HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-01-02 - Planning Commission Agenda PacketCITY OF CORCORAN
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
7:00 PM — THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 2014
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Open Forum
4. Approval of
a. Agenda
b. *December 5, 2013 Commission Minutes
5. Unfinished Business:
6. New Business
a. *PUBLIC HEARING. Ess Brothers Site Plan Amendment and Conditional Use
Permit Amendment at 9350 CR 19 (PID 07- 119 -23 -43 -0004) (city file 13 -031)
i. Staff Report
ii. Open Public Hearing
iii. Public Comment
iv. Close Hearing
V. Commission Discussion & Recommendation
b. Downtown Design Guidelines Subcommittee
i. Appoint two members to subcommittee
c. Chairperson and Vice - Chairperson Election
i. Elect Chairperson and Vice - Chairperson for 2014
7. Reports:
a. *Planning Project Update
b. Liaison Report (Lynch)
c. Other Business
8. Adjournment
*Literature to review
Material relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet,
located near the entrance to the Council Chambers Meeting Area.
CITY OF CORCORAN
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
7:00 PM — THURSDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2013
MINUTES
Present:
Chair — Dean Jacobs, Vice Chair — Rickey Ravnholdt, Commissioners — Meredith Wu, and Nell
Kadlec. Commissioner Dorothy Theis arrived at 7:05. Absent: Commissioner Darrell Krueger
1. Call to Order — Chair Dean Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:02pm.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Open Forum — None
4. Approval of:
a. Agenda — Motion by Ravnholdt seconded by Kadlec to approve the agenda as
presented. Voting Aye: All (Motion carried 5:0)
b. *November 7, 2013 Commission Minutes — Motion by Ravnholdt seconded by
Wu to approve the minutes as presented. Voting Aye: All (Motion carried 5:0)
5. Unfinished Business — None
6. New Business t*44hh1\'_
a. PUBLIC HEARING. Preliminary PUD Development Plan, Preliminary Plat and
Rezoning to PUD (Planned Unit Development) for U.S. Home Corporation (dba
Lennar) for a residential development called "Ravinia" at Gleason Road and
County Road 101 (PID 36- 119 -23 -13 -0007, 36- 119 -23 -13 -0005, 36- 119- 23 -14-
0005, 36- 119 -23 -14 -0003, 36- 119 -23 -14 -0006, 36- 119 -23 -43 -0001, 36- 119 -23-
41 -0002, 36- 119 -23 -41 -0003, 36- 119 -23 -24 -0001, 36- 119 -23 -24 -0003, 36 -119-
23 -21 -0001) (City File 13 -025)
i. Staff Report — City Planner Kendra Lindahl presented her staff report
ii. Chair Jacobs opened Public Hearing
iii. Public Comment — At total of 13 people spoke at the public hearing;
William E. Mason, owning multiple properties along 66th Ave N and Park
Trail Rd, commented that his Development Agreement for County
Seasons Estates stated he has no financial responsibilities to improve
66th Ave N.
Mavis McGee, 6951 Co Rd 101, expressed concerns regarding access to
her entire property if the sewer line crosses her property. She also
expressed concerns related to flood plain and drainage including
maintenance responsibilities as well as the possibility of Hennepin County
increasing the Right of Way along Co Rd 101 and how this will affect
setbacks, landscaping, and privacy.
Greg Hoglund, 19220 Hackamore Rd, stated concerns that the homes
would be too close to one another and the proposed density is too high.
Mr. Hoglund also exhibited concerns with past and present flooding of his
property due to heavy rains as well as run -off from the existing farm.
Mike Haeger, 19240 Gleason Rd, submitted comments in writing. Mr.
Haeger is not planning to sell his property into development at this time.
His concern is that the current plan set does not show access to his
property and a storm water storage pond is shown on his property. He
would also like to have access to be able to develop his property in the
future.
Denise Tabor, 19450 Gleason Rd, stated that her property gained access
from Gleason Rd and is concerned how the access will be maintained
during and after development.
Jerry Faue, 6627 Co Rd 101 (White Tail Trl.), had questions related to a
timeline of when the private drive: White Tail Trail would be addressed. He
is concerned about construction traffic, heavy equipment damaging the
road. He is also concerned about drainage across the rear of his property.
Alan Schultz, 6519 Hunter La, Enjoys the "rural feel" of the area. He
would like to know how the elevation of the Gleason Rd /66th Ave N
connection will affect traffic noise, light intrusion, and privacy. He would
like the City to minimize the impact of the new roadway. He would also like
to have the trail connection to the new development and the trail along the
south side of Gleason eliminated. Mr. Schultz also asked for a snowmobile
trail connection. He stated that trails on both sides of Gleason Parkway
would not be necessary. He is concerned that the Next gen homes would
be used as rental properties, like "duplexes."
Lee Luebke, 6710 Park Trail Rd, is concerned about drainage onto his
property. He would like to see a traffic signal installed at 66th Ave N and
Co Rd 116. '-4mok.
Bob Schnell, 19210 Hackamore Rd, expressed concern regarding
changes to drainage and run -off. He is also concerned about the
implications of an increase in traffic in the area.
Jim Nichols, 6351 Co Rd 101, expressed his concerns regarding storm
water management and drainage as well as an increase in traffic.
Jackie Hoglund, 19220 Hackamore Rd, asked that as many trees as
possible along her property line be preserved. She also reiterated
concerns of the present drainage/ flooding situation on her property.
Ronald Rudolph, 6536 Hunter La, posed the question as to whom would
be financially responsible for costs related to a retaining wall, fencing, and
landscaping needed along the Gleason Rd extension.
Tim McGee, 6951 Co Rd 101, inquired as to when the plans for new
infrastructure (sewer and water) would be available for review.
iv. Close Hearing - Motion by Ravnholdt seconded by Theis to close the
public hearing. Voting Aye: All (Motion carried 5:0)
City Planner Lindahl and City Administrator Martens responded to
questions and concerns raised during the public comment period.
Infrastructure: The developer is financially responsible for any and all
required infrastructure improvements. The City Attorney will review Mr.
Mason's Development Agreement. The City is currently working on
gaining right -of -entry agreements to gain access to all neighboring
properties affected by the new sewer line. After all agreements are
executed, site surveys will be conducted to determine location and a plan
will be drafted. The goal is to have plans finalized to go out for bids in
March 2014 and start construction in May 2014.
Storm Water Management: The developer cannot increase the impact on
surrounding properties. A majority of the storm water will be stored on -site
and released to the conveyance system gradually to lessen impacts. The
city will have easements to maintain and control all drainage ditches and
conveyance systems.
County Road 101 Improvements: Planner Lindahl stated that Hennepin
County has no global plans on their capital improvements list at this time
for the area north of the proposed Lennar development.
Access: The City engineer will oversee phasing, construction traffic,
property access and road closures, as well as road safety. The City
confirmed that staff is aware of Ms. Tabor's access /easement concerns
and will continue to address them throughout the process. Ms. Lindahl
confirmed that the overall goal with the County would include vacating the
White Tail easements and providing public street access to the affected
properties.
Gleason Rd — 66th Ave N Connection: The connection is required per
the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The trail system and public spaces
were approved as presented by the Parks and Trails Commission. The
trail on 63rd is intended to allow the Hunter neighborhood access to the
public amenities, including trails and parks in the new development. The
snowmobile trail issue will be addressed.
Tree Preservation Plan: Although the City does not have an ordinance
for tree preservation, all tress indicated as preserved on the approved pan
and all trees off -site must be provided protection throughout construction.
Mr. Joe Jablonski and associates, Lennar, gave an informal
presentation, responded to public comment and were available for
questions.
Traffic and Density: Mr. Jablonksi confirmed that the development is on
the low end of required density of 3 -5 lots per acre. The current plan
shows a density of 3.2 lots per acre. The lower side yard setbacks request
is for garage - garage on a very minimal amount of lots that due to shape,
will require less setback.
White Tail Trail: Lennar acknowledges the White Tail Trail concerns and
that planning and prep are needed. The mass grading will happen in a
very controlled manner, overseen by the City Engineer. Gleason Rd will
remain the primary construction entrance, whereas White Tail will be
secondary and only utilized as needed.
Buffers and Storm Water. There is substantial tree preservation to lessen
the impact and buffer the transitions; trees are only being removed where
required for infrastructure stub -outs. Storm water and drainage will be
limited; a bulk of the water will remain on site in storm water ponds. These
ponds will control the rate of flow and may even help to correct some
issues outside the development. Lennar is willing to meet with property
owners to review their concerns and present their plans.
V. Commission Discussion & Recommendation — The Commission
discussed a number of issues and conditions related to the development.
Setbacks and reasoning for reductions was discussed. It was determined
that because these reductions were to be utilized on a minimal basis, they
made sense. Maintenance and style of cul de sacs, including the
proposed islands were addressed. The commission agreed that the island
landscaping should be maintained by and included in the HOA
agreements. The Commission recommended that wherever possible,
trees be preserved and natural buffers be kept to minimize impacts on
neighboring parcels, especially at the Gleason Road extension. Street
lighting was discussed. The City will be meeting with the utility company to
draft a street lighting plan. Also discussed was the amount of garage to
home frontage ratio. The developer has requested flexibility on this. The
Commission determined that this would be agreeable allowing garage
doors were matched to the home by color and style as to minimize their
appearance.
Motion by Ravnholdt seconded by Wu to recommend approval of the
draft preliminary plat resolution, with minor corrections and subject to the
findings and conditions prepared by staff. Voting Aye: All (Motion carried
5:0)
Motion by Ravnholdt seconded by Kadlec to recommend approval of the
Preliminary PUD draft resolution, with modifications and corrections and
subject to the findings and conditions prepared by staff. Voting Aye: All
(Motion carried 5:0) *Note: Votes were cast to make changes to the
Conditions, including: modifications to 8; 10a; 12; and the addition of a
new #21 to require additional buffers.
Motion by Theis seconded by Ravnholdt to recommend approval of the
draft Ordinance Amendment resolution prepared by staff. Voting Aye: All
(Motion carried 5:0) v&'q4mkk,
Motion by Ravnholdt seconded by Theis to recommend approval of the
draft Findings of Fact resolution, subject to the findings and conditions
prepared by staff. Voting Aye: All (Motion carried 5:0)
7. Reports:
a. *Planning Project Update — Information Only
b. Liaison Report — Presented by Mayor Guenthner
c. Other Business — Chair Jacobs and the Commission acknowledged the
expiration of Commissioner Kadlec's term at the end of 2013 and thanked her for
serving on the Planning Commission.
8. Adjournment — Motion by Ravnholdt seconded by Wu to adjourn. Voting Aye: All
(Motion carried 5:0) Meeting adjourned at 11:04pm.
Submitted by INf
Mike Pritchard
Code Compliance Official
•
i
•
•
I_ A
N
From Site to Finish
105 South Fifth Avenue
Suite 513
Minneapolis, MN 55401
TO: Corcoran Planning Commission
FROM: Tracey Kinney, Landform through Kendra Lindahl, Landform
Agenda Item 6_a.
F O R M
Tel: 612 - 252 -9070
Fax: 612 - 252 -9077
www.landform.net
DATE: December 23, 2013 for the January 2, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting
RE: Troy Ess request for Site Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit Amendment
for an accessory building at 9350 County Road (PID # 07- 119 -23 -43 -0004) (City File
No. 13 -031)
120 -DAY REVIEW DEADLINE: March 14, 2014
1. Application Request
The applicant has requested approval of a site plan amendment and conditional use permit
amendment to allow a 5,500 square foot detached accessory building with 20 -foot sidewalls.
2. Context
Background
The applicant relocated the Ess Brothers business onto this parcel from the property they own on
Highway 55. This property was used for contractor operations in the past and has variance
approvals for accessory buildings on site.
Zoning and Land Use
The property is guided Rural Service /Commercial on the 2030 Future Land Use Map. The property
is zoned CR (Rural Commercial).
Surrounding Properties
The surrounding properties are guided Rural Service /Commercial (west, north, east and south) and
Rural /Ag Residential (northwest) on the 2030 Future Land Use Plan and the surrounding properties
are zoned CR Rural Commercial (west, north and east) and TCR Transitional Rural Commercial
(southwest).
Natural Characteristics of the Site
There are no significant natural resources on the property and no trees in the area of the proposed
accessory building.
Landform5m, SensiblyGreensm and Site to Finish$* are service marks of Landform Engineering Company.
•
•
•
•
3. Analysis of Request
Staff has reviewed the application for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance
and City Code requirements, as well as City policies.
A. Level of City Discretion in Decision - Making
The City's discretion in approving or denying a conditional use permit amendment is limited to
whether or not the proposed request meets the standards outlined in the City Code. If it meets
these standards, the City must approve the conditional use permit amendment.
The City's discretion in approving or denying a site plan amendment is limited to whether or not the
proposed request meets the standards outlined in the City Code. If it meets these standards, the
City must approve the site plan amendment.
B. Consistency with Ordinance Standards
The applicant is proposing an accessory building with 20 -foot sidewalls where there is a 13 -foot 6-
inch maximum and to exceed the total building area with 5,500 square feet where there is a 1000 -
square foot maximum. Section 1030.020 Subd. 5(D) allows the landowner to request a conditional
use permit to exceed this height limitation if the following conditions are met:
1. The proposed use shall be in conformance with all City regulations.
Accessory buildings like this are a permitted use, but the conditional use permit is required to
address the larger sidewall height, area of the proposed building and the metal building
materials. The proposed building height is approximately 30 feet. The principal building height is
approximately 15 feet high. The allowed principal building height is 35 feet per Section 1040.090
Subd. 7 "CR" Rural Commercial District. The principal, proposed building and other accessory
buildings are less than allowed. The applicant is a contractor and has indicated that the larger
building height and larger door is needed for equipment. The building is located between other
existing buildings mitigating the height impact to neighboring properties.
The proposed 5,500 square feet accessory building is an addition to a number of accessory
buildings on the property. Section 1030.020 Subd. 4(F) limits accessory buildings to 1,000
square feet; however, Section 1030.020 Subd. 4(D) allows the landowner to request a
conditional use permit to construct more than one detached accessory building with a footprint in
excess of 120 square feet subject to Section 1070.020 (Conditional Use Permits) of the
Corcoran Zoning Ordinance. The larger building is similar in area to the surrounding accessory
buildings on the property and will not increase the impervious surface area. The applicant has
indicated that the larger building area is needed to improve operations.
All setback requirements have been met. The building is approximately 150 feet from the west
property line and County Road 19, 110 feet from the north property line, 495 feet from the west
property line and 420 feet from the south property line.
Ess SPA and CUPA (13 -031)
January 2, 2014
•
•
C
•
There is landscaping indicated, however the new 5,500 square foot building requires a total of 6
trees and 18 shrubs pursuant to Section 1060.70. Staff has included a condition in the approving
resolution that the landowner provide a landscape plan to ensure compliance with the ordinance
standards. It appears that additional landscaping could be provided along CR 19.
There is no wetland impact proposed.
2. A certificate of survey shall be required that identifies all existing structures on site, including
buildings, septic sites and wells. In addition, the survey shall include the proposed structure,
flood plain, wetlands, and any recorded easements.
A certificate of survey has been provided.
3. Applicable criteria as outlined in Section 1070.020 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Corcoran
Zoning Ordinance.
Staff has reviewed the application for compliance with the general conditional use permit
standards in Section 1070.020 and found that those conditions have been met as noted
below. Specifically:
1. Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities
and capital improvement plans.
2. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will promote and
enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, morals or comfort.
3. The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in
the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish
and impair property values within the neighborhood.
4. The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the
district.
5. Adequate public facilities and services are available or can be reasonably provided to
accommodate the proposed use.
6. The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations
of the district in which it is located.
7. The conditional use and site conforms to performance standards as specified by this
Chapter.
Staff finds that the proposed accessory building would meet the conditional use permit
standards in this section. The building is similar to the size and materials of other
Ess SPA and CUPA (13 -031)
January 2, 2014
•
•
•
•
accessory buildings in the area. The building will comply with all other ordinance
standards and will be compatible with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The building materials standards required by this Section have been met.
The applicant is requesting approval to allow the accessory building to be finished with metal
siding and roof. The plans show brown wainscoting and roof, mocha tan (light brown) siding and
white trim.
Section 1060.50 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes building standards for the city and
indicates that all accessory buildings with metal siding and roofing may be allowed by with a
Certificate of Compliance, provided they:
a. meet the standards adopted by the Minnesota State Building Code.
b. have been treated with a factory applied color coating system against any fading or
degradation.
The metal siding and roofing meets both standards. Staff recommends that the metal siding
be approved as part of the CUP rather than requiring a separate certificate of compliance
application and fee. The certificate of compliance is a tool to allow administrative approval of
a metal building if they meet ordinance standards and there is no additional information that
would be gained by requiring the certificate of compliance.
5. The proposed building will be compatible with surrounding land uses.
The City Code allows metal roofing and siding for accessory buildings in nonresidential areas
with a Certificate of Compliance. This property is located in the rural commercial portion of the
city and there are a number nearby properties with similar uses. The applicant has indicated that
the building will be used for distribution of cast iron, steel, and sealing products. The proposed
building would be compatible with other accessory buildings in the area.
The City Engineer and the Elm Creek Watershed District have reviewed the plans and have no
comments.
4. Conclusions
Staff finds that the standards for a conditional use permit amendment (and certificate of compliance)
and site plan amendment have been met or can be addressed with the changes discussed in the
staff report. We have included conditions in the draft resolution to address these issues.
5. Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the draft resolution
approving the conditional use permit amendment and site plan amendment.
Ess SPA and CUPA (13 -031)
January 2, 2014
•
•
•
Attachments
•
1. Draft Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Site Plan Amendment
2. Aerial Location Map
3. Survey dated November 20, 2013
4. Plans and other documentation dated November 20, 2013
Ess SPA and CUPA (13 -031)
January 2, 2014
City of Corcoran
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -xx
Motion By:
Seconded By:
January xx, 2014
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT AND SITE
PLAN AMENDMENT FOR TROY ESS FOR A NEW ACCESSORY BUILDING AT 9350
COUNTY ROAD (PID 07- 119 -23 -43 -0004) CITY FILE (13 -031)
WHEREAS, Troy Ess has requested approval of a conditional use permit amendment and site
plan amendment to allow a new accessory building that exceeds the maximum sidewall height
and area on the existing lot legally described as follows:
All that part of the South 629.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter, which lies West of the
following described line and its extension.
Commencing at the Southwest corner of the said Southeast Quarter; thence on an
assumed bearing of North 89 degrees 50 minutes 29 seconds East along the South line
thereof, a distance of 109.5 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be
described; thence North 00 degrees 09 minutes 31 seconds West to the North line of
said South 629.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter and there terminating except the South
22 rods of the East 16 rods of the West 43 rods of said Southeast, Section 7, Township
119, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the conditional use permit amendment and
site plan amendment at the 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 for a
conditional use permit amendment and site plan amendment, subject to the following conditions:
A conditional use permit amendment and site plan amendment is approved to allow an
accessory building, in accordance with the application received by the City on November 20,
2013, except as amended by this resolution.
2. A certificate of compliance to allow metal roof and siding on this accessory building is also
approved as part of the conditional use permit amendment and site plan amendment.
3. A building permit is required prior to beginning construction.
4. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant /landowner must:
a. Submit a landscape plan showing a total of 6 trees and 18 shrubs. The plans must show
planting details.
b. Record the approving resolution at Hennepin County and provide proof of recording to
the City.
c. The applicant must comply with all conditions in the Metro West Inspections Service's
memo dated November 26, 2013.
Page 1 of 2
City of Corcoran
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
January xx, 2014
RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -xx
d. Electronic files of the plans shall be submitted to the City in AutoCAD format.
e. Submit a financial guarantee for the proposed work as outlined in Section 1070.050,
Subd. 9 of the Zoning Ordinance.
5. Approval shall expire within one year of the date of approval unless the applicant
commences the authorized use and completes the required improvements.
VOTING AYE
❑ Guenthner, Ken
❑ Asleson, Rich
❑ Cossette, Tom
❑ Lynch, Diane
❑ Thomas, Ron
VOTING NAY
❑ Guenthner, Ken
❑ Asleson, Rich
❑ Cossette, Tom
❑ Lynch, Diane
❑ Thomas, Ron
Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared adopted on this xx day of January 2014.
ATTEST:
Jeanie Heinecke — Clerk
Kenneth Guenthner - Mayor
Page 2 of 2
City Seal
Welcome
Results
Links
Tax information
View oblique imagery {Bing maps}
Survey documents
About the data
PID: 07'11923430004
9350 Co Rd No 19
Corcoran: MN 55374
OwnerFfaxpayer
Owner: Ess Real Estate Llc
ESS REAL ESTATE
Taxpayer: LLC
9350 CO RD NO 19
LORETTO MN 55374
Tax District
School Dist: 877
Sewer Dist
Watershed Dist: 0
Parcel
Parcel Area: 7 acres
304,815 sq It
TorrenslAbstract Torrens
Addition: Unplatted 07 119 23
Lot:
Block:
All That Part Of The S
629 Ft Of Se 114
Which Lies W Of Fol
Desc Line And Its Ext
Cam At Sw Cor Of
Metes & Bounds: Said Se 114Th On An
Assumed Brg Of N 89
Deg
Nate: This Is A
Partial Metes &
Bounds Description. v
Ts. n� ms.retii.. Ana ��
Legend
Measure
r.-
NNNIELL. -L-1
JIM
Y�
t
r
w
Map
r�
\�f
lzrj
rj
r t '�- -
HybHybrid Aerial -
.J
r
ore.
�
F
.J
r
Certificate of Survey and Topographic Survey m
asise.h,lea,
J,wren , „,m .,�.,, _ \ P
all .as— m
S� I /e I �.m�e • ^ate .r°mro ux,/ .,m,n / w sz
I LF III m ream .,w,ar _,ar,a�� srm,,, e� >,r., rwro+. caw”. -,aasv
s _ m,w mar e
swam
Fakupo
ari �.,
5 I rP ;rm er 1 I , 9lrrltlip� wr.'S .ess. .rma.m .r ae
E
\ \
w,lw.
.r.„.n .,m,.,<j � o ) .rwom arena„ .ram.,, .,...;
aal. /, ✓�� "�.:
—m ay p,a ' 1 r, .— < - -,.
_ .
rwa. BM I� arena errmmw, ..rw. c >a
3 w .raraw .,arras ° » \\ a °� .,m. .,am.w
v . mien` N
Y .raro. 1 T a 0 a se Fs
Ail
.wraw o'.uaul II i2 /J�el a AREA R9B ACRE5 £
n+rme _
cmr°ne 1 I' 3
1 .anon / ' - °-- _
__.lame,____ _�mna------------
___µl + °a "°"I _._ _____j l..__ ___ __ _._____�_______\' LEGEND
W —: — eanotes rmce .w
v'w✓ \ emoma sfwm a e. she
8 s. mu.,amaa $ F J — — emrcfaa —loran 0.01
Oft ma,d, °9,�rma„ n 1� a a. area brelanf
°ASm .rmae, m $ i5 it denote: aacea
,°, °sr @ I r denotes en ling cwlcur
_ Imv�s L PR Jv tlenofes a sVa( Newfia+
>— <a denotes case (
1 f °n.o ,+ �, Imam •wr.n m m Emafea 1'Zra"e a..
y ..m itg . m •r m °y n denotes ao '1
4 `16 Oafs
I e� "^O a"•\ O denotes O , Pore
° \ wod ..,as ray
e
p
+ °m a M" I• Y em a. a,.-d spot nevafion
wgaallceigailh: 1°lr d p
. rmnw swne„ u+me. m ,Z�6 I iDSf iwn. rn a1a.m r n. r» nn M+Po, n� rM'rw°w r°%ro ]iev N°'p
a" '°+�ra,T
,f0.w 1 "i1 h
°wIa +�uu.A : S R rnm m ,r . wm m i
ria — P
tl
_Q-7
r max; d� I
;;
"M Cesar, yes "I ww �,;.,s
sari. I as a i i:a am „,a COUNTY ROAD NO. 10/ 1
a
rnmabra„aiyermx ewer. qen Raaysyder • eenayaim, mw,umemyuae
fepaf wavpspwW 6YlMd,anda' '��yW' O tlrroba 1l hAfh by 14 sale lfdnplpe
Certificate of Survey and Topographic Survey on part of tM1e Southeast nesota rfer of Section ], TOwnsM1ip nrYObx}awefrt&o]eMyMlama 9WWO . "bad aerandmerradbylclass"0062
119, Range 23, Hennepin County.
Minnesota wnurwuausaesaww wda•y. Ess Brothers & Sons, Inc. Q-500ATES O Bali W55319
yw.arme syy wkanl,e om. pBVJee2 <n]
ReNSatl' /1 .alarm. Oah:
saw. Sods ClreckeeBY: ikx: (169f@9I3.RIS
R.rae ory 11/11/13 M.L.H. 1a =30' P.E.O. Ry aMs
i•.pyaemsalwdswerwla rz 13 -0525
lknrN AyltlS2 pay; II /IS/IJ
.a I H I. H'.B- 1, 8' -0'
FLOOR PLAN
Al SCALE:
NO&1H
x'c'
101 -0'
FOOTING SCHEDULE
MAR —
FI I6 "X11" PAD FQJTMO
n ]o ^r.I B "em woTmo
COLUMN SCHEDULE
MARK SIZEt TYPE
}PLY E %6
ca Ial NLY 2xe
1PLY lxB
E3E4T
E BENT INC. D0�1oiu
2MM COUNTY NOAD,O
CORCOMN MN. fi ]V
VW'B-7.
FEB)OB9.Poi, EAx
Boaannem
z
AI
// RABBLDWN IN
/ FlOER OL4SNMSIIL
2
\Q 4
3X<
/ PREV B)QF R,oS
wDnC
o .1 wsa w c
G�
LOA. P RRWFSIEEL
_
METAL M DRIPEDO EDfrE
p
-
F':
TRVSN BfiARINO
Illl'P'
\\
i
.' f�EL 61
\ d'XM1 "NBFAStIn
\\ LM1'METALFASCIA.
C]EC
FPEE
�'C I 16
IS C
-- C Li
MJ M1
e MR1PVLT VAPoR
F -:
msw
-`
�rn26'
TUROIT d111
� DNOPENMO y
114'0' Y
r
v
-
1Nf 1INER PANEL �
_
TW. WALLS[
Y
u
TER Wf
1�1
n
J
R-E6 BATE INNVL
11L I, $ END WALLS,
O
CI O
iCl iC
T^
- F
DOVBLE^NCLE TRBrI
TB -0'IBOH
M
COMT C PERQ+WiFA
6,
r
yJ
W
M
INI. uNER PnxEL
_
In
x
kA
Fl
C^ eAA-1
Y
4
COLVFdN
O
2ENCNEDUIE
I
I
E'XB " BWKSIRLF
I
f`
F
54'X104' STORAGE
C.IXTN20'lIC
(2Z4'MFNDWAL4S1
I
TRF TED2'Xe'
Etl -0'TRVSSTO t'ONC SUR
k O
W 'n
EXOTREATEDSPLASH
'IMRGO DEPTH
'r
~` M1' BIRW VR CONCRETE SLAB
W REBAR N'EA. WAY
5
11 .UVR
y�
1.
a1VER OWNER6SVP1Y.ffD BASb
IIINFf ..NE
d
6>
Y61. Pb�\V Tt F TBBFAf
"I�
`LkM IEBERT SICCK)CVRE &SEAL'
I
'
3
I
1
CLII'
M
.a I H I. H'.B- 1, 8' -0'
FLOOR PLAN
Al SCALE:
NO&1H
x'c'
101 -0'
FOOTING SCHEDULE
MAR —
FI I6 "X11" PAD FQJTMO
n ]o ^r.I B "em woTmo
COLUMN SCHEDULE
MARK SIZEt TYPE
}PLY E %6
ca Ial NLY 2xe
1PLY lxB
E3E4T
E BENT INC. D0�1oiu
2MM COUNTY NOAD,O
CORCOMN MN. fi ]V
VW'B-7.
FEB)OB9.Poi, EAx
Boaannem
Dwxmssurrubo \/ 7 l\
vn$B mil
L'Xr TREATED
tIOLO WWN I'IYP: �
F
=p-
�= I -1
NEEBCXEOVIS � RBVI$IO \5
z CROSS SECTION
Al SO LE: l2 " -1' -0"
PLOOR PIA\'
I_`I
INSIR.. BAFftPS F¢L
ENN2E lRVSS SPpB
// RABBLDWN IN
/ FlOER OL4SNMSIIL
2
\Q 4
3X<
/ PREV B)QF R,oS
wDnC
o .1 wsa w c
G�
LOA. P RRWFSIEEL
_
METAL M DRIPEDO EDfrE
p
-
F':
TRVSN BfiARINO
Illl'P'
\\
\ d'XM1 "NBFAStIn
\\ LM1'METALFASCIA.
'- 1E195"LVLCONT.W'J.DER
e MR1PVLT VAPoR
1
E9f.A PRPPANELR WALLS15El
BARRIERTIR.
WN.LS .k CE1LDlf
KNOE BRI.(5 � /
TUROIT d111
� DNOPENMO y
114'0' Y
r
v
1Nf 1INER PANEL �
a
TW. WALLS[
Y
u
TER Wf
1�1
n
R.E
IEE SEWWICNE.DI .
R-E6 BATE INNVL
11L I, $ END WALLS,
O
T^
- F
DOVBLE^NCLE TRBrI
TB -0'IBOH
M
COMT C PERQ+WiFA
6,
r
W
M
INI. uNER PnxEL
In
x
kA
C^ eAA-1
Y
COLVFdN
O
2ENCNEDUIE
E'XB " BWKSIRLF
F
C.IXTN20'lIC
(2Z4'MFNDWAL4S1
TRF TED2'Xe'
k O
W 'n
EXOTREATEDSPLASH
'IMRGO DEPTH
'r
W REBAR N'EA. WAY
11 .UVR
\'OYES:
1.
Dwxmssurrubo \/ 7 l\
vn$B mil
L'Xr TREATED
tIOLO WWN I'IYP: �
F
=p-
�= I -1
NEEBCXEOVIS � RBVI$IO \5
z CROSS SECTION
Al SO LE: l2 " -1' -0"
PLOOR PIA\'
I_`I
—WE VENT
i OA. FlIOPANELLLRVOFSTEEL
1 WEST ELEVATION
A2 SCALE: 1/6' =1' -0"
e1>--
Rd`c:Q VEdtf
d94'A. 15PPAN9.Q R WFSIID.
d9 fN.IRPPANELQ WN.I.SI£CI.
z SOUTH ELEVATION
TRU 11 tlF -sRIW -
TO.W_WWW-`
I16' -0'Y
( i)
E3EgT
EBERTINC. Ve"ox
2ME5 CWMY ROABIO
CORWMM MN, fi tff
pWH9B.Teu
peT aRa.9sst PAx
800 -89ABW
L
z
z
0
H
O�
V` t O
W lT a
1 _ I REVtsloxE L..1
ELRVnnoNs
SIIEE/f /�
AY
metal sales
manufacturing corporation
1
_
23350 CouNry Rono 10
/
98. 784 - FAX X (76
(800) 627. 1669 • (763) 498. 7844 •FAX (763) 498. 9951
669 - (76
EBE47 Email gebert@ebertconst.com • www.ebertconst.com
UCTICN
LIGHT GAUGE PRODUCT COLORS
Brite White (39) White (30) Red (24) Patriot Red (73)
Burgundy (15) Goldenrod (48) Brown (12) Mocha Tan (22)
7
Burnished Slate (49) Light Stone (63) Forest Green (26) Taupe (74)
Ash Grey (25) Zinc Grey (29) Charcoal (17) Black (06)
FILE COP
Hawaiian Blue (70) Ocean Blue (35) Dark Blue (21)
Color selections are close representations but are limited by processing and viewing conditions. Actual samples are available by request.
All colors provided in MS Color6t30 coating system. Trim is available in all colors. All colors carry a 30 -year limited point warranty.
9..
3/4 "1--
36"
Classic Rib
5/6" t
36"
Pro Panel II®
"The Innovators"
• Job Pack
• Custom Cut
• Jobsite Delivery
• Full Line of Accessories
• Custom Accessories Available
MS(6G) /2002
jr qen
CITY OF ` ,ORCORAN
8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340
763.420.2288 — Office 763.420.6056 — Fax
E -mail - general aC)ci.corcoran.mn.us / Web Site - www.ci.corcoran.mmus
MEMO
Meeting Date: January 2, 2014
To: Planning Commission
From: Brad Martens, City Administrator
Re: Downtown Design Guidelines Subcommittee
On September 26, 2013 the City Council approved dedicating funds to update the Downtown
Design Guidelines. On December 12, 2013 the City Council further discussed the item and
directed staff to work to form a subcommittee involving the following members:
• City Council: Two members
• Planning Commission: Two members
• Parks and Trails Commission: Two members
• General public: Two members
In order to fill the two open spots from the Planning Commission it is requested that a motion be
made and approved appointing two members to this subcommittee. A memo from Kendra
Lindahl is attached describing the work required by the subcommittee.
Planning Commission action:
Consider a motion to appoint two members to the Downtown Design Guideline Subcommittee
Attachment:
1. September 16, 2013 Memo from Kendra Lindahl
Agenda Item
L A N D F 0 R M
From Site to Finish
105 South Fifth Avenue
Suite 513
Minneapolis, MN 55401
TO: Corcoran City Council
FROM: Kendra Lindahl, Landform
Tel: 612- 252 -9070
Fax: 612 - 252 -9077
www.landform.net
DATE: September 16, 2013 for the September 26, 2013 City Council Meeting
RE: Work Plan for Updating Appendix A of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the Southeast
District Plan and Design Guidelines (which include the Downtown Illustrative Plan and
Downtown Design Guidelines)
60 -DAY REVIEW DEADLINE: NA
Summary
As the City Council has been discussing the potential TIF planning projects, the downtown area has
been the focus. Although many different items are being discussed, the overarching theme has
been to encourage development, redevelopment or expansion of businesses in Corcoran.
When the 2002 Comprehensive Plan was completed, the development of Downtown Corcoran was
a priority. In 2003 and 2004, as part of the Comprehensive Plan implementation, the City of
Corcoran developed Design Guidelines for different areas of the City. These guidelines were the
result of significant public input and work from Commissions and Council. The guidelines were
adopted as Appendix A of the Zoning Ordinance.
When the Zoning Ordinance was updated in 2011, the Design Guidelines were not included in the
update and remain as adopted in 2004. However, in 2012 the Planning Commission identified
update of these guidelines as a priority, as did the City Council.
The City Council directed staff to prepare a work plan to update the Southeast District Guidelines
and Plan in Appendix A. The other districts (Northeast and Southwest would be updated at a later
date).
Work Plan
The Council has identified an update to the downtown design guidelines as a priority for 2013, but
because of current budget issues, the City Administrator has asked that the work be committed this
year, but work delayed until 2014.
Our proposed work plan includes preparation of a new downtown master plan and associated
design guidelines in conjunction with the transportation planning efforts. Our work includes meetings
with the engineering team, City Staff, and subcommittee (consisting of a 6 -8 member committee of
commissioners, council members and citizens) and meetings with the Planning Commission and
City Council. We would ask the Council to appoint these representatives to a subcommittee that
Landforms, SensiblyGreen and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.
n
M
would be part of the planning process. Our work plan anticipates a 4 month process kicking off in
January. We would expect 2 subcommittee meetings prior to the public hearing process.
Each task is outlined below with an estimated number of anticipated meetings and task deliverables.
For clarity purposes we have divided this work into 4 major tasks (although some tasks will overlap):
Project Management and Communication:
Maintaining communication with City Staff to ensure that meeting notices are published and
that the project remains on schedule is critical. We will:
a) Conduct a kickoff meeting and status meetings with City Staff to track the planning
process, review deliverables, and coordinate and manage the project work effort.
b) Prepare a project approval schedule which will be reviewed and approved at the kickoff
meeting.
2. Review of Previous Work and Assessment:
We will analyze the community to build a framework for Southeast District (including
Downtown) Master Plan and Draft Design Guidelines. By holding kick -off meetings early in
the process, we will be able to define goals and objectives in concert with the Transportation
Plan process. The main goal of this task is to develop design principles that will provide
guidance for the development of the Downtown Master Plan and Design Guidelines. We will:
a) Gather remaining items and review existing background information relevant to the
project from the City.
b) Analyze Downtown Master Plan and Design Guidelines in relation to the Comprehensive
Plan and Zoning ordinance for consistency.
c) Meeting #1 with the Subcommittee to solidify the goals and objectives and identify key
issues, strengths, and weakness of the current Downtown Master Plan and Design
Guidelines.
3. Develop Southeast District (including Downtown) Master Plan and Design Guidelines:
The Master Plan and Design Guidelines should be a readable and usable document. We will
develop the plan based on the principals, information gathered and feedback received.
a) Work with the Engineering Team to coordinate and integrate the Draft Transportation
Plan with Draft Downtown Master Plan.
b) Prepare the Draft Downtown Master Plan with the Draft Transportation Plan that
responds to information gathered and feedback received and aligns with the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
c) Prepare Draft of Design Guideline text that realizes and details the principals espoused in
the Downtown Master Plan.
d) Prepare associated graphics for the Downtown Master Plan and Design Guidelines.
e) Meeting #2 with Subcommittee to review Draft Downtown Master Plan and Draft Design
Guidelines.
f) Make one comprehensive edit to the Draft Downtown Master Plan and Draft Design
Guidelines based on Planning Commission and City Council and public input.
g) Make minor modifications to the Draft Downtown Master Plan and Design Guidelines
after the Council and Planning Commission's public hearing, but prior to approval by the
City for final distribution.
Design Guidelines
September 26, 2013
D
h) Make minor modifications to the Final Downtown Master Plan and Final Design
Guidelines based on comments.
n
4. Public Engagement and Review Process:
Landform will:
a) Establish a Subcommittee to ensure that the deliverables meet the community's needs.
b) Lead one (1) kickoff meeting with City Staff and the Engineering Team to review the
project outline and solidify the goals of the Downtown Master Plan process.
c) Lead two (2) Subcommittee meetings /workshops at key junctures to gain input.
d) Attend one (1) Planning Commission meeting and two (2) City Council meetings to
present the draft and final version of the Downtown Master Plan and Design Guidelines.
Our work plan shows the tasks and the estimated time required for each, based on previous
discussions and the City TIF budget:
Task 1) Project Management and Communication
$1,050
Task 2) Review of Previous Work and Assessment
$3,600
Task 3) Develop Master Plan and Design Guidelines
$13,500
Task 4) Public Engagement and Review Process
$1,850
Total Fee:
$20,000
Additional meetings or expansion of the scope of work will require additional services and will be
billed at our hourly rate.
2. Action
Direct staff to begin this work in January 2014.
Design Guidelines
September 26, 2013
jr qen
CITY OF ` ,ORCORAN
8200 County Road 116, Corcoran, MN 55340
763.420.2288 — Office 763.420.6056 — Fax
E -mail - general aC)ci.corcoran.mn.us / Web Site - www.ci.corcoran.mmus
MEMO
Meeting Date: January 2, 2014
To: Planning Commission
From: Brad Martens, City Administrator
Re: Chairperson and Vice - Chairperson Election
Annually the Planning Commission must elect a Chairperson from among its appointed members
to run its meetings. In addition, the Planning Commission has created the position of Vice -
Chairperson to fill the role of Chairperson in his /her absence. Both of these positions are for a
term of one year.
Although the City Code states that the commission shall "elect" a chairperson, it does not define
how that process happens. Staff recommends the Planning Commission use the motion, second,
and vote process to select both the Chairperson and Vice - Chairperson.
Attachment:
N/A
Agenda Item
L A N D F O R M
From Site to Finish •
105 South Fifth Street,
MEMORANDUM Suite 513
Minneapolis, MN 55401
DATE December 17, 2013
TO Brad Martens
cc City Council, Planning Commission, Parks & Trails Commission
FROM Kendra Lindahl, City Planner
RE Active Corcoran Planning Applications
The following is a summary of project status for current, active projects:
•
• •
Tel: 612 - 252 -9070
Fax: 612 - 252 -9077
www.landform.net
1. Armbruster Topography and Wetland Waiver (city file no. 09 -011). An application has been
received for a waiver from the topography and wetland requirements and was reviewed by the City
Council on November 23, 2009. The City Council expressed concerns about the concept and directed
the applicant to revise the concept plan. The applicant submitted a letter extending the review period
until January 1, 2014. Staff recommends that no further extensions be provided.
2. Lennar Rezoning, Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Development Plan for "Ravinia" (City
file 13 -025) (related files are infrastructure design files 13 -026, -027 and -028). The application is
scheduled for Parks Commission review on November 19th, a public hearing at the December 5th
Planning Commission meeting and Council action on December 23rd
3. Ess Brothers Site Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit Amendment for an accessory
building at 9350 County Road (PID # 07- 119 -23 -43 -0004) (City File No. 13 -031) The applicant is
requesting approval for a 5,500 square feet detached, accessory building with 20 -foot sidewalls. This
item will be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a January 2nd Public Hearing and by the City
Council on January 23rd
Also, there are a number of projects that have been approved, but are still not filed and closed out:
1. Corcoran Business Park (city file 06 -005). The City Council granted a one year extension to the
final plat approval, which expired on April 12, 2011. Staff has spoken to the applicant and is still
working to close out this project.
2. Park Place Storage After- the -Fact Extension of Approvals (city file no. 10 -008). On September
23, 2010, the City Council approved a site plan and conditional use permit amendment for Park Place
Storage to construct the 18th and final mini - storage building on that site. The approvals expired on
September 23, 2011. The conditions have been met and a building permit was issued in September.
The applicant has completed most of the site work with final items to be completed and final inspection
this spring.
3. Hope Ministries Conditional Use Permit for Cemetery and Vacation of Drainage 8r Utility
Easement at 19951 Oswald Farm Road (city file 12 -002). Hope Ministries has submitted a request
for a conditional use permit to allow a cemetery west of the existing church. The application was
approved by the City Council on March 22nd and site work had begun. The letter of credit for site
improvements has been released but we are holding the escrow pending completion of the approved
landscaping.
4. Schmid's Hidden Valley 2 "d Addition Topography /Wetland Waiver, Preliminary Plat and Final
Plat at 21820 Oakdale Drive (PID 04- 119 -23 -34 -0007, 04- 119 -23 -42 -0002 and 04- 119 -23 -42 -0003)
Landform , SensiblyGreen and Site to Finish® are registered service marks of Landform Professional Services, LLC.
1
(City File No. 12 -016). The application for topography and wetland delineation waiver was approved
at the September 27th Council meeting. The preliminary plat and final plat were approved by the City
Council on April 25th. The applicant requested a modification to one condition and the change was
approved by the City Council on December 12th. The applicant may now proceed to record the plat.
5. Site Plan and Variance for Maple Hill Estates Community Center) (City File 12 -022). The
landowner and the City received a CDBG grant to construct a new community center on land north of
the manufactured home park that is also owned by the park owner. This new building is in the process
of being designed. The building is likely to straddle a lot line or at minimum require a setback
variance. The survey has been completed and the site plan is currently being prepared. This item
was approved by the City Council on April 25th. The City Administrator is working on this project.
6. Heinz Second Addition Preliminary and Final Plat at 20801 CR 117 (03- 119 -23 -14 -0002) (City file
13 -003). A wetland and topographic waiver was approved on January 24th. This item was approved
by the City Council action on April 25th. The applicant is working on complying with approval
conditions so that they can get the final plat mylar signed and recorded. The applicant has site work
to complete and then the escrow can be refunded.
7. Lano Equipment at 23580 Highway 55 Site Plan Amendment for Cold Storage. (31- 119- 23 -34-
0007) (13 -006). This item was approved by the City Council on July 11th. The building permit has
been issued and staff will work with the applicant to close out the escrow.
8. Great River Energy Administrative Permit and Site Plan Modification for replacing tower at 7251
CR 116 (26- 119 -23 -41 -0001) (city file 13 -008). This project was administratively approved.
9. Triden Ridge Estates Second Addition Preliminary Plat and Final Plat at 23425 CR 117 (city file
13 -019). The landowner received a wetland delineation and topography waiver on June 27th. The
application was reviewed by Parks Commission and Planning Commission. The City Council tabled
their review at the October 24th meeting pending additional information from staff regarding the viability
of the proposed horseback trail and questions about the interpretation of the park dedication policy.
The Council approved this item at the November 25th meeting.
10. Meadow Creek Estates 2nd Addition Preliminary Plat, Final Plat and Easement Vacation (PID 06-
119 -23 -32 -0005 and 06- 119 -23 -34 -0003) (City file 13 -020). This plat was approved by the City
Council on October 24th. The mylars have been signed and released for filing. Staff with work with the
applicant to address any outstanding issues and close out the file /refund the escrow.
11. Ess Addition (city files 05 -017, 08 -003 and 12 -024). The City Council granted an after - the -fact
extension for this final plat at their November 29, 2012 meeting and a second extension at the
November 25, 2013 meeting. The applicant is now working to file the required documents to close out
this file. The approvals for this project expire on December 29, 2013. The applicant's attorney
indicates that they would like to have the mylars signed on December 23rd so they can record the
documents on December 26tH
12. City- initiated Ordinance Amendment regarding Density (city file 13 -021). This item was revised
by the Planning Commission review on October 3rd and the City Council on October 24th. The City
Council tabled the item and asked staff to look at additional options. The Council approved this item at
the November 25th meeting.
13. Rockford School District Ballfield Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit (and possible variance)
(city file 13 -023). Staff received an incomplete application last week and is working with the applicant
to complete the missing items to allow for an expedited review process for the new varsity baseball
field project. The Parks Commission reviewed this at their meeting on October 15th and it is tentatively
scheduled for a public hearing at the Planning Commission on November 7th and Council action on
November 25tH
14. Schendel Pre - Sketch Plan (City File 13 -030). The developer requested a discussion with the City
Council regarding 03.3 acre Schendel property located north of County Road 10 and west of County
Road 116. The Council reviewed this item and provided feedback at the December 12th meeting. The
development team and City staff will review options.
MEMORANDUM
Finally, there are a few projects that have not yet been started but have been identified as action items or
future projects:
Sign Ordinance Update. At the April 25th Council meeting, the City reviewed a request for the city to
initiate a sign ordinance update. Specifically, they requested that the City review the ordinance
standards relating to sign area, sign height and internal illumination and, because this is a city -wide
issue, that the ordinance update be completed by the City out of the City funds. The Council
discussed the issue and directed staff to bring a proposal back at a later date because the Council felt
that this was a significant undertaking that would involve much more than this one issue. We will work
with the City Administrator to determine the appropriate meeting to have this considered.
2. Design Guideline Update for Southeast District /Downtown. The Council approved a Landform
proposal to update the existing design guidelines for this area. The design guidelines are adopted as
part of the Zoning Ordinance and will be enforced as new development is proposed, consequently, the
City Council wishes to revisit that planning effort to ensure it is still consistent with the City's goals.
The original proposal anticipated a January 2014 kickoff and use of an 8 -10 person subcommittee.
Prior to staff beginning this work, the Council will need to appoint this subcommittee.
MEMORANDUM