e e good evening it's now 6:30 and I call to order the regular meeting of the Victoria city council please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to
the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible Li and justice for all the first item on our agenda this evening is announcements our next Workshop will be held on Monday April
28th from 2: to 6:00 p.m. at the Victoria Recreation Center in the multi-purpose room during this Workshop the council will discuss its next strategic plan 2025 through 2028 as well as long-term plan for the Victoria Recreation Center all meetings
of the city council are open to the public and held in the council chambers at City Hall unless otherwise noted we encourage anyone wanting to attend our Council meetings or workshops to register um in a in advance and contact our city clerk in other announcements
there's an upcoming open house for the highway west uh let me start again on that there's an upcoming open house for the downtown West Highway 5 and 11 in Improvement project and Highway 11 project on Thursday March 27th from 5:
to 6:00 p.m. at the Victoria city hall in the council chambers any questions or additional information about this or any of the upcoming Transportation related Projects please visit the city website at victoriam mn.gov or contact our city
engineer Cara Garen we are also accepting nominations for our community Builder award each year in June June the city recognizes an individual Group business or organization that has through their outstanding volunteerism
or exemplary action demonstrated an extraordinary commitment to making Victoria a better place today and for the future nominations are due by March 31st please contact our Communications and public engagement director Kendra gr
with any questions or if you need additional information about the program that concludes our announcements this evening there is a proclamation that I will read from the dis a proclamation recognizing April as National volunteer month whereas the month of April has
been nationally recognized as volunteer appreciation month to honor the hard work dedication and passion of volunteers across our nation and whereas the city of Victoria is grateful for the volunteers who generously dedicate their time and talents to serve our community
and whereas the city of Victoria acknowledges the positive impact that volunteer work has on making Victoria a great Community for everyone and whereas the city of Victoria believes that government alone cannot fulfill all of the community's needs and we value our
Partnerships with businesses faith-based organizations nonprofit organizations foundations as well as individuals and group who contribute their time resources and skill to make a difference and whereas the city of
Victoria is committed to promoting volunteerism and expresses heartfelt thanks to all volunteers in our community for their dedicated service and commitment to improving Victoria now therefore be it resolved the city council of Victoria
hereby proclaims April 2025 as volunteer appreciation month the city of Victoria en encourages our residents to recognize the positive impact of volunteerism in our communities our next order of business is to adopt the final agenda Council can
I get a motion to adopt the final agenda move to adopt the final agenda we have a motion can I get a second second we have a motion and a second all in favor signify by saying I I I any opposed motion carries the next item on the agenda is the open Forum this is the
opportunity for anyone to address the Council on an item that is not on the agenda and not in application form that will be coming to the council at a future date no one has registered to speak in advance but if there's anyone in the audience who would like to address the council please step to the podium and state your name and address
for the record seeing no one we'll move on to our next item on the agenda which is our consent agenda the consent agenda items are routine administrative and don't do not require deliberation or housekeeping items that are required by law they're approved with one vote unless someone
requests an item to be considered separately Miss Hardy does staff wish to pull any consent items for separate discussion and vote this evening none from staff m Madam mayor is there anyone on the council that wishes to pull an item from the consent agenda seeing none any members of the audience wishing to
pull an item from the consent agenda for separate discussion and vote seeing none I will entertain a motion for the consent agenda motion to adopt a consent agenda we have a motion can I get a second second we have a motion and a second all in favor signify
by saying I I any opposed motion carries now moving on to our regular agenda item 6 one is a variance request for installation of a pool at 6580 Aster Trail presenting on this item this evening is associate planner Travis briely Mr brierly the floor is yours
Madame mayor and Council uh tonight's request is specifically for a uh Shoreland setback uh the applicants are requesting a variance should allow for a pool to be installed between their home and Lake Virginia within the Shoreland overlay setback this request is to
encroach within the setback 28 ft from the standard 100t setback set by our Shoreland ordinances a little bit of background the application was considered complete back in January of this year uh there was a 60-day rule which we extended so
we have 61 days left to make a decision on the application as uh or excuse me the city council does before uh the application expires uh we did mail all notices within 350 ft and publish in the paper uh we held two public hearings uh with the Planning Commission one on on
February 18th as well as one on March 18th the second uh public hearing was presented due to new information coming forward after the first um public hearing was held and I will be covering that later in the presentation staff has
also discussed the application with the DNR with Carver County as well as the minihaha Watershed District when we look at an application we're looking at uh what's considered practical difficulties is the me meat and potatoes of any typee of variance
application we want to look specifically if it's a reasonable request in this case a pool being a part of a single family home is a reasonable request and staff's opinion as there are many pools in single family properties and it is a permitted use uh we also want to look at
if a pool is installed on the property if it would change the essential character of the property or the neighborhood uh again single family homes uh regularly have pools throughout Victoria so staff does not believe that it would cause any change to the essential
character the final part to that is the uniqueness of the property in this case we're looking at the plight of the of the landowner plight of the property a condition that's not caused by the owner but an external condition when we do look specifically
the parcel that's uh 6580 Aster Trail was part of a minor subdivision done back in 2014 the layout of the parcel uh was was approved by the city C Council as well as split back in 2014 into this
weird y shape but it is a legal parcel um the applicant is proposing a primary location for their pool to be between the lake and the home and where that red line is across the screen is the 100 foot setback um the applicant has worked
alongside a landscaping uh company which has provided guidance to the city as well as to the applicant them themselves on what would need to be done and there's four locations where the pool go the first one I want to take a look at is the East option which is the
front yard of the home on the north side of the driveway that area would not be practical for pool and staff's opinion due to overstory trees as well as pools don't generally go into the front yard of single family homes we also look at the just south of the home and there's
significantly steep slopes those slopes would cause for retaining walls and be built as well as a lot of storm water mitig and controls would need to be put in place to make the pool fit there on the north side of the home which was one of the areas that uh Stafford proposed
for the pool to go prior to the February 18th public hearing uh we had learned after the fact that by putting a pool there there would be more storm water issues and that's not a pool the size being requested which is 18 by 36 but realistically any type of impediment to
the Natural or to the graded storm water on the property would either push that storm water towards the home or or towards the property line and across the property line um looking on uh the screen the Blue Line demonstrates where the water generally runs from the front yard and the green lines represent what
would happen to the storm water in a general sense if there's an impediment such as a pool or any other type of fixture um because of that there are some challenges to the site um that come with that the last place to look is the
West option this like I said this is where they want to put the pool the entire P would be beyond the 100t setback is indicated by the red line but it is the flattest area of the property that required the least amount of grading and at least a about of storm water mitigation uh controls to be
built uh there is a secondary option that the applicants have proposed to the Planning Commission um that has a shorter encroachment which would only be about 9 ft uh the blue box you see on the screen is where they would like to get the pool that's where their application's for but there was
discussion to actually go just north of that or to the left on the screen um that would have the pool only encroaching partway through the setback as indicated by the red line uh part of their application was also two other properties that were mentioned uh that had receive variances
uh the first one to look at is 6642 AST Trail uh that variance was uh granted um by the city in 2023 uh and it was the deconstruction of a home and the Reconstruction of a new home on the similar footprint uh the city had worked very closely with the Watershed as well
as the DNR to make that happen and there were certain requirements going there one thing I would like to point out is that this variance that is cited here did not have a change to the 100 foot setback from the ordinary High waterm Mark uh the other uh variance which the
city had issued was in 2024 for 7321 tamarak Trail um this was a request for the impervious cover on the site when the homeowners had purchased the property the uh pools were not considered an impervious cover so they didn't go into that hard cover calculation there was a change to the
zoning code afterwards that made it an impervious cover and would go against that calculation uh working with u contractors as well as uh with the DNR storm water mitigation controls were brought forward and the city council had approved a variance to go beyond the 25%
impervious cover that was allowed for this site um just a touch touch back on practical difficulties from the statute there's very specific things that the city council should be considering during the process um the biggest part
uh is variances may be granted to the applicant um if they can demonstrate practical difficulties that is on the applicant to show the Practical difficulties of the property um when we're looking at that it's is it being is the use or is the reason for
the variance something that would be normal that you'd see on a property in this case we're looking at a line being shifted to allow for a pool but the primary thing we're looking at is the actual setback line itself um the other thing we need to consider is there's a plight of the landowner due to circumstance that unique to the property
not created by the landowner um things such as the shape of the property or where the home was built uh can be taken in consideration um we're also looking at if it's grter not uh altering the essential character of locality staff has agreed that it wouldn't um as well
as the city council can uh can take a look at the economic considerations but that shouldn't be the sole purpose of making the decision when we look at our city code we're looking at a few specific things um if the variant or our code
specifically states that the commission will not recommend and the council will not Grant a variance unless the following facts are presented one is strict enforcement and interpretation of our code um showing a practical difficulty or undue hardship the are thing is if there's exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances um to Grant the variance as well as the variance not creating any adverse effects to the property the the public um and things of that nature as well as the variance being granted is a permitted use with inside that District so in this case pool is would be a
permitted use with inside our R1 zoning uh for the discussion tonight um staff would recommend that the the council Focus or uh has some discussion especially on the three items listed uh the first one being is there exceptional or extraordinary circumstances in
relation to this application in relation to the property itself as far as layout topography storm water things of that nature um the other thing to look at would be there any adverse effects if it's granted are there other mitigation strategies that um we would want to
consider if the variance is granted um and the other question that that comes up is should the variance be granted for any amount of encroachment um the applicants asking for 28 ft is that the appropriate amount should it be more should it be less uh that's fully within
the uh City council's purview to make that decision as well as if the variance is approved um are we looking at the primary or alternate location and that's where that uh encroachment would come into place uh the last thing would be is there any other reasonable conditions
that the city council would want to consider for the installation um with that being said I'm more than happy to stand for any questions Madame mayor of the council you may have thank you Mr brle um did you the Planning Commission saw this earlier this week is
that correct or last week correct Madam mayor and what and it was the second time in front of the Planning Commission can you uh review what the findings of the Planning Commission were um Madame mayor city council absolutely uh the first uh plan or the first public hearing was held on the February 18th
plan Planning Commission um testimony was provided by the applicants as well as the landscaper as well as a neighbor to the applicant um who spoke in favor of the variance being granted through discussion of the Planning Commission
the Planning Commission unanimously uh voted for a recommendation to the city council for denial prior to that recommendation making its way to the city council for consideration uh the applicant had presented new information regarding the storm water on the north
side of the property and the difficulties that' be presented uh staff had a meeting with the applicant as well as the landscaper to learn more about what was going on and get an expert opinion to what could be created and what difficulties would buy ahead um
based on that we rehel a public hearing during the March 18th Planning Commission meeting where there was a recommendation for uh to the city council for denial of a vote of six to one and tonight is the rest of the information being presented for the
council's consideration all right thank you Council questions discussion on this item may I comment on the public hearings yes please um I had a chance to watch both of them I did not attend either one of them um the second one I
think is the most important to focus on at this point in time based on the new information um watching it I felt that the numbers 6 to1 were swayed a little bit and it's possible that that could
have been a lot closer vote than was done again my feeling from watching it the second thing is I felt they weren't necessarily voting on practical difficulties and other things I think they were voting on the fact that it's a luxury item and they're afraid to create
um any sort of um any sort of precedent for granting this and I kept screaming at the computer I was watching it that a variance is not something that can create a precedent it is something that stands on its own so I felt that the
planning commission's discussion and reasons for denial were incorrect okay thank Youk you thank you council member other questions comments are are we going to get into a little bit more of the detail on the uh
two options that are that ENC a little bit the TW I understand the first one the 28 foot encroachment and then the potential second option as the 9 foot encroachment are we going to go into any more detail or is this the time to ask questions about that councilman I be more than happy to go into more
detail about those two Ops all right great um yeah if you could bring up that there we go perfect so I guess the the property owner's preference is the first the 28 foot that's what they initially went after and then this is an alternative option
the 9- foot encroachment what are kind of the pros and the cons of the option be all call it absolutely Madame mayor city council the pros and cons of the two locations um are basically the location itself uh
between sunlight between where it fits on the property and natural look of the property as well as a storm water management um with having the pools indicated Into the Blue Area that's more of a flat are area so your mitigation need to do to protect the natural resources such as Lake Virginia they're
lessened um by moving the pool to the north through to the left on the screen um is going to increase the storm water mitigation that's going to be needed however the trade-off is that it doesn't encroach as far into the setback okay okay I had a chance to tour
the parcel last week and again from an amateur there is a lot of trees that would need to come down there's a lot of landscaping that would need to be done and from my personal opinion and what I found it looked like
the actual runoff and other options for Plan B would actually be worse for the environment than plan a council member Pon are you saying Plan B is that one that's further left that's the white one versus the blue one got it thank you so
we're we're going to call that plan a and plan B okay plan white versus Plan B so I that that was my opinion on it and looking at it it looked like that would be a more detrimental environmental
option that makes sense thank you Council other questions comments we did receive a good extensive um review and a landscaping plan and um the landscaping and the pool company
folks are here with us this evening and um let's talk can I talk to the Landscaping person first why don't you go ahead and step forward here we're going to need you up by the microphone and just introduce yourself selves there's two of you and you guys are you guys are the
experts in this and um so I think the big concern that we have here is the the protection of the natural resource which is Lake Virginia and I understand you guys have done some work around Landscaping that can mitigate the damage that could be done to Lake Virginia can you speak to that a little bit yes ma'am
I'm Nick Bloom with outdoor Perfection this is Jeremy Schultz my partner and lead designer um on this property specifically to what uh Christian was saying um the part that's out the rear of the house towards the West is the flattest part so when we had to um talk
to the Stockman family and then the the pool company to go further off to the north there we figured um probably around a 225 cubic yard more of disturbance so we were just just doing a average of a foot depth of what we'd have to disturb to go further our Trail
to store materials all of that kind of stuff the pool company shifting everything over so like you said there's trees that need to come down and all that other stuff too the area that when you're really at the home it is the perfect it's just it's a very flat spot with one corner has a little bit of a dip in it when you go further off to the
north is where it becomes a lot more of the disturbance that's needed to kind of get that to the north and tucked back to the east um along with this proposal that we have up there all of the brick material so you guys know and all of the flat surface is a permeable Pap on top of all this so this isn't concrete with
extensive runoff this is all um engineered permeable paper so they're willing to capture all their storm water runoff um within the area right there we also have proposed to um have all the gutters and the down spouts of everything else on the home captured so
really if this project did end up taking place they would I mean honestly be in a better position for rain runoff than they are currently right now very good thank you any other questions or comments for these gentlemen perfect thank you yes ma'am all right Council any other
questions I have a question for Bob member Pon Vose if we approve this we are creating a variance on top of our Watershed ordinance or lak Shore
ordinance what kind of risks are we running with being sued by the DNR or the minha Creek Watershed District yeah mayor and Council and I appreciate the heads up about the question council member before uh the meeting um you know the obvious answer is that when a city
is faced with opposition to a variance uh the most likely opponent is going to be another landowner uh a neighbor or somebody impacted by the land use uh at issue um and those folks folks negatively impacted by a variance in
theory do have the ability to sue a city over that so that's the typical opponent to a variance that ends up in court uh but you're right uh state agencies and Regional agencies like your Watershed have what lawyers call standing they
have the ability also they have an interest in other words in the outcome of a city's decision on a setback variance away from a lake or in other cases other things that the DNR has an interest in they have standing they have an interest in those issues and so yes
in theory they can sue and have sued cities over the grant of variances that they the DNR and this hypothetical um view to not be meritorious or not be legal so that is theoretically a possibility I would say that practically
speaking and I don't know if staff wants to speak to it I I think I heard that the DNR was as I think they're required to be notified of the request for a variance from a Shoreland uh setback the DNR of course has an umbrella regulatory
role over Shoreland and Shoreland setbacks uh they would not be expected to weigh in that way get involved legally unless they've already been involved and they've expressed a strong view on this I don't I don't know if that's the case or not I don't know the
backstory on that but it would be somewhat unusual for the DNR to only jump into something like this after at the very end after the city's already acted one way or the other on the variants um normally they would have weighed in um before they continue down the road of of legal uh action and then
just while I've got the mic the last thing I would just say is that staff's quite right in pointing out the test you've seen that in a couple of slides the it's important though to understand that uh I think we frequently in in zoning law we think about conditional uses and variances being sort of the
same thing and they're really opposite things they're the flip side of the same coin maybe but they're they are flip sides a conditional use is something that's permitted that's something that's allowed under your zoning code expressly allowed as long as certain conditions are met a variance of course is
something that's not legal something that is not allowed by your zoning that is can only be granted by the city if the applicant proves that they're entitled to it so the burden shifts a cup is something that it's entirely up
to the city to decide on that's on the city to disprove show that a cup is not warranted on a variance it's on the landowner to show that the variance should be or must be granted so they bear the burden and I think staff
pointed that out in one of the slides very good thank you thank you for that legal lesson attorney V sure cheers all right uh Council any other final questions comments I do have a question for Tris you stayed in our
background on this the placement of the home was was put close to the setback and this is a minor subdivision to essentially uh allow the home to be
placed on the parcel itself and then as a result this placement was known at the time and you make the statement that because it's a known Factor it doesn't create a
hardship is that correct uh Council council member yes um and mayor and Council when when the applicants had purchased the home the home was already built and it was already subdivided uh any challenges to the property that that existed existed at the time of purchase
whether known or unknown to the homeowner themselves so it has been looked at as that's not a PL because those are known conditions if we were to build something and then after the fact say hey we put it in the wrong spot now we want to move it someplace else that'd
be one thing but saying we want to leave it and we want an exception to the ordinance and we need a variance for it is another so it would be up to the city council at the end of the day to determine is the placement of the home is the subdivision and and the shape of the property does that lot rise to a
level that creates uh practical difficulty for the for the landowner in this case specifically the plate council member evansky anything else I'm just I want to get council's view encroachments into the into the Shoreland buffer I mean these exist for
a purpose they were put in place to protect the waterways we do already have waterways in the city that are already compromised lakes shutz lake for example is on the DNR list of things that that
is now um a lake that's in Jey and so I think it's incumbent upon us when we're looking at these kind of variances to keep that frame of reference and ask ourselves if the variance is something
that fits within our criteria what is being done to reduce the impact with respect to this particular request um because it it clearly will
have an impact on the Shoreland District we're going to put um you know in large measure a non-permeable surface into that setback there is already a boat house on the property the length of the Shoreland uh
in terms of the lot is is a smaller piece than what we're seeing on other properties so um I think that these considerations need to be taken place is to whether as Travis points out should we Grant um
variances into these protected zones very good Council comment yes I would add it's permitted use within any private property ownership within the city um I believe commissioner our council member yansky and I were both
part of the group that helped design this ordinance um this ordinance has also received a lot of we'll call it amendments and possible variances because maybe it wasn't crafted properly um I don't want to get into debating the
ordinance itself tonight and if 100 feet is proper if 75 ft is proper if the DNR sees this recreational Lake as 100 foot setback or 75t setback location um I just just think that the individual
property owner should have the right to do something that's permitted something that will be less impactful than a lot of other things mitigate a lot of other uh runoff that could possibly help benefit the lake um I guess I'm I'm kind
of for the the variance is a legal aspect that we can take to allow them to do this outside of the ordinance um and I you know I'm I'm in favor of private property owners doing
what they'd like with the property they've purchased good other questions comments I just just a comment I want to make sure I heard it correctly I think it was the Landscaping uh company said they'd be in
better position after the pool from the runoff perspective than prior to the pool is that from the water capture perspective okay just want to make sure I heard that correctly we're getting head nods from the from the Landscaping folks on that for for our audience at
home okay can I ask one other question of Staff council member P if this was approved as a variance The Next Step would we have a layer of DNR approval that we could put within or Mina Creek Watershed district
for um granting this varience so we get through the legal aspect then it must meet this condition with the DNR and it must meet that condition is there a way that we can do that or not Mr rle U Madame mayor um council member uh when
when we look at at what the dnr's role would be if the variance is granted by the city council what that' be is moving the line as far as an application for a pool or or their plan for what they're doing that application would then be reviewed by the DNR specifically one
advantage this property has is that elevation is higher so the Watershed District doesn't get into it so that that's one less layer to do um but when the application comes in staff is going to review it staff is going to look at the impervious cover and
comp there's compliance and there's not work with the applicant to resolve those and and then make sure that the DNR is aware that an applications come in and allow the applicant to go through the dnr's process on its own but that would be a requirement um and doesn't uh
necessarily need Council direction to do that as it's DNR it's within the DNR rules for that pa okay thank you council member pson is that clear clear good I have a question actually for the landscapers homeowners um the idea of
Plan B as we're calling it tonight uh it it would be proposed under that plan that the same storm water mitigation efforts would be made under that is would be under the initial plan a of putting all of the improvements within
the 100 foot setb cor sure please uh please yeah John stock one of the home owners yes under plan b or the white plan as we call it I think the downsides are it does require more grading it requires a larger
retaining wall to be built or a retaining wall to be built versus the other plan so those are you're disrupting that area more by things but all the mitigation PL practices would be the same in Plan B okay thank you for answering that all right council member
evansky anything else um I I I don't have any other questions right I I think for you know from my perspective um what's really important here for me is the mitigation work that's been done to protect the water
and I feel like you guys have covered all your bases in that I feel like um it this property is going to be in a better place um following this project than it would than it is currently now so um provided that the uh DNR gives the
nod to this and um you know I I feel like you guys have done a really great job at making sure that you've covered your basis so thank you for that I appreciate that that's uh it's not often we see all that kind of great teamw work together so I appreciate that all right
any final comments from Council seeing none I will then entertain a motion I'd make a motion to approve a variance request allowing an encroachment of 28 feet to the zoning ordinance section
2020 to- 6D requiring a high water setback from the ordinary high water line for the purpose of installing a Pool and Patio for the property at 6580 Aster Trail pending DNR approval thank you council member Pon we
have a motion can I get a second second I have a motion in a second all in favor signify by saying I I I any opposed oppos motion carries um do you have the dissension noted thank you mayor yes just one clarification I I
should have jumped in before the vote but uh I don't think it's a problem um just as to the condition the maker of the motion stated it as um a conditioned upon approval of DNR permit um I'm not sure that the DNR permit is required um
here and so I and I think that's reflected in the resolution you've just approved which says verification that a a DNR approval if it's required is obtained so I I'm I don't think there is one but um if there is one I guess you're you're requiring that it be
obtained okay so do we need to make a friendly if that's consistent with what everybody was thinking I don't need you to take vote on that I I think that's reflected in the resolution though so y very good thank you attorney Bose very good congratulations Mr and Mrs Stockman
you're on to to The Next Step um next uh next item 6.2 is a revised sketch plat for the proposed West Creek Village Residential development presenting this item is city planner
Brian mccan Mr mccan you're up thank you mayor and council members Excuse me yes tonight we do have a Revis sketch plat application from lenar for the West Creek Village site uh as you may recall you reviewed this last
August I believe uh lenar has since made some changes to their sketch plat for consideration this evening uh just as a general note sketch plat uh is just to give them initial feedback you're not making any formal motions or approvals
as part of the meeting tonight so we just want to help guide them if they decide to pursue a preliminary plat application after this so just a reminder for the location and area consists of two Parcels approximately 89 acres in size they're
located north of County Road 10 angler Boulevard West of the marsh Hollow development and south of the marsh Lake hunting club uh previously they had shown I believe 156 town homes and 13 single family homes this revised um
sketch plat that you'll be seeing this evening consists of 36 single family homes 18 Twin Homes and 56 town homes for the existing conditions for the site it's a generally flat F vacant Farmland
uh with Wetlands throughout the site as you can see on the screen um some of those being attributed to West chasa Creek which is located on the north side of the site here so here is the revised sketch plat that was provided uh they still retain
13 of the single family homes on the north side of Creekside Lane here those will be those large Lots compliant with our Shoreland ordinance um and then more single family along the east side of the north south road going down to County
Road 10 and then adjacent to that is where we have the 56 town homes on a proposed Private Road here as well as some Twin Homes on the west side of the road looking at our comprehensive plan
for these areas they're guided for a blend of low density residential which requires 2 and a/4 to 6 units per acre medium density which is 6 to 12 units per acre um pockets of open space would generally align with our wet lens that I
showed earlier and then a small portion of commercial on the very south side of the parcel across the railroad tracks as I'm highlighting here so the comp plan amendments that would be required for this development to occur as shown they'd have to make some alterations to
the low and medium density areas here uh they would also have to pursue the conservation residential district for those shorel properties on the North side um and then they would also have to change that small portion of commercial to open space designation since they're
uh encumbered by Wetlands as we look at our comp plan and potential uh density calculations for what they're proposing our current existing Citywide density is at 3.47 units per acre you might
remember that our 240 requirement is three units per acre and our 2050 requirement per them at Council will be 3 and2 units per acre so we're pretty close to that 3 and 1 12 right now we're not quite there yet uh looking at what
this development would change for us density wise it would reduce it by 009 down to 3. 36 Citywide uh the reason for that being is because of that adjustment to the conservation
residential they would have a density of 0.62 units per acre for those 13 uh single family homes uh the single family standard Lots would meet our minimum 2 and a/4 acre requirement that area would be about
2.56 the town or the Twin Homes uh which is allowed in a 6 to 12 unit per acre range they'd be on the higher end closer to that 12 units with about 11 and A2 and then the town homes kind of saying right in the middle of that range as well with
9.89 and from a map perspective this is what Those comp plan amendments would look like with the conservation residential on the North some slight modifications here with the low density and the medium density areas and then designating uh this entire chunk down
here as open space so this property is still within Laketown Township so annexation is still required when that happens uh the property would automatically receive an agricultural Zoning for our zoning code uh the township has already approved the
annexation request from lenar so the city council would be the next step when we get to the preliminary plat phase um regarding rezoning from agricultural they're proposing PUD with R1 for the single family and then standard R3 for
the twin homes and town homes uh rezonings are required for all of these items which are discretionary so city council has the authority to approve or deny those uh based on the development that comes in since they're requesting a PUD I
thought it would be helpful to pull up our plan du development process slide again uh just to reiterate that it's to allow Innovative creative and flexible development design uh the sketch plat process is where they get the initial input then they put in
the details at preliminary plat and the final ordinance is adopted at final plat as we look at their proposed deviations for the single family um they are requesting reductions in our minimum
lot width lot depth um lot area as well as our front setback side setback and an increase in impervious surfacing um for the shorel land Lots they would not have to make any adjustments these are for those single
family homes on the east side that I showed going on that north south rad uh for the R3 Twin Homes there's a potential PUD that they might request for the minimum lot width as it relates to the units the Twin Homes are 60 foot
wide products um if I if I have that correct and 25 and 25 so they might request a reduction from 40t lot width down to 30t or 25 ft whatever can fit their twin home product in
there and then the town homes as they showed them would meet our standard R3 requirements here are some examples of the architecture for the single family homes that they have that were included with the packet um as well as some of the twin Home Products here these are
the end units for their Liberty Liberty town homes so what they would do is basically take two end units and combine them if you could picture a twin home as two of these or two of these uh kind of as it's shown
here and then lastly What was seen at their first sketch plat back in August their standard uh Liberty Town Home Design which they would incorporate with this development moving on to streets and parking they I mentioned at the
beginning they're proposing a private Street for the town homes uh we would like the city council to give staff and the potential developer feedback regarding uh if they would desire that street to be public or private or street with to um potentially accommodate any
parking I'll note that the Planning Commission did recommend a 26t wide private street during the meeting last week and then looking at our parking requirements based on the renderings I just showed you they would meet all our
minimum requirements for single family twin home and town home parking with those enclosed spaces and the driveway space that they would have looking at pedestrian connections so they do have a 8ft trail shown on the south side of the development which
would uh weave down and over to the marsh Hollow development to the east they also have a 8ft tra Trail shown on the south side of Creek Side Lane here extending all the way to the West uh staff also would like feedback from the
city council on if a 8ot trail should be required on the North side for the whole stretch uh planing commission did note during the meeting last week that they thought a trail between the culdesac and the private drive as shown here with the sidewalk was sufficient just upgrading
that to a trail and then lastly the town home concept is over three units per acre so the city council should decide if they would like sidewalks on both sides of the street for the town home portions um
that was playing commission's preference um or if they're comfortable with just the sidewalk on the single side as shown here in the sketch looking at landscaping and tree preservation these are all our standard requirements for R1 um and R3 properties
that they would have to plan for including Boulevard trees plantings buffers open space And Then There are significant numbers of of trees on the site my understanding is that they will be saving a majority of them but if they do exceed that 20% removal threshold
they'll have to mitigate any additional trees and then Shoreland overlay as I mentioned there is a portion within 300 ft of West chesca Creek for this site those are those larger acreage Lots those will have to have 25% impervious
maximum 75 ft lot width and minimum 50% open space based on what we've seen those 13 single family lots will meet all these standards and then Parkland dedication uh if this development were to move forward in total they would have to do
uh just over two and a half acres of Park dedication or about $271,000 total um that does not exclude the 8ft trails that they showed as well as the quarter acre Park that they've proposed with this development as well
so those could be uh reduced from that amount and the Parks and Recreation committee did review this twice they had a preliminary plat application back in January uh that was rescinded before planing commission city council review but when the parks and rec committee
reviewed them they were supportive of cash fee or alternative Park dedication then looking at Highway 10 access I'll probably start it and then kick it off to Cara um our fire department requested gated uh areas for this emergency access
to 10 I think when the city council saw it the first time around it was uh potentially proposed to be as an additional access for everyone within this development that's not the case this would be for emergency vehicles only so fire department is requesting uh
gates at both ends to present or prevent any through traffic and Carver County has reviewed this and uh provides some comments including that the access is removed once development occurs further west of this
property good evening mayor members of the city council uh Brian said most everything related to that but um Highway 10 does have um adopted by the county adopted um corridor plan for um
Highway 10 that has limited access um planned for it so in particular for this piece of property and the proximity to the railroad tracks the county would not allow full access to County Road 10 um from this property
so um but given the nature of how many homes we have already constructed off of Creek Side Lane with only one access they understand the concern from an emergency perspective with only having one access so the county is agreeable to
having a temporary emergency access that as development continues to progress to the West eventually that um would be removed so Cara that where your um Mouse is right there that's that temporary access you're talking about correct that
would be gated and only opened if there was an emergency correct and the rest of the homes in this development would be accessed via Creekside Lane so through marsh Hollow um up over to County Road 11 and how
many how many homes total are we talking about about 100 so about a hundred more homes on that same Creekside correct and that is you know Creek Creekside Lane was designed as a
um neighborhood collector is I believe what we ended up calling it um that is intended to be a I'm going to call it significant for the city east west collector um that will serve that part of the city so uh
they were required to submit a traffic impact analysis that um was submitted to the county to take a look at the impact on the intersection of Game Farm Road and Highway 11 um you know all of this development is consistent with what was
planned for the South growth area and part of the comp plan so um unless suddenly you all were proposing to dramatically change the densities um from what was in the comprehensive plan this is consistent with what was planned for the area the challenge is just the timing
eventually as we move to the West red fox um is planned to extend from Marsh Lake Road all the way to County Road 10 um the completion of red fox will depend on the Hunt Club at some point developing um but but certainly the
South half to Highway 10 um would be completed sooner than later as those land owners would choose to sell their property for development of course it's up to them and what's the what does the county
have um planned for access on County Road 10 it is limited so it's mil spacing so um the adopted Corridor study which was adopted in covid times so it's like 2020 I want
to say so the city of Victoria did participate in the corridor study but the city council at the time did not pass a resolution of support for County R 10 we did not agree with the vision um it it really is planned um the best way
I would describe it is to be similar to how you would um if you look at Highway 5 through Chan Hassen so like 41 um east of 41 that's really if you wanted to try to
get a visual in your mind of how the county views that Corridor in terms of it being a rural section roadway two four lanes two lanes in each Direction um that is the vision from Highway 11 out to Waconia with preservation of
RightWay for the potential of a six Lane um intersection at um County Road 11 so the city was not in agreement with that Vision particularly between the railroad tracks and County Road 11 at the time we
were so far away from developing this property that it didn't really make a whole lot of sense to engage in a lot of back and forth they weren't prepared to move forward with a project this land wasn't annexed into the city yet we didn't have utilities to the area um so
both the county and the city agreed that we would continue to engage in this dialogue for County Road at 10 once um any of us were in the area and so that time is becoming imminent now um
the county will be releasing a request for proposals for a 2028 project to improve the intersection of 11 and 10 with the primary improvements on 11 so up to the railroad
tracks um you know past the Quick Trip property but as part of that RFP they are going to start looking at preliminary design for Highway 10 so once that works starts that is going to be the point in time where the city is going to need to re-engage in the
discussion of what our vision is for 10 particularly between the tracks and County Road 11 where we have our commercial um whatever we call the triangle area um you know that we had the workshop on that's going to be the point where we're going to need to um
really start to dialogue with the county about what the vision is for that section as we start to move west um from the railroad tracks where we moved into um single family residential and medium density residential there was a lot less
um disagreement with what that access spacing should be and with our red fox um North South collector planned we didn't have as many challenges that but uh County Road 10 is planned to be realigned um through a portion of
developable property west of here so that's going to come into play if the city council starts to consider moving anything ahead of the 2030 property so the kuchenmeister property that had come before the council in sketch platform if
the city council decides to start entertaining um potential development of that property that's going to come into play of that additional study that we mentioned that staff mentioned that we would have to start to do more work on if we were going to start to entertain
land um before 2030 in that area okay thank you that was long sorry um still me then okay so um gradi and storm water management everything um on this parcel is pretty typical um they
would need to meet wmo rules including wetman Wetland mitigation um Wetlands including buffers need to be located on outlots that will be deeded to the city um storm water facilities need to have access the one thing that's a little bit
of a challenge here is along the west side of the property there um is like a tributary to chasa Creek that runs along the side of it um with Wetland and Wetland buffer that is impact
um their ability to extend sewer and water and roadway all the way to the property boundary um so that's going to be something that we're going to have to work through if this project moves forward to preliminary plat typically we do require the developer to build the infrastructure all the way to their
boundary um but there's Wetland there and so um we've been when they were potentially moving forward with preliminary plat we had been um working through that with the developers so that going to continue to be a challenge that we'll have to work through if they um
come back forward with a preliminary plat it's hard to build you can't really build a road to the middle of a wetland um and stop it so we have to figure out how we're going to work through that challenge site utilities those will get extended um for Creekside Lane to the
east um we've talked about all of these things before um so no big updates there um um I'm going to turn it back to you but before I do can you take me back to a
slide that has the site layout so I can just talk about public private streets a little bit perfect okay so um this Loop here is the loop that they um that we are discussing whether it should be public
or private and what I what I did want to note is that this does continue to be an area that the city has not settled on a standard for um frankly we're a little bit all over the board with it as all of these multifam projects are coming
before the city we've developed a um variety pack of circumstances so um Victoria Ridge the development just south of the railroad tracks the city council recommended approval and the project was approved
with a private Street serving the multif family area um with a 24t wide street that is um privately owned and privately maintained with a pretty narrow roadway
in that case we ended up um obligating the developer to be responsible for the um sewer and water services all the way out to the main to address some concerns that staff had with the ability to
address a curb stop leak curb stop leak in a very narrow tight Corridor if you recall um that was just not that long ago than we that we approved that um the uh Whispering Hills development um
you're all familiar with that development that is another multifam neighborhood where we have primarily public streets and then we have like what we call little finger areas serving the multif family product um so at some
point we do need to in my view come up with a standard that we end up um putting into place so we aren't trying to negotiate these with every developer that comes in the door and what I can tell you is even from a staff
perspective there isn't really an easy answer for what the right solution is here so um I I don't generally like to speak for the developer but I am in a note here um originally in the
preliminary plat and the concept that you saw previously um they were proposing public streets in this area and one of the challenges that staff identifies when we're dealing with public streets in this type of scenario and we talked about it with the Victoria
Ridge Development is really snow removal and it the issue isn't a challenge for the city per se so the city trucks would come through here if it was a 28 foot wide Street they would come through with their big plow truck they would run through it like
they do your neighborhoods but with the density the snow is going to get pushed into everybody's driveway and off our off our plow guys are going to go and they're not going to come back all of these um town home
units in this circumstance and every other circumstance in the city the snow removal happens by a private snow removal contractor who is doing all of the driveways they come in they clear the snow and what happens is you have these competing snow removal contractors
you have our big plow truck coming in and then you have the um company for the neighborhood snow removal contractor coming in depending on who gets there first you've got snow getting pushed back and forth and back and forth and and really the people it becomes the
challenge for are the people who live there and eventually when they move in they're your residents and your taxpayers so um we internally as a staff are constantly trying to debate what the right answer here is and unfortunately
I'm not sitting here in front of you today with a recommendation for what staff thinks the right answer is so we're looking for your input let's talk a little bit about about those private roads I know that's been a it's been a bit of a challenge so um the the road that's being proposed here on this plan
is 24 foot you mentioned uh 28 foot is preferred so 28 foot is the city standard for a residential street okay now we've had some discussions in these multi family areas whether we should be
going with a wider street so if we were to standardize a public Street should we actually be increasing our street width to something like 32 so we have a little bit more room to work but 28 is our standard residential
street in like the streets you all live on okay and a question for the developer on that um come on up to the podium here um if what impact if we uh widen that street to say 28 or maybe even 32 what
does that do to your project sure so good evening mayor McMillan uh my name's Josh metzer with lenar Minnesota um happy to be here again um we've been on this project for a while um
so yeah as and this might be uh new information for City staff as well um it's new information for me but um was our you know while we're working through this um revised concept plan we do have our engineer working on revising our
preliminary plat set um which as Brian explained we were a couple days away from bringing BR to Planning Commission about a month ago um but based on challenges um that that staff um wasn't comfortable with they weren't ready to
recommend the project for approval um which we thought well best to not bring that forward let's make some changes um which is why we have this plan here tonight um so our uh engineer in working reworking some of this for the pre-at um
if this remain of public Street they they were able to and of course this might change as the site fully designs but uh right now they were showing 31 um off street parking stalls in the um town home area so Brian maybe if you could
zoom in on the town home area most of them are located on that Central kind of Island block you know that Island there um where the private Street swings um on the curb
they've put about 10 stalls on that southern portion about 17 up um around the curve near the park um now the Tot Lot would probably have to get reor reoriented a little bit from what it's shown here and then a couple of spots in
between buildings on the straightaways on either side of the street there so I don't know if that would influence staff or council's uh feeling on whether this uh were to go private or public uh if it were a public Street um I don't believe
the city allows parking stalls to be um loaded off of a public street so if the parking stalls are desired it should probably remain private um that my understanding would allow for
the street to be 24 feet in width um which would prohibit parking on the street if you wanted the uh off Street stalls Plus on street parking um the street would need to at least 26 feet wide if it's private hopefully I didn't confuse
things more for you I I yeah I don't know if everyone else followed that it was a lot though yeah mayor yeah sorry can I can I follow I'm interested in the private Street question mostly here too um I I think maybe what you were alluding to and and for developer reps a
benefit I I think you are saying and I agree that the question of whether a street is private or not is sort of one thing the question of the width of the street is another thing and so theoretically a street could be built to the city's standard but still be a private Street true and there's some
advantage to that in the scenario that plays out all too frequently where private streets eventually get requested to be public streets again in 10 or 20 or whatever years uh and then cities feel like yeah we'll take it over but we want it up to City standards at that
point so and I think that's what you were alluding to and so may you know to the extent the city would require that this be even if it's private Street 28 ft or 30 ft I think the question was how does that impact your development targets um and is that feasible from
your perspective yeah I mean I think previously we had a public Street shown here which was 28 ft um driveways were a little bit tighter in that design um snow storage was more of a concern I
believe um The Wider the street the more snow you have to plow off the less area you have to store it um narrower Street um private street that that makes it private again a private contractor um and that contractor is the one clearing
the street and the driveways whereas if it's public you have the city clearing the street you have the private clearing the driveways uh and sidewalks so I guess there's pluses and minuses to both scenarios so if we made the Street wider what I'm hearing is you're going
to have to reorient that Tot Lot a bit and we'll probably lose some parking right I mean we might still be able to get some parking in there but certainly not the 31 stalls that were showing on the revised plan that I was looking at what's what's required for
parking mayor and council members we do not have a guest parking requirement currently in our multif family districts it's something that we would like to incorporate in the future but it's not a standard we have right now okay and these each of these homes would have a
um two stall enclosed garage uh the driveway would be two stall wide uh minimum of 25 ft deep from if it's a private street from the edge of the curb to the front of the garage door if it's public it would be even more than 25 so you can fit depending on the car
you could fit up to four vehicles on a driveway of 2 5 ft long maybe not four trucks but for cars okay thank you um Council any questions for Mr meter as long as we've got him here at
the podium the other the other point on this too is from that diagram what were we thinking of for sidewalks on that in that town home area we had shown on one side um a lot of our town home
communities have no um sidewalks if it's private streets um we are showing uh on one side currently okay all right Council anything else at this
moment I think with the density having it as a private street where the company that's required to to remove snow from the streets also required to move from the driveway makes sense um my concern is 10 years down the
road when they want to sell the street back to us what does that look like so I'm literally torn yeah I you know we've we've battled this question with public or public private streets quite a bit and they almost always want
the city to take them over again and they don't meet our standards and and there's some there's some tricky things with that um so I I think um I'd like to see us do do a little bit of work on that and Miss gar and I understand that
there's no easy answers to what a what a standard Street looks like but we might want to dig into that a little bit too um can we take a look at the slide where it shows the variances that they're requesting from
standard there we go um so this one in R1 the deviations going from 12,000 ft to 5 500t from 80 ft to 56 ft that's that's a lot of deviation and I'm not sure I'm
comfortable with it so is there um things that can be done to make that not so Stark so what we're doing here is we're we're pivoting here right from 148 Town Homes row Town Homes uh in
a medium density guided area to 111 homes um and with the revised plan Brian we do have 37 uh single family instead of 36 um so what we're proposing here is um
you know fewer units by what is that 37 um we and that's actually a mix that we think will work well the homes that we're proposing are uh so it's 5 56 foot wide lock
uh it's comparable to the homes over in Marsh Hollow which are on 51 foot wide Lots um so it's a a smaller type single family home our row Town Homes um will be similar uh in nature to Victoria
Ridge and the marsh Hollow Town Homes uh so we feel it you know what we're proposing here is is matching what's going on in the area uh some of the single family homes in the north side of Creekside Lane will be served by uh private streets similar to what's happening in Hunter brck Creek Side
immediately adjacent to those so it's it's very similar in feel in nature to to what's happening in the general area there so and it it's also you know it's was intended to be a medium density area because you have the Arterial Highway 10 to the South you have a railroad
Corridor you have commercial uh guided area to the you know directly to the east you have Flex employment directly to the east and south um it's an area that obviously um it makes sense to be guided for a higher density which is why
the City guided it that way back in I'm not sure how far back it went to medium density so that's what we're looking at here um it's not so much that we're looking at it from where we're coming down from a standard large single family
lot that's the standard R1 we're more coming up from a town home type standard to a single family maybe a little bit smaller um but that's kind of how we're viewing it okay um and the 5500 the
actual smallest lot um is 5,6 672 um again newer information as our Engineers dialing in the lot sizes um so and looking at 37 Lots I did some
averaging of lot size um and also some impervia surface I know the Imp is asking for quite a bit there at 50% so the average lot size of the 37 is um 7,18 uh the largest being
10,800 the smallest being that 5672 um as far as um the impervious goes what I did is I I I assumed our largest footprint of the homes that would be built in this
neighborhood um put that footprint on each lot plus a three-c car driveway because these are all three car homes a three car wide driveway and then another 240 Square ft extra to play with for patio or a porch in in their backyard um and
so the average impervious if you know all of those had the largest home placed on them uh was 45% um just one lot was at 51% but of course you know we have smaller homes that we would build there on that lot
um the some of the larger Lots were coming in at 27% impervious so um really about 45% is where the neighborhood that the single families would land on impervious okay um and then I want to take a look
at those proposed models um one of the things that we have heard loud and clear from our residents is um single level living and these all if I'm not mistaken look to
be twostory um do you guys have a product that's single level living that you be that You' be that you would consider putting in this development so the part of the transitioning from the previously proposed row Town Homes to
single family is with row Town Homes um you don't have to worry as much about a rear setback and a rear yard because you know you're dealing with com lot areas for Town Homes uh so there was a lot more room depthwise with our town homes
now trans transitioning to a single family you have a rear yard of 30 feet minimum that you have to to meet plus the depth of your home plus a 25 foot front set back um we also have maybe Brian if you bring the the site plan
up a lot of wetland on the site and all of the single family homes are backing up to that large so that area on green you see that's a one giant Wetland um and it comes right up to the rear of those single family lots on top of that
you have a buffer area I forget how deep it is it's going to vary I think in certain areas but you have a buffer area that you have to leave natural um untouched that has to be out lotted outside of the single family lots so
we're getting pinched um already on these that's why the the request for um ad depth of um less than 130 ft which is the standard um now these are probably our shallow single family homes um not
only because they're smaller square footage trying to Target a you know a lower price point um but because you have a second story you're able to you know include bedrooms bathrooms laundry
in that Upper Floor you go to a single story that footprint is going to get probably twice as big it's going to get too deep um so we just the single family product we have we do have them um but they are just too deep um for this part
of the neighborhood um and you know it we wouldn't be building these if we didn't think we could sell them um we are still building and selling these everywhere so um as much as there are folks that do want that
single level living there are I would say equal number that do want this the two-story traditional single family um now of course we are looking elsewhere in the city of Victoria um and we have had discussions about a villa type
product um so that is something that we are we do have in mind going forward but for this particular site um not something that is is going to be able to fit you mentioned a lower price point can you give us an idea about what that lower price point
sure um so I guess I'll I'll give you the whole thing um so our Our Town Homes some of those will be depending on where you're at in the site some will be a slab on grade with no basement uh those would start at 380 and then others that do have a
basement with a walk out uh the town homes themselves will be starting at 400 uh the Twin Homes would start at 420 and then these single family homes uh we have starting at 560 so by comparison uh lak town I think
we were selling at probably the mid to Mid sixes to Upper sevens okay so thank you Council um other questions for Mr metzer or any other discussion items on this
plat just a comment I do like movement you've made on the unit types and the quantity of types bringing it down and having more single family I and mayor said this as well I I do the one level
would be preferred um but it sounds like you're looking at it in other areas and it's just not feasible here um there's no way in this to do a uh a segment of those units in single the single level
like just smattering of them yeah there's really not you know a a community of this size um we're already at three types of product uh if we had a fourth in there it gets to be two okay yeah got it other questions
comments throw some comments on this council member evansky with we routinely go back and forth with this sidey setback we're drifting off topic with this yet again um we're
shrinking lot sizes down I don't you know I'm not seeing the affordability aspect coming into play for that compromise and um in in the overall package um we have
other newer examples that are going up where we requested larger sidey setbacks we have them and we have um you know frankly more lot for the home that's sitting on it so
um when we look at this area it's more rural it's more agricultural this feels like we're just pounding a bunch of housing into a small smaller and smaller space uh and it's not
giving what people come to Victoria for a housing products if we're going to have to amend our comp plant to do this that it still feels like there's some more work to be done on you the Planning Commission also brought some very good
points in terms of Road sizes and sidewalks um I'm still uncomfortable with the amount of cark land that we're bringing to these spaces especially in this area we we continue
to uh you know struggle with the amount of um land that we're going to get for those amenities um but I feel that you know if we we're just not working hard enough to
get the product that um people are accustomed to come from to Victoria if I could can I respond so it it's certainly an agricultural field now um but that is going to be changing um based on the
land guided to the east that I had talked about commercial Flex employment I was able to sit in on the work session that Council had at the fire hall to discuss the um vision for the the southern growth area and there were all
sorts of grand visions of of major things happening here and this you know site is is immediately adjacent to that to the West so you know and it's been guided medium density
um based on you know the access to the site limited to one access um and the densities the minimum densities that a medium density calls for the the number of units that we were proposing in there just wasn't working with what we needed
to get there for a unit count and what the city and City staff needed needs to provide as far as services and placement to of you know infrastructure which is why we're switching to this lower density option um it wouldn't be suitable in our
opinion to Place Large lot single family immediately adjacent to Twin homes and town homes um especially when the feel of the area on the south side of Creekside Lane is like I said in Marsh Hollow you've got 50 foot wide homes
that were approved the city was comfortable with that you've got row town homes in the other portion of marsh Hollow and Victoria Ridge we proposing a similar type product um with a mix of private streets and public streets um as
far as Parkland uh with our initial um concept plan we were proposing to offer up that northwest corner which was I think going to be a perhaps a three or 4 acre public park the city um did not want that
uh they think they cited proximity to what will be future Marsh Hollow Street or Marsh Hollow park um which is the large open area in the marsh Hollow um neighborhood on the south side of Creekside Lane we are proposing a Tot
Lot um and some open space area around it we're proposing a uh quite a lengthy Trail cut across the a small Upland Corridor connecting all the way over to Marsh Hollow to connect up with the marsh Hollow Trail which will give folks
in the southern end of our neighborhood pedestrian access over to the marsh Hollow park um and according to my calculations I don't think Brian was including uh the 37 single family lots that we're now proposing in the Parkland dedication uh we're also going to be
giving near a half a million dollars in Parkland dedication bees so we've worked this from every angle that we can um understanding staff Planning Commission and City council's
previous comments and feelings on it and this is what we think makes best for us um and for the city as far as as how it's guided and and the limitations with wetlands and access to the site okay Council any other yeah council
member Roberts so first of all I guess I it for me it's I would agree with Andy like I do appreciate and like that like I it's not I don't necessarily like I don't it's not that I dislike this layout or
anything um and I think you guys have made good progress on it um I think part of it at least for me I can't speak for the rest of you but for me and I think a lot of residents there's a little bit of
building fatigue maybe right not that that we don't want to build but there's a little bit right we've done a lot of building and we're starting to see how the South area is starting to develop right that's more and more goes up and I I pardon me even is like do we
need to have another conversation a bigger conversation about like okay now that we've done part of this like is this the way we want to keep going is this the you know what changes need to be make do we want to keep plowing ahead with things like this
that in fair right like you say you know you have similar products to and you listed you know multiple other developments but that's also part of where the fatigue comes in right yes it's similar in what we've done in other
places in other areas in that area but it just it's starting to Fe right like part of my you know people didn't move out here for Suburbia hell right like it's it we
it's because we want something different and again it I don't it's not that I necessarily dislike what I'm seeing here but it's I don't love it and it's I think we're to that point where we're like we need to love it to do it so I
that's just my personal feeling there's again there's a little bit of you know it it's just it it's it's kind of the same wash rinse and repeat so if you can help us understand that then to help us try to plan this I
mean sure it's guided medium density there's very specific density requirements that we have to meet or or we're not going to get a sanitary permit to build a project you don't love it what do you love it's hard to say as someone who doesn't buil right like until I see it
it's hard to say that's what I'm going to love right like so um we gave op you know feedback I agree with the mayor with single family or sorry Single Living Single level living I get that it doesn't fit here um but again to my my
point maybe it's a bigger discussion that we need to have as a council going forward about like is this what we want to keep doing or is or or no or do we want to step back or do we want to do things differently I I get that that's what it's zoned for right and so that
it's Med I I just I don't know maybe it's just where my head is at tonight but that it yeah what I understand your point about it looks like every other neighborhood you know it looks like every other neighborhood that's in Victoria and I think one of the things
that we sort of pride ourselves on is the fact that every neighborhood has some character and it's Unique um so you know maybe that's just the nature of what this is going to be but I think you know council member Roberts brings some good points
um you know and we have to kind of think through what where do we want to be with this and I maybe maybe the hores left the barn on this already and we can't back up and do something different but but there is there is something to be
said about you know how how can we how how can we do something that doesn't feel like everything else that we've got and unfortunately for us you know on a site of this size and a guidance and and certain zoning
regulations that we have to try to meet right well you came I mean you clearly you came here we have a set of rules you followed the rules and here we are so um you know that's that's not lost for sure so other questions
comments I was way down just on parking and Street access and the only thing that I was looking at is the private Street I think it's the right way to go I think the private Street and the snow clearing all one contract but the
private Street to be built at the city minimum to me there's not a lot of places to park there but over the course of time I feel like that's going to come back to us um and then I was happy to hear that you had carved out some other
spots for public parking because these people are going to have parties they're going to have friends over they're going to have events where you're not going to be able to park in the driveway way you're going to have to park someplace wider Street affords you the ability to park on the
street and then the other access points make sense to me um how big is that Marsh area is that like a 100 yards across Brian um mayoring council members that's a good question at its widest
point yeah I'd guess about 100 yards I mean to me that is kind of Victoria you have a really nice wet land in the backyard that you're not going to get every place else so while your yard might only be 5600 Square fet you do
have this massive Marsh to look at out your backyard so you actually have this three football field size backyard that you get to take a look at or the people with the single family homes
um most of the other things you heard from the Planning Commission um again I'm new I don't hate it but um yeah it's just a little bit different being that it's zoned slightly
different as well got new rules coming into place if we get to keep any rules at all so um can yeah can I ask this question yeah so I agree with Christian about to me with these multif family housing options
right it does kind of make sense to have it private I know there's there's some issues with that down the road potentially but having it private because like we talked about right depending on who comes first you're either going to get snow back into the uh Street or you're going to get snow
back into someone's uh driveway um it so I know we've had issues with private roads and then later asking us to take them back over publicly um I mean obviously we don't have to say
yes to that but is the concern that then they're just not going to do what they need to do to take care of it and then we're going to end up having to fix it again anyways at some point basically if I may you ple please so a couple of things we have we've taken
some back so um I I do think that's an important considerate consideration to be mindful of is you're making these decisions so there is the school of thought of building it to City standard what I can tell you when you build it to City standard it does make it harder for
the council to say no um so Garden Path is a good example they call every five years and ask us to take it back and staff says no and the reason we say no is because it doesn't meet City standards I think those roads are 24 ft
wide the setbacks are very narrow so it would be really challenging for the city to take that one back so um that's resulted in it as a no um I think if you spoke to anybody in their HOA I think
why the question keeps coming up is they're concerned about having enough reserves to deal with those roads um you know they're they're the same age as the roads that we're dealing with that have the $10 million price tag for Mill and overlays um and so
why those questions come up after 20 years is those folks have to figure out how they're going to pay to maintain that infrastructure and is the HOA doing a good enough job of building up the reserves that are needed to maintain what's needed to be maintained so on the
Victoria Ridge project um you know there was specific discussion and some specific language built into the development agreement that was a attempting to um create some obligation for them to plan for um I can't remember what the
final language ended up being that we landed in that development agreement with that they need to communicate to the city that they are saving for and planning for that eventual maintenance to try to um protect everybody against
that eventual reality so in that particular case the city landed on a 24t wide Street um and then then sought to put some protections into the development agreement and I think they have to report something to
us five years every five years every five years um that they're planning for the maintenance of the the roadway and such to try to plan for that but you know there isn't there isn't a right answer we've looked at what other cities
have done everybody's doing everything a little bit different I think if there if there was obvious answer we'd already be doing it um but I do what we talk about is if it looks like a public Street the people who move
in there have expectations that it's being that they're moving into a public Street and as taxpayers they're expecting the same level of service that they're that you're all getting on your public street so I tend to prefer it not
to be built the exact same way that a residential street is because then there's no differentiation for people who are buying there so I tend to prefer um some level of deviation because I think it it helps
protect you down the road makes it easier to say no yeah thanks for that it's helpful so not 28 feet it's your decision that's just my perspective 20 some years I've been here
yeah it's the opposite of mine saying I think it's going to happen and I'm setting up future councils to be able to take it back but perhaps the better way to go about it is to build it not to City specs so the upcoming Council can't take it
back now I will say we build it to City standard from a pavement section perspective to make sure it lasts as long as all of the other roads that you build but look and feel um you know Mark culs is the city's senior consultant
who's been around as long as I have um a lot of those roadways um in the marsh Hollow development where you'll see like the six and 12 units type design he's a big proponent
of that for the um private streets for multif family because they're really narrow they really are more like an Alleyway um so they they are private they aren't they don't look like a public Street and that's um part of that
protection but we do standardize what the design is to make sure that they last as long you're talking Road rather than Road correct yeah so that it it lasts the same it gets the same service life that a public Street would just the
width okay very good any final comments thoughts questions okay there's no official action yeah please you know the alter I guess a question um it is guided medium density if there's trouble with the
deviations we're requesting if we came back with a town home project that met the R3 standards to a t had private streets the way Mark colis um had referred to them in the comment letter
um imagine meline Trail if you will if you if you're familiar with mine Trail um we could build something like that that would meet our three standards what we're trying to do here is something a little different a little bit more creative um a little bit more unique but there is a path to go
to to meet our three standards but in our opinion is a much less inviting neighborhood to live in um would would is that something that would a good question just trying to look for a path forward and and
that's a good question let's let's roll back to that R3 uh well uh can you kind of walk us through my what that might look like with this plan is it more single family homes no it's it would be more Town Homes town homes on the south
um and perhaps um maybe Brian if you could go to the existing land use map Talk Amongst yourselves while we load because you know the people that I report to are are they're going to want to come forward with something at a preliminary plat
level um trying to at this point I feel like we're going to be left guessing and I don't want that mayor and council members if I can jump in for please Miss Hardy so thank you um I've been just jotting down some notes as
we've gone along and I'd like to take a minute to kind of summarize what I what I feel I'm hearing from the consensus of the council and then what I a as you're thinking through these things and thinking through next steps I think as you know we have a multi-disciplinary team that works on these projects um
daily and are very good at what they do they're very creative and so um one thing that you might want to direct us to do is um if I've captured this correctly to go back and work with um Josh and his team um maybe taking a
different using the lens of what we gathered here tonight uh to relook at things and see if we can move move something forward from there um so as you're noodling that I'll just take a moment to to capture what I feel like I've heard um and I think some of the
the comments that were made here and I feel like I saw some head nods that every neighborhood is unique that and as we go through Victoria one of the things that we really feel that sets our community apart from other Suburban communities is that um we we use those
and I'm going to throw in some words here but those natural landscapes the things um the the landscape to um add some character and individuality to each of those neighborhoods and so I feel like there was some consensus that with
what you were seeing here that um that that might be lacking and so um that may or may not be the case so maybe there's an opportunity for us to just go through um and look at this layout and see how
um those natural features could be Amplified or enhanced as part of this project um I think there was some really good discussion on private streets and so um and I I think um it feels like
that there might be some consensus to uh continue to explore the private streets and I think I was just seeing consensus that um if we do end up going that route to make maybe make sure that they do look different um if not if we're going
to um go the public Street route or a private street that if it looks like public then maybe we want to um consider doing something that we did previously within that development agreement just making sure that there's um we'll just say money in the coffers for when if and
when the city would be asked to take that back um that um that we can um do those improvements um without spreading that out to the
other tax space um also I was hearing some consensus about the town home area including parking for guests um and it feels like that that could be incorporated um I think there was also
some discussion about uh recognizing the movement and the appreciation for the diversity in the project in in the products here um and while we still would prefer single level living that the this um the challenges with this
particular land um might that might not fit here and so I just want to take a minute to check in to make sure that you're comfortable with us proceeding with the products that you've you've seen here tonight or if that's something that we should still
explore and then um and I did also here see some head nods with a suggestion with um maybe this kind of comes back back to that first thing that I noted the marsh being an amenity uh potentially so is there an opportunity
to really make that connection as that Marsh marshy area being um connected to the to the neighborhood as a unique characteristic so I know in the past that we've talked about uh making sure that
um uh the meline trail for example the the side yard setbacks and we had some of that conversation tonight being just the problems with the soil the challenges that we have with our clay soils here um with drainage that that just becomes problematic um for us so I I think I've
I saw some head nods here with those sidey setbacks um some concern when we're mushing that together and putting things in these soils closer together that creates some problems um I certainly don't want to put words in the council's mouth but that meline trail
example I think historically has been something we've learned from that and that's not something we want to repeat um but I will pause there to make sure that I've captured your your thoughts and your where your where the consensus
is correctly and would offer again that staff would be happy to go back and work with the team yeah um I think um yeah I think you summarized it nicely um we've got this this picture up now Josh if you want to take a look and kind of talk
through what you're you're thinking here sure and I guess before I do get to that point Dana thank you for bringing up natural features that's something I guess I should have pointed out and didn't um Christian or sorry council member Pon you did allude to it
um that you know all but six of the single family homes do back up to the large Marsh to the east um part of what we like about this layout with the town homes and Twin Homes is almost all of them back up to some sort of open space
and some privacy um whereas some Town own communities you'll see the buildings backed right up to each other where if you're on your back patio you got your neighbor across the way on their back patio you know 50 feet from you um what
you're getting here is quite a bit more privacy than you would normally have in a a typical town home Community um to the West you have chasa Creek that runs along the west property line so that's another natural buffer there
yes in the future there will be likely some uh residential development to the west but it will be um kept at a distance by the the presence of the creek there uh the area north of Creekside Lane uh I not I don't have the
exact numbers in front of me but there's um probably close to 11 acres I think that are being uh put in conservation it's a mix of wetlands uh wooded Uplands land and open space Upland
so um I know it's hard to look at these things from a two-dimensional black and white perspective and really get a feel for it um but I hope there's you know you know some validity and some of
the things that we we think are are positives of this neighborhood you know pedestrian connection walkability um trying to preserve some open space give some privacy to some of these folks when they get home at night to go to
their back patio and and and I think that is a benefit That's Unique it's a benefit um it helps in a neighborhood like this and I think just I think you're more on the right track with this than you are with your other option that you said just putting a whole bunch of
town would agree right like I would agree I think that would that would be going the wrong way cuz I I think the only route had to go to not be kicked to a PUD to not have to go through a comp plan Amendment at least for everything
south of Creekside Lane for the north we will have to because it's um too sensitive an area in order to meet low density requirements you'd have to blow up trees and wetlands um but to the South the other option was
to lay it out like a meline trail where you have a public Street running down the middle and little Feeder private streets feeding off to um 12 units you know six and six off of each of those private streets and it you know you'd
end up with just rows of town homes yeah can can you talk about like the difference in what the S like the inside square foot so not the of the comparing the town homes to your twin homes so they'll they kind of look I
mean similarish to well it's basically um Our Town Homes if you took the interior units out and SLA those two end units together okay it's that's it um so square footage wise let me pull that up so talking on an individual unit
basis um you're going to have anywhere from 1,700 to 18850 in total square footage um that's with a basement um no I take that back with a finished
basement some of these will be up around 2500 square fet um three bedrooms uh up if you finish the basement uh there's a bedroom down so it could be three to four bedrooms uh 2 and 1 half to three and A2
um bathrooms depending again on whether it has a basement and if that basement's finished um two stall garage the garage yeah um and again it's uh the Twin Homes will be the same type of unit
as the town homes except uh the number of buildings or number of units in that building okay very good I think um we'll let staff continue to kind of work and help see if we can tweak that a little bit maybe give us a little bit
more Elbow Room in those setbacks and see what else we can come up with as far as maybe working on that private road I ask one question about the products before we wrap we go to the next slide um the other
slide I mean I raised three kids with a two-car garage can we knock off the top and maybe make the garage into more of a single single level living family type of an arrangement um if we go with a smaller
yard maybe a smaller home again I'm not an engineer I'm not a architect but um seems to me like you could make a a more livable smaller plot two-car garage
type of a setup would just be my input and maybe you can't but and we certainly have a two-car product I mean we have a all the way down to a 25 5 foot wide product okay well you just made a comment earlier regarding the fact that
you couldn't get enough space and to me it's like I don't know how big a g one of the garages is what 150 square no it's probably more than that caught 300 square feet there's a living room I don't know just an idea yeah and
we we just don't have a product that's wider and shallower um I think getting that yeah we just we don't have that Josh do you have a product that is like the town homes that are a Pioneer Trail and Bavaria Road by the tucked in
by the railroad tracks over by mcnight yeah right across uh Pioneer Vista I think we're calling it I'm not exactly sure the name but you know kind of kitty corner from the church um let's I would say this is essentially like once to
come out of the first roundabout cross road tracks and then there's the town to the right before second row before you hit the second roundabout so it's nestled along the train tracks
um yeah I know what you're talking about um we don't have something that is exactly like that um what we're we what we are proposing to build here is if you went down Pioneer Trail to the other end of um the golf
course right at the Curve there right there right where your cursor is those are the same town home uh we would be building here so you would be able to if you wanted to take a drive and Clover Ridge
is that you're it's uh Pioneer Vista oh the road yeah Clover Ridge Clover Ridge but it's p vist yeah you get right on um I'm not in love with what you have for the product for the town D so
um and especially given that uh if you have a taller product you can probably maybe get vistas of wetland that you're talking about that the single family houses are backing up to a taller
product I mean the MCN those the ones that are off mcnight I think they're a taller product and it feels like the garages are kind of more tucked in an alley as opposed to um just facing
Street oh the ones are we did used to have a product like that um it's expensive to build which means it's expensive to sell which is why we got away from that one well I mean I if you're asking for like what we like in terms of feel I
mean it's that's more aligned with I think if we're going to go into density have that on one side single family lore across the street everybody gets to see the
swamp the Wetland the Wetland I'm sorry Wetland not SW it's not a swamp it's a wetland okay all right affectionately referred to as a mark okay all right thank you so much
Josh appreciate it um thank you continue to work with staff we'll see if we can we can get there um this was discussion so no official action is needed so Brian you good um thank you Dana for capturing
those thoughts um so at this point there are no more items on our regular agenda so we're going to move on to reports and emerging issues attorney V you're up first no thank you mayor I don't have anything to report Miss Hardy anything from staff thank you mayor members of the council just a quick note for
anybody watching us at home or on demand that there will be a number of closures coming up for um the various Transportation Improvement projects that will be kicking off here at the end of the month so we encourage everyone to um pay attention follow the detours and um
please follow the county and if not um the city uh while the county is taking the lead on the communication we're kind of reposting as quickly as that information becomes available so our residents and visitors to our community remain informed very good thank you so
much Council any reports from Council this evening all right seeing none there are no more items to come before the body this afternoon so I will entertain a motion to adjourn make a motion to adjourn we have a motion can I get a second second we have a motion and a
second all in favor signify by saying I I I any opposed motion carries We Stand adjourned