##VIDEO ID:YFx7KSQG4YM## e the chasa Planning Commission Wednesday September 11 2024 Planning Commission meeting Liz would you make a rooll here here cell here here Herber here here cie herey and chairperson Brett here with that we'll move right into a in the agenda I'll make a motion to adopt the agenda is there a second second all those in favor opposed motion carries um then we'll go to a visitor presentation and so this will be anyone in the crowd that would like to speak to the Planning Commission about something not on the agenda tonight so any other issues grievances anybody online Liz no okay so then we'll move on to approving the previous meeting minutes uh I'll make a motion to approve those minutes second second by Kerber all those in favor I I opposed motion carries we have no consent items tonight so we'll go to action items and then I'll just point out here so our first action item is postponed technically so if someone is in the crowd here for the cloud headquarters the large Data Center building that is not going to be discussed tonight just a let you know there's anyone here by mistake okay with that we'll move on to action item 7B public hearing to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for a dog groomer at 1152 Street East River Valley groomers pc-2 24-14 Liz Can you present please chairperson brass and members of the Planning Commission uh we have a conditional use permit request in front of us this evening for the property at 1152 Street East uh being proposed by River Valley groomers so the sighten question is highlighted in blue on this aerial exhibit it might be a little bit hard to uh read that blue outline but I will Circle it with my cursor here um the site is located in downtown chasa uh so on the southern portion of the city um Highway 41 um on its eastern side um Second Street East um intersects with Highway 41 so the site in question is on that east side of Highway 41 and what we know as kind of the downtown commercial area of the city uh so the building that they're looking at to locate the dog groming business is um located in downtown so the Zoning for specifically an area of downtown where this site is located is zoned downtown historic commercial what is known as our C3 zoning District um there's a list of permitted and uh conditional uses that are listed within that zoning District uh and one of those conditional uses is small domestic animal such as dogs and cats grooming service indoor pet shop um so being that it's listed as a conditional use in this zoning District they are um any user that would like to operate this type of use does have to obtain a conditional use permit with the city so that's why they're going through this request right now and why they're in front of you this evening every cup um requires a public hearing with it as well uh so the current request again they are asking for approval of a conditional use permit to operate a dog grooming business at the location known as 115 2nd Street East uh just a few details of the specific operation um uh that's uh in the request this evening is the space or building that they're locating in is a multi-tenant space so they will be taking up one of uh the spaces within that building um there is a total of three tenant spaces so this would fill out uh the building uh today so it's roughly 2200 square feet in size um would be the space that they are uh locating in um they will be open every day from 9: a to 7:00 p.m. and they will offer bathing grooming and nail trimming um for uh dogs that get brought in and they will have a total of three stations within their tenant space for that use itself um they will also have a total of five employees um that will work there not all at the same time uh but during the open hours of the uh operation they do not plan to have any overnight pet stays uh with their operation so they'll only have short holding periods for if dogs um are waiting to be picked up by their owners um parking will be provided provided via uh public parking outside of the building both on street and in a public lot behind the building um and based on what their need is with their employees and the amount of uh customers that come in they'll need roughly about five stalls at any peak time so nothing super um demanding and again that's that's only when um they're at their peak times um so the space again is highlighted on this screen the purple areas are defining kind of those near vicinity parking areas for the tenant space uh so again the public parking lot um is located directly behind uh this building and there's a number of spots uh behind there um as well as uh stalls right in front of the building on Second Street East and uh directly across the street so um that gives uh customers the ability to just walk right into the the tenant space uh from where they Park so there's a uh list of criteria that's looked at for a conditional use permit request um I'm only going to get into a few of them this evening um but the other ones are spelled out within the report if anyone wants to fully delve into those um the ones in question relate to items C and D um item C uh refers to the establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and Improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district um so getting to that evaluation all of the operations with this use would happen Indo so there's nothing that's going to um be located outside of um the space itself sell that could um in some way impede or um uh have an impact on the normal uh orderly development around the uh this tenant space um the staff on site would be taking care of the dogs that do come in for um any of the grooming business uh needs um so they will have uh supervision at all times um in addition to uh the owners of those stocks uh that bring bring them men so there won't be any loose dogs around um and then just to note that this use is not an atypical use for this area in fact there's two other uh animal type uses within kind of the uh downtown area uh which are mainly ve veterinarian uh clinics um so a dog grooming business will be a nice supplement to those uh two businesses but also be something that is not again atypical for the area um in regards to d uh adequate utilities access roads drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided uh so they are locating into an existing space so they're not proposing any new utilities or building additions or alterations um with their use they're simply just um occupying a tenant space within an existing building um because of the change of use uh within this building um like any business they'll have to uh work with met counil to determine if there's any additional sack charges uh required for this type of use um and that basically means if if they're exceeding the water or sewer usage uh that's already applied at that site they'll they'll have to U pay for additional uh charges to connect into the regional system um access to parking is provided via public parking um as I noted before um and this layout and um parking provision again is not an atypical setup in downtown um so a lot of businesses rely on public parking within downtown um so there it doesn't appear to be any concern with what's provided near the site and what they're able to access and they have uh no con concerns with um how much the demand that they're getting from their operation and being able to supplement that with public parking um at most again they'll have maybe up to six people in the building but that is um on the peak side of things um and the applicant stated that most of the time the pet owners drop off their pets so the need for long-term parking or staying in their parking space for a long period of time is not as common um and again again the parking proposed and the provision that's uh available to the site is not um different or uh demanding something uh atypical to the area and what the other businesses um uh demand as well so staff does not see an issue with uh that setup uh so with that um we are asking you to make a motion this evening to recommend approval of the conditional use permit to operate a dog rooming use at 115 2nd Street East and then subject to the conditions that are laid out in the staff report and then if this were to move forward this evening uh the city council date would be the following Monday on September 16th to review thisiss does any member have any questions for City staff is the building currently empty vacant nope so it currently has two other tenants in there there's a photography studio and then a printing press or uh printing type user so this would fill out the building okay is the only access from the Second Street there's not an access behind the building correct a customer access yeah yeah the front door would face Second Street East um I believe they do have a rear access in the back just for employees no no access in the back the alleyway sorry this a Max of eight kennels for holding pets before or after they're being groomed is that correct just eight and no plans to get any larger than that okay shaking their heads no okay any want to have any further with that I will make a motion to recommend approval wa there's a public hearing oh sorry just jumping right ahead here I will open up the public hearing at 7:12 if anyone like to step forward to the mission and have any thoughts or anything you like to say step forward no one online online you can raise your hand and we will call on you not seeing anyone will close the public hearing also at 7:12 and bring it back to commission again and with that I will make a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit to operate a dog grooming business at 1 15 Second Street subject to the following seven conditions there second second commiss aen all those in favor I oppos motion carries uh thank you and then with that Liz if you could move on to the last item tonight thank you you're welcome you're welcome thank you commissioner or chairperson brass and Planning Commission members uh we have another request this evening for a concept plan uh specifically for the property that we're noting as the engelen proper property specifically located at 4460 Spring Creek Drive and this is being proposed by py homes so the site in question is again highlighted in blue on this aerial exhibit um and where I'm circling my cursor uh the site is located on the Southwest edge of this of the city of chasa so it does border with the city of Carver on its Southern edge off of Spring Creek Drive um the major roadways around here are chasa Boulevard or otherwise known as County Road 61 uh which blanks the north side of this property and then Highway 212 which blanks the North Western portion of the property um and then Spring Creek Drive uh about the southern edge of the property and uh the properties that are south of that road are within the city of Carver uh so just to give people an idea of what the review process looks like and um what the next subsequent uh steps look like for this proposal the city of chasa has a three-step review process we're at the first initial step in the review which is the concept plan um this is more of a highlevel review and overview of the project um in where uh Planning Commission and city council identify um and even staff identify certain things to work on as they move forward in the process each of these steps do go to the city's Planning Commission and city council um again the concept that we're in right now is more of that General overview and absorption of feedback from um all constituents um this exhibit show show kind of the adjoining uses around the concept plan area uh the concept plan area is highlighted in kind of an orange yellow tone and centered on this aerial exhibit um some of the adjoining uses um are um the friends and worm property which came in for uh previous approvals for a subdivision on their property for 162 single family lots um that is also um the property that is immediately east of this property that's owned by the friends family and this is about a 2 acre personal adjacent um so we're again on the Southwest edge of the city um of chasa and then the city of Carver is directly south of the subject area um the developer as required uh for the city's process um needs to conduct a neighborhood meeting before they submit an uh concept plan to the city uh they did conduct that on July 11th of this year and they did have a number of residents attend that meeting um and Ju Just to briefly uh go over some of the questions and concerns that were raised from residents at that meeting um those pertain to the overall site layout of the project um and I know there was a note specifically about the homes um facing spring Creek Drive um there was a a mixed uh review of that from uh neighbors um also concerned with the proposed density uh tree preservation Highway noise uh traffic increases and questions about construction traffic in Access um and then just earlier uh this year in June is when that uh subdivision or preliminary plat and re zoning was approved for the high point Vistas project directly north and across County Road 61 so in terms of existing conditions of the site in question this evening um so it's owned by the England family um it is composed of approximately 18 Acres they fall just below that 18 acre U Mark in area it's currently used as um uh a residential use with um Agricultural and outbuildings on the site and you can see the sprinkling of out buildings um throughout the site there uh but the majority um of the property is used for that agricultural use um as I noted before the friends property um is this two acre parcel immediately east of the property this is not a part of this concept plan review however you will see um a ghost layout for this property in terms of access um Spring Creek Drive um is basically centered on that border of city of chasa and city of Carver um however uh most of this uh does reside in the city of Carver uh So currently and proposed uh the project will be uh accessing off of Spring Creek Drive um there's a current driveway to the residents out there today um and a part of this concept proposal they proposing two points of access on this public Street and then also just want to note in in terms of existing conditions that uh utilities to the site from chasa are not readily available um and I will show uh an exhibit later on in terms of where those uh stand today so the current request again is for a concept plan for a 49 lot detached single family subdivision um in terms of how that fits into the zoning and comprehensive plan guidance out here uh the site is currently in a open zoning District so it's basic basically a holding zone until it develops and gets rezoned into a district that is um consistent with the comprehensive plan the comprehensive the plan uh guides this site as low density residential um and an excerpt from our comp plan is shown as an image here um basically low density residential allows the property to have a density range between two to five dwelling units per net acre um so how this plan um fits into that um they are proposing a 3.1 dwelling unit per net acre Proposal with um what's shown on the concept plan so it's within that threshold that is Guided by the comprehensive plan uh the concept plan is shown on this slide here um again there's a total of 49 Lots um and they're about 60 feet in width for a majority of these uh there are a few that definitely exceed that with uh for the ones that are on the corners um 19 of those lots will front on Spring Creek Drive we proposing to front on Spring Creek Drive um and then the remaining would come off of the internal Street network uh there are two access points proposed on Spring Creek Drive one that would line up with Birch Street uh to the South and then additional access um to the West uh to come off on Spring freak Drive um one of the questions that we do have from a layout standpoint is whether this needs to be um uh accessed onto Spring Creek Drive um I think further evaluation um to look into cue stacking uh this street is uh one of the uh conditions of approval laid out by staff um they are also showing just a a ghost layout for the friends property um so access to the Friends property would have to come through this development and that's why they're showing um this ghost layout but again just to mention that the concept plan does not include um the approval of this ghost layout at the time that the friends property and family want to move forward with a development plan they would have to go through their own approvals on that but since access is is pretty dependent um going through uh the Anglin property that's why they need to show um how access can be achieved um in terms of setbacks that are proposed um they are proposing a 25 foot front setback um 7 and 1/2 foot side setback for a corner lot on on its side it would meet a 20 foot setback and then a rear setback of 20 feet um in terms of how this compares to other uh subdivisions we've done in the city these are the same setbacks that have been applied in Rivertown Heights which is the DR Horton um project uh just to the north of this property in the southwest area so the setbacks proposed are not different from what we've seen before um this screen shows the housing product that they are proposing on the top um portion of the slide so they are proposing twostory uh homes um on 6 foot wide Lots um and they will range anywhere from two car to three car garages and then between a threshhold of 2,000 to 3,000 square feet in um uh total square footage um and I just wanted to show how the product that they're proposing um looks compared to what's on the south side of Spring Creek Drive and Carver um these are the existing homes that are located south of this site um and the lots that these are located on are 50 to 55 foot wide Lots um as I mentioned before with utilities they are not readily available at this time um for this site um where utility stub off today um water um is on the North side um near founders path where Rivertown Heights is so this is the Rivertown Heights development I'm circling here that's where water steps off today and then sewer is located um uh east of this site um south of chasa Boulevard County Road 61 um with high point Vistas getting their pre- plat approval um they are planning to extend utilities down chasa Boulevard and down uh the proposed right of way for Savannah Way um so they will be at the intersection of Savannah way and County Road 61 so in a readily available location um however um they're still working through um their plans um and their timeline uh of when that's going to happen but um to make utilities readily available for this site they are kind of dependent on that development happening first um if they don't want to wait for Point Vistas uh it would come at the cost of them extending from where the utilities exist today um another piece uh to talk about um and this is more set up as a a discussion Point um for the Planning Commission is related to um park park space or usable space for the development uh Parkland dedication um the comprehensive plan does not not guide this area as a neighborhood or public park space um however um it is worth noting that the site itself is located more than a half a mile or up to a mile away from um nearby park facilities um and some that uh would require Crossing some major streets um so it is kind of isolated in this location in terms of having um that space for uh the residents of this development um so we are asking you as a discussion item this evening uh to talk about this further in terms of uh the appropriateness of uh looking at uh or having the developer further evaluate um a usable open space or a Tot Lot within um their actual project area um and adding it as the condition of approval um and I note that because it's not an ordinance requirement it's not a comprehensive plan um identified piece therefore um you know through this PUD or PRD process um at the discretion of uh the Planning Commission and Council you can add a condition of approval to further evaluate that or um uh require that in the development um and just for precedent sake um this piece is not um something that we haven't seen before uh a previous development uh which was a town home development um on the north side of Clover Ridge uh just outside the borders of the Clover Ridge Neighborhood um when that came through the approval process um it was uh noted and conditioned during the Planning Commission and Council to provide a Tot Lot um so it it has been a request before um um so it wouldn't be out of the box necessarily so just to reiterate a couple things that I kind of already went through and things to work on for uh preliminary um and actually one thing that I haven't yet but the first item on here um with uh the location um of this site and uh how the uh rest of the development has uh been happening in Southwest chased has been predominant predominantly detached single family homes um we did uh put as a condition of approval um and have been um encouraging the developer to evaluate maybe introducing another housing uh product within this development in addition to the detached single family um such as a town town home product or a villa product um much like what was done in Brooks Bridge which was another py uh development um this one was a mix of row homes and Villas within a pretty similar scaled site um and the reason for uh this uh condition or further evaluation um at least from staff standpoint is there is an opportunity here to provide for uh more diversity in the housing um products and price points uh within the city um and this um again is that time to uh further evaluate that and see if there's an opportunity to again provide that variety uh within this area another thing to work on um again which we've already iterated is uh the West access shown onto Spring Creek Drive and whether or not that can be converted into a culdesac um working on uh the utility access and hookups and how that's going to be done um providing sidewalks on both sides of the street which is a um uh requirement SL policy of the city in any new development um and then with the site being flanked by Major roadways on the North and uh Northwest portions of the site screening will be a a big component um of those edges um so they'll have to work on a landscape plan as a part of their preliminary um moving forward um that one kind of goes in tandem with um a noise study um which mindat typically requires along those major roadways um and again is something that was done on the high point vist site too is just to understand um how to mitigate noise from the adjoining roadways major roadways um and how screening and other methods can help to mitigate um and minda will probably have um additional ideas towards that front but um again that's a study that they'll need to put together for preliminary um so in conclusion um with the conditions applied and working through those uh we are asking you to make a motion to recommend approval of the cona plan for the engelin property and then based on the conditions that are laid out in the staff report um if this item were to move forward this evening it would also be look at at the following Council date of Monday September 16th 7 p.m. in this room as well Liz um bring it back to commission we'll discuss first and although it's not a public hearing on this one I will open it up to the to the visitors here tonight um so a quick question in regards to utilities obviously they're up quite a wayte from there just remind me are they not able because it's chasa development not able to tap Carver utilities obviously there's utilities across the street because it's located within the city of CHA yeahor okay so potentially with whatever comes out of this meeting tonight conditions we may or may not and put it on to this in addition they're lesser I take the financial burden of extending those utilities they're probably in a waiting period for a while until something moves forward okay um I will let I have some questions for the applicant and and whatnot and want to have people come for but let any other members of the commission ask questions St yeah they're between 500 to 600,000 is what they've told us have we have we reached a spot in our economy now that's let the starter home starting seem that way is that where we are now that is yeah I mean it's been General size of them looks like they're small they do yeah okay was can you refresh on the park was it suggested to the developer to possibly install a park into that neighborhood I mean it's I just think it'd be a very good idea with Spring Creek Road there I'm with Campbell on this yeah yeah I mean the heavy traffic on Spring Creek yeah exactly exactly yeah they to Cross Road and it's a half mile away and so it's not even a suggestion it's so we can kind of Talk Amongst yourself on that but yeah it uh certainly on my mind yeah Liz could you clarify I'm just wondering your last point there about the the diversification of adding the town homes that's something new why why now why [Music] not with high point Vistas why not with the last one why with this one well I I'll jump into just kind of wondering why now because we had a convers I think um and we'll let the people come up I think there's a lot of from the neighborhood meeting there's a lot of potential issue with all the driveways on Spring Creek and maybe potential they could solve that if they did like a rear loaded town home or Villa to where you could still have the houses face each other so I think maybe that was the idea but I don't want to jump to conclusions until we hear from the but from the uh crowd the house is on the other side of street access Spring Road right yeah yeah so exactly so I want to hear from the neighbors like I said I'm just kind of understanding the concept of it would be a potential to alleviate their concern of all these extra driveways um you're going to also have additional bars yeah that's true more density and then like L said too the extra access point I'm not sure about as well but but I think that was the part where I was like was that the point was that the reason for it or and how receptive was it from the devel to know what caused your right I mean why why now Olson think some of the reasons that uh Cher brass is put forward way into the suggestion I think the you know this is a this is a relatively smaller site um so it does provide some opportunities to think maybe a little bit more creatively with it um in addition to that I think staff has gotten uh you know we've heard on multiple occasions a desire to see more diversity in housing options offered in developments um so we felt like this is a good opportunity to have that discussion um with this development in front of you there's not there's an opportunity to talk about what sort of housing makes the most sense in this location given the pressures that it faces relative to the neighborhood and uh you know maybe taking a look at other styles of housing would help in that in in this particular situation it feels like I think it's a valid conversation um anytime we see development is are there ways ways to work with the developer to pursue diversity and housing options that's a priority that I think we've long held and it's so it's a worthy discussion but I me don't get me wrong I I I agree with it it's it's worth the conversation this is literally the first time that has come up in my now six years better to start now huh of of start somewhere everything has been single family single family or multif family it's it's it's always been one or the other this is what it is I think there are neighborhoods though like Clover over Ridge like mix but that's before us but that was before but that's it has happened yeah it has but that's the part where it's like was just kind of questioning why this one I don't think they're saying they have to but I do want to hear from that right I think it's kind has a potential problem solve if there is issues could the developer look at it and I'm trying to also understand what is the problem we're trying to solve yeah well I don't think we know yet because I think we're gonna hear well the price Point's got to figure into it too yeah um Liz can you bring up this yeah that'd be good just I think this is kind of yeah can you zoom it in a little zoom in just on the like control mouse wheel there you go yeah right so like for me also just amongst commission here before we get into the crowd I'm not a fan of 39 40 41 47 48 49 32 33 34 31 like those like for instance house 40 now again it's open market someone will buy whatever they want to buy right free free market but you know you're looking at that and it's like is there a better way to design that where it's like you got a house and they it's locked in there in a little prison like faces back all the backyard sometimes you get these in little and crannies on developments you get houses that kind of the backyard faces another house or two backyards face each other on a row but this you've got like three with 47 48 49 you you know the curve and then you got the other House's space in that way and then you got the House's space in this you just got this I don't know right that's feels really dense yeah well that's the part where it's like they talking about you know not having the two access points and yeah that might help where it's the or maybe even if he had like some sort of more denser option there like right or something I don't know like I just feel I just feel like it looks my opinion just talking about lot I just feel like it looks a little dense and look but there's definitely opportunity there if you take just having one access point that matches and across right and or right yeah if we're looking at a tot line our little Park area for children be use here where you don't have these houses face each other and got a little area um because again you're at least a half mile away for a park and if you zoom out in Carver there's really nothing there either and that's unfortunately can't control that down theill so you got cross a County Road that's busy don't like it at all um so and I will I I will um I will throw my hat in the ring for lot one um the trees on lot one maybe in lot two um we can save as many of those as we can I know we're not talking many have we got tree study yet or is that too too early do it those there aren't many Tres on the lot but you know if we can save as many as we can there then that would be great tear him down I'm playing to calers wait 80 years um okay is there further questions for staff or should we open it should I open it up mean it's not yeah open up see have to say so it's not a public hearing but I'll open it up at 7:41 for anyone like to come forward talk to commission when you do step forward please say your name and address and um feel free to come on up my name is Karen mosow and I live on 1894 Spring Creek Drive so I'm facing um I am one that's quite concerned about the number of driveways coming on our already busy street we have a police sign that says hey your speed is thus and such already trying to control the speed and that cross street coming right into the middle of the development is just not good at all we are we encouraging more families we already have families little kids on bikes and people walking with strollers and to add traffic in the middle is just not cool I like cross street mean the second access the second ACC yeah you got don't have the map up any fine y I understand um and one of the ideas I like your um culdesac idea that's cool but the other one would be to go way to the um West corner where you're talking about the big trees are now but that's also a um natural slowdown Point as you go to the other part of Spring Creek and you've got Green Ash Drive coming up from the south and it just would make sense it's almost like a continuation of Green Ash Drive to have the intersection there um it continues to have their pie shaped and and you know irregular lots and the rest of it but um it was just another idea I had but most mostly I wanted to speak to the fact that please don't have that second cross street come into the middle of our neighborhood Jackie storeall 1964 malberry so we live further on in that development but we were at the first public hearing and generally um people liked the first plan that the Builder came out with um that didn't have the houses the driveways facing Spring Creek it that their um the backs of the houses would be facing Spring Creek and so it it had a better flow to it it didn't seem so regimented you know it was just a little more free flowing and less um obtrusive you know visually for the people living right across the street um so generally I think we liked the first plan better and we I don't Recall why it was switched but I think they fit another lot in the property or something like that here is um was there a previous iteration that I'm not aware of or we haven't seen yes um and it's consistent with um what jappie is saying um there were or there was a plan that showed all of the Lots fronting off the internal public Street system versus Spring Creek Drive um we had a or we got commentary back back from the city of Carver um and there was a note about maybe putting the driveways on Spring Creek Drive just from a traffic cming perspective and a a symmetry perspective so yes um there was a previous plan that's we can we can take so I just want to be clear you know it's not unusual thank you um It's Not Unusual that before an application is submitted there's multiple iterations right that might be might be provided to staff we might weigh in provide some direction um as a developer had some right Y and you know even at the stage of the con you know before Concepts plan submission um there may be uh you know well there is the neighborhood meeting that we require right and so in that neighborhood meeting that's before the developers submitted as well so they may be putting some different options forward seeking feedback um so there was feedback provided at the neighborhood meeting I think that influenced the direction of the developer went uh there was also feedback that that staff provided there was also feedback in coordination with the city of Carver um so you know the idea of having this the driveways connect to the street is really to be consistent with what already exists across the street um and and thinking of neighborhood cohesion thinking about when you do have driveways that connect to a street that can often be a c traffic calming device um that's something that we see on some of our streets in chasa like School Master Drive is one that sticks out to me uh where you have a pretty long Street there but there's it's you know lined on either side with driveways um that creates that more neighborhood street feel um and causes traffic often to to move slower than it would when you don't have those access points that's why we design collector roads the way we do without access points because it's it's more designed for traffic threp put and speed right so um those are some of the thought process that went into this this is not a collector Road um Carver does not consider it a collector Road and so they are trying to uh you know establish it as a neighborhood street to the extent that they can um my understanding is it's a bit of a legacy Road um that it had been there you know when when it was more Township and rural areas um and so that presents a challenge in of itself too anytime you're working with with that um but th those are some of the factors that went into uh you know P submitting what they did feedb back working with Carver they're looking for your standard residential street where the houses face each other rather than and you look at someone else's backyard yeah I think the important thing for tonight um and I you know not that I want to keep this top secret anything and we can definitely share it uh with the Planning Commission but I think the important thing is that we're evaluating um what's being what's in front of you this right and so if if you've got comment or direction that you want to give on what's in front of you I think that's a good discussion to have um yeah rather than evaluating something that wasn't submitted right yep of course thank you uh um and so if you were you done speaking okay hi good evening my name is Kevin gillick I'm at 1929 bir Street in Carver and first of all I just wanted to I don't know if we compliment you or you but we're we're Carver the fact that we actually got an invitation to come to a Chas meeting and not disenfranchising us I think it's pretty cool so on that so I mean keep that up comments are always is uh accepted yeah especially compliments having now complimented you um it's your point about plan one and I don't know if this is plan two or Plan Three but now we're talking about the possibility of town homes which would be Plan Three or plan four and so I'm not sure when our questions are and your answers are final it's like is there going to be another so when when do we know what we're talking about yeah so we're talking about this scenar so whatever you saw before is not what's being presented okay see on the what was Li presented is what we are reviewing so it's very common like Nate had said developers go through many iterations talk to this talk to the residents kind of change things a little bit City we have two cities involved and then they get to a plan that they present to us so what you see is what's being presented and then from the feedback on what's being presented we can discuss and maybe add condition or change and this is only concept this again is preliminary you know the major step would be the next one at preliminary plat once they take our feedback from concept go back revise do things come back again for their next visit so once this moves through tonight if it does move through it's only concept right so okay just kind of it can I mean there's I me this is going to be exaggeration but it could be a napkin sketch I mean it can be like I want to put some houses here and like it's just a concept so so if you kind of approved this tonight it sounds like it's going to the city council going to city council then they'd have to approve it they'd have to go back work on everything that's been conditioned in this approval represent again with a new and improved plan which you guys would be involved again we know about the city council meeting because it was on your screen but and you guys were kind enough to send us a postcard once things start moving along in the city council will we also be getting C to see cards from them so we know come back for preliminary plat they would get a notification again and that again to let you know just can't speak on behalf of the applicant we'll hear from them soon probably but there's no utilities nearby and it's going it cost a fortune to move them yeah so this might be a year or two until you I mean you might think it's never going to happen and it really is it just might it might be a while my original compliment of keeping us informed as long as we're informed along the way and have a chance to participate because we don't know where to hunt and Peck to look for information at Carver and chasun if you keep the process simple for us in the neighborhood that's wonderful yeah so thank you for that sure thanks there's more PE I see more people anyone coming up don't be shy no maybe the applicant here want to speak yep okay okay um my name is Haley dy I work for py homes Minnesota manager of land planning entitlement 1650 West 82nd Street sweet 300 Bloomington Minnesota also with me tonight is Dean Lauder um our director of land planning and entitlement as well and so we we he hear the concerns we hear the comments as well from Commissioners um I just want to stand here for any additional comments and can make a few of my own but I want if you guys want to ask anything of me have this time so I will have I'll just start off and then we can get on the rest of the commission and I guess I'm going to address the people in the crowd as well and kind of get some feedback if maybe you know from your neighbors but so starting so starting off first thing first um park space I think it's a big I think it's a big deal I I'm not going to speak until we vote but I'm going to recommend I think it's probably going to be favored here to have some sort of park for children it's just too far away across the county road um the second access Point does seem a little redundant to me when it's especially if we are going to have a bunch of driveways right on Spring Creek um so you're only going to have so many houses I don't know if you really necessar necessarily need two access points traffic study might help with that but um to go to the fir to answer the question to the first um lady who had came come up I again I'm not a traffic engineer but I wouldn't would not be in favor of a road all on the west side it it does make more sense for a safety standpoint to have roads connect with other roads and make perfect te's so when you have four-way stops and stuff like that it's always easier and better but um so second tra second access point a park um density is kind of a new thing you know I'm not sure if it was even discussed or thought about um I guess the only reason I would even say consider the density issue would be if the neighbors are not at all in favor all the driveways on the front it sounds like the city of Carver I don't know if you to go to them next or how this is going to work for you but they want the houses facing front um which makes sense because it's like a neighborhood so the houses face each other but um I'm not even sure if the neighbors would be in favor of a little more dense if that would like throw off the look or not or if you would even be willing to look at that or not so yeah if I may so I understand the need for a tot lot and we will definitely look at that as well as the layout as far as far as that seeing if that Western entrance we can remove and do a cold aack we'll definitely look into all of the items listed and then as far as the density so when we were initially looking at the plan for what could go here in our proposed neighborhood we really look to the comp plan which as you know those are a lot of time energy and resources goes into it from everyone from the city from Neighbors residents and that's guided for low density residential as Liz said and it's 2 to five units per acre and our proposal is in that guideline of the 3.1 and I think and we would definitely need to look into it more but whenever you add more homes or attached town homes or Villas that density increases so for us our signal from the comp plan was to do something that was low density single family detached homes yep yep and I and I as it stands I'm in agreement with you like I think it's fine potentially there is um it would only be a matter of if it's appeasing the neighbors if there's a really a big outcry I mean can't please everybody and so sometimes it's this may be just the way funny um I was just kind of bringing it up because it was brought up um so that's my kind of talking points I'll anyone else want to take over for not to sit here and talk could you elaborate on the I mean since they brought up the the change of the from previous versions so how did you end up coming up with the the two entrances from where you started yeah so originally we had a different concept plan um which staff had seen and we like mentioned we had some feedback to look at a layout with homes facing Spring Creek Drive which mimics what's existing that's a local Road and typically local neighborhood streets do have homes facing on both sides of the street so we also thought that made sense and then in typically what we thought would work best is to have a second point of access just since typically cities do prefer to have two points of access with this number of homes um but again it is something we can definitely look at but that's just how we got there is by feedback from Neighbors as well as staff and to look at it um and the second point of access was just what we thought would work in this but obviously we're getting different feedback to look at other options yeah I just think if you got 20 homes with access directly on Spring Creek now we're only really talking about 20 other homes that need a road and if we called a sack and put a top lot maybe it's 18 homes you know so it would be something that potentially would help the neighbors and and U address concerns and get to or there like a sack over here you talking yeah just kind of like end it right here maybe or something you know or maybe they I don't know maybe they go a little access off of Spring Creek yeah um oh did you say was there already a neighborhood you talked with the neighbors what was your impression of that meeting what did you guys get out of it we heard a lot of opinions in the meeting and I think when any time of development is proposed question right um and so we did our best to answer them at that time but again we're still so early in the phase of concept plan um obviously not all their questions could be answered because we are still very early so we were just looking for their feedback your feedback city council staff what was your biggest concern you took away from from from that meeting hard to decide um I think traffic was a concern um but I know that there's improvements scheduled to be made with high point fista to that County Road 61 um and as well as mentioned you know more driveways actually do help slow down drivers tonight it's the roundabout right Nate Liz potentially future yep there's there's a couple different options being potentially roundabout at that time but yeah I mean the ultimate condition would be a roundabout single L roundabout to help with um the traffic thing now right so actually this Nate this actually puts a Different Twist on things because it creates a border between Carver and ask us so who ultimately has responsibility for this street yeah um because you're talking Spring Creek Drive yeah so typically we'd say okay well we can put stop signs there or this or that so who actually has responsibility for the safety and responsibility for Spring Creek Drive yeah so this this is a conversation that we've initiated with Carver staff around you know now that there's going to be development on the north side of Spring Creek Drive you know how what makes sense right so I think up until this point since Spring Creek Drive has served Carver uh Carver has maintained and and taken care of it um but I think you know both cities recognize that that Dynamic is going to change um and so we need to take a look at how that's shared you know what makes sense right so that'll be part of the discussion uh I think that gets more definition around that um as it pertains to placing you know a stop sign um I think what we would be looking at is you know what sort of signage needs to accommodate this development um and that would be you know the city of Chas is involvement right and I was thinking more specific than the fact of like I said we're we're talking about putting you know development on the North side with yep access and how do you create the flow and keep the safety side of things for both sides of the street knowing that you've got two cities on either side right yeah y that creates fun it's not a typical right situation that we run into um but you know there are areas of the city um 82nd street is another one where that's a local local controlled Road right um that shares a border with Chan Hassen um in one part Victoria uh so there's you know some shared agreements that kind of go into that one as well and knowing that they're asking for it I mean I think that's the part where like Carver was asking for the community feel so it's the you know it's it's it's a unique one but it's the making sure that we're going to with eyes wide open I think you should f a coin for it of Carver is asking for that but like uh the development is in within chasar things right so if suppose residents wants to talk to City of Carver so they can go to the plan their Planning Commission meetings or how exactly they can approach the city saying that they are not in favor of what exactly city is proposing yeah I think you you kind of hit the nail on the head right this this is the development that's in chasa right so it's going to go through Cha's process um obviously the folks are here this evening right so they've they' found their way here um well this isn't development being proposed and all kind of this is our process to manage I'm in here too so technically it's our development our C we can do what we want but it's kind of being neighborly to our right like they had some feedback they'd like to see ultimately yes it's the Chet development yeah because they provide some inputs to the developer the same time like they are responsible to hear the concerns from the they like people right so exactly so the same thing um there any other members in the in the audience you sure you don't want to come forward any other the residents thank you yep yeah come on up my name is Jim Strife I'm at 1941 malberry Lane Carver of course this is in the neighboring uh across the street you know we're one one block back uh question Mount Hope and chasa Boulevard so what I heard was the the possibility of a roundabout a roundabout so does that mean Chas Boulevard would then become a forlane you know so just like it is because of the big development on the North side I think there might be like a second lane in the roundabout to get you know turn off in but there'd be like a one one lane one lane roundabout with turns okay all right I think that was primarily the traffic because there's a tremendous amount of traffic that comes out of Carver out of out of the the Spring Creek Edition and everything funnels right to the corner of uh Mount hul Road and uh chasa Boulevard sure and so that is going to be a people traffic interlock lot of people use Jonathan Carver to get on the 212 though do they uh yes yeah yeah you go either that way or we come through Chas and spend our money here yeah okay sneak up to Fleet Farm go around Logistics understandable that there's a lot of of uh uh versions that will go forward as people add things or ideas or right you suddenly find out the utilities can't be run three or four miles across the farm land you know to support the area or whatever uh the other question I have is is there a a part of this and a grant I'm not a developer by the way are you with the the development firm no I'm with the city of chasa so question makes me wonder whether I'm doing my job i' like to know what the audience SP as if you were the developer so anyways he just has lots of information he's good at what he does yeah is there an environmental impact statement that goes along with the developer I think we get not at the level I don't believe right this is again concept this is kind of high level like hey plop some homes down would there be no so just with the scale of this development doesn't rise to the level that it would require in in environmental impact statement or environmental impact statement is required nor anything else right that that was probably consistent you know I was looking at the plat for your neighborhood um I don't you know I think it's probably a similar scale to what this one is so there's no group that's going to come and say save the bees or or [Laughter] okay all right very good that's all I have thank you thank you um we have someone online oh yep it looks like we have a hand raised online sure yeah that'd be great let's do it um it looks like a Michael mic if you wanna unmute you can speak we go okay um my name is Mike me I live right across the street from the main driveway that goes into the engeland property right now and um one thing that I haven't heard tonight is anything about safety and that was brought up at the community meeting with py that that we had um safety there's a bus stop right at Birch Street right now ber Street and Carver for all the school kids in the morning and so I just hope that the Planning Commission will take into consideration how much construction traffic there's going to be and where that construction entrance is going to be because there's all kinds of kids uh on Spring Creek going to school um you know s 6:30 to 8:00 whenever the bus routes happen and that that was a big concern at the meeting um so that's one the second thing is is that and it's already been addressed but I just want to reiterate that second uh opening or entrance egress Ingress out of the England property not on bir street but the second one down Westward um I don't see why you would need that with only five houses in between The Bird Street entrance and then the second entrance the Vista property that you've already approved doesn't have uh H has many more houses between the entrances than than what what you're looking at for this angland property so I think and on on the Carver side of Spring Creek there's 20 houses between ber Street and Green Ash so I think that the limited amount of houses that you have between the two uh Ingress Ingress streets is is really unnecessary and then lastly I would just like to say that that there was some comments about um that they that they made changes after they got input from the neighborhood and I don't think that's accurate PTI sent out a diagram of the uh proposal for the plat when we got to the meeting they had a different picture up and said disregard what we sent you this is the new layout so there was no input from any neighborhood people about about their their their plat at at the meeting they had already switched it before they held the the neighborhood meeting so I I just want to set that out there for you I know you said you're not considering the old one but but there was no input from the neighborhood about changing it that's all I got thank you very much and I I appreciate being able to attend your meeting tonight thank you um I'll just address a couple of that obviously there will be much consideration to construction traffic at the appropriate time this would not be that time but it will be taken care of um again he sounds like he con concurs with us on the second access point and um and yeah so um any anybody else would like to address the commission you want to come one more time sure you were talking about the density and the existing homes on Spring Creek the picture that she has are only the Western section the Eastern section of Spring Creek now is Villas and immediately on Birch Street is Villas so again as you're making those considerations they are already in the neighborhood single level Villas oh okay and then the um this Highway 61 traffic that's the way a GPS sends people off of 212 to get to us is back around the shed and on 61 and then in so okay thank you yep um anybody else all right with that I will even though it's not a public hearing I'm closing the public hearing at 8:10 we'll bring it back to commission for final thought and discussion I would like to I'll just start off um I think we should add a condition that the that the road the second access point is removed and we should add a condition that we need sort of Park Indoor top lot in the development um sounds like most of the neighbors didn't mind the density per se of the single family homes and the driveways on the road so I I don't see any need to tell a developer to change their whole layout in terms of density I think it looks fine by me it fits within our two to five units per acre um I saw in the provisions something we didn't discuss but I saw in there there's sidewalks on both sides of the street I do like that so those are my two the the road in the in the park is there anything else anyone want wanted to add or contribute I think that's it covers it covers it yep okay um with that I will make a motion to recommend approval of the concept plan for the property subject to the following 23 conditions with two additional conditions one is to remove their second access point and the second would be to add some sort of Park the property I do want to clarify that condition number 23 does um oh iterate the is okay so evaluation on theack so um we would just be adding one okay yeah okay so one extra condition so it's 24 conditions is there a second second we all second let call it cerber all those favor I I opposed motion carries thank you thank you everybody um let's see here moving along we [Music] will receive in the we don't have any other business so receive in the other meeting minutes I'll hereby receive those and then um anything anyone wants to discuss quick with the city questions before we adjourn nothing all is good all well okay to get a motion to adjourn May motion to adjourn C first second second awesome all those in favor I I opposed motion carries