PLAN COMMISSION

August 16, 2007

                                                                                               

Members present:  Breault, Burchill, Yoerg and Mailloux

 

Others present:  Ray Knapp, John Klingelhutz, Paul Mollett, Rob Simonson, Daryl Standafer, Dennis Welsh, David Robson, Brian Zeller, Marc Putman, C. R. Hackworthy, John Gelderman, Pat Dady, Michelle Caron, Gordon Conard, Jim Denison, Joanne Campbell, Beth Stidman, Dick Stein, Bob Long, Dennis Darnold and others

 

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Breault.

 

Motion by Yoerg, seconded by Mailloux to approve the meeting minutes of 7/26/07.

Motion carried.

 

Public hearing and review of request of Klingelhutz Companies to amend the Red Cedar Canyon planned residential development conditional use permit to allow the conversion of the 40 unit Vista Canyon residential condominium facility, 3001 Hanley Road, to a 55 unit residential care apartment complex (RCAC), located north of Hanley Road at the easterly intersection of O’Neil Road and Hanley Road.

Chairman Breault reviewed the public hearing notice and asked if anyone in the audience would like to comment in regard to this request.  Mr. Gordon Conard, 36 Eagles Nest Circle commented that he felt the reuse of the existing 40 unit facility is a good option as it has been unsold and unoccupied for some time.  He noted that this area initially included senior housing.  Conard further commented that an agreement between the owners of the condominium facility and Hans Hagen Homes for participation in the Red Cedar Canyon homeowners association was not realized and that he hopes that if the proposed facility wants access to the Red Cedar Canyon amenities that participation in the homeowners association is negotiated.

 

No other comments were received.

 

Motion by Yoerg, seconded by Burchill to close the public hearing.  Motion carried.

 

Darnold noted that a copy of the housing market analysis was sent in the information packets and that a need for 38 units of assisted housing is identified and the need for an additional 17 units of memory care assisted housing is identified through early 2009.

 

Motion by Breault, seconded by Yoerg to recommend to the Common Council approval of the amendment to the Red Cedar Canyon conditional use permit to allow the conversion of the 40 unit residential condominium facility to a 55 unit residential care apartment complex (RCAC) with the following conditions:

-         limit to 55 units

-         require a Residential Care Apartment Complex (RCAC) license by the State of Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services, Chapter HFS89 – Residential Care Apartment Complexes

 

Page 2, Plan Commission

August 16, 2007

 

 

-         require landscape plan to be submitted for the northern part of the site where the second building was proposed

-         Klingelhutz Companies to address concerns of participation in the Red Cedar Canyon homeowners association(s)

Motion carried. 

 

Renewal of a conditional use permit for the use of 904 Third Street as a manufacturer representative / wholesale sales office with two non-resident employees – David Tank.  Darnold noted that the permit was initially approved in 1999 and that there have been no concerns or complaints expressed regarding the office use.

Yoerg suggested that because the building is located in a residential neighborhood that a review be required in two years (August, 2009).

 

Motion by Burchill, seconded by Yoerg to recommend to the Common Council the renewal of the conditional use permit at 904 Third Street for the use as a manufacturer representative / wholesale sales office with two non-resident employees with the following conditions:

-         one commercial sign, not greater than three (3) square feet in area

-         no additional signage or lighting for purposes of commercial use identification

-         the permit is non-transferable, and

-         the permit is to be re-reviewed in two years, August, 2009

Motion carried.  

 

Request of St. Croix County to amend the comprehensive plan’s future land use designation of the St. Croix County Government Center site, 1101 Carmichael Road from public use to mixed use development for the southern one-half of the site.  The site is generally located at the northwest quadrant of Carmichael Road and Vine Street/CTH UU.  Daryl Standafer, St. Croix County Board of Supervisors and Dennis Welsh (county consultant) with Barsness Consulting Services presented the county’s proposal for development of the county government site.  Mr. Welsh presented information regarding the retention of the northerly 47 acres of the approximately 82 acre site for future use and expansion of the county government center site and open space and the use of the southerly 35 acres for mixed use development including public office and facilities, potential expansion of the YMCA, private office development and senior housing.  Welsh noted the county reviewed the current market of each of the proposed uses. 

 

The concept of the development is that it would create a sense of place and a cluster of civic uses and facilities.  The review of the site for one-family residential use was considered, but not proposed because of the current market / demographics not included in the county’s proposed uses.  Senior housing and affordable housing will be considered.

Page 3, Plan Commission

August 16, 2007

 

 

In regard to the cooperation with other public entities, the county desires to establish locations or to secure sites through purchase options or payment of a reservation fee.

 

Access to the site would be from both Carmichael Road and Vine Street with the accesses moved to the greatest extent possible to the north and west.  The Carmichael Rd. access is proposed to be moved south from the current access to the county government site to the location of the Grandview Park access.  Lots created would access from internal streets.

 

Examples of other county government sites in Minnesota were shown in regard to public multiple-use sites and private / public mixed use developments; examples included Dakota County, Anoka County, city of Shoreview, and city of Maplewood.

 

Welsh acknowledged site constraints may include stormwater ponding and the possible existence of endangered species.

 

Mailloux inquired about access to Vine Street and if traffic lights may be necessary.  Breault commented about traffic congestion in the area, site design and marketing of the property. 

 

Standafer responded, noting that the county is not in the development business, and the county’s role is not yet identified.  Breault asked about the public uses that have shown interest in the county’s property.  Standafer suggested that the county would establish a price for the public uses; and if the property is sold to a developer, they would have to honor that agreed to price.

 

Burchill suggested that a traffic analysis should be conducted of the area.  Breault commented that he did not want to rush into a decision in light of the recent petitions for annexation that have been filed and are under city review.  Breault asked if the county has a timetable established for a city review / response.  Standafer commented that an immediate response is not expected, but that the library foundation is in the process of discussing the possible purchase of part of the site with the county; and they hope to have a decision soon.

 

Jim Denison, 1014 Grandview Drive commented that the traffic at the intersection of Vine Street and Carmichael Road is of concern, and the addition of traffic to that area due to additional development is a paramount concern.  He suggested that part of the southwest quadrant identified in the county’s proposal remain open space as is shown in the northwest quadrant.

 

Joanne Campbell, 1008 Grandview Drive expressed concern about dotted blazing star which has been identified as an endangered species and opined that it does exist and it is not a species that is regressing in its coverage area.

Page 4, Plan Commission

August 16, 2007

 

 

Beth Stidham, 2104 Chestnut Drive referred to a letter that was forwarded to the Hudson Star-Observer; and she asked that the plan commission refer to the city of Hudson comprehensive plan survey.  She asked that this area not be over developed, and she noted the amount of available lease space within the city.  Stidham also expressed concern about the pedestrian crossing(s) at the middle school and elementary school as students have difficulty crossing Carmichael Road at times.  Breault suggested she address that issue with the public safety committee.

 

Dick Stein commented that the potential of development may destroy a nature area and that the ponding of stormwater may provide for a mosquito breeding area.

 

Yoerg asked if the county had received a request by the YMCA to purchase property to expand their facility.  Welsh noted that the last request was in 2005.  Burchill stated that he recently inquired to the YMCA if they had interest, and he was advised that they no longer have plans to acquire property.

 

Darnold stated that he would like an opportunity to visit with Mr. Welsh and county staff to further review the county’s request.

 

No action was taken.

 

Review of future development within the Carmichael Road corridor, I-94 to Vine Street / CTH UU – Plan Commission.  Darnold reviewed the current land uses and 1993 City of Hudson Comprehensive Plan future land use designations noting that much of the proposed land use in the corridor is shown as one-family residential.  Darnold also reviewed the projected amount of wastewater treatment capacity demand the areas between I-94 and Vine Street / CTH UU that would exceed a capacity demand of 145,000 gallons per day if developed as per the designated land uses.  Thus, the city will need to expand the capacity of the wastewater treatment plant to facilitate development along the corridor.

 

Shelly Johnson, Bonestroo (city consultant) reviewed the draft Carmichael Road corridor access management plan noting that the roadway will most likely be required to be expanded to a four-lane section for the area between I-94 and Vine Street / CTH UU and that it must have access control.  Intersections are proposed to be approximately one-quarter mile apart.

 

Mailloux asked if the proposed development across from Target can be reviewed for the number of semi-trailer trucks that will be accessing the site.  Darnold stated that information is generally readily available.

 

 

Page 5, Plan Commission

August 16, 2007

 

 

Yoerg asked if the city should place in reserve a specified amount of capacity of the wastewater treatment plant.  Darnold noted that amount has been previously identified as 100,000 gallons per day.

 

Yoerg stated that the plan commission should refer to the city of Hudson comprehensive plan surveys of the residents and businesses for guidance when making decisions regarding the proposed annexations.

 

Mailloux asked if there is an inventory of commercial lease space that is available.  Darnold thought that could be provided.

 

Breault inquired if Opus had any comments on this issue.  John Gelderman stated that they would be pleased to answer any questions regarding their specific development.

 

Breault suggested that the request for annexations Rock Island Land Company / Double Play Investments (east of Carmichael Road and north of I-94) and by Fahning / Hoffmeister (east of STH 35 and south of Hanley Road) should not be acted on until the overall impact of all the annexations is considered.  Darnold commented that the area proposed for annexation by Fahning and Hoffmeister is surrounded on three sides by the city of Hudson and has utilities adjacent to the parcel.

 

Ray Knapp, town of Troy chairman reminded the city that the traffic issues on ‘Old’ Highway 35 need to be addressed in that STH 35 will become a limited access highway in the future and that low density residential use exists on the east side of ‘Old’ Highway 35.

 

Darnold suggested that a workshop be established to review the Carmichael Road corridor issues and that this issue should be discussed in a special meeting to include only the discussion of the corridor development.

 

Motion by Yoerg, seconded by Mailloux to postpone consideration of the review of the Carmichael Road corridor.  Motion carried. 4-0.

 

Motion by Yoerg, seconded by Burchill to adjourn.  Motion carried.  8:41 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Dennis Darnold, Secretary