planning commission meeting tuesday, april 7,2020 7:00 … · 2020. 4. 14. · planning commission...

-

PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Tuesday, April 7,2020

7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL – ADOPT AGENDA 2. MINUTES December 10, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS

a. Public hearing to consider a request from Simon Properties amending the Albertville

Premium Outlet Mall Planned Unit Development changing the design and size of their freestanding signs.

6. OTHER BUSINESS

None 7. ADJOURNMENT

1

ALBERTVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2019

DRAFT MINUTES

ALBERTVILLE CITY HALL 7:00 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL – ADOPT AGENDA

Chair Buhrmann called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

Maeghan Becker conducted roll call.

Present: Chair Buhrmann and Commissioners, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson and Council Liaison Halling.

Absent: Hudson.

Others Present: City Planner Alan Brixius, Building Permit Technician Maeghan Becker, Noah Larson and Scott Dahlke with Heauring Meadows, Vikram Aggarwal and Erin Witt with Goddard School, Randy K owner of the Cottages of Albertville, and the following Albertville residents: Larry Boller, Dale Weiss, Andrew Sipple, Sarah Hansen, Jonathan Wilkes, Amber Kantor, John Vetsch, Bill Holman and Jason Karolevitz. Please see attached sign- in sheet dated December 10, 2019 for other people that attended the meeting.

Motioned by Klecker, seconded by Anderson, to approve the agenda. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson and Halling. Nays: None. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

2. MINUTES

Motioned by Brempell, seconded by Anderson to approve the August 13, 2019 Planning Commission meeting minutes. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson Halling. Nays: None. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Regular Meeting of December 10, 2019 2

3. PUBLIC HEARINGS

A. Public hearing to consider a request from Heuring Meadows, LLC and Krishna LLC, for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and a zoning map amendment from B-2 Limited Business to PUD Planned Unit Development, a preliminary plat, and PUD development stage site and building plan review to consider a development of 26 townhomes, 159 unit apartment building, and a 10,427 square foot daycare facility on Outlot A, Heuring Meadows at the northwest corner of CR19 and 53rd Street.

Brixius presented the application and packet for the Heuring Meadows Commons.

Heuring Meadow LLC and Krishna LLC are pursuing a multiple use development on an 11.8-acre site entitled Outlot A, Heuring Meadows. Said site is located at the Northwest quadrant of the County Road 19 / 53rd Street intersection.

This multiple use development is intended to consist of 26 townhomes, 159-unit apartment building, and a 10,427 square foot daycare facility. To facilitate the development proposal the following development applications have been requested,

1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment. To change the guided land use from commercial to

high density residential.

2. Zoning Map Amendment: Changing the zoning from B-2 limited business to PUD Planned Unit Development. This is to allow the multiple uses and design features such as the shared private street, shared parking, private playground, etc.

3. PUD Development Stage site and building review.

4. Preliminary Plat.

Attachments:

Exhibit A. Proposed Land Use Map Exhibit B. Site Survey Exhibit C. Preliminary Plat/Site Plan Exhibit D-1. Project Narrative Heuring Meadows Exhibit D-2. Project Narrative Goddard School Exhibit E-1. Site Plan Detail Exhibit E-2. Site Plan Detail Exhibit F. Cross Section View Shed Exhibit G-1. Grading Plan Detail Exhibit G-2. Grading Plan Detail Exhibit H-1. Utility Plan Detail


Exhibit H-2. Utility Plan Detail Exhibit I-1. Storm Sewer Detail Exhibit I-2. Storm Sewer Detail Exhibit J. Landscape Plan Exhibit K. Townhome Elevation Exhibit L. Townhome Floorplan Exhibit M. Townhome Color Elevation Exhibit N. Apartment Elevation Exhibit O-1. Apartment Floorplan 1st/Garage Exhibit O-2. Apartment Floor plan 2nd/3rd

Exhibit P. Apartment Color Elevation Exhibit Q. Goddard Elevation Exhibit R. Goddard Floorplan Exhibit S. Goddard Color Exhibit T. SFR Traffic Study Exhibit U. County Assessor Email Exhibit V. City Engineer Report Exhibit W. Public Comments

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS

Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment

The proposed project site is guided for Commercial land use and zoned B-2 Limited Business (see Exhibit D). The current project includes a commercial daycare; however, the predominant land use is proposed to be residential, consisting of 159-unit apartment complex and 26 townhome units. Any changes in land use or zoning is a policy change for the City Council. The current request is a change in land use and requires the City to amend its Comprehensive plan and change the zoning on the property if it finds the project to be acceptable.

Section 300.1F of the Albertville zoning code outlines the following criteria for evaluating a zoning change or plan amendment:

1. The proposed action is considered in relation to specific policies and provisions of and

found consistent with the official City Comprehensive Plan. Comment: The proposed development requires an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. The Albertville Comprehensive Plan guides the Land along CR 19 for Commercial uses. In 2018, the City Council adopted the following pace of growth goal and policies that are applicable to the current request:


Goal 2: The Vision Study Policies and Proposed Land Use Plan guide the City’s desired land uses and development patterns. However, the City wishes to be open to potential land uses and / or development options that may not be in line with the stated ambitions of this Vision Study.

1. The Vision Study policies and land uses will represent the expressed goals of the City,

however, land use and/or development options that are in conflict with the Vision Study may pursue City Council feedback prior to submitting a development application with the submission to concept plan and narrative to the City Council.

2. Concept Plan submissions must be received two weeks prior to a Council meeting

where the item is to be considered to allow the concept plan and narrative to be included in the Council packet and to allow time for Council consideration.

3. All concept plans will be weighed against the policies of the Vision Study and

changing conditions within the community to determine if the new project has merit and benefit.

4. The Council discussion and direction on a concept plan shall be advisory only and

does not represent any project approvals.

In review of the goals and policies the following policies are available both in support and in opposition to a land use change:

Policies in Support of the Land Use Change:

Pace of Growth

Goal 1: Manage growth that provides quality development and doesn’t fiscally burden the community.

Comment: This project will consist of high-end market rate apartments and townhomes under single ownership and management. The apartment buildings will feature highly durable building materials. The apartments will offer an amenity package that includes on-site property management, 24-hour property maintenance, tot lot playground, community room, fitness room, and secure underground parking. The individual apartments will have a washer/dryer in each unit, dishwasher, microwave, LTV, and individual heating and air conditioning. Apartments will be a mix of studio, one bedroom, and two-bedroom units. Anticipated rent ranges will be $1,000.00 to $1,700.00 a month.

Twenty-six townhome units will abut the sites west and north boundary. The units will be a two-story design with pitched roof and attached two-car garage. The townhomes have durable exterior finishes. The townhomes will be primarily designed with three bedrooms. Anticipated rents for the townhomes will range from $1,200.00 to $1,800.00.


City Staff forwarded the building plans to the Wright County Associates and requested an estimated market value and tax generation from the various proposed land uses. The results are as follows:

Land Use Estimated

Market Value

Total Taxes

Taxes per Acre

159 Unit Apartment $15,500,000 $296,000 $43,478 26 Townhomes $3,000,000 $56,100 $17,261 Commercial Daycare $1,500,000 $53,800 $33,210

In addition to property taxes, the residential development will generate $2,291,393.09 in utility service charges. The service utility charges will include SAC, WAC, storm water connection, building permits, trunk sewer, trunk water, park dedication and administrative fees.

The cost of extending utilities for residential development will be a burden of the developer. The developer shall pay for all on-site utility, street and development costs associated with the development plan. The developer shall also be responsible for street and intersection improvements related to turn lanes and intersection improvements of the 53rd Street – CR 19 Intersection.

Residential

Goal 2: Provide a variety of housing options to meet the life cycle needs of Albertville residents.

Policies:

2. Albertville has a fair balance of housing densities as well as a large supply of medium and

high density residential land use near its borders within other communities. Albertville will limit future multiple family development to locations currently zoned for multiple family land uses. Except for senior housing, no new locations have been identified for multiple family land use.

4. Adhere to the highest community design and construction standards for new

construction and redevelopment projects.

5. Accompany medium and high density development with adequate accessory amenities such as garages, parking, open space, landscaping, and recreational facilities to insure a safe, functional, and desirable living environment.


Comment: In review of this project, the proposed townhomes are similar in design and density to the cottages located immediately north of the project site. These townhomes provide a block of transitional housing between the apartment complex and the single family neighborhood to the west.

Albertville has 302 apartment units within the City. All are 29 years or older. The current housing stock is affordable with limited amenities. Lacking within the City are higher amenity market rate rental apartment options that are appealing to households that are looking for rental options above basic apartments.

The proposed apartment building is proposed to be constructed of durable exterior finishes including:

Base: Decorative precast concrete.

Wall Façade: Combination materials including; lap siding, board and batten siding, cultured brick veneers. The building exteriors use different materials and treatments to provide interesting elevation. Each apartment will have its own deck inset with pre- finished railing.

Roof: Pre-finished metal flashing and asphalt shingle roof.

The apartment project will offer a range of amenities, including on-site management, 24- hour maintenance, Tot lot playground, underground parking, party room, community room, and exercise room. Individual apartments shall include washer/dryers, dishwasher, and microwave in each apartment and individual unit heating and air conditioning. These amenities are not available in Albertville’s current multiple housing stock.

The site plan provides for a private playground and parking for both residents and their guests.

The site and building plan shall be reviewed in detail in this report. Through the development stage review the City will outline conditions to request compliance with City code.

Policies Against the Land Use Change:

Pace of Growth

Goal 1: Manage growth that provides quality development and doesn’t fiscally burden the community.


Policies

4. Maintain current planned commercial and land use patterns and zoning.

Currently, Albertville land use plan guides 468.66 acres of land for commercial use. 195.78 acres or 41.8% of the guided commercial land are currently vacant and available for future commercial growth. The adjoining land uses are single family residential land uses to the west and townhome development to the north. In this respect, the City must determine whether future commercial land uses and site design is better compatible than the expansion of residential land use and the proposed site design.

Commercial

Goal 1: The City will continue to promote commercial development by the City taking advantage of its access to Interchange 94 and the growing population of Albertville and its adjoining communities.

Policies:

1. The City will promote commercial development within locations of the City’s

commercial areas as guided in the Albertville Proposed Land Use Plan.

Comment: The proposed development would retain commercial land use development at the immediate corner of 53rd Street and CR 19. The plan will include the development of the 10,427 square foot Goddard School (Daycare) on 1.62-acre site. The balance of the site, 9.92 acres is proposed for residential development.

Currently, Albertville proposed land use guides 468 acres of land for commercial land use and another 114 acres for business park, which allows for commercial development. In combination, the City has 582 acres of land guided for commercial development. Of this land area, 340 acres, or 58% is undeveloped and available for future commercial development.

The proposed project site is 11.54 of development land, which represents 2% of the City’s vacant commercially guided land.

In support of the City’s ambitions for commercial and industrial growth is the need to provide a variety of workforce housing for the employees that are filling the employment opportunities created by the City’s commercial and industrial growth.

The Comprehensive Plan provides policies both for and against the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning change. In this respect, the following outline shall also be considered in determining if the land use change is appropriate.


2. The proposed land is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area.

The surrounding land uses to the subject site include:

Land Use North Townhomes South Commercial Office East CR19/Commercial Zoning West Single Family Residential

Comment: The proposed site plan is contained within the proposed site with no direct connections into the adjoining neighborhoods with the exception of the site access onto 53rd

Street. The site plan will influence the development and access to the single-family lot immediately northeast of the site. In this respect, the site design must make some accommodations for this property.

The site layout acknowledges the adjoining land use in its design. Along the west and north property line, townhomes and ponding are proposed to provide a land use transition and a distance separation between the single-family neighborhood and the high-density apartments and commercial use. The townhome lots are 140 feet deep, which is equal to the single-family lots to the west. The townhomes mimic the density and design of the Albertville Cottages, located immediately north of the site. The townhomes provide 45- foot building setbacks and 35-foot patio setbacks from the west lot line. The applicant proposes to retain the existing trees and add new trees to act as a landscape buffer along the west lot line, providing additional screening to the project site.

The daycare is to be located at the southeast corner of the site. This use would be permitted within the current B-2 zoning. The building and parking layout is located 275 feet away from the west property line. The site plan provided for a small berm, landscaping, a drainage pond and parking lot between the business and homes to the west. The daycare commercial use is compatible with office use to the south and apartments to the north.

The apartments are located in the center of the site, 185 feet away from the site’s west lot line. The apartment parking is underground with surface parking surrounding the building. The apartment building will be 3.5 stories above grade. The applicant has provided a cross section illustration of the visual impact of the apartments from the single- family homes along Kalland.


In locating the apartments, the site offers the following advantages:

1. The site is located along CR 19, a major collector street within the City. This street will accommodate the traffic of the project site, directing it to major destinations within the City and to the I-94 freeway without the intrusion on lower density neighborhoods. A traffic study has been prepared for this project and its findings are addressed later in this report.

2. The site places the apartments in close proximity to commercial goods and

services benefiting both the apartment residents and local businesses through expanding consumer traffic. In considering the residential change of land use, the City also must consider how this land use will differ from the current guided commercial land use. Inherent in commercial development is a variety of commercial uses such as parking lots, site lighting, truck deliveries, trash collection, which may have greater impact on adjoining land uses than identified uses.

3. The proposed land use conforms to the performance standards of the Albertville

zoning ordinance.

Comment: The applicant is requesting a rezoning to planned unit development to allow for the proposed mix of land uses and flexibilities associated with a private street, common facilities and site design flexibilities.

Compliance with City zoning shall be presented later in this report as part of the detailed development stage site and building plan review.

4. The proposed use will not depreciate the area in which it is proposed.

Comment: This is a common contention with any land use change. There have been numerous nationwide studies that indicated that quality new development does not negatively impact the value of adjoining properties.

For a local comparison, we have researched the property values of single-family homes abutting the City’s current multiple-family housing sites. The Wright County’s tax information shows continued appreciation of estimated market value for properties abutting Westwind apartments, Pheasant Ridge apartments, and Albertville Cottages over the past five years.

The proposed site plan attempts to provide a townhome transition area between the single-family land use to the west and the higher-density apartments along CR19. The transition, a physical separation, moves the higher-density apartments away from the single-family neighborhood.

5. The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not


overburden the City’s service capacity.

Comment: Sanitary sewer and water are immediately available to the site. These existing utilities are properly sized and have available capacity to accommodate the proposed land use.

The extension of utilities through the site will be at the expense of the developer. The development is also required to pay for the outright costs including SAC/WAC, truck utility fees, park dedication fees, and stormwater drainage charges. The site stormwater plan includes a stormwater retention pond designed within the site and sized to accommodate, retain and treat stormwater generated from the site. The applicant’s narrative estimates site investment of $26 million. The estimated tax generation form the proposed projects is shown below.

Land Use Estimated

Market Value

Total Taxes

Taxes per Acre

159 Unit Apartment $15,500,000 $296,000 $43,478 26 Townhomes $3,000,000 $56,100 $17,261 Commercial Daycare

$1,500,000 $53,800 $33,210

6. Traffic generation by the proposed use is within the capabilities of the streets

serving the project.

Comment: (See Exhibit T). The City required a traffic study for this project to identify the traffic issues associated with the development of this site. This traffic study was prepared by the City Consultant for the City and not by the applicant. The specific conclusions can be found in Exhibit T. The general conclusions are offered as follows:

1. The current level of service of the CR19 and 53rd Street intersection is

LOSA.

2. Traffic in the general area will grow at approximately 2% per year.

3. The proposed development is estimated to generate approximately 1555 trips per day (ADT) (184 AM peak and 201 PM peak)

4. The projected traffic generation will create the need for improvement to the

CR19/53rd Street intersection including turn lanes and signalization with full build out.

5. With the intersection improvements, the level of service for the intersection

is expected to operate at a LOSA.


6. The traffic study does not expect any significant impacts on Kalland Avenue NE, with queuing at the intersection from the proposed development on traffic signal.

The traffic study only addresses the proposed project land uses and site design. The study did not give attention to the potential site build out as commercial use.

In calculating the potential commercial build out of the site, the following steps were followed:

1. We investigated existing commercial areas in Albertville including Albertville

Crossing, Mooney Addition, Shoppes at Prairie Run, and Albertville Plaza to determine land area building coverage. These examples allow staff to determine the percent of building coverage for the commercial area. The average building coverage is 16% of land area.

2. The project site has 11.54 acres of the required street dedication. Assuming

a 16% building coverage, the project site would support 80,400 square feet of building floor area.

3. Based on the current B-2 zoning, we would assume that commercial

development would consist of a neighborhood shopping center offering a variety of retail, service, entertainment and dining uses. Based on ITE Trip Operation, 10th Addition, average daily trip generation for shopping center is 42.7 trips per 1,000 square feet of gross leasable floor area. Using the aforementioned characteristics, the commercial build out of the 11.54-acre site would support approximately 80,000 square feet of building floor area. Using national traffic generation standards, the traffic generation is shown below:

80,000 ÷ 1,000 = 80 x 42.74 = 3,419 ADT

In evaluating the traffic impacts, the proposed project is estimated to reduce the site’s traffic generation from the site.

The improvements of CR19 and 53rd Street intersection must be undertaken with any development of the project site, regardless of the land use options being considered.

Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Rezoning Conclusion

The change of land use and zoning remains a policy decision of the Planning Commission and the City Council. The preceding pages evaluated the current proposal against the criteria outlined in Section 300.1F of the Albertville Zoning Code.


The City may choose to deny the land use and zoning change based on the current proposed land use plan and policies that support the retention of the City’s commercially guided land.

The City may choose to approve the Comprehensive Plan amendment and zoning change with the following findings:

1. The Comprehensive Plan allows consideration of land use changes based on

ability to fit a specific site.

2. The proposed project provides a variety of housing choices within the City. The apartment project is market rate and offers design amenities not currently available within the City.

3. The site location offers access to major roadways and commercial areas that will

be convenient to its residents and provide market support for nearby businesses.

4. The site design attempts to reduce compatibility issues through screening, land use transitions, building location and site design.

5. The townhomes are similar to the land uses north of the site in density and design

and provide a land use transition and distance separation between the residential neighborhood to the west and the proposed apartment and commercial uses.

6. The proposed site design and land uses may offer a more compatible land use

relationship with adjoining land uses than future commercial build out for the site.

7. The project will not overburden City utilities and sewer.

8. The project land use reduces the traffic generation of the site when compared to commercial build out.

Preliminary Plat

The applicant is proposing to subdivide Outlot A Heuring Meadows into three lots

Area Land Use Lot 1 70,503 Square Feet Commercial

Daycare Lot 2 290,345 Square Feet Apartments, Tot Lot,

Pond, Private Drive

Lot 3 141,573 Square Feet 26 Townhomes


The PUD is necessary to allow access/frontage on a private street. In review of the preliminary plat, the following requirements shall be provided and approved prior to the final plat approval:

1. The submission of Association Documents that outline the responsibilities for the

maintenance and upkeep of the shared facilities (i.e., street, Tot Lot, parking area, pond).

2. Separate from the final plat, applicant must provide a shared access easement for all

of the private drive. The easement shall run to all properties within the subdivision and include the property exception in the northeast corner of the plat.

3. The plat abuts County Road 19 and is subject to County review and approval.

Applicant shall secure County approval and abide by County conditions of approval.

4. Subject to the City Engineer’s review of all lot line easements and easement width

over the ponding area and utility corridors. 5. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City outlining

responsibility for required improvements and financing of improvements.

Planned Unit Development – Development Stage

The PUD zoning district allows for a mix of land uses in the coordinated master site plan. If the PUD zoning district is approved, the Planning Commission will review the Development Stage Site and Building Plan.

Density

The applicant is proposing 159 apartment units and 26 townhome units over 9.92 acres, for a density of 18.6 units per acre. Within a PUD, the maximum allowable density shall be determined by standards negotiated and agreed upon by the City.

The proposed density for the project exceeds the maximum density permitted by the City’s High-Density zoning district of 14.5 units per acre. The City must determine if the requested density is warranted based on the site and building design amenities.

Setbacks

All the buildings proposed exceed the required setback around the perimeter of the site abutting adjoining properties on public streets. Within the project site, all proposed buildings meet the PUD setback of 15 feet from back of curb of street. All proposed buildings meet setbacks between buildings within the project site.


Roadways

The proposed project site will have three connections to public streets.

1. A right in/right out street connection is proposed at the northeast corner of the site from CR19. The design and permitting of this curb cut shall be subject to the review and approval of Wright County. Applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with turn lanes and curb cuts.

2. Goddard School is proposing curb cut access from 53rd Street. The curb cut

aligns with Kyler Avenue to the south, creating a full intersection.

3. A second 53rd Street curb cut is proposed onto 53rd Street to serve as the primary access to the residential development.

The SRF Traffic Study evaluated the proposed project density and street layout and noted that development of this site will create the need for improvement on 53rd Street and the signalization of the 53rd Street/CR19 intersection. These improvements will be needed regardless of the proposed project is approved or if the site builds out as commercial.

Traffic forecasts indicate that the proposed project will generate less traffic on a daily basis than a future commercial build out of the site.

The traffic study also supports that with the 53rd Street/CR19 improvements, there will not be significant impacts on Kalland Avenue.

A private street is proposed within the project site. This street has a 24-foot drive surface. In considering the private drive, the following conditions apply:

1. The street shall meet the construction standards of City public streets with regard to

subsurface, paving and curbing.

2. The private street shall be covered with a separate access easement that runs to each project site lot with the exception of Lot 1, northwest of the project site.

3. The private street shall be signed “No Parking.”

4. Applicant shall provide a long-term maintenance agreement for the private street

outlining street maintenance and costs responsibilities to each lot. Said agreement shall allow the City to inspect and require street improvements if street conditions decline.


Townhomes

The site plan has a row of townhomes along the west lot line. The depth of the townhome lots is 140 feet, similar to the lot depth of the homes to the west.

The townhomes’ location provides the following setbacks:

1. 89 feet from the north property line 2. 38-45 feet from the west property line 3. 70 feet between townhomes garage face to garage face 4. 15 feet from townhome to private street.

The townhomes are proposed to be two-story, three-bedroom units. In review of the townhome layout, we offer the following comments:

1. The units meet the floor area, width and building height requirements for

townhomes.

2. Each unit has a two-car garage. The separation between buildings provides for parking in front of the garage doors without encumbering the access drive. In total, each unit has four parking spaces.

3. The drive aisle between the townhomes is 25 feet in width, which meets code.

4. The City requires all units to have a mix of exterior materials with 25% being brick,

stone, or an equivalent approved by Council. The applicants building elevation and photo show a mix of materials and variable textures. In review of the elevation, the applicant is required to verify the percentage of brick finish on the building faces, deducting doors and windows.

5. Each unit will have separate utility connections.

The townhomes provide a transitional land use that separates the single-family neighborhood to the west from the apartments and commercial property. The side of the townhomes will face the single-family lots.

Apartments

A 159-unit apartment building is located in the center of the project site. This building is proposed to be three stories with underground parking. In review of the apartments, we offer the following comments:

1. The City’s high-density zoning district limits building height to three stories or

thirty-five feet. The building meets this standard, where first floor is on grade. However, where the parking structure is above grade, the building height standard is exceeded.


Section 1100.03A of the Albertville Zoning Code allows buildings taller than the district standard, provided the following conditions are met:

• The site is capable of accommodating the increased intensity of use.

Comment: See the Comprehensive zoning discussion.

• The increased intensity of use does not cause an increase of traffic volume beyond the capacity of the street. Comment: See Traffic Study

• Public utilities and services are adequate.

Comment: Utilities are available to the site and properly sized. The apartment will have a fire suppression system,

• For each additional story over 3 stories, or for each additional 10 feet above

40 feet in height, front and side yard setback is increased by 5%. Comment: The City’s high-density zoning district requires 30-foot front yard setback. The minimum proposed setback along CR19 is 37.2 feet. This meets the standard above.

Based on the aforementioned criteria, the building height is compliant within the PUD.

2. Parking. The City requires apartment buildings to provide at least two parking stalls

per unit, one of which must be enclosed. The site plan provides 159 underground parking stalls and 161 surface parking stalls, for a total of 320 parking stalls. Eight of the parking stalls are disability parking stalls. The proposed layout meets the City standards for amounts of parking.

The City requires the following of parking lot dimensions of parking stalls 9 feet wide by 20 feet long, with a 24-foot-wide drive aisle. In review of the site plan, we note:

• The parking lot west of Goddard School does not meet the stall length

requirement. These stalls shall be revised to 20-foot depth.

• Applicant must provide a dimensioned plan that illustrates that the underground parking meets City dimension standards.

• The underground parking must offer two points of access which will reduce

complicated maneuvering.

• The parking lot west of Goddard School takes access from the North/South private drive approximately 50 feet from the 53rd Street intersection. We would recommend that this parking curb cut be relocated 100 feet or more from the south property line to allow greater uninterrupted stacking of automobiles at the site egress point.


3. Trash Handling Equipment. The apartment basement plan illustrates indoor storage of

trash handling equipment. The site plan illustrates a pad for dumpsters to be rolled to for garbage pickup. This location will not interfere with traffic entering or exiting the building.

4. Building Materials. The applicant has provided a building elevation and elevation photo to

illustrate the appearance of the proposed apartment building. The building exterior provides a variety of materials, textures and colors. The exterior materials include decorative concrete panels for the exposed garage walls, cultured brick veneers at the building base, corner treatments and entrances. Lap and board and button siding are used for the majority of the building. The roof is asphalt shingle. In review of the building materials, we note:

• Applicant must provide details of the material proposed lap and board and

button siding will be. • Applicant shall provide a percentage breakdown of the various materials for

each building side. Commercial Daycare

The proposed Goddard School will be a 10,427 square foot commercial daycare building with surrounding play areas. In review of the commercial daycare, we offer the following comments:

1. This will be a State-licensed daycare and shall meet standards for State licensing. 2. The building and play areas meet all required setbacks. 3. The site plan proposed 63 parking stalls, 8 of which are disability parking stalls.

The parking number meets code. 4. Some of the stalls have an 18-foot length, these stalls must be revised to meet the

City Standard of 20 feet. 5. All parking will have continuous curb and gutter, paved surface and will be striped. 6. We have concerns for the north end of the parking lot. The current design may

present an attractive shortcut to 53rd Street for the apartment residence. To discourage this traffic issue, staff recommends that parking lot design be revised to provide a peninsula extending from the east curb line of the private street/parking lot to block southbound apartment traffic and provide a one-way daycare exit to the private drive north of the daycare.

7. The building elevation for the daycare meets the City’s requirements for exterior

materials.


8. The daycare is proposing to locate their trash enclosure on the south side of the

building. The trash enclosure will be designed as an accessory building that replicates the design in materials of the principal building. The Planning Commission and Council must comment on the acceptability of the trash enclosure location. This location may be approved as part of the PUD. The alternative would be to locate the trash enclosure north of the building along the private drive.

9. The applicant has provided fence detail that will surround the designated play

areas. The fence is an attractive rail metal fence in black. The perimeter fence will be 6 feet tall, interior fence will be 4 feet tall.

10. Applicant shall provide a lighting and photometric plan for all exterior lighting for the

daycare. Light fixtures, poles, and light levels must meet City standards. Landscape Plan

The applicant has submitted a landscape plan for the entire PUD. In review of the landscape plan, we offer the following comments:

1. Review of the plan materials and sizes, we find that they meet the City

minimum standards.

2. The applicant is proposing to retain existing trees along the west lot line. We recommend that the tree line be inspected and any damaged, diseased, or dead trees be replaced.

3. Landscape plan shows the addition of a combination of coniferous trees and shade trees west of the townhomes to further screen the project site.

4. Shade trees are proposed around the apartment building. This mixture of trees will provide some vertical screening of the taller apartment building.

5. The landscape plan also provides for perimeter building landscaping of shrubs and ornamental trees at the base of the apartments and townhomes.

6. Trees along CR19 must be relocated out of the right-of-way and within the project site.

7. Understory shrub planting shall be required along the west side of the parking lot west of the daycare. The landscape plan shall be revised to show these additional plants, which are needed to screen headlights from the private street and properties to the west.


8. The landscape plan states that all landscaping and grass areas shall be irrigated with an underground automatic irrigation system.

9. All areas disrupted will be sodded or seeded.

Site Lighting

The site plan illustrates location of streetlights along the private street. Applicant shall provide a lighting and photometric plan for all exterior project lighting. Said plans shall include:

1. 90-degree cutoff light fixtures with shielded light source.

2. Pole heights and location.

3. Photometric plan covering the entire site.

Individual light plans for each lot development shall be required to address all exterior lightning, both freestanding and building mounted lights.

CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATIONS

The proposed project has numerous layers and requires City action in a specific order. The following conclusions and recommendations are offered in order of priority:

Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Map Amendment

For this project to move ahead, the current guided commercial land use must be changed to allow the mix of residential and commercial use at this site. Land use changes are a policy decision of the Planning Commission and City Council. In this regard, the following options are presented for Planning Commission and Council consideration:

Motion to Deny the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the zoning map amendment changing the B-2 zoning to PUD for the subject site with the following findings:

1. The current guided land use map and B-2 zoning is appropriate for the site.

2. The City Vision Study policies support maintaining current planned commercial

land use patterns and zoning.

3. Continue to promote commercial development, taking advantage of the City’s access to I-94 and growing population of Albertville and surrounding cities.

Motion to approve the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment and zoning map amendment changing the B-2 zoning to PUD for the subject site with the following


findings:

1. The Comprehensive Plan allows consideration of land use changes based on ability to fit a specific site.

2. The proposed project provides a variety of housing choices within the City. The

apartment project is market rate and offers design amenities not currently available within the City.

3. The site location offers access to major roadways and commercial areas that will be

convenient to its residents and provide market support for nearby businesses.

4. The site design attempts to reduce compatibility issues through screening, land use transitions, building location and site design that may not be available with a commercial build out of the site.

5. The townhomes are similar to the land uses north of the site in density and design

and provide a land use transition and distance separation between the residential neighborhood to the west and the proposed apartment and commercial uses.

6. The proposed site design and land uses may offer a more compatible land use

relationship with adjoining land uses than future commercial build out for the site.

7. The project will not overburden City utilities and sewer.

8. The project land use is estimated to reduce the traffic generation from the site over a commercial build out of the site.

9. The proposed land use will contribute to the City tax base and will generate

significant fees for the City utility and park funds.

Preliminary Plat

Action on the applicant’s preliminary plan following the consideration of the Comprehensive Plan and zoning change.

If the Comprehensive Plan amendment and zoning change are denied, the Planning Commission may deny the Preliminary Plat.

If the Comprehensive Plan amendment and zoning change are approved, the Preliminary Plat may be approved with the following conditions being addressed as part of the Final Plat.

1. The submission of Association Documents that outline the responsibilities for the

maintenance and upkeep of the shared facilities (i.e., street, Tot Lot, parking area, pond). Said documents shall be subject to the review and approval of the City


Attorney.

2. Separate from the final plat, applicant must provide a shared access easement for all of the private drive. The easement shall run to all properties within the subdivision and include the property exception in the northeast corner of the plat.

3. The plat abuts County Road 19 and is subject to County review and approval.

Applicant shall secure County approval and abide by County conditions of approval.

4. Subject to the City Engineer’s review of all lot line easements and easement width

over the ponding area and utility corridors.

5. Subject to conditions outlined by the City Engineer, December 5, 2019

6. The applicant shall enter into a development contract with the City outlining responsibility for required improvements and financing of improvements.

PUD – Development Stage

If the Comprehensive Plan amendment and change in zoning are denied, the City shall deny the PUD Development Stage request to close out the application.

If the Comprehensive Plan amendment and change in zoning are approved, we recommend approval be subject to the following conditions:

1. No construction of the apartments or townhomes without construction of the 53rd

Street / CR19 improvements and signalization. Cost of these improvements shall be the responsibility of the developer.

2. City approval of the overall project residential density as part of the PUD.

3. County approval of the County road access and 53rd Street/CR19 intersection

improvements.

4. Private street shall be constructed to City design standards. The private street shall be signed “No Parking.”

5. Applicant shall provide association documents that outline long-term maintenance

and cost sharing for the private street. Said document shall allow the City to inspect and require street repairs if the private street falls into disrepair.

6. Applicant shall verify that 25% of townhome exterior wall have a brick finish.

7. City approval of the apartment height as part of the PUD.


8. All parking stalls throughout the site, both residential and commercial, shall be sized

9 feet wide by 20 feet deep. Applicant shall provide a dimension plan illustrating the underground parking meets the City parking dimensional standard.

9. Relocate the parking lot access point for the lot west of Goddard School, 100 feet

north of the site’s south lot line.

10. Applicant is to provide a percentage break of the exterior material on the apartment. Applicant provide detail on the lap siding and board and batten siding.

11. On the daycare site, redesign the north end of the parking lot to prevent apartment

residents from shortcutting through the daycare lot to access 53rd Street. Preserve a daycare exit on to the private street north of the daycare.

12. City consideration of the trash enclosure location.

13. Submission of a lighting and photometric plan for the daycare site.

14. Landscape plan to include:

a. Inspection of existing trees, removal and replacement of any diseased,

damaged, or dead trees.

b. Removal of shade trees and landscaping from the CR19 right-of-way and move these plantings onto the project site.

c. Provide understory planting on the west side of the parking lot west of the

daycare to screen the parking lot and headlight glare.

15. Applicant shall provide a scheduled phasing plan for the PUD that outlines timing of site improvement and building construction.

Brempell asked about the number of parking stalls underground, and number of parking stalls above ground. Brixius responded that there are 159 underground parking stalls and 161 surface stalls between the two lots. Anderson asked about the number of Goddard handicap spots. Brixius responded that each building will meet code for the number of handicap spots needed. There is a mistake on the number of handicap stalls on the Goddard site. Anderson asked if the apartments and townhomes will be all rental or some rental and some owner occupied. Brixius responded stating that they will be all rental. Anderson questioned the right turn only on CSAH 19. Brixius responded that the county will address that right turn only. Anderson is concerned about how that will work.


Anderson questioned how and where emergency vehicles will come in and park. Anderson questioned the impact on schools for the population increase this development will bring. Brixius stated that he has not spoken with the school district. Anderson questioned the number of signals from 50th Street to 57th Street and that there are already 3 stop lights and asked how this development would impact the traffic. Brixius responded that the county would not help with signals being put in for this development and that would fall onto the developer. Buhrmann asked if this developer has asked for any City support or financial help for this project. Brixius responded that they have not requested for any support. Klecker asked about the right in and right out on CSAH 19 and is concerned about the speed limit. Brixius responded that there will be turn lanes coming in from CSAH 19, but the county has not yet approved the access permit and they will dictate the design elements so it properly functions. Klecker wanted to point out that not everyone within the Cottages of Albertville Association was notified of this public hearing for this development. Brixius responded that the public hearing notices that were sent out were mailed according to the legal standards of mailing out public hearing notices. Klecker believes that everyone from the association should have been notified. Klecker questioned if 53rd Street was included in the traffic study. Brixius responded that it was included in the traffic study. Klecker is concerned that 53rd Street narrows and cars will not be able to get through if there are cars parked on either side of the road. Klecker is concerned about the retention pond that is proposed for this development and there is a safety concern with children. He would like it to be fenced or have some type of barrier of protection. Brixius stated that Commissioners could make a condition if they feel that some type of barrier is necessary. Klecker is concerned about the high density that is being proposed in this development. Klecker has a concern that the six-plex town home residents, which will be by the Cottages of Albertville, will cut through the grass to the private road and use that as an exit/entrance point. Brixius responded that we can look at some type of barrier to put between the two developments. Klecker asked about the traffic that the daycare is going to generate and if that was taken into consideration for the traffic study. Brixius responded that it has been included in the traffic study. Scott Dahlke with Civil Engineering Site Design, the product engineer for this proposed development. Dahlke approached the podium and introduced the others included on the development team. Noah Larson with Heuring Meadows LLC, Vikram Aggarwal with Goddard School and Erin Witt from Goddard Systems. Dahlke stated that they have been working with City staff in putting this development together. He said that with some of the concerns that are being


raised, they are willing to work with City staff to address them. If it is acceptable to the Fire Chief, they may look at separating the Goddard parking lot from the apartment complex parking lot. Noah Larson with Heuring Meadows LLC approached the podium to discuss the operations of the multi-family perspective. They are looking to partner with Pinnacle Management, which is a large operator to run the entire project and that they are very experienced with this type of project. Brixius asked Larson to describe the amenities that they are offering. Larson responded that they will have a community room, exercise facility, underground parking, in-unit laundry, a rental office with a full time maintenance and one full time rental agent, along with 3 to 4 care takers that live on site. Klecker asked about the community room and who would be able to use it. Larson responded that the community room would be open to the apartment residents along with the townhome residents. Larson confirmed that the community room would be located in the apartment complex and not a separate building. Brempell questioned the height of the ceilings. Larson responded that the ceiling height will be 9 foot ceilings. Brempell asked the dollar rent per square foot. Larson responded with $1.45 per foot. Brempell and Larson discussed the tenants they are targeting. Larson responded that there is a higher age group that would like to live where their families are, but do not want to own a home. They believe that they will also target younger families as well with the location and proximity to Coborns. Brempell questioned if there is a designated school bus stop area and where that would be located. Dahlke responded that the bus company will most likely want one designated area for the complex and proposed an area by the apartments to create a possible bus pick up site. Brixius stated that we should add this comment as a condition if this is to be approved. Buhrmann asked Brixius and Dahlke what the impact would be if we held the developer to the 14.5 units per acre instead of the 18.6 units per acre. Brixius responded that the impact would be the number of units. Buhrmann is wondering if the reduction of the number of units would come out of the town homes or the apartments. Dahlke and Larson responded that they would have to reconfigure the plans and they are not sure where the reduction would come from at this time. Brempell commented on the unit floor plan and strongly recommended that any two bed units are two bath units as well as opposed to two beds, one bath. Larson responded that he believes there will be a mix of both floor plans, but they are still working with the architect on the floor plans at this time. Klecker is concerned about the density and asked the developer about making the apartments a two story instead of three and the townhomes a two-plex instead of a four-plex. Dahlke responded that would be a significant impact and would take a total reassessment of the project in total. Klecker informed the developer that he believes they have done a tremendous amount of work before presenting this


before the Commissioners. Larson and Dahlke responded that they presented this to the Commissioners back in May of 2019 with a higher density project and were told to move forward. Motioned by Klecker, seconded by Anderson, to open the Public Hearing. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson and Halling. Nays: None. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

Larry Boller, resident of the Cottages of Albertville, approached the podium stating that he is not for or against this project. He gave background on his life. He stated that he went to college in Winona and then moved back to his hometown Chicago. He and his wife moved to Palatine that had a population of 12,000. Most people lived in single family dwellings and the crime rate was non-existent. Shortly after moving, the land started to develop quickly with some federally subsidized housing and the population went up to 22,000. The crime rate went up so much, that the cost of policing was outrunning the ability for the town to pay. Boller stated that there were stabbings, shootings, and 3 buildings that blew up. He would like the Commissioners to take these incidents as a precautionary tale rather than an opposition. Boller is wondering about covenants on the property. Boller asked the developer if they have carbon monoxide abatement in the basement figured out. He said that if they have not, that can be very expensive to fix. Boller asked if there are any handicap apartments or townhomes included in the development if they are looking to have residents over the age of 55.

Dale Weiss, Albertville resident at 5528 Kalland Avenue NE, approached the podium. Weiss indicated that most of his concern is the buffer factor between the development and the houses already existing. Weiss stated that this development will cause additional parking on Kalland Avenue from the apartment and townhome residents. He believes that there should be a fence or more privacy for the existing houses which will also deter children from cutting across the yards. Weiss questioned the future land use of the existing single family home at 5447 Labeaux Avenue NE and what that could possibly develop into. He stated that he is not against the idea of this project, but the developer has been very weak on buffers and that he feels sorry for the people in the houses this abuts to and who live in the Cottages of Albertville on the private streets.

Andrew Sipple, Albertville resident at 5439 Kalland Avenue NE, approached the podium. Sipple stated that he is completely against this development. Sipple stated that the traffic is already an issue and if this project goes in it will be even worse. Sipple stated that the property value of their homes will decrease due to this development and that will affect them. He believes that this is a burden to the city rather than a benefit. Sipple questioned the location of this project, and why they chose this spot rather than all the other land available. Sipple stated that the traffic on 53rd Street and CSAH 19 is horrible in the morning already, and it will increase if this complex comes in. Sipple requested the Commissioners to vote no for this development.


Sarah Hansen, resident of Albertville, approached the podium. Hansen stated that she was involved in the Albertville Centennial Celebration this past year and she loves the small town feel of Albertville. Hansen stated that a lot has changed in Albertville over the past 100 years and held a book up which she stated indicates the history of Albertville. Hansen stated that we are experiencing growth and that our small town needs to be sensible about our limited land use. Hansen stated that there is no city, county or state obligation to provide high density housing for this location. Hansen stated that Albertville is 4.7 square miles; compared to St. Michael, they have 36.38 square miles, and Otsego, 30.53 square miles. Hansen is requesting Commissioners to protect Albertville’s only commercial corridor and to vote no for this development. Hansen contends that we have not seen the best application come in for this location.

Jonathan Wilkes, resident of Albertville at 5486 Kalland Avenue NE, approached the podium. Wilkes stated that he is completely against this development. Wilkes stated that he has a background in law enforcement and that he has seen what these high density housing communities will bring to a community; such as nuisance calls, an increase in law enforcement response, and police responses. Wilkes stated that the traffic will be a huge issue. Wilkes stated that the foot traffic will increase and that people will be cutting through yards and there will be an increase in trash. Wilkes stated that he and his wife moved here due to the lack of high density housing. Wilkes requested Commissioners to vote no for this development project.

Amber Kantor, Albertville resident at 5583 Kalland Avenue NE, approached the podium. Kantor stated that she is raising 3 kids and has lived in her house for the past 10 years and that she lives next to Oakside Park where this development is being proposed. Kantor stated that there are children that flood this area and that this development feels very scary and that there is a possibility of a huge influx of children being proposed with this development. Kantor stated that this proposed development feels very stifling and unsafe and that they would be losing the small town feel of Albertville.

John Vetsch, resident of Albertville at 5618 large Avenue, approached the podium. Vetsch stated that the cost of policing would increase. Vetsch stated that if we allow this rezoning, he believes that other properties will do the same and we will get more multi housing to follow. Vetsch stated that this property is not going anywhere, and that it doesn’t need to develop quickly. Vetsch and Brixius discussed the percentage of floor space on each acre of land up and down CSAH 19. Vetsch mentioned the traffic study paid for by the developer, and questioned who will pay for the stop lights if they are needed so it does not fall onto the tax payers of Albertville. Brixius responded that there would be no residential development allowed until the signal is in place by the developer and that this will be a requirement for approval. Vetsch commented that he hopes this condition does not fall through and land on the tax payers.


Bill Holman, resident of Albertville at 5530 Kalland Avenue at the Cottages of Albertville, approached the podium. Holman stated that they have to maintain their private property. He stated that the Cottages of Albertville Association as a whole does not have police coverage and they have had 4 burglaries, 2 break-ins, and he has reported other incidences. They have had one lady that has fallen because of kids biking around their property and she was so startled. Holman believes that if you build this complex and do not have a fence, they will have an increase in people and kids coming through on their private property. Holman stated that there is a 10mph speed limit, but they cannot enforce it because there is no police protection in their area. Holman stated that the sheriff cannot come in there unless a crime was actually committed. Holman stated that he will be opposed to this development if they do not put a barricade up between the two lots.

Randy K, with Arch Management and Kalland Avenue Properties (owner of the Cottages of Albertville at 5580 Kalland Avenue NE), approached the podium. Randy stated that all the landowners present have purchased their existing land under the assumption that this parcel of land was zoned B-2, and now this developer is trying to change that. Randy’s question to the City and Commissioners is once you allow this to change, when will it stop? If you allow it for one developer, you will have to allow it for another. Under Section 4800 in the Zoning Ordinance, under Planned Unit Development, Section G, it states a PUD is not intended as a means to vary planning and zoning principles. Randy references this to state that if he looks at this proposed plan, he is not sure how many zoning principles are being changed or how many rules are being broken. The rules and regulations are there in order to have an even playground for everybody. Randy believes this development will go up due to money. Randy references Section 4800.3 under the Zoning Ordinance and asked Brixius if all the different lots are going to be subdivided with different owners. Brixius responded that Lot 2 and 3 will be under single ownership and that Lot 1 will be under separate ownership with the daycare. Brixius stated that the Cottages of Albertville went through the same rezoning action that this developer is requesting. Zoning Ordinance 4800.3.B states that no more than approximately 75 units should be built on a single parcel and we are at 159 units. Randy went on to state that the developers are meeting the minimum of all the requirements; he states that they should be going over the minimum. There is no mention of recycling and or trash enclosures. Randy also stated that there are no designated dog areas. He mentioned some traffic conflicts. Randy commented on the proposed floor plans. Randy mentioned the water issue in the underground HVAC systems at the Cottages of Albertville that they are currently experiencing and fixing. Randy would like a water flow study to be sure that they will not have further water drainage issues due to this development coming in. Randy is concerned about the tax increase this project will bring to all landowners. Randy asked the developer what the average building cost per unit will be. Larson responded $160,000 per unit.


Keith Whitley, resident of Albertville on Kalland Avenue, approached the podium. Whitley is concerned about the retention pond because of the geese, mosquitoes, and depth of the pond. He is wondering if the pond should be fenced for safety purposes. Whitley asked if there has been an environmental study done for this. Whitley would like to know if this landscaping will be taken care of. Brixius asked Dahlke to talk about the retention pond design. Dahlke stated that the ponding for this site and existing streets are designed to drain to the pond behind the Fieldstone Family Homes on 51st Street NE. Dahlke stated that in 2014 the requirements for drainage increased and that is why there is a retention pond being proposed in that location. Brixius confirmed with Dahlke that there is no drainage going towards the Cottages of Albertville. Dahlke stated that all landscaping will be maintained by a landscaping service. Whitley questioned aeration of the retention pond and Dahlke stated that could be added as a condition for approval, if necessary. Multiple residents from the audience stated that they have had flooding issues already and this may increase the issue, Dahlke informed them to talk to the City Engineer. Brixius stated that no matter what is developed on this site, there will still need to be a retention pond.

Klecker questioned the developer about if pets will be allowed in this complex or not, and if there would be a pet washing station. Larson responded that they would allow pets, and that a pet washing station would most likely be put in the underground garage. Klecker brought up concern about all the animal stool that would not be picked up after the owners. Larson stated that now in days, rental management companies can take a sample of the stool and send it to the lab to test for the animal DNA. If there are any droppings found outside on the property, the rental company takes a sample and sends it to the lab to find out who the owner is, and then the owner would receive a fine for not picking up after their animal.

Council Liaison Halling asked how much of an obstacle would it be to put up a fence between the Cottages of Albertville and the proposed development. Larson stated that they would have to look into that to see what it would all entail.

Jason Karolevitz, resident of Albertville at 10560 58th Street NE, approached the podium. Karolevitz was upset stating that he received first notice about this on November 27 and the meeting for this is December 10. He does not believe that is enough time to get feedback from the city residents. Karolevitz believes that the City Planner is not looking out for the residents of the City of Albertville and he is for this project. Karolevitz believes that this parcel should stay commercial and should not be zoned for residential high density. Karolevitz believes that this high density should be put in a low traffic spot, for example behind the mall. Karolevitz is requesting the Commissioners to deny this proposed development.

Jenny Clairmont, resident of Albertville at 10442 51st Court NE, approached the podium. She stated that she has the same concerns as everyone else has already stated. Clairmont mentioned that she does not see much guest parking for the complex and believes that people would be parking on side roads. Clairmont is concerned about the crime rates and the population of the school district.


Clairmont is wondering about what type of background checks will the management company being doing, especially with a school being right next door. Clairmont believes that retail would be the best fit for this parcel and she is requesting the Commissioners to deny the proposed development.

Lee Moran, resident of Albertville at 5433 Kahler Drive NE, approached the podium. Moran stated that this parcel is on our main road in our city. Moran stated that the developer is going to build the proposed complex and then they will move on and build the next thing and that they do not care about Albertville’s community. Moran stated that if we were to keep this commercial this lot will bring in businesses and job opportunities for our kids. Moran stated that he has been here for 19 years and that we have to protect our small community. Moran stated that this decision is the moment where we are deciding what is going to be on our main street in Albertville and this is what will shape Albertville for the rest of its life. Moran is requesting that the Commissioners deny the proposed development.

Sam Wilkes, resident of Albertville at 5486 Kalland Avenue NE, approached the podium. Wilkes stated that she and Sarah Hansen have walked door to door around the community talking about this proposed development and not one person was on board for this project to be approved.

Sarah Hansen, resident of Albertville, approached the podium. Hansen wanted to speak on behalf of all little ones who do not have a voice here tonight. These little ones are the future of our town and of our community, let’s make good choices with their safety and quality of life in mind.

In regards to the way Brixius was addressed by residents, Buhrmann stated that Al Brixius’ role is to present the facts and to present as much information as he can to everyone. Buhrmann also wants to remind everyone that no matter how the Commissioners vote, it is only a recommendation to Council; the decision ultimately lies in their vote.

Karen Hansen, resident of Albertville, approached the podium. Hansen stated that she has been in the community for 19 years and she lived in the development that got flooded. She asked the developer to take the water issues seriously because having dealt with it herself, she knows it is a big issue and it is a big concern for this area. Hansen stated that she is concerned about the crime rate because the Wright County cannot keep up with the current crime rate and a lot of the sheriffs do not want to work out here. Hansen stated that she does not approve of this development and that she is requesting the Commissioners to deny this proposed development.

Larry Boller asked Chair Commissioner Buhrmann if they should write the Council members with all of their concerns. Brixius stated that they can send anything to Council or City Administrator Adam Nafstad and/or Maeghan Becker.


Vetsch stated on behalf of all Council members that they would be willing to receive any comments regarding this.

Sarah Hansen stated to go to the webpage and all staff contact information is on there as well.

Motioned by Anderson, seconded by Brempell, to close the Public Hearing. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson and Halling. Nays: None. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

Klecker spoke about coming to this area and becoming part of this community. Klecker stated that he believes that this is the start of a change for this community and he understands the concern that the residents are raising.

Brempell stated that he leans more on the developer side of things, he stated that he is a number spreadsheet person. Brempell stated you will get more people to show up against something, rather than have an audience of people that are for something. Brempell was disappointed in the way some of the comments were addressed and challenges residents to have some-what of an open mind in to making this work.

Motioned by Anderson, seconded by Klecker, to deny the request from Heuring Meadows, LLC and Krishna LLC, for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and a zoning map amendment from B-2 Limited Business to PUD Planned Unit Development. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson. Nays: Halling. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

Motioned by Anderson, seconded by Klecker, to deny the request from Heuring Meadows, LLC and Krishna LLC, for a preliminary plat, and PUD development stage site and building plan review to consider a development of 26 townhomes, 159 unit apartment building, and a 10,427 square foot daycare facility on Outlot A, Heuring Meadows at the northwest corner of CR19 and 53rd Street. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson. Nays: Halling. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

B. Public hearing to consider zoning tax amendment related to swimming pool fence standards and trash handling equipment.

Anderson commented on the location of where the trash equipment will be located. Motioned by Brempell, seconded by Anderson, to open the Public Hearing. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker Anderson, and Halling. Nays: None. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

No one approached the podium.


Motioned by Brempell, seconded by Anderson, to close the Public Hearing. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson, and Halling. Nays: None. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

Motioned by Brempell, seconded by Anderson, to approve the zoning tax amendment related to swimming pool fence standards. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson and Halling. Nays: None. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

Motioned by Anderson, seconded by Klecker, to approve the zoning tax amendment related to trash handling equipment. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker, Anderson and Halling. Nays: None. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.

4. OTHER BUSINESS

A. NONE.

5. ADJOURNMENT Motioned by Brempell, seconded by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at 10:08p.m. Ayes: Buhrmann, Brempell, Klecker Anderson, and Halling. Nays: None. Absent: Hudson. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, Maeghan M. Becker, Building Permit Technician

N O R T H W E S T A S S O C I A T E D C O N S U L T A N T S , I N C . __________________________________________________________________ 4 1 50 O l son M emor i a l H ig h way , S t e . 320 , G o l d en Val l ey , MN 55422

Te l ep h on e : 7 6 3 . 9 57 . 1 1 0 0 W e b s i t e : w ww. n ac p l an n i n g . c om

MEMORANDUM: TO: Adam Nafstad

FROM: Alan Brixius

DATE: March 16, 2020

RE: Albertville Outlet Mall PUD Amendment - Signs

FILE NO: 163.06 20.02

PROPERTY ADDRESS: 6415 Labeaux Avenue NE.

BACKGROUND: In 1999, the City of Albertville approved a comprehensive sign plan as part of the overall Planned Unit Development. This sign plan included three freestanding signs that identified the outlet Mall properties. The PUD granted flexibility in sign size and location. Simon Properties wishes to update the freestanding signs. The freestanding signs change in design and size. The Freeway sign (A-1) and the Mall entrance pylon sign have been reconfigured to t include individual tenant identification. The change in size of the freeway sign is significant enough to mandate an amendment to the PUD. ANALYSIS: The approved 1999 PUD agreement approved the following freestanding signs for the Outlet Mall. Labeaux Avenue Monument Sign: Sign C-1 The new plans for the Labeaux monument sign illustrate that they replicate the existing monument sign in sign area and height. This sign modification meets the original PUD approved sign dimensions and is acceptable. Labeaux Avenue Pylon Sign: Sign B-1 The existing Labeaux Avenue pylon sign is 30 feet tall with a sign area of 228 sq. ft. The proposed sign plan changes the sign configuration to include both an Outlet Mall

http://www.nacplanning.com/

1

Identification sign (112.5 sq. ft.) and four major tenant signs (28.87 each and 115.5 sq. ft. in total tenant sign area). The accumulative sign area of all the sign is 228 sq. ft. equal to the original PUD sign area allowance. This proposed sign is 27.75 feet in height which meets city standards. Highway 94 Pylon Sign: Sign A-1 The Outlet Mall PUD agreement approved a Freeway Plyon sign not exceed to 55 feet in height and 375 feet in area. The proposed new sign is 54.25 feet tall meeting the city approved standard. The sign area being proposed with the new sign exceeds the previously approved 375 square feet sign area. The Outlet mall is pursing the PUD amendment to allow for the larger sign area. The new Freestanding Pylon sign has been reconfigured to include an Outlet Mall Identification sign (264 sq. ft. in area) and five major tenant signs (52.5 sq. ft. x 5 = 262.5 sq. ft.) The total sign area of the freeway pylon is 526.5 sq. ft. The Outlet Mall has provided a narrative explaining the need for the revised freestanding signs which include:

1. The desire to have key tenants identified on the freestanding signs to drive optimal traffic and sales for the center.

2. The Freeway sign competes with the numerous billboards located along both sides of the freeway through Albertville.

In staff review we finding that the Labeaux Avenue Monument sign and pylon sign while reconfigured still meet the previous approve Outlet Mall PUD sign area and sign height standards and are approved. The Freestanding Freeway sign area exceeds the previous approved freeway sign by 151.5 feet. The enlarged sign with tenant identification provides opportunity for additional Mall identification and increase traffic generation and sales. Keeping the City’s commercial land areas vital and effective is a goal of the City Vision plan. Additionally, the sign location will not interfere with other signs and provide proper separation between the bill boards on the north side of the highway. CONCLUSION: Based on Staff review of the request PUD amendment we recommend approval of the revised Albertville Premium Outlet Mall Comprehensive sign plan PUD amendment based on the plans dated 10/29/2019 revised 2/10/2020. This amendment will allow the following freestanding signs Lebeaux Avenue Monument Sign not to exceed 67 sq. ft. in area and 10 feet in height. Lebeaux Avenue Pylon Sign not to exceed 228 sq. ft. in area and 30 feet in height.

2

Interstate Pylon Sign not to exceed 526 sq. ft. in area and 55 feet in height. These signs are approved contingent on the property owner obtaining necessary building permits for the new signs. CC Maeghan Becker Paul Heins Mike Couri Mike Lawrence Sign Crafter’s outdoor.

1660 Pacolet Court Gastonia, NC 28052ph 704.868.4500 fx 704.868.4592

www.signcon.com

This artwork is the sole property of Sign Connection, Inc. It maynot be reproduced without the expressed written consent of

Sign Connection, Inc. Artwork fees may be applicable.Customer supplied artwork may be modified for manufacturing.

Client:

JOB#:

Customer: Simon Properties

Job Name: Albertville Premium

Outlets

Address: 6415 Labeaux Ave NE,

Albertville MN 55301

Sales Contact: Matt Elkin

SCF-025 Rev: 3 Effective Date: 11.16.2017

Conceptual Drawing

Design Development

Final Production

Revision Date(s): 10/29/2019 EH

Critical to Quality Information:

xxx

Customer Approval: Date:

Font Schedule

This sign is intended to be installedin accordance with the requirements of

Article 600 of the National ElectricalCode and/or other applicable local codes.

This includes proper grounding and bonding of the sign.

© 2016, Sign Connection, Incorporated

FONT 1FONT 2FONT 3

Exterior Identification SignageDesign Package

November 8, 2019


www.signcon.com



Client:

JOB#:



Outlets





Conceptual Drawing

Design Development

Final Production



xxx


Font Schedule





FONT 1FONT 2FONT 3

PAGE: 2

3/32”=1’

Steel size TBD aftertechnical field survey;shown here for representationonly

Initial Design Date: 4/4/2019

Designer: E. Hellstrand

Scale:

Scan of old artworkprovided by client

Interstate 94 Sign - A1 *Technical shop drawings showing correct sizing and logos will be provided prior to any permitting and/or fabrication*On site surveys will be performed prior to any permitting and/or fabrication *Per city requirements, new sign square footage must be at or less than existing sign square footage

11'-0"

24'-0"

3'-6"

15'-0"

1'-6"

54'-3"56'-5"

264 sq ft

52.5 sq ft eachx 5262.5 sq ft

ALL ARTWORK SHOWN HERE IS CONCEPTUAL ONLY

UNTIL FIELD SURVEY IS COMPLETED TO DETERMINED

EXISTING STEEL DIMENSIONS AND EXISTING SQ FT

5"


www.signcon.com



Client:

JOB#:



Outlets





Conceptual Drawing

Design Development

Final Production



xxx


Font Schedule





FONT 1FONT 2FONT 3

Labeaux Ave. Sign - B1

PAGE: 4



Scale:1/8”=1’

Existing Sign Condition Proposed

Steel size TBD aftertechnical field survey;shown here for representationonly

*Technical shop drawings showing correct sizing and logos will be provided prior to any permitting and/or fabrication*On site surveys will be performed prior to any permitting and/or fabrication *Per city requirements, new sign square footage must be at or less than existing sign square footage

18’-9”

6’-0”

10’-6”

2’-9”27’-9”




0'-11"

4.2"


www.signcon.com



Client:

JOB#:



Outlets





Conceptual Drawing

Design Development

Final Production



xxx


Font Schedule





FONT 1FONT 2FONT 3

PAGE: 6

Scan of old artworkprovided by client

Monument Sign - C1 *Technical shop drawings showing correct sizing and logos will be provided prior to any permitting and/or fabrication*On site surveys will be performed prior to any permitting and/or fabrication

Existing Sign Condition



Scale:1/4”=1’

Reface cabinet withnew flex faces; retrofitlighting with white LEDfixtures;

Existing pole covers,decorative pieces, andcabinet to be repaintedin field; exact colors TBD

Proposed





www.signcon.com



Client:

JOB#:



Outlets





Conceptual Drawing

Design Development

Final Production



xxx


Font Schedule





FONT 1FONT 2FONT 3

A1

B1 C1

SITE PLAN

PAGE: 8