933.80 feet as measured at right angles to the South line thereof. Except the West 450.00 feet of the North 200.00 feet as measured at right angles to the North and West lines thereof. Also except the West 40.00 feet of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract Property. ALTA/NSPS OPTIONAL TABLE A NOTES (The following items reference Table A optional survey responsibilities and specifications) 2)Site Address: PARCEL 1 - PID: 3611923330009 - 19710 Hackamore Road, Corcoran, Minnesota 55340 PARCEL 2 - PID: 3611923330010 - 19800 Hackamore Road, Corcoran, Minnesota 55340 PARCEL 3 - PID: 3611923330007 - 6320 County Road No. 116, Corcoran, Minnesota 55340 3)Flood Zone Information: This property appears to lie in Zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain), Zone X (Areas of 0.2% annual chance flood; areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protexted by levees from 1% annual chance flood), and Zone A (No Base Flood Elevations Determined) per Flood Insurance Rate Map, Community Panel No. 27053C0158F, effective date of November 4th, 2016. 4)Parcel Area Information: Parcel 1:Gross Area:405,457 s.f.~ 9.308 acres Wet Area:182,495 s.f.~ 4.190 acres Net Area:222,962 s.f.~ 5.119 acres. Parcel 2:Gross Area:759,749 s.f.~ 17.441 acres Wet Area:99,391 s.f.~ 2.282 acres Net Area:660,358 s.f.~ 15.160 acres. Parcel 3:Gross Area:435,407 s.f.~ 9.996 acres Wet Area:39,211 s.f.~ 0.900 acres Net Area:396,196 s.f.~ 9.095 acres. Totals:Gross Area:1,600,613 s.f.~ 36.745 acres Wet Area:321,097 s.f.~ 7.371 acres Net Area:1,279,516 s.f.~ 29.374 acres. SURVEY LEGEND X X WB SURVEY REPORT This map and report was prepared with the benefit of a Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Old Republic Natioinal Title Insurance Company, File No. HB-45094, dated November 13, 2020. 1)We note the following with regards to Schedule B of the herein referenced Title Commitment: a)Item no.'s 1-10 are not survey related b)Item no. 11. NOTE: We have been informed that the property described at Item No. 5 of Schedule A is being platted as a part of the current transaction. The new plat must be recorded prior to closing or, if it is to be recorded with the other closing documents, it must be signed by all appropriate parties and governmental agencies, including the county surveyor, prior to closing. In addition, real estate taxes must be paid in full for all of the underlying tax parcels for the year in which the plat is recorded. c)Item no. 12. Terms and conditions of Centerline Easement, in favor of Northern States Power, the right, privilege and easement to construct, operate and maintain a wood pole electric transmission line, as created in document dated June 10, 1958, filed October 10, 1958, as Document No. 3141415. Terms and conditions of Centerline Easement, in favor of Northern States Power, as created in document dated March 23, 1959, filed March 26, 1959, as Document No. 3168450. This easement is granted to supersede and cancel that certain Document No. 3141415, dated June 10, 1958, and filed of record on October 10, 1958. Partial Release of Easement dated November 28, 1972, filed November 30, 1972, as Document No. 3986476, excepting and reserving a strip of land 75 feet in width being 37.5 feet on either side of the following described line to wit: Beginning at a point on the West line of said Section 36, said point being 9 feet North of the South 1/16 Section line; thence East to point on the East line of Section 36, 9 feet North of the South 1/16 line of Section 36 and there terminating. Shown hereon. d)Item no. 13. Terms and conditions of Easement for drainage purposes, in favor of Hennepin County, as created in document dated February 27, 1968, filed April 23, 1968, as Document No. 3710888. Shown hereon. e)Item no. 14. Subject to Hennepin County State aid Highway No. 116, Plat 21, filed December 6, 1973, as Doc. No. 4057045. Shown hereon. f)Item no. 15. A portion of the property contains wetlands which may be subject to federal, state, or local regulation. The right to use or improve these wetlands is excepted herein. See Table A, Item No. 18. g)Item no. 16. Subject to Hackamore Road as laid out and traveled over the South 33 feet, more or less. Adjacent to and south of parcels. h)Item no. 17. Subject to County Road No. 116 as laid out and traveled over the West 33 feet, more or less. Adjacent to and west of parcels. 2)Observations/Comments noted hereon per field survey such as (but not limited to): access, occupation, and easements and/or servitudes: a)A fence appears to meander the north and east lines of Parcel 3 and Parcel 1. Ownership of said fences is unknown to the surveyor. Site SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 14000 25TH AVENUE NORTH, SUITE 120 PLYMOUTH MN 55447 (952) 476-6000 WWW.SATHRE.COM PI N T O D R I V E ( C . S . A . H . 1 1 6 ) HACKAMORE ROAD 62ND AVENUE N PARCEL 1 PARCEL 2 12 13 1314 17 16 NO R T H Fe n c e Li n e Bo u n d a r y Li n e Fence ties are shown on the side of the boundary line that the fence is located on. 0 SCALE IN FEET 50 25 25 50 100 SR R G N NE ENIG E D E S I E NN S US S Y R S O E R E V R P L A NO.BY DATE REVISIONFIELD CREW ALL DRAWN CMT CHECKED DLS DATE 2/28/2020 USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. Hennepin County TWP:119-RGE.23-SEC.36 2 FILE NO. 3 3120-068 CORCORAN, MINNESOTA CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PREPARED FOR: Lakeview Development Company, LLC SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 14000 25TH AVENUE NORTH, SUITE 120 PLYMOUTH MN 55447 (952) 476-6000 WWW.SATHRE.COM PI N T O D R I V E ( C . S . A . H . 1 1 6 ) PARCEL 1 PARCEL 2 PARCEL 3 12 1314 17 NO R T H Fe n c e Li n e Bo u n d a r y Li n e Fence ties are shown on the side of the boundary line that the fence is located on. 0 SCALE IN FEET 50 25 25 50 100 SR R G N NE ENIG E D E S I E NN S US S Y R S O E R E V R P L A NO.BY DATE REVISIONFIELD CREW ALL DRAWN CMT CHECKED DLS DATE 2/28/2020 USE (INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR CONVEYANCE OF INFORMATION) OF THIS PRODUCT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED WITHOUT SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.'s EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. USE WITHOUT SAID AUTHORIZATION CONSTITUTES AN ILLEGITIMATE USE AND SHALL THEREBY INDEMNIFY SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. OF ALL RESPONSIBILITY. SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO HOLD ANY ILLEGITIMATE USER OR PARTY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES OR LOSSES RESULTING FROM ILLEGITIMATE USE. Hennepin County TWP:119-RGE.23-SEC.36 3 FILE NO. 3 3120-068 CORCORAN, MINNESOTA CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PREPARED FOR: Lakeview Development Company, LLC SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC. 14000 25TH AVENUE NORTH, SUITE 120 PLYMOUTH MN 55447 (952) 476-6000 WWW.SATHRE.COM 123 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 49 50 51 52 53 55 46 47 24 14 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 56 57 58 59 60 54 18 61 15 16 48 PI N T O D R I V E ( C . S . A . H . 1 1 6 ) HACKAMORE ROAD 62ND AVENUE N 12 13 1314 17 16 HWL-99 9 . 4 HWL-998.3 CO Pond Access Pond A c c e s s Pond Access Po n d A c c e s s Pond Access OUTLOT B 272,591 SF OUTLOT A - 5,056 SF OUTLOT B OUTLOT C 37,316 SF OUTLOT D 96,107 SF OUTLOT E 117,136 SF OUTLOT E 40.0 24 . 0 20.0 20 . 0 20.0 16 . 0 Club House Pavlion Pon d A c c e s s Pon d A c c e s s Pond Access Po n d A c c e s s c 3OFWOODLAND HILLS OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA GONYEA COMPANY9-15-2023 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2023 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson L1LANDSCAPE PLAN10-10-2023 site plan revisions 2-13-2024 1-25-2024 buffer ordinance 2-13-2024 site plan revisions 20 21 22 23 HWL-9 9 9 . 4 29 c 3OFWOODLAND HILLS OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA GONYEA COMPANY9-15-2023 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2023 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson L2LANDSCAPE PLAN10-10-2023 site plan revisions 1-25-2024 buffer ordinance 2-13-2024 2-13-2024 site plan revisions 8 9 10 11 P o n d A c c e s s OUTLOT A - 5,056 SF 16 HWL-998.3 c 3OFWOODLAND HILLS OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA GONYEA COMPANY9-15-2023 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2023 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson L3LANDSCAPE PLAN10-10-2023 site plan revisions 1-25-2024 buffer ordinance 2-13-2024 2-13-2024 site plan revisions 123 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 49 50 51 52 53 55 46 47 24 14 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 3536 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 56 57 58 59 60 54 18 61 15 16 48 PI N T O D R I V E ( C . S . A . H . 1 1 6 ) HACKAMORE ROAD 62ND AVENUE N 12 13 1314 17 16 HWL-99 9 . 4 HWL-998.3 CO Pond Access Pond A c c e s s Pond Access Po n d A c c e s s Pond Access OUTLOT B 272,591 SF OUTLOT A - 5,056 SF OUTLOT B OUTLOT C 37,316 SF OUTLOT D 96,107 SF OUTLOT E 117,136 SF OUTLOT E 40.0 24 . 0 20.0 20 . 0 20.0 16 . 0 Club House Pavlion Pon d A c c e s s Pon d A c c e s s Pond Access Po n d A c c e s s WET PRAIRIE FOR WETLAND BUFFERS (STATE SEED MIX 34-262 FORMERLY BWSR W3) NATIVE DRY PRAIRIE SOUTHEAST (STATE SEED MIX 35-621 FORMERLY U6) SOD (TYPICAL) c 1OF 12-27-2023 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson G1GROUND COVER PLAN WOODLAND HILLS OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA GONYEA COMPANY SILT FENCE/GRADING LIMITS 2-13-2024 2-13-2024 site plan revisions 123 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 4546 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 20 26 14 61 994 9 9 4 9 9 6 98 8 99 0 9 9 4 9 9 6 1 0 0 0 1004 9 9 2 10 0 2 1002 1004 1006 1004 1000 984 986 990 992 994 996 1000 998996 1000 1002 1002 1002 1004 10 1 2 10 1 0 10 0 8 1 0 0 6 10 0 4 1 0 0 2 9 9 6 9 9 2 9 9 0 990 996 10 0 8 9 8 2 9 8 4 9 9 0 9 9 2 9 9 6 994 990 992 992 992 99 8 996 9 8 6 9 9 0 9 9 2 994 1 0 0 4 99 0 990 992 9961000 99 6 99 4 99 2 994 992 990 990 990988992994996 1000 996 986 98 6 9 8 6 976 980 98 4 98 6 98 6 100 2 988 992 99 4 99 6 99 8 10 0 0 996 9 9 6 9 9 2 99 2 998 10 0 2 99 2 9 9 2 98 8 988 986 9 8 4 99 4 9 9 4 99 2 996 99 8 10 0 0 1000 1000 9 9 8 100 0 1000 996 99 6 9 9 8 9 9 6 994 994 996 99 6 996 992 996 998 9 9 2 988.19 996 998 998 998 998 994 992 990 990 99410 0 2 1 0 0 0 998 994 994 998 992 99 6 99 4 99 8 9 9 6 996 994 9 9 4 9 9 6 1000 1002 998 996 1001.5 PI N T O D R I V E ( C . S . A . H . 1 1 6 ) HACKAMORE ROAD 62ND AVENUE N 12 13 1314 17 16 HWL-99 9 . 4 HWL-998.3 CO HP LP HP LP LP LP H P HP LP LP LP St r e e t " A " S t r e e t " C " Street "B" Street "D" Stree t " E " Pond Access P o n d A c c e s s Pond A c c e s s Po n d A c c e s s Po n d A c c e s s Pond Access 18' Emergency Access OUTLOT B 278,107 SF OU T L O T B OUTLOT A - 5,056 SF OUTLOT B OUTLOT C 37,316 SF OUTLOT D 82,344 SF OUTLOT E 100,295 SF OUTLOT E Club House Pavlion OUTLOT F 18,997 SF 40.0 24 . 0 20.0 20 . 0 20.0 16 . 0 WET PRAIRIE FOR WETLAND BUFFERS (STATE SEED MIX 34-262 FORMERLY BWSR W3) NATIVE DRY PRAIRIE SOUTHEAST (STATE SEED MIX 35-621 FORMERLY U6) SOD (TYPICAL) c 1OF 12-27-2023 JLT JLT Name Reg. No.Date Revisions Date Designed Drawn 2015 Pioneer Engineering, P.A. Mendota Heights, MN 55120 2422 Enterprise Drive (651) 681-1914 Fax: 681-9488www.pioneereng.com LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTSLAND SURVEYORSLAND PLANNERSCIVIL ENGINEERS I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota 44763 Jennifer L. Thompson G1GROUND COVER PLAN 12-27-2023 WOODLAND HILLS OF CORCORAN CORCORAN, MINNESOTA GONYEA COMPANY SILT FENCE/GRADING LIMITS Agenda Item 8a. Page 1 of 3 8200 County Road 116  Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288  www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO Meeting Date: March 12, 2024 To: Planning Commission From: Natalie Davis McKeown, Planner Re: Commercial and Industrial Update Discussion – Part 2 ____________________________________________________________________ 1. Request This is a continuation of a discussion the Planning Commission had on December 5, 2023 regarding the City’s goal to update the district standards for Commercial and Industrial areas. The Planning Commission was asked to provide feedback to the City Council on updating the underlying zoning districts and architectural standards for commercial and industrial land uses. 2. Background In January, the City Council identified adopting a work plan to update commercial and industrial districts as a 2023 priority. A work plan was adopted at the regular City Council meeting on November 20, 2023. As a part of the work plan, the City Council wanted to obtain Planning Commission feedback regarding the update early on and throughout the process. The City Council had the first in-depth discussion about this update at a work session on September 14, 2023, based on 15 sets of questions posed by staff to better define the scope of the update. The staff report for this meeting is attached to this report for reference. Based on this discussion, Council identified the following scope for the update of all commercial, industrial, and mixed-use districts: - Consideration of a height-related transition from residential districts. - Evaluation of architectural standards/window requirement to break up the massing of large facades. Agenda Item 8a. Page 2 of 3 - Complete review of each use allowed in commercial, industrial, and mixed-use districts and add use-specific standards where warranted. Specific uses noted: o Parking ramps – should a standard be added to prevent location adjacent to a residential use or district? o Recycling facilities – should only indoor recycling facilities be allowed? o Keeping of animals – should this be removed, particularly in the Business Park district? o Urban farming (e.g., vertical farming) – how can this be allowed? o Should a standard be added related to access on a major road/collector road for high traffic uses, such as warehouses? o Storage uses.  Would like to understand if there is an average crime rate associated with this type of use.  Do we want to remove mini storage as a conditional use?  Are there some areas where the City would be less concerned about allowing mini storage (e.g., allowing storage in industrial districts if the storage user does not have frontage on a major roadway)?  Is there a desire to allow indoor storage facilities? o Retail  Is there room to simplify how different retail uses are handled in each zoning district?  Is there a reason grocery stores are only specifically called out as allowed in the C-2 (Community Commercial) District?  Are there specific retail uses the City is more concerned about that should continue to be called out separately (e.g., liquor stores)? - Should flexibility be provided in applying the impervious surface limit in commercial and industrial districts on a per plat basis rather than per lot. 3. Discussion The Planning Commission held a discussion on some initial questions on December 5, 2023. The Planning Commission asked for a table compiling all the allowable uses across the districts with commercial and industrial uses for more meaningful discussion. This table is enclosed to this report for review and feedback. Additionally, City Council has since directed staff to specifically focus on Rural Commercial (CR) standards stemming out of a concept plan review in the last month. Historically, the City has records of applying the rural development rights program (allowing subdivision of property at an overall density of 1 units per 10 acres while allowing some lots to be as small as the district minimum lot size around 2 acres) to CR properties and uses as well as Rural Residential (RR) properties and Agenda Item 8a. Page 3 of 3 uses. However, the Council provided direction in February 2024 at a recent concept plan review to move away from utilizing development rights for rural commercial properties. However, this begs the question as to whether the minimum lot size and other district standards for the CR need to be re-evaluated. The Planning Commission is asked to provide any initial feedback; it is expected this will not be the only chance for Commission review on this specific topic. Attachments: 1. Table of Commercial and Industrial Uses 2. Concept Plan Staff Report to Council 2/8/2024 3. Section 1040.090 - CR (Rural Commercial) Urban  Reserve  (UR) Rural  Resident ial (RR)RSF‐1 RSF‐2 RSF‐3 RMF‐1 RMF‐2 RMF‐3 MP CR TCR C‐1C‐2BPI‐1 DMU GMU PUD PI Accessory buildings and structures for a use  accessory to the principal commercial or  business use provded such structure does  not exceed 30% of the gross floor space of  the principal use.AP AP AP Accessory Dwelling Unit AP* AP* AP* AP* AP* AP* AP* AP* AP* Accessory Dwelling Unit exceeding 960 sq  ft.C* Accessory structutres AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU Accessory uses incidental and customary to  uses allowed in this Section AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU Adult Entertainment Business, subject to  Chapter 113 CU Agriculture and Tree Farms.PP Allowed Home Occupations as regulated by  Section 1030.100 AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU Assisted living facility C CC Automobile Retail (tires, batteries, etc. No  body work or repair work).PC*C  Automotive detailing shops.P Bakery, retail.PP PP Banks, savings and loan, credit unions and  other financial institutions, with or without  drive‐through.PPP Banks, savings and loands, credit unitons  without drive‐through.PP Barbers, Beauty Shops and similar personal  service uses.PP PP Car Washes C* C* Cemetaries and Memorial Gardens C C Civic Buildings, such as City Hall, libraries,  fire stations, etc.P PPPPPP P Commercial Feedlots, subject to MPCA (MN  Pollution Control Agency) requirements C Commercial Kennel, subject to Chapter 81 CCC Table of Uses P ‐ Permitted Uses      AU ‐ Accessory Uses       C ‐ Conditional Uses.       I ‐ Interim Uses       AP ‐ Administrative Permit       * ‐ Subject to additional district standards Urban  Reserve  (UR) Rural  Resident ial (RR)RSF‐1 RSF‐2 RSF‐3 RMF‐1 RMF‐2 RMF‐3 MP CR TCR C‐1C‐2BPI‐1 DMU GMU PUD PI Table of Uses P ‐ Permitted Uses      AU ‐ Accessory Uses       C ‐ Conditional Uses.       I ‐ Interim Uses       AP ‐ Administrative Permit       * ‐ Subject to additional district standards Commercial printing establishments.PP Commercial recreation and entertainment  (not to exceed 5,000 square feet).C Commercial recreation and entertainment.CC  Commercial Riding Stables, subject to  Chapter 81 CC Community Centers C Conditional Home Occupation License  (CHOL) as allowed by Section 1030.100.II I I I I I II I Conference centers and reception halls P Contractors operations P Contractors Operations, including accessory  outside storage.C Copy/Print Shop PPP Day Care facilities accessory to educational  facilities or Places of Worship.C* C C C C  Day Care Facilities, County licensed, 12 or  fewer individuals AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU Day Care Facilities, State licensed, as  defined by statute PPPPPPPP PPPP PP P Day Care, Commercial, accessory to  permitted uses in this district.C Day Care, Commercial. PC Department Stores P Development in the 2030 Metropolitan  Urban Service Area (MUSA) prior to  availability of municipal sewer and water I* Drive‐through businesses, subject to  Section 1060.060, Subd. 12 CC C Drive‐through lanes serving permitted or  conditional uses, except for restaurants, for  which drive‐through lanes are not allowed  in the DMU. C* Drug Stores, Variety Stores, etc. P Urban  Reserve  (UR) Rural  Resident ial (RR)RSF‐1 RSF‐2 RSF‐3 RMF‐1 RMF‐2 RMF‐3 MP CR TCR C‐1C‐2BPI‐1 DMU GMU PUD PI Table of Uses P ‐ Permitted Uses      AU ‐ Accessory Uses       C ‐ Conditional Uses.       I ‐ Interim Uses       AP ‐ Administrative Permit       * ‐ Subject to additional district standards Dry cleaning and laundry pick up,incidental  pressing and repair without dry cleaning  processing.PP PP Dwelling, Single‐Family Detached PPPPPPP P Dwelling, Attached P Dwelling, Detached P Dwelling, Multiple Family CPP C Dwelling, Multiple Family with a minimum  density of 10 units per net acre, which may  include units combining living and working  space within the unit, if all units on the  same floor of a building are the same.PP Dwelling, Senior CPP P Dwelling, Single‐Family Attached ‐ 8 units  per building maximum with each unit  having a separate entrance PP Dwelling, Single‐Family Attached with no  more than six (6) dwelling units per  structure in a row (and no back to back  townhomes)p Dwelling, Two Family CU P P Educational facilities, K‐12.C* C* CU* CU* CU* CU*P Equipment rental PU Essential services and structures.AP P Essential Services, as allowed by Section  1030.090.AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP Event Centers I* I* Farmers Market II Fences as regulated by Section 1060 AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU Funeral Homes and Mortuaries PCCC  Golf Courses and other outdoor  recreational facilities of a commercial  nature.C C  Greenhouses and Nurseries C* C* I* I* C* C* C* Grocery Stores (not to exceed 50,000  square feet).P Urban  Reserve  (UR) Rural  Resident ial (RR)RSF‐1 RSF‐2 RSF‐3 RMF‐1 RMF‐2 RMF‐3 MP CR TCR C‐1C‐2BPI‐1 DMU GMU PUD PI Table of Uses P ‐ Permitted Uses      AU ‐ Accessory Uses       C ‐ Conditional Uses.       I ‐ Interim Uses       AP ‐ Administrative Permit       * ‐ Subject to additional district standards Hardware Stores.P Health clubs and fitness centers  C Health clubs and fitness centers less than  5000 sq ft.C C Hobby and Craft Stores P Home Furniture and Home Furnishing  Stores.P Hospitals, nuring home and similar care  facilities CC C  Hotels, inns and bed and breakfast  establishments.C C PP Household Applicance Stores. P Indoor sports and recreation (commercial)  provided the structure and use is located at  least 100 feet from any residential zoning  district.P Keeping of Animals, subject to Chapter 81 AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU Laboratories/research facilities.CPP Land reclamation, mining and soil  processing I  Laundromats.P Liquor ‐ Off‐sale/On‐sale.P Living quarters, which are provided  accessory to a principal agricultural use CC* Lumber yards/building material sales.CP  Manufactured homes.P Manufacturing or assembly of products  that produce no exterior noise, glare,  fumes, obnoxious products, by products or  wastes or creates other objectionable  impact on the environment.PP Mini Storage/Self Storage Facilities. C* C* Mining and Soil Processing.IU Motor Fuel Stations.C* C* C* C Motor Vehicle, Boat or Equipment Repair. C* C* Motor Vehicle, Boat or Equipment Sales. C* C* Urban  Reserve  (UR) Rural  Resident ial (RR)RSF‐1 RSF‐2 RSF‐3 RMF‐1 RMF‐2 RMF‐3 MP CR TCR C‐1C‐2BPI‐1 DMU GMU PUD PI Table of Uses P ‐ Permitted Uses      AU ‐ Accessory Uses       C ‐ Conditional Uses.       I ‐ Interim Uses       AP ‐ Administrative Permit       * ‐ Subject to additional district standards Museum C C  Nursing Home C C  Office/Warehouse PP  Offices, medical and professional.P PPPP PP C  Open or outdoor services, sales and  equipment rental. C Outdoor seating accessory to a resturant AU Outdoor seating within public ROW or  public open space AU* Outside Storage, accessory to an allowed  use C* Outside Storage, as a principal use I* Parking as a principal use I* Parks, playgrounds, trails, other  recreational facilities of a non‐commercial  nature and directly related buildings and  structures.PPPPPPPP P Place of Worship/Assembly C C*C*C*C*C*C* C C C P Play and recreational facilities, including  swimming pools and tennis courts, for use  of the property owner and guests.AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU Printing and publishing.P Private recreational facilities.AU Public open space plaza, square or other  related uses.AU Public parking ramp.P Publlic and Private Clubs and Lodges. PP Radio and television stations or studios PP  Recycling facility‐indoor P  Residential Facility in a single family  detached dwelling, serving 6 or fewer  individuals and licensed by the State PPPPPPPP P Residential Facility with 7 to 16 individuals,  licensed by the State.CCCCCC Restaurants and cafes without drive‐ through PPP Urban  Reserve  (UR) Rural  Resident ial (RR)RSF‐1 RSF‐2 RSF‐3 RMF‐1 RMF‐2 RMF‐3 MP CR TCR C‐1C‐2BPI‐1 DMU GMU PUD PI Table of Uses P ‐ Permitted Uses      AU ‐ Accessory Uses       C ‐ Conditional Uses.       I ‐ Interim Uses       AP ‐ Administrative Permit       * ‐ Subject to additional district standards Retail goods and service uses of a similar  nature within a fully enclosed building  (without a drive‐through and not to exceed  50,000 square feet).P Retail goods and service uses of a similar  nature within a fully enclosed building  (without drive‐through)PPP Retail goods and service uses of a similar  nature.PP Retail sales related to the processing of  product on site so long as it does not  exceed 30% of the floor space of the  principal building.AU Retail Uses accessory to permitted  development limited to 10% of the gross  floor area of the building School facility, leasing space.IU Schools, Private C Seasonal Outdoor Retail Sales. AP* AP AP* AP* Seasonal Produce Stands PPI I P Signs as regulated by the City Code. AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU Special Home Occupations as allowed by  Section 1030.100 AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP AP Sporting Goods and similar retail sales P Street Vendors I Structured parking. AU Tailoring services, shoe repair and similar  services.P Taverns PP PP Technical, vocational, business and  college/univeristy satellite  facilities/schools.P Temporary living quarters IIU Temporary real estate offices.AP AP AP AP AP AP Temporary structures, subject to Section  1030.040 IU IU AP AP AP AP AP & IIIAU & III Urban  Reserve  (UR) Rural  Resident ial (RR)RSF‐1 RSF‐2 RSF‐3 RMF‐1 RMF‐2 RMF‐3 MP CR TCR C‐1C‐2BPI‐1 DMU GMU PUD PI Table of Uses P ‐ Permitted Uses      AU ‐ Accessory Uses       C ‐ Conditional Uses.       I ‐ Interim Uses       AP ‐ Administrative Permit       * ‐ Subject to additional district standards Temporary trailers and construction  equipement for the durantion of  construction only where temporary  lavatories are provided in compliance with  City and State requirements.AU AU AU AU AU AU AU AU Tenant restaurants, cafeterias, and retail  services limited to tenants of the building,  provided that they be essentially limited to  providing service to the uses of the  permitted use, and that no signs or other  evidence of these uses are visible from the  exterior of the building. AU AU Theatre CC Towers and Antennas (freestanding) as  regulated by Section 1060.100. CC CCCC C C Towers and Antennas, subject to Section  1060.100, only when co‐located on an  existing structure AP AP AP* AP AP AP AP Trade Schools, Seminaries and other Higher  Education Facilities CC Veterinary clinic, Animal Hospital and  related indoor kennel; and pet grooming CCCC Warehousing and indoor storage used in  conjunction with offices or manufacturing  facilities.P Warehousing/distribution and indoor  storage P Wholesale Showrooms PP Page 1 of 7 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item ___ City Council Meeting: February 8, 2024 Prepared By: Nicholas Ouellette through Kendra Lindahl Topic: Sketch Plan for 3019 Addition at PID 07-119-23-14-0003 (city file 23-027) Action Required: Feedback Review Deadline: NA 1. Request The applicant, Scherber and Associates, is requesting the opportunity to appear before the City Council to solicit informal comments on a sketch plan for a proposed subdivision of the 66.37- acre parcel located at northeast corner of County Road 19 and County Road 30 (PID 07-119-23-14- 0003). The sketch plan proposes four residential lots and 15 commercial lots. Their request will also include a comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning for a portion of the site. The applicant submitted a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Preliminary Plat for “3019 Addition” in October. That application was deemed incomplete. The applicant has now provided a written request pause the development application and bring this concept plan to the City Council for review and feedback. 2. Analysis The applicant has submitted a narrative with their formal application and a new sketch plan detailing the proposed subdivision. The sketch plan shows four rural residential lots and 15 commercial lots. The sketch plan process provides an opportunity for the applicant to get information from the City that can be incorporated into a formal development application. The next steps would be: 1. Make Application for Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning and Preliminary Plat Complete. 2. Apply for Final Plat (and development contract) Page 2 of 7 Context Zoning and Land Use The western two-thirds of the property is guided Rural Service/Commercial and zoned Transitional Rural Commercial (TRC). The eastern third of the site is guided Rural/Ag Residential and zoned Rural Residential (RR). The site is located outside of the 2040 Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). Surrounding Properties The surrounding properties to the north and east are guided Rural/Ag Residential and zoned rural residential. Properties to the east and south are guided Rural/Ag Residential and Rural Service/Commercial. The properties to the south are zoned Transitional Commercial Rural, Rural Commercial and Rural Residential. Properties to the east are zoned Transitional Rural Commercial and Rural Residential. Natural Characteristics of the Site The 2040 Comprehensive Plan Natural Resources Inventory Areas Map identifies no natural resources on the subject property. Properties abutting the site to the east and northeast are identified as high quality natural communities. A small portion of the site on the east is in the Shoreland Overlay District. Sketch Plan Development Rights The 66.37-acre site has seven development rights according to the development rights map. The proposed development of 19 lots (15 commercial and four residential lots) exceeds the number of development rights for the property. Corcoran uses a development rights program as a method of managing development density in rural areas where municipal services are not planned and in Metropolitan Urban Service Areas (MUSA) where municipal services are planned but have not yet been provided. The development rights program is unusual--cities manage density through minimum lot sizes. In Corcoran, the number of lots created outside the MUSA that are not planned for City services are restricted by the number of development rights. Historically, the development rights program has been more difficult to administer than a minimum lot size and tracking has been a challenge over the years due to inconsistent record- keeping at City Hall. However, landowners have been operating under this system for more than 40 years and it does allow more flexibility than a minimum lot size when development is proposed. Page 3 of 7 In 2003, the development rights map was a paper map with handwritten development rights. Parcels in 2003 showed development rights on both Rural Residential and Rural Commercial properties. In 2004, that existing map was digitized and has been maintained by staff has properties develop. Section 1070.070 of the Zoning Ordinance provides a process for a landowner to appeal the number of development rights on the zoning map and states that “ reflects the number of development rights remaining on properties zoned Agricultural and Rural Residential and is intended to show the maximum number of residential units that may be developed per individual property.” However, this is inconsistent with the map itself, which shows development rights on property zoned Rural Commercial and Transitional Rural Commercial. Section 1040.020, Subd. 8 (UR District) and Section 1040.030, Subd. 7 (RR District) of the Zoning Ordinance regulates development density and “identifies the maximum number of residential units or non-residential units that may be developed” (italics added). The development rights program allows one development right for each 10 acres of land. As part of a recent development proposal (Kariniemi Meadows), the City Council was asked to interpret how development rights should be applied in the Rural Commercial district because of the inconsistency in the ordinance and development rights map. The Council clarified that each lot in the Rural Residential and Rural Commercial districts requires a development right. This interpretation was applied to the subdivision and staff has shared this Council interpretation with all developers, including the applicant. The applicant would like the Council to reconsider the application of this standard that development rights shall only be required for residential lots. Applying development rights for residential lots only would permit the applicant to develop the commercial portion of the site with more lots than would be permitted if development rights for commercial lots is required. However, the development rights should be adjusted to reflect one development right per 10 acres for the remaining residential portion. The applicant is proposing to adjust the portion of the site guided Rural/Ag Residential to be approximately 15.2 acres in area (through a comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning). Landowners are permitted one development right for each 10 acres of land, rounded to the nearest whole number. This would permit the applicant to develop two residential lots based on the proposed Rural/Ag Residential area of 15.2 acres. The remaining 51.17 acres of property guided Rural Service/Commercial would be permitted five commercial lots, utilizing the five remaining development rights based on the City Code interpretation previously provided by Council. If the Council changes the interpretation it would allow as many lots as can fit in compliance with the CR district standards and other performance standards in the City Code (15 are shown). The Council should discuss the standard for applying development rights for both residential and commercial lots. Council has two options: Page 4 of 7 1. Reaffirm the current Council direction, which requires a development right to create a lot in the Rural Residential, Transitional Rural Commercial or Rural Commercial zoning districts. This would allow two residential lots and five commercial lots based on the land use proposed by the applicant. 2. Modify the previous policy decision and eliminate the need for development rights in the Rural Commercial district. a. Should the Council choose this option, staff recommends that the Council also clarify that any development rights available to a lot shall be based ONLY on the area zoned Rural Residential. It would be unfair to other landowners in the City to apply development rights differently than one development right per 10 acres for the remaining residential land. b. In this case, it would mean that the applicant would be allowed two residential lots based on the current layout and unlimited commercial lots (provided the minimum CR district standard are met). • Whichever direction the Council chooses, Council should direct staff to initiate a zoning text amendment to clarify the standard for the application of development rights. Staff recommends that the amendment be brought to March or April Planning Commission/City Council meetings. Lot Standards The sketch plan appears to show compliance with the Rural Residential and Rural Commercial districts lot standards, which requires the minimum standards as shown in the table below: Rural Residential Rural Commercial Lot Area 2 acres 2.5 acres Minimum Lot Width 200 feet 100 feet Minimum Lot Depth 300 feet 200 feet Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks: Front, From Major Roadways 100 feet 100 feet Front, From all other streets 50 feet 50 feet Front Porch (≤ 120 square feet) 40 feet n/a Side 25 feet 20 feet Rear 25 feet 20 feet Adjacent to Residential n/a 50 feet Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet 35 feet Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage n/a 50% Page 5 of 7 The proposed residential lots range in area from 3.01- to 4.65-acres in size and would comply with the lot dimension and setbacks for the Rural Residential district. The 15 proposed commercial lots range in size from 2.5- to 3.57-acres in size and would comply with the lot dimensions and setbacks for the Rural Commercial district. However, the 15 proposed commercial lots exceeds the number of commercial lots permitted by the remaining five development rights, unless the Council changes the policy interpretation. Proposed Uses The proposed residential lots are single family homes and the proposed commercial lots are conceptually shown as office and warehousing developments (i.e. contractors operations). The conceptual buildings are 10,000 square feet in size with 8,000 square feet of warehousing space and 2,000 square feet of office space. There is extremely limited space for outside storage for these types of uses on the small lots shown, particularly once landscaping, septic, well and setback requirements are met. Staff notes that the proposed uses suggested by the applicant and allowed by the Zoning Ordinance are similar to the uses in the historic downtown industrial area. Landowners and the City have noted that those lots are too small to reasonably accommodate current business operations. Those businesses have a limited ability to grow and several struggle to provide adequate parking. While the applicant’s plans appear to comply with the minimum lots, staff believes that the will struggle to find quality users on such constrained lots and we have encouraged the applicant to consider larger lots. Parking Office uses require one space for each 200 square feet of floor area (at a minimum of 8 spaces). Warehousing uses require five spaces plus one space for each two employees on the largest shift. The concept shows 14 parking spaces provided for each lot. Depending on the number of employees for the largest shift for one lot, at least 15 parking spaces would be required for each commercial lot. Staff is concerned that the lots are too small to accommodate parking requirements and protect the primary and secondary septic systems. It is the developer’s responsibility to ensure reasonable development can occur on each lot. The applicant has indicated that he intends to sell vacant lots to end users who would ultimately develop the lots. Eliminating lots would allow the developer to provide larger lots with more flexible space for future landowners. Utilities The entire site is situated outside the MUSA and will be served with well and septic. The applicant must provide information with the preliminary plat that shows primary and secondary septic sites can fit on each individual lot. It may be challenging to find two Page 6 of 7 viable septic sites per lot and leave adequate space for a commercial structure and required parking stalls. The applicant’s plan shows two septic sites for each lot but has not received preliminary approval from Hennepin County as will be required prior to preliminary plat. Some of the lots show septic sites in the front yard, which historically have been a challenge for landowners as they work to protect both sites from construction impacts. Access The proposed access to the site is from County Road 30 in the southeast corner of the site and provides a street extension (Street A) to the parcel to the north. The applicant’s narrative indicates the proposed access location from County Road 30 has been deemed acceptable by the Hennepin County Highway Department. Residential lots will have access from Street A. Access to the commercial lots is provided by a second street (Street B) and cul-de-sac (Street C), both interior to the site. Street B also provides an extension to the parcel abutting the site to the southwest for future access when the property is redeveloped. Engineering staff is awaiting additional information from the applicant in order to complete the feasibility study for the site. The information from that study will be incorporated into the applicant’s plans and be conditions of any approvals. Trails and Sidewalks The Parks and Trails plan in the Comprehensive Plan identifies a proposed on-road trail through the site and proposed off-road trail along the east and north property lines. The concept plan does not show either proposed trail. Plans should be revised to show the approximate location of future trails. A trail easement must be provided for staff review with a formal preliminary plat application. The City could discuss the location of the trail and possible access points throughout the site. Stormwater The City Engineer’s memo provides detailed comments on stormwater for the proposed sketch plan. A stormwater basin is shown in the east portion of the site to accommodate stormwater for the proposed development. A stormwater management plan will be required with a preliminary plat to ensure compliance with City and Watershed standards for stormwater. Wetlands The applicant has provided a wetland report that indicates there are no wetlands on the site. Page 7 of 7 Floodplain The site includes a small portion of floodplain along the east property line. As part of a formal submittal, the plans will need to indicate the areas that are considered floodway, flood fringe and general floodplain as defined in Section 1050.030 Subd. 3. Based on the revised boundaries of the districts covering the property, the corresponding standards from Section 1050.030 shall apply. Shoreland The eastern portion of the site is in the shoreland overlay district. The overlay district must be shown on the plans to ensure compliance with shoreland standards. 3. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council review and discuss the sketch plan and provide the applicant with informal comments and direction on the application of development rights for the site. Any opinions or comments provided to the applicant by the City Council are considered advisory only and shall not constitute a binding decision on the request. Attachments 1. Site Location Map 2. Sketch Plan dated January 24, 2024 3. Applicant Narrative dated October 17, 2023 4. City Engineer’s Memo dated January 30, 2024 5. Land Use Map 6. Zoning Map 7. Parks and Trails Plan 8. Development Rights Map dated December 20, 2023 9. Development Rights Map dated 2001 Hennepin County Property Map Date: 1/30/2024 Comments: 1 inch = 800 feet PARCEL ID: 0711923140003 OWNER NAME: Craig Scherber & Assoc Inc PARCEL ADDRESS: 52 Address Unassigned,Corcoran MN 00000 PARCEL AREA: 66.37 acres, 2,891,272 sq ft A-T-B: Abstract SALE PRICE: $850,000 SALE DATE: 10/2021 SALE CODE: Warranty Deed ASSESSED 2022, PAYABLE 2023 PROPERTY TYPE: Farm HOMESTEAD: Non-Homestead MARKET VALUE: $730,000 TAX TOTAL: $12,780.01 ASSESSED 2023, PAYABLE 2024 PROPERTY TYPE: Farm HOMESTEAD: Non-Homestead MARKET VALUE: $570,900 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 not suitable 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 2024 CONCEPT GHOST PLAT CON C E P T G H O S T P L A T PROJECT LOCATION SURVEY DATA 1/1 LEGEND: CI V I L E N G I N E E R I N G SI T E D E S I G N 305 Lakeview Ave. Tonka Bay, MN 55331 Craig Scherber 612-810-8400 SCHERBER ASSOCIATES CONCEPTUAL CR ZONE BUILDING USES AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS CONCEPTUAL CR ZONE IMPERVIOUS AREA Revised 12/18/20 Please attach a brief description of your project/reason for your request. Project Narrative: The existing 66 acre property has current comprehensive plan land use of Rural Service/Commercial (west 1,640 ft) and Rural/Ag Residential (east 990 ft), and is currently zoned TCR (west 1,640 ft) and RR (east 990 ft). We are applying for a comprehensive plan amendment to shift the boundary location between the two land uses approximately 490 ft to the east to align with a proposed north-south collector street. The location of the proposed north-south collector street has been determined appropriate to accommodate future street extension to the south and future street extensions to the north. The proposed north-south collector street intersection location with CSAH 30 has been deemed acceptable by Hennepin County Highway Department. We are applying for rezoning from TCR to CR (west portion) similar to adjacent properties. We are also applying for adjustment of the boundary location between the CR (west portion) and RR (east portion) to align with the proposed north-south collector street, constant with the requested comprehensive plan amendment noted above. We are applying for Preliminary Plat review for proposed subdivision and development of Rural Commercial lots on the west portion of the property, and Rural Residential lots on the east portion of the property. The project proposes 15 CR compliant lots and 4 RR compliant lots. All lots will have private well and septic systems on each lot. Access to all lots would be by new public streets internal to the project. No lots will have direct access to CSAH 30 or direct access to CSAH 19. New public streets are extended to property boundaries at locations appropriate for future extension to adjacent properties. Public street access to the development is proposed from CSAH 30 with left and right turn lanes constructed as required by Hennepin County Highway Department. The developer will subdivide, construct drainage improvements, and construct public streets per city standards. The developer will not build houses, commercial buildings or site improvements on each lot. Lots will be sold to end users. End users will obtain site plan and building permits for construction of buildings and site improvements on each lot. Landscape improvements will be installed by end users on each lot. Landscape design will satisfy base landscape requirements and buffer yard requirements where applicable. No impacts are proposed to adjacent properties. Access for the development will be direct from County Road 30. Buffer yard landscape requirements will provide appropriate screening to adjoining properties. Minimal impacts to utilities, parks, and natural environment are proposed by the project. Municipal utility services are not available, all lots will provide private well/septic utility services. The project will pay required park fees to accommodate additional park needs resulting from the project. Proposed stormwater management features address natural environment stormwater related concerns. Schedule for development construction is Spring 2024 provided city approvals are obtained. Memo To: Kevin Mattson, PE, Public Works Director From: Kent Torve, PE, City Engineer Steve Hegland, PE Project: 3019 Addition Concept Plan Date: January 30, 2024 Exhibits: This Memorandum is based on a review of the 3019 Addition site concept plan by Scherber & Associates with the following documents; a. Concept Plan D 3019 site by Civil Engineering Site Design, dated 01/24/2024. The concept shows 4 single family units and 15 commercial lots. Comments: General: 1. Comments provided are preliminary based on the Concept Plan provided. Additional comments should be anticipated on future submittals that include more details of the development. 2. In addition to engineering related comments per these plans, the proposed plans are subject to the review of planning, zoning, Public Safety, and all other applicable codes and standards of the City of Corcoran, NPDES, ECWMC, Hennepin County, etc. 3. A feasibility study will be conducted on the development with the preliminary plat approval to review the development impacts on transportation system, stormwater/drainage, and public utility system. 4. Adjacent development to the west has a current SIPA and is incorporating site improvements into the development. The adjacent grading and stormwater management shall be considered in the design of this development. Plat: 5. The applicant shall show all drainage and utility easements and all platting requirements are met per the City Code. Drainage and utility easements shall be provided per City requirements. 6. Easements should be provided over all infrastructure used for the maintenance, conveyance and treatment of stormwater. 7. Easements should be provided over any/all public infrastructure as applicable. 8. Any existing easements should be provided to the City for review. Vacation of existing easements currently in place requires a City process and should be identified in the project schedule. Transportation 9. The Comprehensive Plan identifies a minor collector to run north/south through the site. The location of the north/south roadway is sufficient for this minor collector location as it is located slightly farther from the intersection of County Road (CR) 19 and CR 30 which is a major intersection and also there are trees and wetlands which could be impacted if the roadway was aligned with the shared lot line to the south of CR 30. January 30, 2024 3019 Concept Plan Kevin Mattson Page 2 of 3 10. Turn lanes along CR 30 into the proposed development are anticipated to be required by the County. Both an eastbound left turn lane and westbound right turn lane should be anticipated to be required. 11. Temporary cul-de-sacs will be necessary on both Street A and Street B. 12. An 80-foot dedicated Right of Way (ROW) is shown which is anticipated to be sufficient for the rural roadways. 13. ROW dedications are shown for both CR 30 and CR 19 of 70-feet which should be sufficient for the concept level. Actual ROW dedication requirements will be determined by Hennepin County and have previously typically been 65-feet of half ROW. 14. No trails or sidewalk systems are shown in the Concept Plan but may be necessary as required by City. 15. No road connection is shown to the adjacent development to the east. Preserving adequate ROW for the option for future looping or utilities should be reviewed by the City. Stormwater 16. A stormwater management plan will be required for this development in accordance with City of Corcoran and Elm Creek Watershed Management Commission Standards. 17. Applicant shall reference the City of Corcoran Stormwater Guidelines for Development Review for standards for stormwater systems and modeling. 18. Wetland delineations for this site have been completed and any impacts will follow WCA protocols. 19. The wetland buffer zones and wetland buffer signage shall be clearly identified and labeled. If existing vegetation is proposed to be used as wetland buffer, these areas shall be reviewed with the City of Corcoran wetland specialist to determine if they are viable candidates. 20. The site discharges generally to the east to Rush Creek. o A large drainage swale conveys water through the site through a drainage ditch from the south to the east of the site. o An existing draintile is believed to drain from west to east across the site and connect to a additional draintile from the south of the site before it ultimately discharges to Rush Creek. o The development shall identify the route and conditions of this draintile flow and its conveyance should be rerouted through the site without adverse impacts. o Applicant shall investigate and document the condition, capacity and elevations of this draintile. 21. Site plans shall identify stormwater maintenance access routes to the ponds and all features of the stormwater management system. 22. All drainage swales shall maintain a minimum of 2% slope and all slopes should be 4:1 or flatter unless approved by the City Engineer. 23. If abstraction is required by ECWMC for the site, the City strongly prefers a NURP pond with filter bench (offset to one side of the pond) be used with an adequate maintenance access. The filter bench design is efficient from land use and requires less future maintenance as compared to other treatment options. 24. Due to the rural nature of Corcoran conveyance systems, offsite receiving waters will be evaluated to understand any impacts from additional drainage. 25. A floodplain is present along the very east side of the site. This floodplain elevation shall be defined and the development shall meet all City, watershed and other regulatory floodplain regulations. January 30, 2024 3019 Concept Plan Kevin Mattson Page 3 of 3 26. It is assumed a regional stormwater system will collect and treat the stormwater from the entire development as individual stormwater treatment systems for each lot would be inefficient within the space provided. Water/Sewer 27. Water and sewer will be provided via well and septic system. 28. The site layout shows the parking lots and layouts being utilized up to the septic systems. Working around and maintaining viable primary and secondary septic sites may compromise some of the usable space within the lots. 29. All septic systems shall be reviewed by and approved by Hennepin County. 30. Wells and septics will need to be reviewed for the regulatory setbacks within the development. Ci t y o f G r e e n f i e l d City of Maple Grove City of Medina City of Rogers Be c h t o l d R d Pio n e e r T r l Trail Haven Rd Co u n t y R o a d 1 1 6 County Road 30 Schutte Rd Oakdale Dr County Ro a d 1 0 Horseshoe Trl Co u n t y R o a d 5 0 Larsen Rd Wi l l o w D r Hunter Rd Co u n t y R o a d 1 9 Homestead Trl Ca i n R d Ro l l i n g H i l l s R d Country Rd Mo h a w k D r Larkin Rd Fo x l i n e D r Strehler Rd Dassel Ln Old S e t tl e r s R d Stie g R d Ka l k R d Meister Rd Ma p l e H i l l R d 93rd Ave N Tessmer Rd Bl u e B o n n e t D r Jubert Ln 456710 456750 456719 456730 4567116 4567101 4567117 Br o c k t o n L n N 109th Ave N 4567101 ")55 Hackamore Rd MorinLake ScottLake JubertLake GooseLake CookLake R u s h C reek RushCreek South F o r k R u sh Creek SouthFor k R u shCr eek 6/21/2022 6/21/2022 1/25/2026 1/25/2026 1/22/2023 6/21/2022 5/27/2029 1/22/2023 1/22/2023 5/27/2029 12/13/22 4/27/2022 4/27/2022 5/27/2029 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet ± Path: \\MSPFSV02\DesignDepot\Library\Software\GIS\Client\City of Corcoran\City wide maps\2040 Future Land Use.mxd Date: 10/27/2021 Time: 9:57:35 AM User: LPSRemote Rural/Ag Residential Existing Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Mixed Residential High Density Residential Rural Service/Commercial Commercial Mixed Use Business Park Light Industrial Public/Semi-Public Parks/Open Space Agricultural Preserve (Date of Expiration) Open Water Municipal Boundary 2040 MUSA Future MUSA Expansion Area Parcel Boundaries Streams Lake/Open Water Wetlands Map 2-12040 Future Land Use Source:Revised National Wetland Inventory (MN DNR, 2009-2014) !!!!! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! !!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !!!!!!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! !! ! ! ! !!! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! !!!! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! !!! !! ! ! !! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! î î î s s òñð òñð ñ ñ ï ï î î s ñ ï ROAD SCHUTTE GLEASON ROAD JUBERT LAKE MEISTER ROAD O L D S E T T L E R S R D HORSESHOE TRAIL STI E G R D WI L L O W D R I V E HACKAMORE ROAD TR A I L H A V E N R O A D CA I N R O A D OAKDALE D R STREHLER ROAD PI O N E E R T R COUNTY ROAD 117 RO L L L I N G H I L L S R D LARKIN RD TOWNSHIP OF HASSAN CI T Y O F G R E E N F I E L D CI T Y O F M A P L E G R O V E SCOTT LAKE BE C H T O L D R O A D $+ $+ $+ $+ $+ $+ $+ $+ MORIN LAKE GOOSE LAKE COOK LAKE RUS H C R E E K Official Zoning Map 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet Zoning Districts: UR Urban Reserve RR Rural Residential RSF-1 Single Family Residential 1 RSF-2 Single Family Residential 2 RSF-3 Single and Two Family Residential 3 RMF-1 Medium Density Residential RMF-2 Mixed Residential RMF-3 High Density Residential MP Manufactured Home Park P-I Public / Institutional TCR Transitional Rural Commercial CR Rural Commercial C-1 Neighborhood Commercial C-2 Community Commercial DMU Downtown Mixed Use GMU General Mixed Use BP Business District I-1 Light Industrial PUD Planned Unit Development ï Cemetery î ChurchsGolf Course ñ Government Building òñð Public Park ! ! ! !! 2040 Metropolitan Urban Service Area City Limit Open Water Shoreland Overlay District Adopted June 2011 19 10 30 116 101 50 19 10 ± Updated September 2020 Ci t y o f G r e e n f i e l d City of Maple Grove City of Medina City of Rogers % Trailhead Morin Lake Scott Lake Jubert Lake Cook Lake 456710 456750 456719 456730 Co u n t y R o a d 1 1 6 Oakdale Dr B r i d l e Pa t h J e f f r e y L n Abilene Ln Tr a i l L n Hunters Rdg County Road 30 He a t h e r Ln Pio n e e r T r l Trail Haven Rd County Ro a d 1 0 Horseshoe Trl Ro b e r t L n H o r s e s h o e Bend D r Co u n t y R o a d 5 0 Larsen Rd Gleason P k w y Wi l l o w D r Hunter Rd Co u n t y R o a d 1 9 ES t Homestead Trl Ma p l e H i l l R d Ca i n R d Ro l l i n g H i l l s R d S u n d a n c e Rd Country Rd Mo h a w k D r El mSt Larkin Rd Fo x l i n e D r Strehler Rd Cain Pl 6 5 t h Pl N Dassel Ln Old Se t t le rs R d County R oad 1 1 7 Stie g R d Be c h t o l d R d Ka l k R d Schutte Rd Meister Rd F o x V a l l e y Dr M y s t i q u e Dr H a g e Dr 93rd Ave N Sc hut t e P l Br a n d y w i n e Rd Chisholm T r l Tessmer Rd HighBlu ffLn Winc hest erTrl JubertLn R u s h C re e k RushCreek County Ditc h N u m b e r S i x t e e n Co u n t y Ditch N u mber Three SouthFor k R u s h C r e e k NP NP NP NP NP NP NP ASA ASA ASA ASA OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP OSP 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet ± Path: L:\2294\100\2040CompPlan\Parks and Trails Map.mxd Date: 1/15/2019 Time: 1:22:31 PM User: ShuJC0243 Map 5-1Parks and Trails Plan Existing Parks and TrailsRegional TrailExisting On Road TrailCity ParkTrailheadPrivate Park/Open Space Proposed Parks and TrailsProposed On Road TrailProposed Off Road TrailProposed Off Road Trail outside 2040 Development AreaNeighborhood ParkCommunity ParkGreenway CorridorMunicipal Boundaries2040 MUSAFuture MUSA Expansion AreaParcel BoundariesStreamsLake/Open WaterWetlands NP 79 Section 1040 (District Regulations) Page 114 March 17, 2021 1040.090 – CR (RURAL COMMERCIAL) Subd. 1. Purpose. This district is the existing Burschville area located at the intersection of County Road 19 and County Road 10. The intent of this district to provide a mix of neighborhood commercial uses and rural industrial, such as contractor’s yards and similar uses that do not require municipal water or sanitary sewer services. Municipal sewer and water will not be provided in this area. Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. A. Automobile Retail (tires, batteries, etc. No body work or repair work). B. Civic Buildings, such as City Hall, libraries, fire stations, etc. C. Day Care Facilities, State licensed, as defined by statute. D. Day Care, Commercial. E. Offices, medical and professional. F. Retail goods and service uses of a similar nature. Subd. 3. Accessory Uses. A. Accessory structures as regulated by Section 1030.020 of this Chapter. B. Accessory uses incidental and customary to uses allowed in this Section. C. Keeping of Animals, subject to Chapter 81 (Animals) of the City Code. Subd. 4. Conditional Uses. The following are conditional uses, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1070.020 of this Ordinance and the specific standards and criteria that may be cited for a specific use: A. Adult Entertainment Business, subject to Chapter 113 of the City Code. B. Commercial Kennels, subject to Chapter 81 of the City Code. C. Commercial recreation and entertainment (not to exceed 5,000 square feet). D. Contractors Operations, including accessory outside storage. E. Greenhouses and Nurseries, subject to the following: Section 1040 (District Regulations) Page 115 March 17, 2021 1. When abutting a residential use or district, the property shall be screened and landscaped in accordance with this Chapter. All structures shall be set back at least 100 feet from any residential property line. 2. On-site storage and use of pesticides and fertilizers shall meet the standards of the Minnesota Department of Agriculture. 3. Adequate off-street parking is provided on an improved surface as required by this Ordinance. 4. Adequate parking, loading and maneuvering areas shall be provided. 5. Loading areas are screened from adjacent residential uses. 6. Well and Septic Systems can be accommodated on site to serve the proposed facility. 7. Not more than 30 percent of the site area shall be covered with buildings or other structures. 8. Hours for retail sale of product to customers shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. 9. Lighting shall comply with all ordinance requirements. If more than 25 percent of the greenhouse spaces are to be lit at night, they shall be screened from residential properties by use of a retractable curtain, landscaping, buildings or other methods to prevent light pollution, including sky glow. 10. The site complies with the minimum lot area standards for the district. 11. Sale of accessory items shall be permitted, provided they do not generate more than 20 percent of the sales (measured by retail value or sales volume) for the business nor cover more than 10 percent of the site area. 12. At least 50 percent of the nursery stock to be sold on site must be grown on site. 13. The provisions of Section 1070.020 of this Ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. F. Laboratories/research facilities. Section 1040 (District Regulations) Page 116 March 17, 2021 G. Lumber Yards/building material sales. H. Mini Storage/Self Storage Facilities. 1. Units are to be used for dead storage only. Units are not to be used for retailing, auto repair, human habitation, or any commercial activity, except as allowed by this Section. 2. Combining office and /or retail space with a self-service storage facility may be allowed by Conditional Use Permit. 3. Storage of hazardous or flammable materials is prohibited. 4. No exterior storage is allowed. 5. The facility shall be secured by either the walls of the structure and/or fencing. All doors on the units shall face inward and away from the street and property lines. 6. An on-site manager is allowed only where adequate sanitary facilities are provided, either through use of a septic system or through connection to the public sanitary sewer system. Use of portable sanitary facilities does not fulfill this requirement. I. Motor Fuel Stations. 1. That the proximate area and location of space devoted to non- automotive merchandise sales shall be specified in the application and in the conditional use permit. Exterior sales or storage shall be only as allowed by the conditional use permit. 2. The off-street loading space(s) and building access for delivery of goods shall be separate from customer parking and entrances and shall not cause conflicts with customer vehicles and pedestrian movements. 3. Motor fuel facilities shall be installed in accordance with State and City standards. Additionally, adequate space shall be provided to access gas pumps and to allow maneuverability around the pumps. Underground fuel storage tanks are to be positioned to allow adequate access by motor fuel transports and unloading operations which do not conflict with circulation, access and other activities on the site. Fuel pumps shall be installed on pump islands. Section 1040 (District Regulations) Page 117 March 17, 2021 4. All buildings, canopies, and pump islands shall be located to comply with the minimum setback requirements of the zoning district in which they are located. 5. All canopy lighting for motor fuel station pump islands shall be recessed or shielded to provide a 90-degree cutoff. Illumination levels for pump islands shall not exceed 30-foot candles. 6. Litter Control. The operation shall be responsible for litter control within 300 feet of the premises and litter control is to occur on a daily basis. Trash receptacles must be provided at a convenient location on site to facilitate litter control. J. Motor Vehicle, Boat or Equipment Repair. 1. All servicing of vehicles and equipment shall occur entirely within the principal structure. 2. To the extent required by State law and regulations, painting shall be conducted in an approved paint booth, which thoroughly controls the emission of fumes, dust, or other particulated matter. 3. Storage and use of all flammable materials, including liquid and rags, shall conform with applicable provisions of the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code. 4. Parking, driveway, and circulation standards and requirements shall be subject to the review and approval of the City and shall be based upon the specific needs of the operation and shall accommodate large vehicle equipment and semi-trailer/tractor trucks. 5. The storage of damaged vehicles and vehicle parts and accessory equipment must be completely inside a principal or accessory building. 6. The sale of products other than those specifically mentioned in this Section shall be subject to a separate conditional use permit K. Motor Vehicle, Boats and Equipment Sales. 1. All sales shall occur on one lot. 2. Parking areas for the outside storage and sale of vehicles, boats and trailers, shall be on impervious surface, either bituminous, concrete, or approved equivalent. Section 1040 (District Regulations) Page 118 March 17, 2021 3. Interior concrete or asphalt curbs shall be constructed within the property to separate driving and parking areas from landscaped areas. Interior curbs shall be a nominal 6- inches in height or greater. 4. All areas of the property not devoted to buildings or parking areas shall be landscaped in accordance with this Ordinance. 5. Off-street parking shall be provided for customers and employees in accordance with this Ordinance. 6. Parking for sales display shall not be less than 9 feet wide by 18.5 feet in length. 7. Display of motor vehicles, boats, and trailers for sale off the property of their owner is prohibited unless authorized by Conditional Use Permit. L. Open or outdoor services, sales and equipment rental. M. Places of Worship/Assembly. N. Towers and Antennas (freestanding) as regulated by Section 1060.100 (Telecommunications Services) of the Zoning Ordinance. O. Veterinary clinic, Animal Hospital and related indoor kennel; and pet grooming. Subd. 5. Interim Uses. The following are interim uses, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 1070.030 of this Ordinance and the specific standards and criteria that may be cited for a specific use: A. Accessory Dwelling Unit, subject to the following: 1. Not more than one accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed on a lot. 2. An accessory dwelling unit shall comply with the same minimum building setback requirements as required for the principal structure and shall be attached to the principal structure. 3. An accessory dwelling unit shall be a clearly incidental and subordinate use, the gross floor area of which shall not exceed the gross floor area of the principal use or 800 square feet, whichever is less. Section 1040 (District Regulations) Page 119 March 17, 2021 4. The exterior design of an accessory dwelling unit shall incorporate a similar architectural style, roof pitch, colors, and materials as the principal building on the lot, 5. The owner of the property or the property caretaker shall reside in the principal dwelling unit or in the accessory dwelling unit. 6. There shall be no separate ownership of the accessory dwelling unit. 7. Rental of the accessory dwelling unit separate from the principal use is prohibited. 8. In addition to the parking spaces required for the principal use on the lot, 2 off-street parking spaces shall be provided for an accessory dwelling unit. Such accessory dwelling unit parking spaces shall not conflict with the principal use parking spaces, and shall comply with the requirements of this Chapter. 9. An accessory dwelling unit shall have a separate address from the principal use on the lot, and shall be identified with address numbers. 10. The interim use permit shall expire if the principal use of the property changes or the ownership of either the property or the principal use changes. 11. The interim use permit shall be issued for 3 years in accordance with the procedures outlined in Section 1070.030 of the Zoning Ordinance. Such permits will be administratively reviewed every 3 years to ensure compliance with conditions of approval and ordinance requirements for accessory dwelling units. Interim uses found to be in compliance may be extended by the Zoning Administrator for periods of up to 3 years each. B. Temporary structures, subject to the standards in Section 1030.040 (Temporary Structures) of the Zoning Ordinance. Subd. 6. Uses by Administrative Permit. A. Accessory buildings and structures for a use accessory to the principal commercial or business use provided such structure does not exceed 30 percent of the gross floor space of the principal use. B. Essential Services, as allowed by Section 1030.090. C. Seasonal Outdoor Retail Sales. Section 1040 (District Regulations) Page 120 March 17, 2021 1. Seasonal outdoor retail sales shall not exceed a combined total of 120 days in any 12-month period. Outdoor retail sales shall not occupy an area exceeding 10 percent of a lot's area, and shall meet all yard setback requirements. 2. Where seasonal outdoor retail sales are conducted in a parking lot, they shall be confined to a defined area, and not be allowed to obstruct access of emergency vehicles or pose a traffic safety problem. Temporary fencing or other suitable mechanisms shall be used to delineate the sales area and provide for pedestrian safety. 3. Where tents, temporary green houses, or similar structures are used to store, and/or display merchandise, they shall be anchored to provide a wind-load resistance of 40 miles per hour. D. Temporary structures, subject to the standards in Section 1030.040 (Temporary Structures) of the Zoning Ordinance. E. Towers and Antennas as regulated by Section 1060.100 (Telecommunications Services) of the Zoning Ordinance, only when co- located on an existing structure. Subd. 7. Area Requirements. The following minimum requirements shall be met in the CR district. Properties may be subject to special requirements for overlay districts as noted in Section 1050 (Overlay Districts): Minimum lot area 2.5 acres Minimum lot width 100 feet Minimum lot depth 200 feet Minimum Principal Structure Setbacks: Front, From Major Roadways* 100 feet Front, From all other streets 50 feet Side 20 feet Rear 20 feet Adjacent to Residential 50 feet Maximum Principal Building Height 35 feet Maximum Impervious Surface Coverage 50% *Major Roadways are Principal Arterial, A Minor Reliever, A Minor Expander and A Minor Connector Roadways as shown on the 2030 Roadway Functional Classification map in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. (Ord 348, passed 05-25-17, Ord. 389, passed 02-28-19) Page 1 of 3 8200 County Road 116  Corcoran, MN 55340 763-420-2288  www.corcoranmn.gov MEMO Meeting Date: February 22, 2024 To: City Council From: Dwight Klingbeil, Planning Technician Re: Planning Project Update Projects/comments in blue italics are new. The following is a status summary of active planning projects: 1.Commercial and Industrial Development Standards (Citywide) (City File 23-023) The purpose of this zoning ordinance amendment is to address and evaluate the allowed uses and use specific standards within commercial and industrial developments. The Council adopted a work plan at the November 20, 2023, regular meeting, and requested the Planning Commission to provide their initial feedback. The Planning Commission discussed this item at the December 5, 2023, meeting and expressed their desire Commercial and Industrial Development Standards address a number of items such as: specific architectural standards, infrastructure investment incentives, encouragement toward sustainable development practices, proper transitions of intensities and height, the permitted and conditional uses of each zoning type, verbiage, and lighting standards City Staff prepared a survey for current landowners and lessees to express their opinions on items to be addressed with this update. Staff mailed the online survey invitation to property owners and tenants whose property is either currently zoned, or guided for Commercial, Industrial, or Mixed-Use. The comment period for this survey closed on January 31, 2024. Staff is reviewing the responses in preparation for the draft update to the Commercial and Industrial Standards. At the February 8, 2024, City Council meeting, staff was directed to prioritize Rural Commercial (CR) and Transitional Rural Commercial (TCR) district updates to be approved by the end of quarter 2. Staff will prepare for a second Planning Commission discussion at the March 12th meeting. Feedback from the Planning Commission and business community Survey will be shared with the City Council at the March 28th regular Council meeting for further direction. Staff will also prepare a revised work plan to be reviewed on March 28th to reflect the change in direction. 2.Minks Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, and Variance (PID 27-119-23-43-0005) (City Agenda Item: 11a. Page 2 of 3 Lyndon Minks applied for a preliminary plat, a final plat, and a variance which would allow him to adjust the western lot line of his property at 6925 Old Settlers Road. The public hearing for this item was held at the January 4, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. After a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request, 3:0. The Council approved this item at the January 25, 2024, Council Meeting. 3. 3019 Addition Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and Preliminary Plat (PID 07-119-23-14-0003) (City File 23-027) Craig Scherber & Associates LLC have applied for a Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, and Comprehensive Plan Amendment for a Residential and Commercial Development on the property at PID 07-119-23-14-0003. The application includes 15 commercial lots and 4 single-family residential lots. The applicant received Council feedback on a concept version of this proposal at the February 8, 2024, meeting. 4. Hope Community Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Preliminary PUD, Preliminary Plat (PIDs 11-119-23-14-0003, 11-119-23-14-0005, 11-119-23- 14-0006, and 11-119-23-11-0012) (City File 23-028). Hope Community Church submitted application materials for a Preliminary Plat, Preliminary PUD, Rezoning, and Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow for a mixed-use development around Hope Community Church. The proposed development includes medical offices, retail space, market rate apartments, townhomes, senior villas, and assisted living units. The public hearing for this item was held at the February 1, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. After hearing several testimonies from the public, the Planning Commission motioned to recommend approval of the application as presented 3:1. 5. Khacholing Center Place of Worship CHOL IUP (PID 06-119-23-13-0002) (City File 23- 029) Lobsang Yeshi & Nga Thi Ngoc Nguyen, of the Khacholing Center, applied for a Interim Use Permit to hold regular religious classes within a room at 23360 Oakdale Drive. This item is complete for City review and has been scheduled for a public hearing at the March 12, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. 6. Pioneer Trail Industrial Park Final Plat & Final PUD (PID 32-119-23-43-0005, 32- 119-23-43-0006, 32-119-23-43-0013)(City File 23-030). Contour Development LLC has applied for a Final Plat and a Final PUD at 6210 Pioneer Trail. The application consists of 0 lots and 3 outlots. This application is incomplete for City review and is not currently scheduled for any upcoming meetings. 7. Lister Garage CUP (PID 32-119-23-21-0007) (City File 23-031). J Brothers Design, Build, and Remodel has applied for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of an accessory structure with sidewalls that exceed 10 feet in height in the front yard of 23615 Julie Ann Drive. The Public Hearing for this item was held at the February 1, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. After a brief discussion, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the application as presented. This item has been scheduled for the February 22, 2024, City Council meeting. 8. Tavera 6 Final Plat & Final PUD (PID 35-119-23-11-0003) (City File 23-032). Lennar submitted application materials for the Final Plat and Final PUD for Tavera 6th Addition, and staff is reviewing the materials for completeness. This item is complete File 23-025) Page 3 of 3 9. Woodland Hills Preliminary Plat, Rezone, & Variance (PID 36-119-23-33-0010, 36-119-23-33- 0003, 36-119-23-33-0007) (City File 23-033). Woodland Hills of Corcoran, Inc. & Gonyea Company submitted application materials for a Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, and a Variance to develop 60 single-family lots on the northeast corner of the Hackamore Road and County Road 116 intersection. The proposal is to create 60 detached single-family lots, 1 amenity lot, and 5 outlots on a 36.74-acre site. Council provided informal feedback to the applicant’s concept plan (Northeast Hackamore 116 Concept Plan) during the July 27, 2023, Regular Meeting. This item is complete for City review and the public hearing is scheduled for the March 12, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. 10. Chastek Farm Preliminary Plat, Preliminary PUD, Rezoning (PID 25-119-23-12-0002) (City File 23-034). Trek Real Estate & Development, Inc. submitted an application for a Preliminary Plat, Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD), and Rezoning of the Chastek Farm located at 7600 Maple Hill Road. The request is to allow the development of 117 single-family for-sale lots on the 38.16-acre site. 101 of these lots would have a width of 55 feet, and the remaining 16 would have a width of 65 feet. This item is complete for City review and is tentatively scheduled for the April 4, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting. 11. Heather Meadows 3rd Addition Preliminary Plat/OS&P (PIDs 05-119-23-31-0001 & 088-119-23- 22-0011) (City File 24-002). Mark and Markus Lee, of ML Unlimited LLC, submitted a preliminary plat application to create 12 single-family lots and 2 outlots at 22901 Oakdale Drive. The proposal includes platting the two existing homes on Oakdale Drive and extending Heather Lane southward to plat 10 additional lots. To satisfy the requirements of the Open Space & Preservation density bonuses, this proposal includes the preservation of 44.8-acres of open space in two outlots. This application is incomplete for City review and is not currently scheduled for upcoming meetings. 12. 610 Extension Business Park Concept Plan (PID 12-119-23-23-0001) (City File 24-003). United Properties submitted a Concept Plan application to develop a business park at the Oswald Farm, located at 19510 County Road 30. The narrative provided by the applicant describes the proposed business park to range from 864,000 - 1,017,500 square feet on the 76.89-acre parcel. This application is complete for City review and is scheduled for the February 22, 2024, City Council meeting. for City review and is scheduled for the March 28, 2024, regular City Council meeting.