Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/07/2003MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION Monday, April 7, 2003, 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers 1830 County Road B East 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes a. March 17, 2003 5. Public Hearings None 6. New Business a. Utility Easement Vacation - Schroeder Milk (2080 Rice Street) 7. Unfinished Business a. County Road D Extension EAW Review - Chuck Ahl b. Legacy Village AUAR Review c. Zoning Code Amendment - New Mixed Use Distdct (Hillcrest Village) 8. Visitor Presentations 9. Commission Presentations a. March 31 Council Meeting: Mr. Tdppler (changed from March 24) b. Apd114 Council Meeting: Mr. Desai c. Apd128 Council Meeting: Mr. Mueller 10. Staff Presentations 11. Adjoumment MINUTES OF THE MAPLEWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION 1830 COUNTY ROAD B EAST, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA MONDAY, APRIL 7, 2003 I. CALLTO ORDER There was a joint city council and planning commission workshop held in the Maplewood room from 6:00 p.m. to 7:05 p.m. Chairperson Fischer called the meeting to order at 7:11 p.m. I1. ROLL CALL Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Tushar Desai Present Mary Dierich Present Lorraine Fischer Present Matt Ledvina Present Jackie Monahan-Junek Present Paul Mueller Present Gary Pearson Present William Rossbach Present Dale Trippler Absent Staff Present: Melinda Coleman, Assistant City Manager Chuck Ahl, Public Works Director Tom Ekstrand, Assistant Community Development Director Ken Roberts, Associate Planner Lisa Kroll, Recording Secretary II1. APPROVAL OFAGENDA Commissioner Pearson moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Commissioner Rossbach seconded. Ayes- Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek, Mueller, Pearson, Rossbach The motion passed. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the planning commission minutes for March 17, 2003. The recording secretary submitted a new set of revised minutes at the planning commission meeting. Commissioner Ledvina moved to approve the planning commission minutes for March 17, 2003, as distributed at the planning commission meeting. Commissioner Pearson seconded. Ayes- Desai, Fischer, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek, Mueller, Pearson, Rossbach Abstention - Dierich VI. Planning Commission -2- Minutes of 04-07-03 PUBLIC HEARING None. NEW BUSINESS a. Utility Easement Vacation - Schroeder Milk (2080 Rice Street) Mr. Roberts said Mr. Bob Banken, of Schroeder Milk Company, is requesting that the city council vacate a water utility easement on the Schroeder Milk property. There was once a water main located within this easement. It has since been removed and the water main rerouted. Mr. Roberts said this easement now remains in place and lies beneath the applicant's building addition. Chairperson Fischer asked the applicant to address the commission. Mr. Bob Banken, Plant Manager for Schroeder Milk Company, 2080 Rice Street, Maplewood, addressed the commission. Mr. Banken said he did not have any questions for the commission. There were no questions by the commission for the applicant. Commissioner Rossbach moved to approve the resolution on pages 7 and 8 of the staff report for the vacation of the water utility easement on the Schroeder Milk property. The reason for this vacation is because the easement is no longer needed due to the rerouting of the water main. Commissioner Pearson seconded. The motion passed. Ayes-Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek, Mueller, Pearson, Rossbach This item will go to the city council on April 28, 2003. VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. County Road D Extension EAW Review - Chuck Ahl Mr. Chuck Ahl, Director of Public Works said that on March 31,2003, the city council tabled final action until April 14 on the EAW for the County Road D Extension. The city council directed that the findings of fact on the EAW be sent to the planning commission for comment. Similar to the AUAR document, this is an environmental study of the proposed road alignment. The planning commission's opposition to this alignment has been noted. The commission's role is to comment on the environmental impacts should this road alignment be selected by the city council. The commission should review and provide a recommendation on the EAW as it relates to this particular road alignment. Commissioner Dierich asked Mr. Ahl if this EAW is for this suggested alignment and if the city council decided to go with a different alignment would the commission review another report? Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -3- Mr. Ahl said that is correct. Chairperson Fischer asked Mr. Ahl if the desire was to have the access to the auto dealerships stay on TH 61 or come out onto County Road D instead? Mr. Ahl said MnDot noted in their letter that they are adamant about closing both access points at County Road D. Minnesota case law states closing of a median is non compensatory. In other words, a governmental unit can close put a center median and still provide reasonable access, which would mean a right in and a right out. However, if MnDot closed either access point to the east or the west of existing County Road D, they are opening themselves up to some type of litigation so they have carefully worded their letter. Mr. Ahl said he would anticipate that happening in the near future as MnDot proceeds and identifies the funding options for this area. Chairperson Fischer said if the access would be coming off County Road D, which would mean driveways disturbing some wetlands, has that been computed in the figures as the worse case scenario? Mr. Ahl said because there are a number of options for access, staff has not calculated that yet. Additionally, they see that a frontage road might be necessary to provide access, however, a frontage road would be a private roadway and any mitigation and applications would be the responsibility of the property owners. Therefore, the government funding would not be involved in that and staff has not included it. They believe a frontage road is something that would need to be a MnDot initiative. Commissioner Rossbach asked Mr. Ahl what method the city uses to keep the sewer pipes from sinking in poor soils? Mr. Ahl said the city is currently looking at that issue. The water main would probably use restrained joints to get a longer length through that area. The city may have to go to a steel pipe system for the sanitary system. Both the city and Mr. Mogren are checking to determine if the city needs to go through the wetland area of the golf course property or not. The city may not put the piping under the roadway segment. The roadway segment will sink slowly over time. If the city keeps the sanitary sewer and water main out of the roadway embankment, the hope is that the sinking will occur in the roadway and not in the piping system. Commissioner Rossbach asked when the public would hear about this and voice any concerns? Mr. Ahl said the intent is to have this item at the April 14 city council meeting, have it come back to the planning commission on April 21, and then there will be notices sent out notifying residents of the public hearing at the city council meeting on Monday, April 28, 2003. Commissioner Rossbach said in the report there is discussion about work hours and waivers for working outside the 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. timeframe. He asked what the waiver means and if this is common for the city to grant? Mr. Ahl said the waiver provision is noted in the document and it is in the code. Maplewood tries to stay within the Monday through Saturday 12-hour timeframe from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. with no work done on Sunday. Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -4- Mr. Ahl said, however, because of utilities and traffic impacts, the city will authorize work outside those hours. The city tries to notify the neighbors if those hours should happen to change. When it gets late in the season, and there are weather conflicts, the city occasionally grants those types of waivers. Commissioner Rossbach said he noticed in the report that the construction will begin in November 2003. He asked why construction would begin in November when the ground is hard? Mr. Ahl said to construct a roadway project through wetlands it is best to surcharge the site through a freeze-thaw cycle so there is less sinking. The goal is to get the fill material on the surface by November 2003, so it would go through the freeze-thaw cycle. Commissioner Ledvina asked Mr. Ahl about the evaluation of the zoning for the area west of TH 61 and when the evaluation would take place? Mr. Ahl said assuming things are approved the evaluation would be presented to city council on April 14 and to the planning commission April 21. He said those dates can change as both the city council and the planning commission request more time to review these particular items. Commissioner Dierich said on page 9 of the EAW states there is a possibility that the city would be denied a stop light by MnDot at the intersection of County Road D and TH 61. Mr. Ahl said MnDot said they would deny a stoplight at the current intersection of County Road D and TH 61. However, MnDot stated that they would approve a stoplight for the realignment of County Road D to the south and the intersection of TH 61. Commissioner Dierich said on page 10 of the EAW it says the road would be designed to accommodate all forms of traffic. She asked Mr. Ahl what exactly did all forms of traffic mean? Mr. Ahl said all forms of traffic means pedestrian movement, transit movements, and vehicular turning movements. He said it means that all turn lanes will be provided for the vehicles at the new intersection. Commissioner Dierich said regarding the statement on page 12 of the EAW, has MnDot given the city any decision on that interchange? Mr. Ahl said MnDot is stating that they don't have the funds available. Governor Pawlenty submitted a billion dollar proposal to move road improvement projects ahead, but it will also move some projects back. The Unweave the Weave Project will be moved forward. That project will include some improvements to the Highway 61 and Highway 694 interchange. Because that interchange will handle some detour traffic of the Unweave the Weave project (which will separate Highway 35E and Highway 694) there will be some road improvements. That project is in the MnDot work plan for the years 2011 to 2015. Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -5- Commissioner Ledvina moved to recommend that the planning commission recommended to the city council adoption of the attached resolution receiving the findings of fact for the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) on the County Road D Realignment Project (city projects 02-07 and 02-08) and approving the finding of no significant impact for the projects. Commissioner Pearson seconded. The motion passed. Ayes-Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek, Mueller, Pearson, Rossbach b. Legacy Village AUAR Review Mr. Chuck Ahl, Public Works Director, said that on March 31,2003, the city council considered the final approval of the AUAR for the Hartford Group. After discussion, the city council tabled action until April 14 and requested that the planning commission and the five property owners along Hazelwood Avenue receive a full copy of the report and mitigation plan. Previously, planning commission members had received a staff summary of the report. The planning commission had previously stated their opposition to the current alignment of County Road D and the intensity of the density of the Hartford Group proposal for the Legacy Village site. This opposition has been noted. The planning commission's role, at this point, is to review the AUAR as the environmental review document that it is intended - not as a land use document. The assumptions of the AUAR do not imply approvals of density, only an analysis of the potential environmental impacts of such a proposal. The AUAR is intended to establish the limits of environmental impact. The planning commission's comments should be limited to review of the mitigation for the impact and the subsequent plans. The comments regarding the intensity of development and alignment of roadways will be the subject of future meetings when the city reviews the actual proposal potential for Legacy Village. Commissioner Mueller said looking at the Hartford Group document north of the power lines it shows townhouses and condominiums for sale. He asked if those housing units were included in the total number of housing units? Mr. Ahl said yes, those are included in the total number of housing. Chairperson Fischer asked what does the water commission or the wastewater sewer board say on getting the sewage capacity under this proposal? Mr. Ahl said they are currently on their way to having those particular items resolved. Chairperson Fischer asked if the planning commission recommended this plan that it in no way obligates the commission to approving any particular item in this proposal? Mr. Ahl said this is not a land use approval document. It is only one part of the list. It doesn't mean that if there 850 housing units and they revise it to have 1,000 housing units that it would not have to come before the commission for a review because it most definitely would need to come back for review. Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -6- Commissioner Ledvina asked about the wastewater flow data. He is wondering why the applicant estimated the wastewater flow using the sewer access charge method and why it was viewed as inaccurate? He said on page 25 of the AUAR report there is a table of wastewater flow and the numbers they are using relates to the Woodbury meter readings. He wondered why they disagreed with the developers in the calculation of the wastewater flow calculation? Mr. Ahl said the discussion with the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services was that in the year 2000 it was found that the city was estimating nearly double the amount of sewage to be generated by the city's land uses. He said in raw numbers the city was estimating 2000 gallons per acre. Mr. Ahl said what the city has found is, that the city was taking more capacity out of the interceptors or (SAC). What that does, is buy the community capacity and interceptors and the city was taking more than their share. Basically the city was using numbers that were double than that of other communities. The Metropolitan Council recommended that city staff use the Woodbury and Plymouth Comprehensive Plans and the sewage figures in those plans when developing Maplewood's numbers. Commissioner Desai said there have been environmental studies done for the Blanding's turtles and native plants but he asked what the plans were with displacing animals such as deer that live in the area? Mr. Ahl said there is a section in the report on page 11 that talks about the displacement of wildlife in the area. He said as the city urbanizes the area, they are finding many of the animals such as deer are adapting to the changes just like the Canadian goose has. Commissioner Rossbach asked what multi-family really means and what the difference is between row houses, townhouses, and multi-family residential? Mr. Roberts said it is all a combination. Row houses are connected together and town homes are typically connected, but not always, and are run by an association. Multi-family housing includes rental apartments; row houses can be rental or owner occupied, and senior housing is usually rental. Commissioner Rossbach asked because of the freeway and other noise levels, is there a need for additional insulation in the walls? He said the standard wall is 5~ inches in depth and he asked if staff is considering requiring the developer to build thicker walls on the north side? Mr. Ahl said the city would not require a thicker wall but would require the developer to use a higher grade of insulation to provide better soundproofing. He said there would also be a requirement of the developer to use a higher quality window to reduce noise levels. Chairperson Fischer asked if the city can require developers to use a higher-level product than what is required by the UBC code or does the UBC code say you can require higher standards because of the level of noise in the area? Mr. Ahl said it is his understanding that the UBC code can require a higher class of insulation and better quality window then the normal UBC code. He said the city has the option to require that the developer follow these codes because of the noise mitigation and it is strongly recommend because of future litigation. Commissioner Mueller asked if the city is fond of this plan so far? Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -7- Ms. Coleman said the plan date-stamped February 12, 2003, is only a beginning point. She said the Hartford Group has paid for an outside planning consultant, Phil Carlson from DSU to review the plans. Mr. Carlson has been working with city staff evaluating the plan that the commission sees before them. Ms. Coleman said the city staff's initial reaction is that there is too much there for the density. Staff is checking what other communities are doing in terms of density and where the density does and doesn't work. She said the first meeting between the Hartford Group and the city staff would be on Friday, April 11,2003. The first concern is there are too many units for the density and the units are too close together. Commissioner Dierich asked if the land will be developed one piece at a time or will this be an overlay district? She said she thought this area required a PUD? Ms. Coleman said this would be a PUD and the land will be developed in phases. As Mr. Ahl said, the first phase will be the row houses, senior housing, multi-family and the Ashley Furniture Store. The city does not have a corporate developer yet for the pieces of land to the north. She said the city will give an overall ballpark density and they will come in and have individual phases approved. So the city will be negotiating separate parcels as developers come forward, which is the way the market works. She said the city wanted to see more corporate in the area and the city is disappointed that there hasn't been anyone interested in the corporate site. Commissioner Dierich said on page 31 of the AUAR it states no matter what alignment the city chooses for County Road D, the AUAR is going to be okay for the whole area. She asked if that is the case, will the city have to do new reports for sewer studies, drainage changes, ponding and mitigation pieces if a different alignment is chosen? Mr. Ahl said he would anticipate the city would be required to have new drainage studies if the alignment is changed. He said what that statement says is that all of the alignments considered provide the adequate traffic mitigation for this site. The EAW study is only for one alignment. The storm water plan would have to be revised and the sewer and water would likely have to be redone as well. Commissioner Dierich asked what would a typical noise decibel level be? Mr. Ahl said a guess is in the 45 to 50 decibel level for a typical neighborhood, which is fairly common with normal background noise. He said an example of a higher decibel level is a lawnmower, which can get up to 65 to 70 decibels. The issue is the freeway noise that is generated, which will be a 60 to 70 decibel level of noise a day. The current state acceptable noise level for daytime noise is 65 decibels. However, that standard changes at 10:00 p.m. when it goes down to a noise decibel level of 55. Unfortunately, the freeway noise doesn't go below 55 decibels until after 11:00 p.m. when the traffic level goes down significantly. He said that is where the noise levels are at almost all the locations along the freeway systems in Maplewood. Commissioner Dierich said on page 52 of the AUAR it states the city is not anticipating substantial impacts on the Maplewood, North St. Paul, Oakdale school system. She asked if the estimated 800 units being built there in the near future, wouldn't you estimate that possibly 50% of those families would have children? She asked if that would impact the school system and inquired what schools would those children attend school? Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -8- Mr. Ahl said the information received from District 622 is that there is a declining enrollment of students at Maplewood, North St. Paul and Oakdale. The school district has been given information on the Legacy Village proposal and the district is counting on the potential of children enrolled in the school district in the near future. Commissioner Dierich said the Metropolitan Council stated in the report that they wanted a tree inventory done; she asked when the city might see that plan? Mr. Ahl said he was informed the tree inventory is currently being prepared. Chairperson Fischer asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak regarding this item? City council member, Kathleen Juenemann, residing at 721 Mt. Vernon Avenue, Maplewood, addressed the commission. She said the city council would be having much discussion about the Legacy Village proposal. The city council has many questions and concerns regarding the density and the wetland issues as well. Commissioner Rossbach moved to recommend that the planning commission recommend that the city council adopt the resolution approving distribution of a Final Alternative Urban Area-Wide Review Document and Mitigation Plan for Legacy Village, City Project 02-18. Commissioner Ledvina seconded. Ayes-Desai, Dierich, Fischer, Ledvina, Monahan-Junek, Mueller, Pearson, Rossbach The motion passed. This item goes to the city council on April 14, 2003 and will come back to the planning commission on May 5, 2003. c. Zoning Code Amendment- New Mixed Use District (Hillcrest Village) Mr. Roberts said the planning commission tabled this item on March 17, 2003. He is now bringing it back to the planning commission for further discussion. Mr. Roberts said last October, the Maplewood city council extended a development moratorium for the Hillcrest Village redevelopment area so that staff could draft zoning and design standards based on "Smart-growth" development principles. Staff's goal is to have an ordinance submitted to the city council for their acceptance before the moratorium ends on October 28, 2003. To accomplish this, staff proposes a series of meetings with the planning commission and community design review board (CDRB) to receive comments and guidance from each committee in the preparation of these standards. Mr. Roberts said staff recommends that the planning commission offer comments and guidance on land uses proposed within the Hillcrest Village redevelopment area. Staff will use this feedback to draft a new Mixed-Use zoning district for the Hillcrest Village redevelopment area, as well as other redevelopment sites within the city. Commissioner Rossbach said staff must have determined that to accomplish what they wanted to the current zones would not work and therefore, a new zone needed to be created. His concern is creating a new zone could be used against the city. He wondered what would happen if a person came in and wanted to change the zoning for their proposal? Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -9- Mr. Roberts said he does not envision the newly created zone being used against the city. He said the reason is, that when the intent and purpose is written for the newly created zone, anyone that would want to use the new zone elsewhere in the city would have to convince the city council that what they are proposing meets that intent and purpose and they would be bound by those rules. Ms. Coleman said our current zoning classifications would not fit for this redevelopment area. She said the city is trying to get a handle on what was planned years ago with the City of St. Paul and the Metropolitan Council. She said the city council has made the Hillcrest Redevelopment Area one of their top priorities. On May 5, 2003, the planning commission will review the Capital Improvement plan, which takes into account heavy investments into this neighborhood. Staff would like the Hillcrest area to redevelop but are trying to determine if the Hillcrest area or the Gladstone area should be developed first. She said there seems to be more interest from the property owners in the Gladstone neighborhood over the Hillcrest area. The city is trying to work through a new zoning classification that would apply (at least in theory) in either of those neighborhoods. Looking ahead for the Hillcrest Redevelopment area the city came up with a new mixed-use development, a denser development, which keeps with the Met Council's goals. The city's objective is when businesses get relocating some of the businesses to make room for redevelopment that those businesses could be relocated in the Gladstone area or elsewhere in the city. Staff is interested in knowing if the planning commission thinks the land use is in the right ballpark because if there are things that are objectionable, then staff needs to know if they are going down the wrong path. Commissioner Rossbach said he does not think staff is going down the wrong path. He agrees with the statement in the report that there needs to be some detailed architectural designs. Chairperson Fischer said she agrees with Mr. Rossbach's comment. She asked staff which item on the planning spectrum is the item that the planning commission will be faced with first? Mr. Roberts said it the staff's intent to have a complete ordinance with the uses and the design elements in place by the end of the moratorium in October 2003. He said the city council would adopt the ordinance, set it on the Hillcrest area stating here are the new standards and the zoning for that zoning district. He said once the moratorium goes off, any of the properties within that area will be subject to the new zoning code. Ms. Coleman said the Walgreen's proposal that was rejected by the city council was denied by Maplewood because the developers weren't willing to bring the building up to the street close enough and they did not listen to the city's concerns regarding architectural details such as windows on the street and other details that the city embraced. She said this was all addressed in the White Bear Avenue Corridor Study and the Hillcrest Redevelopment Area plan done in conjunction with the City of St. Paul. In her opinion, the most important thing would be the design characteristics. The city would want to prepare the boulevard and street-scaping and also require the buildings to be built up to the street, be pedestrian friendly, and provide for transportation. She said there could be a joint meeting between the planning commission and the community design review board to review these types of issues. Chairperson Fischer asked staff how far east or west the city is referring to for this redevelopment plan? Ms. Coleman said the redevelopment would be basically from Van Dyke Street to White Bear Avenue. Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -10- Commissioner Pearson said one of the items discussed in the White Bear Avenue Corridor Study was the issue of parking on the streets. He said the City of Maplewood does not allow vehicles to be parked on the streets overnight and the City of St. Paul does. He said he wondered which parking rules would take effect for this redevelopment. Chairperson Fischer said she did not believe them were any carriage houses in Maplewood and she wondered why they were included in the new TN2 zoning definition on page 16 of the staff report? Commissioner Rossbach said since Ms. Fischer brought up the issue of carriage houses, he said maybe he needs a better understanding of what a carriage house is. He thought a carriage house was a separate garage with living quarters above it for the servants to live in. Ms. Coleman said the way a carriage house was presented to her was that it was basically a townhouse with an accessory residence above the garage. She said in today's world this type of home could be applicable. Many adults find the need to move their elderly parents into their homes. A so-called carriage house would be a good example of that use. The carriage house idea was something that was accepted by the people in the working groups when this was written in the planning process. She said the market will drive the idea of a carriage house and if there is a developer that wants to build these carriage houses the city will entertain the idea, if they come up with an alternative plan the city will look at that as well. Commissioner Rossbach asked if the city means there will be a development of carriage houses? Ms. Coleman said no, this was only a small piece of land on the west side of Larpenteur Avenue and White Bear Avenue. The carriage homes were referred to as the Mews townhome. It was defined as a row of townhomes, with a row of garages, with accessory apartments on top. Mr. Roberts said a carriage house would be subordinate. He said it would almost be an accessory use to the primary townhouse. Commissioner Mueller said he attended a meeting today and heard the new Ventura Village located in Minneapolis recently approved such carriage homes. He asked staff if the City of St. Paul has considered changes in their zoning regulations? Ms. Coleman said the City of St. Paul is in the process of approving this plan and they are looking at approving their plan sometime this fall. Planning commission members had an open discussion regarding the proposed land uses (permitted, conditional and prohibited) on pages 5 through 7 in the staff report. Planning commission members agreed with the recommended land uses in the staff report. VIII. VISITOR PRESENTATIONS None. Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -11- IX. COMMISSION PRESENTATIONS a. Mr. Trippler was the planning commission representative at the March 31, 2003, city council meeting. Mr. Trippler was absent from the planning commission meeting. Mr. Rossbach attended the March 31,2003, city council meeting and he gave a presentation on it. Items discussed included: 10. Schmelz Countryside storage/sales lot was approved 3 to 2. The applicant will no longer have the pond but they have planned on installing the ecosystem parking lot. Larpenteur Avenue Redevelopment area was approved ayes all. The AUAR for Legacy Village and the EAW for the County Road D Realignment was tabled. On July 26, 2003, there will be a party at Champp's Restaurant, which is a one-time event. The city council discussed the sewer, water main improvements, and lift station improvements. The city council discussed street improvements to Keller Parkway. The city council gave an update on the discussion of group homes in Maplewood. The Sibley Cove apartments will be reconsidered at the April 28, 2003, city council meeting. The city council discussed support for a local sales tax resolution for the City of Maplewood but it was tabled. The city council said they are looking for new ways to get funds for making city improvements because of all the cutbacks for the city and state the city needs a new way to replenish the funds. b. Mr. Desai will be the planning commission representative at the April 14, 2003, city council meeting. Items to be discussed will be the Home Occupation Hair Salon license on Pinkspire Lane and the Van Dyke Townhomes on Van Dyke Street. c. Mr. Mueller will be the planning commission representative at the April 28, 2003, city council meeting. Items to be discussed will be the Utility Easement Vacation for Schroeder Milk and the Sibley Cove apartment proposal will be reheard. Chairperson Fischer said there was a handout given to all planning commission members for the upcoming workshops on Land Use Planning. Ms. Coleman said money has been set aside for these workshops, so if members are interested in one of these workshops, contact Andrea Sindt or herself. Planning Commission Minutes of 04-07-03 -12- X. STAFF PRESENTATIONS Ms. Coleman said the handout given to commission members at the workshop has some action priority work plans in it. The commission should look through the handout because it relates to the redevelopment of the Gladstone and Hillcrest areas. Ms. Coleman said this would be coming before the planning commission at the May 5, 2003, meeting to discuss the capital improvement plan. With the Hartford Group and the Legacy Village proposal, the city council may have to meet on a weekly basis. Because the Legacy Village plan is so large, the city council may have to meet more then twice a month. Staff will keep the planning commission aware of discussions regarding this proposal. However, the planning commission may be asked to attend additional meetings along with the city council so all interested people can hear the discussion at one time. XI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:32 p.m.