CITY OF WACONIA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA

Transcription

1 CITY OF WACONIA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Regular Meeting of Thursday, Feb. 2, 2017 Planning Commission City Hall 6:30 PM Waconia, Minnesota MEMBERS: Robert Grohmann, Steve Hebeisen, Don Osmundson, John Meisch, Nathan Vilmain ALTERNATE MEMBER: Dan Lesher CITY COUNCIL MEMBER LIAISON: Jim Sanborn STAFF: Lane Braaten, Community Development Director Brenda Stein, Recording Secretary Ethan Nelson, Assistant Planner 1. Call meeting to order and roll call 2. Adopt Agenda 3. Minutes Approval from: December 1 st, 2016 Regular Planning Commission Meeting. Pages New Business A. ELECTION of OFFICERS and OATH of OFFICE: New Planning Commission member Dan Lesher. B. PUBLIC HEARING: Comprehensive Plan Amendment by Brian Koch and Gary Meuwissen to re-guide the property located at 9525 Orchard Road as Commercial (C) and Wetland/Open Space (W/O). Pages Other A. Staff Update Adjourn WORK SESSION: Utility Sheds/Accessory Structures

2 WACONIA PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, December 1 st, 2016 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Waconia Planning Commission was called to order by Mike Blanchfield at 6:30 p.m. Additions for tonight s meeting is the Sign Plan for the Oppidan Development for the Waconia Crossing/Waconia Center. Also note, there is a revised Preliminary Plat hand out for Hilgers and Tenth Street. A packet of public comments for the sketch plan on Dean Hilgers property is place in front of each Commissioner for review. 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: ALTERNATE: STAFF PRESENT: VISITORS: COUNCIL LEISON: Vilmain, Hebeisen, Blanchfield, Grohmann, Meisch Osmundson Grohmann Braaten, Nelson, Stein See Attachment Sanborn 2. ADOPT AGENDA: Motion by Meisch, seconded by Grohmann to adopt the Agenda as presented. All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED. 3. APPROVE MINUTES: Motion by Hebeisen, seconded by Vilmain to adopt the Minutes of November 3, 2016 meeting, all present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED. 4. NEW BUSINESS: A. PUBLIC HEARING; HILGERS AND TENTH STREET PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY DEAN HILGERS FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT TH STREET WEST. Braaten introduced the application by describing the location, zoning and surrounding properties. This property is located at th Street West and zoned B-1 Business Highway District. Braaten explained that the City purchased a permanent right of way easement for the construction of a segment of Fischer Way and a portion of the realignment of 10 th Street West. This easement is noted on the preliminary and final plat documents. The applicant is not proposing any outlots as part of the Hilgers and Tenth Street Plat. Braaten asked Commissioners to review the revised plat that had been provided and not the plat document provided in the packet. The revised plat shows the road right of way dedication, which in turn eliminates the proposed condition, which should be stricken if a recommendation of approval is forthcoming. Present use of the property is a used car lot which currently has an interim use permit for an unsurfaced parking lot. No public comments have been received for this application. 1

3 Blanchfield asked Braaten for a detailed explanation of the right of way easement area. Braaten stated that a section of 10 th street West and the Fischer Way will now be platted as dedicated road way and was a condition of approval (number 8) which will need to be struck for the conditions. Meisch asked about condition number 3 regarding other issues regarding land disturbing activities. Hilgers stated there is an overhead pole from Xcel energy/centurylink that runs along the old 10 th Street right of way, these poles are still in place. Hilgers is not sure what the goal for these utilities would be, but there cannot be a building in that right of way. Braaten indicated that at this time we do not need to be concerned with the poles or easement areas, the comment was intended to notify the property owner of possible issues regarding future development of the parcel. Motion by Blanchfield to open the public hearing. No public comments were received. Motion by Vilmain, second by Hebeisen to close the public hearing. All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED. Motion by Osmundson, second by Hebeisen to approve the Hilgers and Tenth Street Preliminary and Final Plat Application submitted by Dean Hilgers for the properties located at th Street. All present voted aye with the 12 conditions of approval except for condition number eight. MOTION CARRIED. B. INTERM USE PERMIT: EXTENSION REQUEST BY DEAN HILGERS FOR ANUSURFACED PARKIKING LOT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT TH STREET WEST. Nelson gave an overview of the property location on the overhead map showing that the primary use is a car lot. The request from Dean Hilgers (the applicant ) is to extend the deadline for the Interim Use Permit (IUP) granted by the City for the unsurfaced (gravel) parking lot on the subject property. The initial IUP was approved by the City Council in 2012 and extended in May of 2015 as the City was working through the Hwy. 5 project, the realignment of 10th Street West and the construction of Fischer Way, which impacted the subject property. The current IUP for the unsurfaced parking lot is set to expire on December 31st, Hilgers has requested to extend it so that it coincides with the preliminary Plat. Nelson stated that after an internal conversation with staff, it was recommended that the Commission come up with a date instead of leaving the deadline open ended. The date that was mentioned was a September 1, 2017 deadline. Scraping and sodding the lot or paving the lot would be required or another request for extension depending on what the Planning Commission decides. Blanchfield asked Hilgers about his realistic expectations regarding a time line for the development of the proposed parcels. Hilgers replied that the lot to the east will be sold to a restaurant and they are adding red rock to the other parcel for the car lot use. The west lot will realistically will not be developed until the next spring, March 1, After a discussing the timing of the extension it was decieded that the Interm Use Permit shall expire on September 1, This will also give the Commission an opportunity to hear of he updates regarding this property progress, if in fact the property does not develop as quickly as Mr. Hilgers is anticipating and he needs to come back for an additional extension of the IUP. 2

4 Motion by Meisch, second by Vilmain to recommend approval of the extension request by Hilgers for an unsurfaced parking lot for the property located at th Street West with a deadline date of September 1, All in favor voted aye. MOTION CARRIED. C. INFORMAL DISCUSSION: SKETCH PLAN DEAN HILGERS FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 300 BURANDT BLVD AND 224 REDWOOD STREET SOUTH. Braaten explained that this is an informal discussion regarding the Sketch Plan submitted by Dean Hilgers for PID #s and to advise the applicant of the extent to which the plan conforms to the Comprehensive Plan and City Ordinances and discuss possible modifications that may be necessary if he were to come forward with a formal application. The City received a Sketch Plan Application from Mr. Dean Hilgers (the applicant ) to facilitate a discussion with the Planning Commission regarding the possible future development of the properties located at 300 Burandt Blvd. and 224 Redwood Street South (the subject parcels ). Submittal of a Sketch Plan allows possible developers to provide a concept plan to the Planning Commission to receive feedback on a potential project to determine any conflicts prior to submittal of any future applications such as Preliminary Plat, Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Annexation, etc. Braaten showed the property location, zoning and pointed out that the 5 acres are within 1,000 feet of Burandt Lake and therefore located in the Shoreland Overlay District. The applicant has submitted a sketch plan for PID#s & indicating three possible development concepts resulting in the number of lots ranging from 10 to 30 units. Braaten presented the three options in detail as explained below. 1. The existing zoning of the subject property is R-1, Low Density Residential (R-1) and said properties are located within the Shore land Overlay District as the property is located within 1,000 ft. of Burandt Lake. The lot requirements for the R-1 zoning district and Shoreland Overlay District have been combined and are listed below: R-1, Single- Family Residential Lot Area Lot Width Density 2 to 4 10,500 sq. ft. 75 ft. min. Units/Net min. Acre Concept Plan 1 10 Lots 10,500 sq. ft. 75 ft. 2 units/acre Concept Plan 2 30 Lots 4,400 sq. ft. 40 ft. 6 units/acre Concept Plan 3 21 Lots 7,000 sq. ft. 50 ft. 4.2 units/acre 2. Concept Plan 1 provided by the applicant would provide 10 parcels sized per existing City Code requirements for the R-1 zoning district and it appears the lot width and hardcover requirements could be met also. 3. Concept Plan 2 indicates a more densely developed neighborhood with minimum lot widths of 40 ft. and lot sizes just under 4,500 sq. ft. This concept would greatly exceed the standards of the R-1 zoning district and would have to be developed under a Planned Unit Development District (PUD), which allows flexibility in the City s development standards if the development can meet the eligibility and objectives of said district. The applicant has indicated that the opportunity to develop the property at a higher density, while still allowing single family homes and properties, would allow for more choice for prospective homeowners at a lower price point in the community. 3

5 4. Concept Plan 3 illustrates a hybrid of the two plans above, indicating a minimum lot width of 50 ft., a parcel area of approximately 7,000 sq. ft., which would result in approximately 21 proposed units on the approximately 5 acre parcel. The lot sizing indicated in this concept is more typical of the lot sizing for the single family residential parcels located near downtown Waconia. 5. Concept Plans 2 and 3 would both require the property to be rezoned and developed as a PUD to allow for the reduced lot sizing and setbacks indicated by the applicant. 6. Stormwater management (i.e. storage, treatment and reuse) is always a large component of any residential development. Two of the plans submitted indicate a small stormwater storage pond along the west property line. Based on the current Carver County Water Management Organizations regulations it appears that significantly more acreage would be required to develop that subject property than what is currently indicated on the concept plans. This will be reviewed by the CCWMO at the time of preliminary plat application to insure compliance with said regulations. 7. City staff discussed the concept plans provided and have determined that one access off of Burandt Blvd. would be most appropriate in this location due to spacing and site lines from said property. 8. Any future development of the property will require park land dedication. City Ordinance indicates that typically 10% of the property shall be dedicated for park purposes or cash in lieu of land may be required if the area is not suitable or desirable for park purposes. 9. If either Concept 2 or Concept 3 are developed an internal sidewalk/trail system may be appropriate with some type of controlled crossing to the City trail on the southeast side of Burandt Blvd. This could be something similar to the rapid flashing beacon installed by Ridgeview during their construction of the parking lot on the west side of Cherry Street. Braaten reminded the Commission that this is not a public hearing and the process of discussion does not go to City Council, Hilgers is just looking for feedback on these options. Questions and Comments from the Commission: - Hilgers heard comments from residents that it would be attractive to have an option of smaller lots and smaller homes without a lot of upkeep and maintenance in the downtown area. Some people do not want to make a large investment but rather a new home on a smaller scale. -Hilgers stated that Option 1, the least dense option would be the easiest from the stand point of being a developer. Hilgers is hearing from others that affordability is important and they want to stay in the downtown area vs on the south side of Highway 5. -It was felt that option 1 was favorable because the standards are for the R-1 district. -Hilgers mentioned the importance of hearing from neighbors and residents regarding what is needed in the City of Waconia with housing needs. -Questions regarding the pond placement on the sketch plans. Hilgers stated that the pond location would be entirely up to the engineer and final approval by the CCWMO. -Discussion regarding speculation that a PUD has to have 5 acres or more and this property is less than 5 acres. The City Code does state that a PUD should be 5 acres or more, under certain circumstances the City can lessen that acreage. On GIS is comes out to be exactly 5 acres. -Commissioners stated that this property should stay true to the R-1 District. -Hilgers mentioned the size of homes on these smaller lots if approved for using option 3. -Commission asked about how much home inventory is available in Waconia. Braaten stated that the lot inventory has dropped significantly. Braaten will get the Commission the final numbers for lot inventory after the 1 st of year although he gave them an overview of what may be coming and what inventory is left. Questions and Comments from the public: Wendy Kuntz, 261 Sunset Blvd, Waconia, MN

6 -Kuntz is hoping for low density, R-1 homes single family neighborhood to comply with the character of the neighborhood. -Importance of protecting the lake -Concerns of storm water runoff. -Kuntz feels as though concept plans 2 and 3 are unacceptable. -Opposed to changing to PUD development Bill Lano, 789 Pintail Circle, Waconia, MN Lano is hoping to keep this property zoned R-1 -Lano stated general thoughts on the development. Commission members commented that the existing zoning on the property should stay as R-1, Single Family Residential and any future proposed developments should be consistent with said requirements. D. SIGN PLAN WACONIA CROSSING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. Braaten displayed the property location, pointing out 10 th Street, Cherry Street and the proposed monument sign locations on site plan for the Waconia Crossing Development. The applicant, Mr. Tom Ryan, on behalf of KTJ 290, LLC, has submitted a Sign Plan for the Sudheimer Retail Addition, which the Planning Commission reviewed in October and the City Council approved on November 7 th, 2016 via Resolutions , , and The afore-mentioned resolutions approved the Sudheimer Retail Addition Preliminary and Final Plats, and the Site Plan and Design Review for Lots 1, 2 and 3 of the Sudheimer Retail Addition. Braaten commented that the City Ordinance states The City Council may recognize separate Sign plans for planned development districts which will supersede these regulations. Any such Sign plan approved by the City Council will have the effect of a sign ordinance for the applicable Premises of Record. Such an individual Sign plan will only be considered if; (i) the development includes a substantial site area and/or the Sign plan is necessary to address the unique visibility needs of the development; and (ii) the City Council finds that the Sign plan meets the purpose and intent of these regulations. Braaten mentioned that the three items we are considering are three proposed monument signs. All wall signage will meet ordinance requirements and we are only talking about the monument signs. B-1, HIGHWAY BUSINESS DISTRICT AND HIGHWAY DESIGN DISTRICT SIGN STANDARDS Monument Signs: One Monument Sign is allowed per Premises of Record. The maximum Sign Area of each such Monument Sign shall be based on the Street Frontage of the Premises of Record on which such Monument Sign is located as follows: FRONTAGE: MAX. Sign Area in Square Feet: a) For corner lots, the owner of the Premises of Record shall decide which Street Frontage of the applicable property will be used to calculate the maximum Sign Area allowed (i.e. the owner may choose one side of the property with Street Frontage or the other, but not both). The Monument Sign must be located on the side of the Premises of Record that was used to perform the above calculation. b) No Monument Sign Structure shall exceed 15 feet in height or 15 feet in width. The Monument Sign structure shall not exceed 150 square feet. 5

7 c) For Multi-Tenant Buildings, one Monument Sign per Premises of Record is allowed. The Sign Area of each such Monument Sign shall not exceed 120 square feet, with a maximum Sign Area of 50 square feet per tenant. d) Each Monument Sign shall be constructed of materials similar in appearance to those of the principal building that it serves. The ground area around the base of each Monument Sign shall be landscaped with shrubs and landscaping equal to fifty percent (50%) of the Sign Area. Landscape materials shall be selected to withstand the environmental conditions of the site and provide seasonal interest. e) No Monument Sign shall be placed closer than ten (10) feet to any public right-of-way line. Staff has provided the Sudheimer Retail Addition Final Plat below to illustrate the street frontage for each of the parcels along the road sections of Hwy. 5, CSAH 10, 10 th Street and Cherry Street. The applicant has submitted the proposed monument signage for consideration for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Sudheimer Retail Addition. PARCEL FRONTAGE* B-1 STANDARD SIGN PROPOSED SIGN AREA AREA (based on frontage) Lot ft. (along Hwy. 5 frontage) 120 sq. ft. maximum** 120 sq. ft. maximum Lot ft. (along Hwy. 5 frontage) 40 sq. ft. maximum 100 sq. ft. maximum Lot ft. ( along Hwy. 5 frontage) 50 sq. ft. maximum 100 sq. ft. maximum * Street frontage calculations are based on the sign location indicated on the attached site plan provided by the applicant (see Attachment #1). ** City code allows additional sign area for multi-tenant signage. 1. Lot 1 - The proposed multi-tenant monument sign proposed for Lot 1, Block 1, Sudheimer Retail Addition meets the City Code Sign standards for Sign Area, which allows one multi-tenant monument sign per Premises of record for a multi-tenant site if the sign area for each such monument sign does not exceed 120 sq. ft. The proposed multi-tenant sign does not meet the 150 square foot monument sign structure requirement and therefore needs to be considered as part of the proposed Sign Plan for the development district. Hebeisen asked about the square footage for the monument- regarding the 120 sq. ft. of signage and the fact that the structure cannot exceed the 150 sq. ft. They are proposing this monument for lot 1 that is about 170 sq. ft. of structure. 2. Lot 2 - The applicant is proposing a monument sign for Culver s to be located along Hwy. 5 not to exceed 100 sq. ft. in sign area. The Planning Commission should consider if allowing a monument sign well over the sign area allowed of 40 sq. ft. meets the standards stated above, or if the monument sign should meet the existing sign standards for the B-1, Highway Business District. The applicant has not, as of yet received the dimension drawings of the proposed Culvers sign and therefore is requesting sign area similar to the Holiday Gas Station. Braaten commented that per City Code, if this wasn t a PUD, our Code would allow 40 sq. ft. for the Culvers signage. This sign proposal is 2 ½ times bigger that what is allowed. 3. Lot 3 The applicant is proposing a monument sign (in the location of the pylon sign shown on the attached site plan) for a Holiday Gas Station to be located along Hwy. 5 not to exceed 100 sq. ft. in sign area. The Planning Commission should consider if allowing a monument sign double the allowable City Ordinance standards for the B-1 zoning district meets the sign plan standards stated above. 6

8 The Holiday Monument Sign is proposed to be 100 sq. ft. Based on City Code and frontage they would be allowed a sign square footage of 50 sq. ft. which means they are asking for double. Vilmain wondered if there was an entrance off of Highway 5 onto this property. The entrances are on Cherry Street and 2 shared main entrances off of 10 th Street. Blanchfiled asked Tom Ryan what the unique circumstances for the additional signage space. Mr. Ryan stated that the uses themselves along with the amount of information displayed such as a reader board. The signs being proposed are their standard signs displayed although there are other signs used. If the Planning Commission chooses to recommend approval of the Sign Plan, staff would recommend the approval upon the following conditions: 1. The approved Sign Plan shall be the applicable sign ordinance for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, of the Sudheimer Retail Addition and shall supersede the regulations stated in Section , Subd. 4.C. B-1 and B-4 Districts. 2. All other signage, such as wall signage, shall meet the requirements of the City sign regulations. 3. The ground area around the base of each Monument Sign shall be landscaped with shrubs and landscaping equal to fifty percent (50%) of the Sign Area. Landscape materials shall be selected to withstand the environmental conditions of the site and provide seasonal interest. Motion by Hebeisen, second by Meisch to approve the Sign Plan for Sudheimer Retail Addition/Waconia Crossing Commercial Development. All in favor voted aye. MOTION CARRIED. Planning Commission schedule for keep as is with no changes. There will not be a work session this evening. There has been a slight modification to the Culvers Site Plan which includes changing the trash enclosure to the patio area and the patio area in the location of the trash enclosure. Thank you to Blanchfield for years of service. There being no further business, motion by Blanchfield, second by Meisch adjourn at 7:55 PM. All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, Brenda Stein Recording Secretary 7

9 8

10 REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Meeting Date: February 2 nd, 2017 Item Name: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Koch/Meuwissen 9525 Orchard Road - PID# Originating Department: Community Development Department Presented by: Lane L. Braaten, Community Development Director Previous Commission Action (if any): RECOMMENDATIONS/ ACTION/MOTION REQUESTED (Include motion in proper format.) Motion and findings recommending either approval or denial of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposed by Brian Koch and Gary Meuwissen to re-guide the property located at 9525 Orchard Road as C, Commercial and W/O, Wetland Open Space. EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM (Include a description of background, benefits, and recommendations.) REQUEST: The City has received a request from Mr. Brian Koch and Mr. Gary Meuwissen (the applicants ) to amend the City of Waconia s Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the applicants are requesting the property located at 9525 Orchard Road be re-guided as Commercial (C) and Wetland/Open Space (W/O) rather than the current guidance of Rural (R) (see attached land use map). The applicants have indicated that the request to re-guide the property is to allow for a future bus garage on the subject parcel in close proximity to the schools and the development of other future commercial uses along the improved highway corridor. BACKGROUND: With the construction of the new high school to the north of the subject property and the future County 110 Highway improvements the applicants have indicated that this area should be guided as a commercial use. The construction of CSAH 110 will be done in two segments over 2017 and 2018 and will include the following: 2017 Road Improvements to allow for the opening of the new high school 1. Roundabout at the intersection of Hwy. 5 and Orchard Road 2. Improvement and westerly extension of Community Drive 3. Extension of CSAH 110 north along the Orchard Road alignment to the intersection with the extension of Community Drive 4. Roundabout at the intersection of CSAH 110 and Community Drive 5. Improvement and cul-de-sac of 94 th Street east of CSAH 110 alignment 2018 Road Improvements 1. Extension of CSAH 110 north from Community Drive roundabout 2. Roundabout at the intersection of CSAH 110 and CSAH 10 just north of Country Ponds residential development 3. CSAH 10 road improvements up to Sterling Hills Development to allow for trail and roadway improvements. The improvements are being completed in conjunction with the expansion and construction of the high school project and the Carver County Transportation Plan. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CITY CODE The information stated below is taken from Table 3-8 of the Land Use Plan section of the Waconia Comprehensive Plan which describes the acceptable land uses and associated zoning districts for the land use categories indicated above: 9

11 Category Land Uses Zoning Districts Rural Includes farming and very low density housing A, Agricultural District (not exceeding one house per 40 acres). Locations shown as Rural are not planned to be annexed to the City of Waconia. Commercial Businesses providing retail trade or services for individuals or businesses. Also includes office buildings B-1, Highway Business District B-4, Health Care Business District Wetland/Open Space Includes wetland and floodplains. C, Conservation District Any other zoning district The Waconia Comprehensive Plan s Land Use Plan chapter translates the community vision for growth and conservation into a recommended physical pattern of neighborhoods, commercial and employment areas, roads and parks. Further, the chapter states The Land Use Plan will be used by the City in making decisions about private development proposals, and the location, size and timing of public improvements. The Land Use Plan chapter of the Waconia Comprehensive Plan includes: 1. Objectives for land use 2. Policies to guide land use and community design decisions 3. A map of the desired future pattern of land use. The Planning Commission should consider the land use goals, objectives, and policies stated in the Land Use Plan chapter of the Waconia Comprehensive Plan and determine if the proposed re-guidance of 9525 Orchard Road is appropriate. Further, the Planning Commission should consider the additional information provided in the entirety of the Comprehensive Plan as it relates to this application. The Waconia Comprehensive Plan states These criteria should be considered when reviewing changes to the plan: 1. The change is consistent with the goals and objectives or other elements of the Waconia Comprehensive Plan. 2. The change does not create an adverse impact on public facilities and services that cannot be mitigated. Public facilities and services include roads, sewers, water supply, drainage, schools, police, fire and parks. 3. Development resulting from the change does not create an undue impact on surrounding properties. Such development should be consistent with the physical character of the surrounding neighborhood or would upgrade and improve its viability. 4. The change allows a more viable transition to the planned uses on adjacent properties than the current land use. 5. The change does not have a significant adverse impact on the natural environment including trees, slopes, and groundwater, or the impact could be mitigated by improvements on the site or in the same vicinity. 6. There is a change in City policies or neighborhood characteristics that would justify a change. 7. The change corrects an error made in the original plan. 8. There is a community or regional need identified in the comprehensive plan for the proposed land use or service. 9. The change helps the City meet its life-cycle and affordable housing objectives. 10. The change does not adversely impact any landmarks or other historically significant structures or properties unless mitigated through relocation. Metropolitan Council regulations state that if any municipality changes any part of its comprehensive plan, it must submit the comprehensive plan amendment to the Metropolitan Council for review. As part of the submittal requirements municipalities must allow adjacent governments, affected special districts, and affected school districts up to 60 days to review the comprehensive plan amendment. City staff has notified all adjacent and affected jurisdictions and received no comments in either support or opposition to the proposed amendment. 10

12 Finally, City Ordinance Section , Subd. 6, requires the Planning Commission to hold at least one Public Hearing after not less than ten (10) days nor more than thirty (30) days notice of time and place of such hearing, published in the designated official newspaper of the City. Further, Ordinance requires that the notice contain the description of the land and the proposed changes. The identical notice is required to be mailed to all property owners within 350 feet of the outside boundaries of the land proposed to be amended or rezoned. A notice shall also be sent to the affected Township Clerk by certified mail not less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing. PUBLIC NOTICE/COMMENT: The notice was published in the WACONIA PATRIOT on January 19 th, 2017 and posted at Waconia City Hall. Individual notices were sent to property owners within 350 feet of the subject parcel and a copy was sent via certified mail to the Waconia Township Clerk. As of the date and time of this report staff has not received any public comments regarding this application. CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission should hold a public hearing and consider the Comp Plan Amendment submitted by Mr. Brian Koch and Mr. Gary Meuwissen and make a recommendation with findings to be considered by the City Council at their regular meeting on Tuesday, February 21 st, ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Public Hearing Notice (1 page) Attachment 2: Application/Amendment Request (2 pages) Attachment 3: Land Use Map Existing and Proposed (1 page) 11

13 CITY OF WACONIA, MN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Waconia, MN, will hold a public hearing on February 2 nd, 2017 at 6:30 p.m., at the Waconia City Hall, 201 South Vine Street, Waconia, MN, to consider a Comprehensive Plan Amendment application submitted by Brian Koch and Gary Meuwissen for the property located at 9525 Orchard Road and legally described as follows: PID # , CARVER COUNTY, MN The property includes approximately 31 acres and is located north of Highway 5 and east of Orchard Road. The existing land use, as designated in the Comprehensive Plan, indicates the subject area as Rural (R). The amendment would guide the future development of the subject parcel as Commercial (C) and Wetland/Open Space (W/O). Pertinent information pertaining to this request is available at City Hall. Interested persons may submit written or oral comments pertaining to this matter any time prior to the hearing, or at the hearing on February 2 nd, Written comments will be distributed to the Planning Commission for review and consideration. Please submit written comments by mail, or in person as follows: Mail/in person: Attention: Lane L. Braaten, 201 South Vine Street, Waconia, MN lbraaten@waconia.org By: WACONIA PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: Lane L. Braaten, Community Development Director (Published in the Waconia Patriot on January 19 th, 2017) 12

14 13

15 14

16 15