The URL can be used to link to this page

5.2, 5.3, 5.4 PCSR 04-25-1995 Memo to the Planning Commission Page 2 April 25, 1995 • Attachment C - Staff report to the Planning Commission dated June 27, 11111994 • Attachment D - Planning Commission Minutes dated June 28, 1994 • Attachment E - Steering Committee Minutes dated December 1, 1994 • Attachment F - Inventory of Commercial Property • Attachment G - PUD Ordinance • Attachment H - Goals and Policies from 1988 Comprehensive Plan Background Outlot A of the Brentwood Subdivision, a vacant seventeen (17) acre outlot, is currently zoned Ric (Single Family Residential) with an underlying land use of MR (Medium Density Residential). The Brentwood Subdivision was platted in 1980 into 101 single family lots with an average lot size of approximately 2 to 2 1/2 acres. The request involves a land use amendment and rezoning from Rlc (Single Family Residential) and MR (Medium Density Residential) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) and HB (Highway Business). History of Outlot A Research into the Brentwood Subdivision shows that very few details on the • future use of Outlot A were recorded. The minutes of the March 3, 1980, City Council meeting indicated that the future use of Outlot A was discussed. The applicant indicated at this meeting that "the plans for the use of the outlot were dependent on community demands and needs." However, the current land use and zoning designation indicate single family residential. Attached is a copy of this material along with other minutes relating to the platting of Brentwood. Overview The subject 17 acre parcel is a relatively flat with virtually no trees. The outlot is encompassed on all sides by residentially-zoned property. To the north and west, parcels are zoned Ria, which has a minimum lot size of 2 1/2 acres. To the east side of Highway 169, parcels are zoned Me with a minimum lot size of 20, 000 square feet in size. To the south, Ric, which has a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. The primary access to the site is 197th Street and Irving Avenue via Holt coming from the south. Outlot A is the only portion of the Brentwood Subdivision which is currently planned for City services. However, this site does not have City services available at this time. These services would have to be extended from 193rd and Jackson. Please refer to City Engineer Terry ID s:pla nning:pc:1ua95-4 Memo to the Planning Commission Page 3 April 25, 1995 Maurer's letter for additional information on traffic and utilities to serve the • property. Additional Information Included in this report is a considerable amount of information the Commission should review before considering the applicant's requests. This information will not be discussed in detail; rather, may be referenced during this report. Land Use Amendment/Zoning The first item the Planning Commission shall consider is the land use plan amendment. The applicant's request would change the land use plan from Medium Density Residential to Highway Business. The second item the Planning Commission shall consider is the rezoning of the property from R1c (Single Family Residential) to PUD (Planned Unit Development). The applicant has submitted a concept plan illustrating how the 17 acre parcel could be developed under a PUD zoning. This plan is a "concept", however; demonstrates some of the fundamental elements to development of the site. For example, transportation, building size, III buffer/landscaped areas and general utility information. When considering the rezoning requests the Planning Commission may ""tie" the concept plan to the PUD zoning. In other words, the rezoning and concept plan can be approved with conditions that will address infringement upon the surrounding residential, adversely impacting the transportation system and/or other facilities. The Planning Commission should refer to Attachment G which is the current PUD Ordinance and specifically review the Regulations section. This section outlines criteria for granting a rezoning to PUD. The Planning Commission may want to consider the following when reviewing these two applications: 1. The effect of the proposed rezoning on the comprehensive planning of the entire municipality. 2. The changes in community characteristics that may take place because of the projected land use plan change and rezoning. 3. The relative effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the present zoning map and land use plan, and whether a justification for • s:planning:pc:lua95-4 Memo to the Planning Commission Page 4 April 25, 1995 change exists because of either special reasons or a change • in conditions. 4. Whether the rezoning is designed to correct an improper situation or would result merely in the granting of special privileges. 5. How can the surrounding areas be protected to establish a compatible land use between the two uses. 6. Is the proposed concept plan adequate for the proposed site and what design elements could/should be made part of the project to eliminate impacts on adjacent land uses. 7. Have times and conditions changed enough to warrant a change in the use and zoning. In order to adequately assess the change of land use and zoning for the subject property, one needs to step back and ask a few "comprehensive" questions. 1. How far north along Highway 169 should commercial extend? • 2. Should the City, through comprehensive planning efforts, guide this type of commercial to other areas of the City? 3. Can a transportation system be designed to serve this development without impacting the residential areas? 4. Would this rezoning be in conflict with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan? (Refer to Attachment H). 5. Does the City have an adequate inventory of available and future commercial opportunities without this rezoning? Concept Plan for PUD As mentioned earlier in this report, the concept plan is supposed to illustrate how the development can "fit" within a given area without causing undue hardship upon adjacent land uses and infrastructure. Staffs cursory review of the concept plans, as they relate to the PUD zoning, would include the following comments: • s:planning:pc:1ua95-4 Memo to the Planning Commission Page 5 April 25, 1995 Site Plan • • The subject property is somewhat separated from the surrounding residential by 197th Avenue and Irving Street. With this roadway and a large landscaped area, the opportunity exists to maximize the separation between the proposed commercial and residential land uses. By reducing the size of the building on Lot 1, Block 2, and possibly shifting the building towards Highway 169, this "buffer" area can be further enhanced. • No loading dock locations are shown at this time. With a large retail business as proposed, a loading area will be necessary and quite active. Therefore, it would be recommended that all loading areas be located so they are not adjacent/visible to the homes on 194th Avenue nor from Irving Street. • The green space along Irving Street (west) and towards the south should be maximized by increasing the width, berming and extensive landscaping. This will provide a maximum buffer to the surrounding residential area. • Based on the proposed building square footages, adequate on-site parking • can be provided. Streets/Storm Drainage/Utilities • Please refer to the City Engineer's letter dated 4/19/95. • The proposed retention pond on Lot 2, Block 2 is in an area that is currently wooded. Rather than clearing trees to create a pond, every attempt should be made to utilize the opportunities upon the vacant land. However, buffer areas should not be compromised to accomplish these ponding needs. Signage • Once again, to protect the surrounding residential areas, no signage should be allowed on the south or west side of the building and property. • Freestanding signage should be designed to be compatible with the building's architecture. Furthermore, the maximum height and overall area should be sensitive to the surrounding area. • s:planning:pc:1ua95-4 Memo to the Planning Commission Page 6 April 25, 1995 Uses • • The proposed uses appear to be a large general retail business along with a freestanding gas/service station. The general retail may be appropriate; however, outdoor storage, displays, and open outdoor areas may present a detriment upon surrounding land uses. Furthermore, limiting the hours of operation may be a consideration for development. • The gas station/convenience store may not be appropriate at its proposed location. Lights, traffic and hours of operation will directly impact the home north of 197th. Analysis The proposed land use plan amendment and rezoning requested by Dennis Anderson has arguments which support the change to commercial as well as leaving the land use something other than commercial. Some of the positive results of commercial include: • The property is relatively void of any natural or major wooded areas allowing commercial development to occur without impacting these sensitive areas. • The property is within the current urban service area. • • Access off of 197th which connects to Highway 169. • The property has excellent visibility from Highway 169. • Although surrounded by residential zoning, only seven homes are adjacent to or immediately across the street from the proposed development. • Commercial development contributes handsomely to the City tax base. • If the project consisted of a "major tenant' (i.e. Big Box Retailer) it would strengthen Highway 169's commercial corridor. On the other side, there are also negatives to commercial beginning with: • It is currently zoned Rlc with a residential land use, leading the residents in Brentwood and surrounding residential area to believe the property would be developed as some residential use. • Road improvements would have to made to accommodate the proposed development. Some of those improvements may impact existing residential homes and quality of life for residents. • The proposed project of approximately 120,000 square feet may be too intense for this particular property given its proximity to residential neighborhoods. • s:planning:pc:1ua95-4 Memo to the Planning Commission Page 7 April 25, 1995 • Rezoning of this property may lead to other applications for commercial • which will stretch commercial development further north on Highway 169. Conclusion As the City Engineer points out in his memo, the infrastructure to serve the proposed development can be accomplished. Furthermore, the commercial development could incorporate design and buffering to minimize the impact to surrounding residential areas. However, all these improvements would be done at the expense of impacting a residential area. Therefore, staff submits the following conclusions: • The development is too intense for this parcel and would better serve the community in another location. • The proposed rezoning and land use plan change would impact the character and integrity of surrounding residential areas. • The necessary transportation improvements north of 193rd to the development would be detrimental to the four single family homes along Holt. • • The Steering Committee has not yet identified the commercial and industrial growth areas and therefore, this proposal may be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies. • The rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment to commercial would not be a logical extension of the existing commercial developments south of 193rd Avenue. Recommendation It is recommended the Planning Commission recommend one of the following: (1) Deny the rezoning and comprehensive land use plan amendment based on the findings mentioned above. (2) Approve the applications with certain conditions to accomplish compatibility between the commercial and residential area; or, (3) Recommend the plans be revised to include a reduced commercial area and return to the Planning Commission at a later date for further consideration. • s:planning:pc:1ua95-4 StApril 19, 1995 File: 230-267-11 I'OISI I;1I11i E\GIIEERS Mr. Steve Ach City Planner 1326 Energy Park Drive 13065 Orono Parkway St.Paul,MN 55108 P.O. Box 490 612-644-4389 Elk River, MN 55330-1900 1-800-888-2923 Fax 612-644-9446 RE: OUTLOT A BRENTWOOD ADDITION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Dear Mr. Ach: As requested, we have reviewed the sketch plan for Outlot A of the Brentwood Addition. The plan shows a single user with a building size of 119,000 square feet. It is our understanding that this review is relative to a rezoning request and will be rather cursory in nature. If in fact the property is rezoned, a much more detailed site plan would be submitted and at that time a more detailed review would be performed. Based on the information we have received, we offer the following comments: CIVIL ENGINEERING: ENVIRONMENTAL 1. Traffic MUNICIPAL PLANNING Generally speaking, a building of this size assuming it to be some type of free liFOLID WASTE STRUCTURAL standing discount store will generate between 8,000-10,000 vehicle trips per day. SURVEYING A vehicle coming to the building, and ultimately leaving the building is considered TRAFFIC two trips. During the average weekday p.m. peak hour, this type of facility would TRANSPORTATION generate 750-900 vehicle trips. The site is shown to have a direct link to the 197th Avenue and TH 169 intersection. The roadway serving the proposed building is a ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL newly constructed Holt Street on the east side of the site. There are no proposed ENGINEERING: access points onto the existing Irving Avenue on the west side of the site. Although HVAC it is not shown, it is our understanding that it would be proposed to connect Holt POWER DISTRIBUTION Street southerly to Jackson Avenue. SCADA SYSTEM CONTROLS We believe the existing street infrastructure and proposed new construction can be established in such a manner to accommodate the amount of traffic anticipated to be generated by this type of facility. As you are aware, Jackson Avenue is already signalized at TH 169. We believe that the intersection of 197th Avenue and TH 169 could be signalized with the input of MnDOT. Obviously, if this project is to proceed forward, the developers should provide a traffic impact study, which would then be reviewed relative to specific traffic generated and the proposed infrastructure to handle it. That study should also identify the impact of the increased traffic on the adjacent residential neighborhood. OFFICES IN: WINNEAPOLIS RIOR LAKE ST.PAUL WASECA Mr. Steve Ach • April 19, 1995 Page Two 2. Sanitary Sewer and Water This piece of property is currently within the City's urban service district, although the remainder of the Brentwood Addition is not within the urban service district. Sanitary sewer and water to serve this site would come from Jackson Avenue at approximately the Freeport Avenue intersection. With the Elk Park Center project, sanitary sewer and trunk watermain were stubbed under Jackson Avenue at the intersection of Freeport Avenue. Since, generally speaking, the urban service area runs east and west with this particular piece of property being the northerly extreme, the route to bring sanitary sewer and water to this site is westerly thru the vacant piece of property adjacent to Jackson Avenue. The sewer water would then extend northerly around the St. Andrew cemetery to 193rd, then northerly along Holt Street to the project site. The sanitary sewer water would pass approximately 4-6 existing residential homes, and would also provide service to the vacant property just east of Jackson Avenue. Given the size of this facility, it is likely that the watermain would need to be looped to provide adequate fire flow. In order to provide for looping, a crossing under TH 169 would have to be made, and a connection to the existing watermain in the Hillside Crossing development on the • east side of TH 169. 3. Storm Drainage The sketch plan shows a fairly large retention pond at the southerly part of the project, with long narrow retention ponds running adjacent to Holt Street up to the intersection of 197th Avenue. Obviously, this type of facility would generate a substantial amount of runoff. According to City policy, sedimentation ponding would need to be established on site to control the quality of the runoff. The outlet from the storm drainage system would likely be, again, under TH 169 to the existing storm sewer facility in the Hillside Crossing development. There was additional capacity established in that drainage system for the eventual development of this piece of property. If this project is to proceed, a detailed storm sewer analysis would need to be submitted, indicating the total amount of runoff from the site, amount capacity available in the Hillside Crossing system, and the amount ponding required on site to make the system work. We would mention initially that we are not in favor of these long narrow ponds adjacent to Holt Street. We would much prefer a large single retention pond. There is an internal storm drainage piping system shown for the parking lot. Although no storm sewer is shown on Holt Street, with the construction of the new urban street catch basins and pipe would need to be established along its length to • collect runoff from this area. Mr. Steve Ach • April 19, 1995 Page Three With our general knowledge of the storm sewer systems available in this area, we believe that an adequate design can be presented for this piece of property to deal with storm drainage issues for the type of development shown on the sketch plan. During our review we have not attempted to analyze parking needs, which are shown on the sketch plan. No topography is shown; therefore, no review of the proposed grading of the site has been conducted. Nor are items such as signing or landscaping shown; therefore, no review of these items has been prepared. In summary, we believe that the general traffic and utility service for this site can be dealt with adequately to support the type of commercial development shown on the sketch plan. If you have any questions regarding any of these comments, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, MSA, CONSULTING ENGINEERS Terry J. Maurer, P.E. TJM:pd 267-1910.apr • i CO � ' - -- ' ` x . � • ---_ � _ m �4 n!^ ,'; _ '-___.-/11 _ -__ _-- --- ___ _ - __ _ _ ___ _ _ _ __ _ - _--- _' _-- __ _ -_ _- _ . t , .` .. U. » HkGA WAY H .u0 : .i, ., �U \ STREET st :r. ^ \ 452.71 -`` i ' ' \ Z. ` ` \ ^ • ^ ^ ` I ' \ xp ''^"' ~ ' ,/'� */,',' �«� ' BLOCK \ -)-- �. ' ` --- i^' ~ 0.\" \ \ �� ' --- --4 ^ � _ ~^- Fif -- ` --- ` —'--� ��x ----' / ----~��-- "«�� »)\ / ' / ----'-/�- �� , . • 'r/ / � ---- / � ^,= �° — / � / OUTLOT A / -- , �� ` | � / ___` `. n' | / / ._.` . _ ~ \ '` | | ' I /^~• ' / -```^~ \ \ \ '` � .` ` ..... . ` . 0,:_..„ �� '/ ` ~� -� � `` � ' ri.- .., • ... .. „ . c., �} ,` ` .. .. .. . ....., . , , � �� . .. . „ ~` ' ` ` . „ �� , ‘2.>6. -...s:-.., 1 : ._., � `` . ;1... �� -/ C> ''o��---- ) . ` ` �� ~^ 0 `^.. `. `-�'��_��-- --- -�-- '� --'��'--_.��-_ \ cc `` ^~ w�o '----. 1»�m --' :^L~ yuon' —] � `~� '`»«z�--^'—'--� / �~. . N W' `�~ �o ---- / _____ ______- . " , / / .~.� /. I 'c �� r--- ------- ��}��0O I � �� I ,'�: ��.��°°^� ' `[ I t ' `� �"``. x�»»I • "' • ' '' • '� | ...., ~~ ' i'... • aLK- wu ,_ � | � i AREA 8 | SQ.r � � 4.. r 4 ' i ---. I A \ :..,. ,/c:0 z .....:C.,..!ED) ..- I 1 6. :5- I I ••.: iltio ••••••-...! I li;.;`, i • X4 / :!:': V V Y \'4 Vef• r.\,, \\\\\.k: ......:: me / / i • 2 IL4 V V . i ',i 7' a:ii .i i'4 zi___I ///// I ..'1,1 Ill \. \ — Lr v kr i ,. • . i : l , j/i/ ::::/ ;I§ a LI 46., 1 I Y Ili ' ill/ i . irTi /9,::::::,--y c....i. -1,. ...• i I i ii I : ! ..........7 7 ( qi...:, 7 ( I ' ,1 r c-.:, ,, •-•••< 1 • • I y / i I il • 0 / / ! 1 I i\ i / / 4 _________D ,, ,' I lir co i ....,,,‘, A 0 n) A)5 m D. / Il / • i .,, / • - -:•......-.---,e-sr.:41/?.;•. •__-_— - -- _-__-_- _ , : ., \., colo, n: �w" j Ii N . il i Illi!S .i t- \.13 ..�i 1 * 2 ! „Au mi ,‘,.,v . ld, 1:,, 1• I 61r ,. t _ 1 , ** _ : , ort041". .....1 ;j!i I � .N. 4/ I ..c 0-* ul l'I to I) 3allthirdri I i ' 1111k, . 3z ,) i. '1111 NbiMi II'll; 11111111k to 1'r< fALIT]b.t. itiv .L.I.T. , . ,.i_;.," Imimiimill a!Ill ,, 0110 .,Nu -' I „ ilinglielligra1:i i I.4.4 1.14mift i , \ 01 i- - - , t :, •., ___. Al4or ...w... 11 -44ra :f i .3.,,,,,.. 0r .. ,,,, ® .41P0,‘,-- ,i. to + :::.: ::r I l i . Am bilitlIbia n.weii6;,,, il _ . _ . ma wimp jru ,-l 3 + Li 111111111141111 illiMiit 14, EP i mi.1 1 I I I Mil I I a a rat- 'N'111111"me, 4W7 11,11660ingraf ';;; ., ib, .i., , 111‘. MiEft' A ,... a . IE .... ,,,,,,-..A -i,,,,„ .W 'r'y®�.IllvuEo `©•o ...TriV44/447041 . 5 -� ill :• ®t 01,��® `► a PIM.:V. D �' �� 9111h11 A Ilk i Irl►.r ipiç „I I - 1.. l`ll ••-� ,• 1�1.r.�]F�' a.i SCHOOL , � ' , �, I( \\\\ 14%1'‘. L� ®' • 1=,Ifill Hint, s PAR \, LOCATION MAP ....-C. .. "...,. ''1CASE NO'S. LUA 95-4 ,� ZC 95-4 .6 . Oci of EIkRjyer . ... P.O. Box 490 • 13CE.5 Orono Par:cway • Elk River, MN 55320 • (612) 44I-720 • ... ..: ,., „ , ,. ..,.. _. 1 gp IRla a /+•OI _ aLj ! O • )1 0 . ® _" .LOCATION A • \, ; .+ sir"_ s -Y - s1 _ -- ...1 1-- -----1 t. L 1� . / a i f ;1i ih. ,L — hti —�__ Ir M1.{{LggL•TT" •4Y� ``��'' _ Ili Me 31111201.4: ,-- ,. ', .-. me . ' i ' Ents7. Ric iw. ..,, ..1.,,,, it ..„,ginalettlit .. `lglt - nG .I -4 il, � r' g E. f Ii one � �"In- � • \� i i ' c ., ; .k��i'A aim _.:...t.,,, 1 Ric ® -- , 1-.i i- a� �. r '��6�•' i _ .•r. - a;1177, ,-- -i-'. -, 7 ,Viniga N rig y -= - "='"='.4-1 I'L2b 9TH ,__ !a m ___ __lin a1-aeyi-° amciii 1C �''^ �` ii 50-4: . I. _-- -,,, 2 .tea.l natal __. y/ • ZONING MAP Ea n To Family Residential _ - 1-51 Hignenry cama,,.,aal rrn ,Mural Conservation i Tao Fundy ReeldsntielCji 1.1cht industrial Single Family Residential 433 I Townhouse/MUItINe Ferrety Residential �g Simple Family Residential 1R4 12 Medlin Industrial Family Residential Sold Yeasts Fatality [MCI Single Emily R.sfdsntW Planned Unit Development EAT I Antenna Tome. Pal F.n,tly Residential Central Commercial ' stn [MEI Mineral Exaystbn ® Sim* FarmnJy Residential (C2 I Otib.DistrictAtli •City of �, CASE NO. ZC 95-4 River P.O. Box 490 . 13065 Orono Parkway • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 r , ! g LOCATION ,•,� '. - -� --__ __.._ Ili ,. +- �� 7 r ,r--)1.? M E 1,11::*1/\ •• •k„.. .: ''- • . L.• ' ::---C''. -s"-: - 4 -4 ii t--:: 7____= 1 \` 6 3.41.1011 fA1L•I� 'H _ f\ 70100. _ {t[� 4 __ ______:... _,, , . .. ,._,..,,, __ _ . ,;. ., , ,.. .._7_2.. t._. f A . .. ----- Mt' -3- ,17.--$ 1 1'a OX AMR MLA I74I; � 1 1050.1 IMI 7fJID0. W r071 , 7. .I +. mo: ,� — ''�1 :_�f�l fil-- t® 1 3 I- • i!ifier&-- Vft- }: '� .r IL ` ��- .'�� - C' ISM' :ISO -- --- `— . _ MI ice, ��'s �., i ,' �, i`• .- ?. .a .A.,,...-- Ulf }:G �� ---1-- 2), t�iS" 3YftAOUiiAa 1.', �� ?.:�{ ; L '1 Fin OA - 1 ' � �i , -�. �• COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE MAP HR High Density Residential p Public CB Central Business OS Open Space HE Highway Business A Agricultural LI Light Industrial LR Low Density Residential ",!, -\.( MI • Medium Industrial MR Medium Density Residential CASE NO. LUA 95-4 Ciryof � "Wilimmint 11 ! iIiver P.O. Bos 490 • 13065 Orono Parkway • Elk River, MN 55330 • (61_ t41-7420 REGULAR SEMI-MONTHLY MEETING OF THE ATTACHMENT A CITY COUNCIL OF ELK RIVER HELD IN THE ELK RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY March 3, 1980 II:::0 Members Present: Mayor Madsen, Councilmembers, Otto, Engstrom, Toth. Members Absent: Councilman Duitsman. 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Madsen. 2. Agenda Item 7D, Rail Corridor Study, and Item 7E, the affairs of the Sewer Plant, were added to the agenda. COUNCILMAN TOTH MOVED APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 3, 1980, CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. COUNCILMAN ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED 3-0. 3. Minutes COUNCILMAN ENGSTROM MOVED APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 25, 1980, CITY COUNCIL MEETING. COUNCILMAN OTTO SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED 3-0. 4. Open Mike No one appeared for this item. 5. Brentwood Subdivision Final Plat approval D Mr. Dennis Anderson was present to answer any questions regarding his Brentwood final plat. The City Administrator indicated a developer's agreement has been drawn with the stipulation that if the City cannot sell bonds on the bond market for the street improvements the developer will put the streets into the develop- ment in a 2 phase project. The City Administrator further indicated the developer was in the process of obtaining an easement for the north half of 201st Street. Councilman Engstrom questioned the use and the size of the outlot. Mr. Dennis Anderson indicated the outlot was 17 acres and that the plans for the use of the outlot were dependent on community demands and needs. The City Administrator indicated that City staff recommended approval of the final plat on the condi- tion of the developer's agreement and the developer obtaining the easement for the north half of 201st Street. COUNCILMAN OTTO MOVED APPROVAL OF THE BRENTWOOD SUBDIVISION FINAL PLAT WITH THE CONDITION OF THE EXECUTION OF A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT AND THE OBTAINING OF THE NORTH HALF OF 201st STREET. COUNCILMAN TOTH SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED 3-0. 6. Street Light Request - 7th and Irving Mr. Larry Larson, 510 7th Street, submitted a petition signed by 23 residents of the area requesting a street light at the corner of 7th and Irving. Mayor Madsen asked if there were street lights at every other intersection and further indicated it was a state aid street and could see no problem with the installa- tion of a street light. COUNCILMAN ENGSTROM MOVED APPROVAL OF THE INSTALLATION OF A STREET LIGHT AT THE CORNER OF 7th AND IRVING. COUNCILMAN TOTH SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED 3-0. 1:101011 7. Administrator's Update A. Riverside Bar and Lounge taxes The City Administrator indicated he had discussed the situation of the taxes payable for 1980 with Mr. Barney Gustafson and Mr. Gustafson indicated he MEMORANDUM February 29, 1980 • ;., TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Administrator SUBJECT: Brentwood Final Plat Enclosed please find a copy of the final plat for the Brentwood Subdivision being developed by Mr. Dennis Anderson. The Brent- wood Subdivision is approximately 257 acres and is located im- mediately north of Ridgewood East 3rd Subdivision in Elk River. The final plat anticipates 101 lots . The Planning Commission and the City Council previously considered a lot size variance to accomodate the plat and to allow a range of lots from less than 2% acres to in excess of 21/2 acres . On Monday, February 25, 1980, the Planning Commission reviewed and unanimously approved the final plat for the Brentwood Sub- division. The Planning Commission recommended no changes nor alterations in the final plat. The City staff can find no problems with the final plat and finds that the plat is in compliance with existing City regulations and ordinances . • It is recommended that the Elk River City Council grant final plat approval to the Brentwood Subdivision, subject to the development of a Developer ' s Agreement with Mr. Dennis Anderson, which provides that the City of Elk River will bond for and install improvements to be assessed against the property or in the event that the City is unable to sell bonds , that Mr. Anderson will undertake the improvements with his own capital in a two stage approach over a period of two years . Respectfully Submitted, Robert C. Middaugh City Administrator RCM:adb • 1z-4 19 1 79 7. Brentwood Preliminary Plat imw The City Administrator indicated the Planning Commission reviewed the lot size • variance and the preliminary plat and found the variance would not create an adverse impact on the City's building controls and, as such, recommended approval t of the preliminary plat. Councilman Toth had some questions regarding ground water travel and what impact it would have on the areas south of the develop- ment. Councilman Toth suggested these questions be investigated by the City Planner and the City Engineer. COUNCILMAN TOTH MOVED APPROVAL OF THE BRENT- WOOD PRELIMINARY PLAT AND LOT SIZE VARIANCE. COUNCILMAN DUITSMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED 4-0. 8. William Campbell Liquor License The City Administrator reviewed Mr. Campbell's request for the Council and indicated that no problems had been encountered in the City's background investi- gation. COUNCILMAN OTTO MOVED APPROVAL OF A LIQUOR LICENSE TO BE GRANTED TO MR. WILLIAM CAMPBELL TO OPERATE CAMPBELL'S ELK BOWL AND LOUNGE. COUNCILMAN DUITSMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED 4-0. 9. Povlitzki Liquor License Mr. Tom Libra, real estate agent for Richard and Marlene Povlitzki, was present to request tabling of the liquor license application until a special meeting requested to be held December 20, 1979. The City Administrator indicated the City had not completed its investigation into the background of Richard and Marlene Povlitzki. The City Administrator also indicated the Povlitzki' s have held liquor licenses in the City of Fridley, the City of Minneapolis , North Dakota and Las Vegas, Nevada and that all establishments had been investi- gated with the City of Fridley posing some questions. The City of Fridley �i experienced significant problems with the Povlitzki establishment. The City Administrator indicated questions were raised as to why the City of Fridley issued a license to the Povlitzki's for 14 years when they experienced the problems. The City Administrator also indicated the City of Minneapolis originally denied a liquor license to the Povlitzki's but Mr. Povlitzki appealed the licensing divisions decision to the City Council which reversed the denial. Mr. Tom Libra indicated it had been five years since the Pov- litzki's held a license in Fridley and since then they have held five licenses in five different locations. The City Administrator indicated that City staff could not, until further investigation, recommend approval of a liquor license to be issued to the Povlitzki's. COUNCILMAN ENGSTROM MOVED APPROVAL OF TABLING THE LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION REQUEST BY THE POVLITZKI'S UNTIL A SPECIAL MEETING TO BE HELD DECEMBER 20, 1979 AT 5: 15P.M. AT THE ELK RIVER CITY HALL. COUNCILMAN OTTO SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED 4-0. 10. Policy for Refund of Liquor License Fees The City Administrator indicated the State Intoxicating Liquor Statute gives the municipality the option of refunding the license fees in the event a business is damaged by fire, death of the licensee or if the licensee is other- wise unable to continue or it becomes unlawful to carry on the business for reasons other than revocation of a license. The City Administrator further indicated there was no language in the Statute requiring the municipality to refund liquor fees and that the City of Elk River was under no obligation • to do so. Mayor Madsen asked what is the policy in other coumiunities. The City Administrator implied that other communities he was familiar with didsrle not refund license fees. The City Administrator further indicated the League of Cities was publishing a new model ordinance for municipalities and according to their ordinance, a refund would not be permitted. Mr. Dick Dorsey asked if MEMORANDUM • TO: Mayor and City Council December 13, 1979 FROM: City Administrator SUBJECT: Brentwood Preliminary Plat At a special meeting of the Planning Commission held on Monday, Dec. 10, 1979, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend a lot size variance for the Brentwood Subdivision being developed by Mr. Dennis Anderson. The Planning Commission, in its review of the lot size variance request, found that a variance in this area of the City, with the conditions present, would not create an adverse impact on the City's zoning controls as established in the interim ordinance. Mr. Anderson has indicated he will make the necessary changes or arrange- ments on 201st Street in order to have part of the entire right-of-way in the Brentwood Subdivision or an appropriate easement obtained from the property to the north to allow for a 66 foot roadway. In addition, the street names would be altered so that they are less confusing. In light of these changes and the Planning Commission's recommendation to grant a lot size variance, it is recommended that the City Council grant the lot size variance and approve Mr. Anderson's final plat. Respectfully Submitted, Robert C. Middaugh City Administrator RCM:adb • ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION MEET= HELD IN THE ELK RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY November 26, 1979 0 Members Present: Commissioner Driessen, Fox, Hinkle, Lucas, Tracy & Zabee Also Present: Herbert S. Adolphson 1 . 2a11 Meeting to Order The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Fox at 7:40 p.m. 2. Minutes The minutes from the October 22, 1979 meeting were read and approved. 3. Benda Jim Rolow's proposal for Highway 00 South, was added to the agenda. The agenda was approved. if4. Brentwood Addition Preliminary Plat Dennis Anderson and Jim Klein presented the preliminary plat for the Brentwood 4111 Addition. A profile of Lowell Street extension to the northeast, showed it to be impracticable. The staff thought that some of the vertical b7trves should be lengthened to give better sight distance and safety. Also, some of the grades should be reduced. The developer is thinking of townhouses or multi— unit dwellings for Black 4, along U.S. Highway #169. This would provide cheaper units and cash for the rest of the development. The public hearing was then opened. Les McGray, Vice President of Barton's wanted the Commissioners be aware that Barton's pit is north of this development on both sides of County Road fr33. Also, that they have land rights to the north edge of Brentwood Addition. Dennis Anderson said that Jackson and Norfolk Streets end at the north edge, toward Barton's holdings. Lot sizes averages 2- acres. They have a State Transportation Department letter in regards to sound barriers. There would be approximately 190' of woods . The public hearing was then closed. There are two street hook—ups with Ridgewood East 3rd Addition streets, one with Proctor Street and 2 with US Highway #169 that would be in line with the Hyland Hills outlet cross overs. The drainage easements are not on the plat as yet, but should not present any problems. Also, the power—lines do not present any great problems. Several lots will have some dwelling site limitations because of it. COMMISSIONER LUCAS MOVED APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE BRENTWOOD ADDITION C0MMTSSIONM TRACY SECONDED THE MOTION. ';OTION PASSED 5-0. 3. Child Care Center's Conditional Use Permit 11:::" Sandra Picha with.TJohn Gries, lawyer, Bill Taft, and Philip Kankel presented her plan for the Child Care Center at 403 Main Street. She is licensed for 22 children and could expand in time to 40 children. The existing building is 2 stories and the addition would be one story, with 1200 square feet. The children would range from 2i- to 5 years of age. The operating hours would MEMORANDUM • TO: The Elk River Planning Commission FROM: Herbert S. Adolphson, Community Development Director The Brentwood public hearing held on November 26, 1979, was for preliminary plat and lot size approval . The legal notice was published and notices mailed to adjoining property owners. During the November 26th meeting, the lot sizes were discussed. However, the motion for approval of the preliminary plat did not include the lot size variance. The total area is 250 acres with 13.26 acres in outlots, leaving 236.74 acres for the dwelling lots . There are 101 proposed lots giving an average size of 2.34 acres . The Planning Commission needs to find: 1 . That to do the topography and need to keep street grades low, some lots become less than 2.5 acres . 2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoy— ment of a substantial property right of the petitioner. 3. That the granting of the lot size variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property • in this area. 4. A motion is needed to grant the variance. Respectfully Submitted, Herbert S. Adolphson Community Development Director cla • `Pc tvt-v--/-1-kx-ed (977 5. Brentwood Preliminary Discussion 41, Jim Klein appeared for Dennis Anderson regarding Brentwood development. He explained this development would be on Highway 169 across from Hyland Hills. Commissioner Fox did not think the City Council would accept the park as proposed and also was concerned that lots 1-9 might not be buildable because of sound barrier requirements. Commissioner Hinkle suggested getting rid of some of the cul-de-sacs. The Commission would like to see Lowell Circle connect with Lowell Street. Jim did not think it was possible, because of the contour of the land, to connect Lowell Circle to 196th Circle. The Commission suggested a few alternatives. Basically, the lots are of proper size. There are 92 lots averaging 2 acres. There are a couple lots approximately 1 acre or less and it was suggested that the minimum should be 14 acres. The Commission also would like to see 196th Avenue and 197th Avenue straightened out a little. It was noted that variances would be needed for lot size. 6. Archie Larson turned over to the Planning Commission, old letters, maps, lists, etc., regarding parks. 7. Adjournment COMMISSIONER HOLDS MOVED THE MEETING TO BE ADJOURNED. COMMISSI0PthR LUCAS SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION PASSED 6-0. • Respectfully Submitted, 0 Herbert S. Adolphson Community Development Director AB/ca 11111 �� ATTACHMENT B October 4, 1994 • Elk River Steering Committee 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 Attached are copies of the recorded Protective Covenants for Brentwood, copies of the Brentwood map which shows the two Ridgewood East lots (in red), and a letter signed by the 1979 Mayor and Council Members stating the intent at that time for this property was future highway development. Si erely, • - / • -yam Dennis Anderson • I f • 1.E�.3:�:zf� • •w • PROTECTIVE COVENANTS AND BUILDING RESTRICTIONS AMENDED BRENTWOOD ESTATES, SNiERBURNE COUNTY, ELK RIVER, MIN.*iESOTA McGraw-Anderson, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, hereto declares that the hereinafter set forth restrictions shall apply to all lots in the plat known as Brentwood, and warrants and covenants to and with all future owners of said lots that all conveyances made by them shall be subject to the follow- ing restrictions, to wits 1. No lot, other than Outlot A, shall be used except for residential • purposes. 2. No building shall be erected, altered, placed or permitted to remain On any lot other than a single family dwelling not to exceed 2-1/2 stories in height. Any residence constructed thereon shall have a two car attached garage and be not less than 1,250 square feet of ground floor area except for a two-story house, which shall have a minimum of 720 square feet on the ground floor, and split foyers, which shall have a minimum of 90C square feet on the ground floor. Provided that Lots 1-9, Block 4, shall not be subject to the res- trictions of this paragraph. 3. No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon any lot, • nor shall anything be done thereon which may become an annoyance or nuisance to the neighborhood. 4. No lot shall be used or maintained as a dumping grou-i for rubbish, trash, garbage or other wastes; nor shall any form of rubbish or waste be kept on any lot beyond the main building construction period as specified in paragraph 8. 5. Dogs, cats or other household pets may be kept, provided they are not Kep'G, bred or maintained for any commercial purposes. No other animals may be kept on or about the premises. Small, appropriate structures to house pets will be allowed. 6. No trailer houses, travel trailer, buses, trucks, camper trucks or junk cars are allowed on premises unless properly garaged. 7. No temporary structure of any nature, such as trailer houses, camping truck, basement, tent, shack, garage or other buildings shall be used on any lot at any time as a residence either temporarily or permanently, nor shall a structure to be used as a residence be moved in on any lot. . 8. All structures shall be of new construction. 4.11 struct. •t.-d •i :a.l be �• oorplrted and finihes? within 12 months after � excavation and coni:.ruction. and befo_-_ e �c.... V-L u_ .f use- .s • a :eside-oe. • fi4 .;~4.r:it s it,`,,:pt a � e k . Protective Covenants. "�;� 'rr - ar Brentwood Estates „;-,, r ofPage 2 . 2 +`1i%,, .e = .'.?`"ao . III) i 9. All driveways shall';` e of a hard surface, either tar or concrete for a minimum offort; Q feet, starting at the street level. 10. These covenants shall automatically ran with the land, perpetually, unless an instrument signed by-a majority of the owners of the lots described hereinhas, been recorded, agreeing to change these covenants in whole or in part. 11. If there shall be a violation or an at•,anpt to violate any of these • • covenants or restrictions, it shall be lawful for any other person _ or persons owning any real estate in this subdivision to prosecute any proceeding at law or in equity against the person or persons violating or attempting to violate any such covenant or restriction, r► and wither to prevent him or them from so doing or to recover damages • or other dues for such violation. 12. Invalidation of any of these covenants or restrictions by judgement or Court Order shall in nowise affect any of the other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. • • • Dennis Anderson Barbara •j. An son • . 7�-Li-. /C i w / Signed before me a Notary Public • for Sherburne County. • X - SOLD K. C u" • • • _..:,........1,•11.••• /2 X X i / X '\ may.• / / ;; —2 Z / 11 • 1 iiti. --; X 9' i • 4 2 X 2 \ 2\ X 2 ' l4 ,f. 3 q i. `, / 5 .4. i ay:,. 8 ,e I 's • • 1 t /9 c•. •X 4 `` x. a�`$ g 1 4t`/ X I rr \.,,� X49 - ';�. r 7 ,�'. i 5 I. i i •N. d ' $ 6 X 'f -,,,:-.4.-:-'' `......r KW n r 9 • �; 2` .;' X - ��/ X j y1 X ,i0- '. r 4.. ' i y 7 ..y /7 kLy .. i 1 i .. _ t 2 X / g !i' 3. •a .r1 k ?:. kir X 7 :a 8 X �J i w �,,, �. s i / a's f/;. • T .r ii /O i l/ ��X/2 f { ' s1M. •'ry i •..t`•.,Fig _.. :...:'^•; •i ..ee X a ,s 6 i ,1.-,,,,,„„..,.>c 4 4t ` X r;',6 X r 7 f^+s .7Si'' 4. r 4-._ • i•% X i; 7 t. .: t 8 X ` 3 ' -...-• `s• 3 X j 2 X 9____' :' 1 s: I_ • 3 5 a --.4 1 e,. t t i88i. �.... { r X 10 X ,p.' ,,G....r.. _`+4n. X X •X i ..."...k -6T;_—.- 1 • II =-' .. /O 'fax 9 21 X 5 �- �� :; " .mss°, 8 k i•'. . .. X ` /4 4. X ° x ;-.1,-...._...x"' r-._ ., "_ . ' .„.w ..1•,...„„.......,...".....0P /3 ' X Al yn/ r�,-a^C ..7 - :• -,7TG i _�.;....,........,. '' -.. e . . . - • -; /5 X'' :$ 4// • are.. 9 ,:i 1iO 3 X 1. 4 - l i ..:•*.”' ./ '. ki ps . --...- a+.^ ,- , °fP•�.. , t• ! iia �;. "� sA 5 r _ /6 X X / - 4 4 •t • 7 . i- • 6 } 7 X r'•• �\ 4. 7 2 key t. J i k _ 2/X . 20 X X 9 X o ;; q a \, gip\ i te, h • Tr ,= September 20, 1994 S Mayor & City Council City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 SUBJECT: Outlot A Brentwood Honorable Mayor & City Council Members: The undersigned represent to you as former representatives of the City, that the plan, intention and understanding for this parcel was for it to be developed as Highway Business/Commercial property, when growth and services establish the need for its development. Also, it is our understanding that the proposed development responds to the statements and • desires of City Staff that Highway 169 be developed as the City's commercial, retail and highway business corridor consistent with past and present developmental land use. Sincerely, Frank Madsen Dick Hinkle `• To Arne Engstrom �i`� rk/ \` :NDA ITEM 5.8 \,,..4/ ATTACHMENT C City of �a r COpy, elk MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GARY SCHMITZ, PLANNING ASSIST. Ge,4"ii DATE: JUNE 28, 1994 SUBJECT: LAND USE AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE REQUEST BY DENNIS ANDERSON, PUBLIC HEARING, CASE NO. LUA 94-05 AND ZC 94-06 REQUEST Dennis Anderson is requesting to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan from MR (Medium Density Residential) to HB (Highway Business). The request also involves rezoning from Ric (Single Family Residential) to C3 (Highway Commercial). • LOCATION Outlot A, Brentwood Subdivision, Sherburne County, MN (southwest corner of 197th and Highway 169) ATTACHMENTS Location Map, Zoning Map, Land Use Map, City Council minutes dated March 3, 1980, page V13 of the existing Growth Management Plan BACKGROUND Outlot A of the Brentwood Subdivision, a vacant seventeen (17) acre outlot, is currently zoned Ric (Single Family Residential) with an underlying land use of MR (Medium Density Residential). The Brentwood Subdivision was platted in 1980 into 101 single family lots with an average lot size of approximately 2 to 2 1/2 acres. The request involves a rezoning and land use amendment from Ric (Single Family Residential) and MR (Medium Density Residential) to C3 (Highway Commercial) and HB (Highway Business). • P.O. Box 490 • 13065 Orono Parkway • Elk River. MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (61 2) 441-7425 Anderson, ZC & LUA Page 2 June 28, 1994 • . ~ HISTORY OF OUTLOT A Research into the Brentwood Subdivision shows that very few details on the future use of Outlot A were recorded. The minutes of the March 3, 1980, City Council meeting indicated that the future use of Outlot A was discussed. The applicant indicated at this meeting that the plans for the use of the outlot were dependent upon community plans and needs. However, the current land use designation and zoning classifications indicate that the site was planned for single family residential. Attached is a copy of these minutes. Staff could not find any further recorded information on the future intended use of the subject site. OVERVIEW The subject property is a relatively flat, treeless seventeen acre parcel. The outlot is encompassed on all sides by residentially zoned property. To the north and west, parcels are zoned Rla, which has a minimum lot size of 2 1/2 acres. To the east, parcels are zoned Rle with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet in size. To the south, Ric, which has a minimum lot size of • 10,000 square feet. The nearest commercial property is the Hillside Commercial PUD located on the east side of Highway 169, and south of the Brentwood Subdivision. Current access to the site is limited to 197th Street and Irving Avenue. Outlot A is the only portion of the Brentwood Subdivision which is currently planned for City services. However, this site does not have City services available at this time. ZONING The statement of purpose of the C3 (Highway Commercial) zoning district is to recognize the need for commercial establishments on or serving with immediate accesses to major highways. Permitted land uses should take advantage of the highway access in a manner in which other business districts are not afforded. It is important to note that this rezoning is not tied to any specific development proposal and therefore, the Commission must consider the entire spectrum of potential uses allowed in the C3 district. The Elk Park Center and Hillside Commercial subdivision, although both are zoned PUD, have an underlying land use of HB (Highway Business) and offer a valid comparison of the type of development that could occur on this particular site. • Staff is concerned that rezoning this parcel to such an intensive commercial district could disrupt the residential qualities of the adjacent area. The anderson.pc Anderson, ZC & Lu2-i Page 3 June 28, 1994 subject property has been zoned single family residential and residents in the area have purchased property with the understanding that it would develop as residential. A C3 zoning designation may be too intense of a land use to adequately blend with the surrounding low density residential. TRAFFI C Another major issue to consider before rezoning this site is traffic. It is anticipated that the major access to this site will be from 197th Avenue, which intersects with Highway 169. This intersection is currently not signalized and is not planned to be signalized, which will make travel to and from this site very difficult. It is also anticipated that the commercial traffic generated from this site could impact neighboring residential streets. Lack of direct access to Highway 169, coupled with the inability to utilize a frontage road concept for this site, leads to serious questions as to how commercial and residential traffic would integrate. The Elk Park Center and Hillside Commercial subdivision both have a frontage road concept which will direct traffic away from residential areas. However, the subject site without direct access to Highway 169 will generate additional traffic to the residential streets. • GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN The Growth Management Plan (adopted in 1988) identified the area on the east side of Highway 169 between 193rd and 197th as having the potential for commercial uses, however, the subject property was identified for medium density residential. One of the goals of the Growth Management Plan was to limit strip or scattered commercial operations along the City's major roadways. The subject site is physically separated from any planned or developed commercial property and would conflict with that goal. The Growth Management Plan is currently in the process of being updated by the City. One of the components of this review will be to analyze the need for future highway commercial growth areas and determine if the existing supply of highway commercial property is adequate to serve the City's future needs. A second component of the study will deal with the possibility of creating a neighborhood commercial zoning district designed to provide convenience and service establishments for the residential neighborhoods. Attached is a copy of page V13 of the existing Growth Management Plan in which the neighborhood commercial zoning district concept and the possible future need for this type of zoning designation is discussed. • anderson.pc Anderson, ZC & LUA Page 4 June 28, 1994 • Until these two components are fully studied, staff feels it is premature to consider amending the land use plan map and rezoning of this parcel without the benefit of this comprehensive study. RE COMMENDATION Before any rezoning or land use amendment is approved, one of two findings must be made: 1. There was an error in the original zoning designation, or 2. The times and conditions have changed such that the original designation is no longer valid. It is premature to argue either finding until the study of the Growth Management Plan is completed. Therefore, staff is recommending the land use plan amendment and rezoning request by Dennis Anderson be denied based on the following reasons: 1. The Growth Management Plan Goals and Policies state that commercial development should be located to strengthen the • downtown area and strip or scattered commercial site along major roadways be avoided. 2. The proposed rezoning would allow potential intensive commercial activities immediately adjacent to existing residential areas. Without a natural buffer or physical separation, the compatibility of highway business and low density residential is questionable in this location. 3. The need for additional highway commercial within the Highway 169 corridor, as well as the possibility of a neighborhood commercial designation are currently being studied with the updating of the City's Growth Management Plan. Therefore, a decision on the appropriateness of commercial in the subject area should be delayed until the updated comprehensive study is completed. 4. The traffic issues, such as the lack of a signalized intersection at the corner of 197th and Highway 169, and the lack of direct access to Highway 169, along with the inability to utilize a frontage road concept for this site led to concerns as to how • commercial traffic will integrate with the residential neighborhood. anderson.pc ATTACHMENT D Planning Commission Minutes .n frEt)= '1Page 9 v;fiicr, June 28, 1994 –�—'- krif-La �. � o • 4. POND BE NO DEEPER THAN FOUR (4) TO FIVE (5) FEET IN DEPTH, EXCEPT IN CURRENT POND AREAS, WHERE POND DEPTH IS ESTIMATED AT SIX (6) FEET DEEP. 5. ALL EXCAVATION OR FILLING SHALL NOT DISRUPT THE OVERALL DRAINAGE PATTERNS FOR THE AREA. 6. CONTRACTOR AND PROPERTY OWNER WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TO CONSTRUCT A POND THAT IS BENEFICIAL TO WILDLIFE. 7. APPROVAL OF THIS RECOMMENDATION BE CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL BY THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. 8. PROJECT BE COMPLETED IN ONE (1) CONSTRUCTION SEASON. 9. HOURS OF OPERATION BE WITHIN CITY CODE REQUIREMENTS. 10. FENCING BE PLACED AROUND EXISTING OAK TREES TO PREVENT DAMAGE WHEN EXCAVATED SOIL IS SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE APPLICANTS PROPERTY. 11. PROPOSED ISLAND REMAIN UNEXCAVATED AREA. • COMMISSIONER KREGER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. Commissioner Kreger stated that due to a conflict of interest, he would abstain from discussion and voting on the next item, Agenda Item 5.8. 5.8 Consider a Land Use Amendment and Zone Change request by Dennis Anderson, 4111111411111 Pubic Hearing, Case No. LUA 94-5 and ZC 94-6 Staff report presented by Gary Schmitz. Dennis Anderson requested to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan from MR (Medium Density Residential) to HB (Highway Business). The request also involves rezoning from R 1 c (Single Family Residential) to C3 (Highway Commercial). Dennis Anderson addressed the Planning Commission regarding traffic concerns, the southern parcel he owns, and access to the subject parcel. Chairman Tveite opened the public hearing. Jeff Peltier, 11965-195 Circle, Brentwood, Elk River, stated that the proposed outlot was originally designated residential and he is opposed to this type of proposal. Mike Fox, 11747-197 Avenue, Elk River, asked staff to define the term "Neighborhood Commercial." Gary Schmitz explained. Bob Sturgis, 11789-197 Avenue, Elk River, expressed his concerns regarding traffic; • opposed to this proposal. hippo iGfil Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 June 28, 1994 • Gary Kleis, 19815 Irving Avenue, Elk River, iterated previous concerns; opposed to this proposal. Paul Ostmoe, 19644 Irving Avenue, Elk River, stated he is opposed to commercial development in that area and he is opposed to this project. Dale Miller, 11795-196 Avenue, Elk River, iterated previous concerns; opposed to this proposal. Ken Williams, 19762 Brentwood Lane, Elk River, commended Dennis Anderson for the quality of previous projects, however, he is opposed to this type of project in a residential neighborhood. Dan Schwark, 19785 Irving Avenue, Elk River, opposed to this proposal. Phil Johnson, 19400 Holt Street, Elk River, presented the Planning Commission with signatures of area residents stating they were opposed to this proposal. Mr. Johnson stated he is opposed to this proposal. Doug Waletzko, 19688 Ulysses St., Elk River, stated he is opposed to this project. Rolf Anderson, 19411 Irving Circle, Elk River, iterated previous concerns and asked the Planning Commission to take into consideration that this is a residential neighborhood. Mr. Anderson continued that this is an outlot in a residential neighborhood and the surrounding residents do not want commercial • development in this location. Mr. Anderson is opposed to this proposal. Sue Weiser, 11696-197 Avenue, Elk River,stated she is opposed to this project. Dennis Anderson explained his request and reason for the zone change and land use amendment. Jeff Peltier, 11965-195 Circle, Elk River, questioned staff regarding the notice to surrounding residents. Mr. Peltier did not feel the 350 foot radius is sufficient in all cases. Peter Beck explained the notification radius is mandated by the State. Ken Lueck, 11388-198 Avenue, Elk River, iterated previous concerns; opposed to this project. Jenny Stone, 19783 Lowell Street, Elk River, iterated previous concerns; opposed to this project. There being no further comments from the public, Chairman Tveite closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MINTON RECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THE LAND USE AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE REQUEST BY DENNIS ANDERSON, PUBLIC HEARING, CASE NO. LUA 94-5 AND ZC 94-6, CITING STAFF'S MEMO AS FINDING OF FACT. DENIAL IS RECOMMENDED BASED ON CONSIDERABLE PUBLIC OPPOSITION WITH THE FOLLOWING REASONS: • Planning Commission Minutes I� C. Page 11 June 28, 1994 • 1. THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES STATE THAT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE LOCATED TO STRENGTHEN THE DOWNTOWN AREA AND STRIP OR SCATTERED COMMERCIAL SITE ALONG MAJOR ROADWAYS BE AVOIDED. 2. THE PROPOSED REZONING WOULD ALLOW POTENTIAL INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS. WITHOUT A NATURAL BUFFER OR PHYSICAL SEPARATION, THE COMPATIBILITY OF HIGHWAY BUSINESS AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS QUESTIONABLE IN THIS LOCATION. 3. THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL WITHIN THE HIGHWAY 169 CORRIDOR, AS WELL AS THE POSSIBILITY OF A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DESIGNATION ARE CURRENTLY BEING STUDIED WITH THE UPDATING OF THE CITY'S GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN. THEREFORE, A DECISION ON THE APPROPRIATENESS OF COMMERCIAL IN THE SUBJECT AREA SHOULD BE DELAYED UNTIL THE UPDATED COMPREHENSIVE STUDY IS COMPLETED. 4. THE TRAFFIC ISSUES, SUCH AS THE LACK OF A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION AT THE CORNER OF 197TH AND HIGHWAY 169, AND THE LACK OF DIRECT ACCESS TO HIGHWAY 169, ALONG WITH THE INABILITY TO UTILIZE A FRONTAGE ROAD CONCEPT FOR THIS SITE LED TO CONCERNS AS TO HOW COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC WILL INTEGRATE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. COMMISSIONER EBERLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-1, Commissioner Kreger abstained. 5.9 Consider a Zone Change Request by Riverside Development', Public Hearing, CaseNo.>ZC 94-07 Staff report presented by Steve Ach. Riverside Development requested a rezoning of approximately forty (40) acres from R l e (Single Family Residential) to PUD (Planned Unit Development). Chairman Tveite opened the public hearing. Doug Waletzko, 19688 Ulysses Street, Elk River, asked staff to explain the term PUD (Planned Unit Development). Ken Lueck, 11388-198 Avenue, Elk River, does not feel the rezoning request should be approved just for density purposes. Matt Timinski, 11260-198 Avenue, Elk River, expressed concerns regarding traffic and density issues. Sharon Waletzko, 19688 Ulysses Street, Elk River, asked staff for further details regarding the back of the proposal. • There being no further comments from the public, Chairman Tveite closed the public hearing. ATTACHMENT E Steering Committee Minutes Page 4 December 1, 1994 • Chair Minton questioned why the area was zoned PUD. Mary Eberley commented that it was probably due to the intent to develop the area with caution when considering the wetlands. ik;it, 4;' Area #4 and #5 - Both within the Highway 169 growth corridor. Area #5 is part of the Hillside Estate development, proposed for commercial development along Highway 169 and residential to the east, under a Planned Unit Development. Area #4 covers Outlot A of Brentwood Addition owned by Dennis Anderson. Anderson made application for a land use plan change to Highway Business and rezoning to C3 (Highway Commercial). As a result of issues in staffs report and testimony from surrounding residents opposing the applications at the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the requests. Mr. Anderson requested withdrawing the application before proceeding to the City Council until further input was received from the Steering Committee in updating the Growth Management Plan. Information was provided by Mr. Anderson for the Steering Committee's review, as well as staff' report to the Planning Commission on this issue. Dennis Anderson, local developer and resident, explained that Outlot A was set aside 15 years ago for commercial use and felt the timing was right to begin development. Mr. Anderson explained that he owns 2 lots in Ridgewood East which could be utilized for traffic flow to the site. Ken Williams, 19762 Brentwood Lane, stated that when he purchased his four lots • in Brentwood 15 years ago, it was made clear to him that Outlot A was intended for some type of commercial highway business use. He stated that he was confident Mr. Anderson would develop the site in a manner that would be an asset to the community and not be detrimental to the value of his property. He stated that he strongly favored commercial development over multi-family housing for the site. Mr. Williams also urged the Committee to consider what happened in Brooklyn Park with the amount of high density-low income housing and not to let that happen in Elk River. Mr. Williams also expressed his concern that his comments were misrepresented in the Planning Commission minutes on this matter which stated he opposed commercial development. He stated that his comments related to the fact that he understood his neighbors' concerns but that he did not oppose Mr. Anderson's proposal. The property is currently zoned Ric with 10,000 square foot lots with city water and sewer. Rick Foster, local developer and resident, stated that there is a high demand for highway commercial. He explained that his property on the east side of Highway 169 and Mr. Anderson's on the west side totaled approximately 40 acres. Mr. Foster encouraged the Steering Committee to consider the benefits for the City, County and school district, as commercial property pays for itself five (5) times more than residential. Bob Sturgis, 11789 197th Avenue, Brentwood, expressed his concern that the commercial development continues to extend north up Highway 169 with no end IIIin site. He stated his opposed to the type of commercial development located Steering Committee Minutes Page 5 December 1, 1994 on Dodge Avenue. He urged the Steering Committee to carefully consider what • the area will be like in 15 to 20 years. Mr. Sturgis also stated he is concerned that the roads in the area proposed for commercial development by Mr. Anderson will not stand up to the traffic that will be generated. John Weicht, local developer and resident, stated that he was in favor of the C3 zoning and that the proposed commercial areas on both sides of Highway 169 could be designed to accommodate the traffic. He added that he understood that the Elk Park Center commercial development entity will be contributing in excess of $1 million in taxes a year, and the subject 40 acres east and west of Highway 169 could generate a comparable amount, if zoned commercial. Mr. Weicht explained that he felt the access from Highway 169 to 197th could be refigured for commercial traffic, even if it meant relocating residential property. Gale Anderson, Brentwood resident, expressed her concern that her home would be directly affected by commercial development and traffic from Outlot A. Merry Sipe, Committee Member, questioned whether or not all property owners had access to information regarding the future development of Outlot A. Dennis Anderson, developer, referred the Committee to the first item in the protective covenants document which exempts Outlot A for residential purposes. He noted that the covenants are filed with every abstract for the Brentwood Development. Gale Anderson, Brentwood resident, expressed her concern that the hill on Outlot • A served as a buffer and later was mined out to make it flat. She also expressed concern how quickly the commercial zoning east of Highway 169 was done. Steve Ach explained that the zoning is PUD with a commercial land use. Pat Dwyer, Committee Member, explained that those people that purchased property after the Brentwood was platted were made aware of the potential development of Outlot A, but those purchasing prior to the Brentwood platting would have not had that information and had no idea their residential streets may someday become part of traffic flow to a commercial development. Marly Glines, Committee Member, noted that the Ridgewood East area was developed under the old township, and Brentwood area was platted after the consolidation. Ken Williams, 19762 Brentwood Lane, stated that he was in favor of a quality commercial development. Discussion followed regarding the proposed roads and existing roads needed to access the commercial development. Steve Ach stated that the distance from Irving Street to Highway 169 will be a critical element. Anderson stated that he felt there would be adequate stacking area on 197th for traffic moving between Irving and Highway 169. Gale Anderson requested that adequate notice be given when a proposal from the developer, Dennis Anderson, is brought forward to the City for consideration. • Steering Committee Minutes Page 6 December 1, 1994 Jeanne Eggert, 19319 Oxford Street, stated that when she moved to the area 17 • years ago, she assumed the Outlot A area would one day be commercial, simply because of its close proximity to Highway 169. She also expressed her concern that the City carefully consider decreasing the amount of existing multi-family zoning. She cited problems in the Brooklyn Park area from the intense multi- family-low-income housing, and does not want to see that happen in Elk River. Bob Sturgis stated that he was not against commercial development but urged the Committee to push for high standards in the types of uses and appearance of the development. Ken Williams expressed his concern for high quality development in the City. Barb Miracle, resident, questioned whether or not there are any plans for further commercial development in the area located north of Beaudry Express at the intersection of Highway 10 and Proctor. Steve Ach stated that the property is owned by Beaudry Oil and that some interest has been expressed in developing it in the future, but that there are no specific plans at this time. John Weicht requested that the Committee consider rezoning approximately 17 acres west and north of St. Andrew's Cemetery from Ric and R3 to R2, or possibly, PUD. He stated that owners of this property were interested in developing the property with quality ($150,000+ per unit) twin homes. He also explained that a small corner of the property at Jackson and Highland would possibly be a good location for some type of office use, due to the high traffic at that intersection. • Jeanne Eggert questioned whether or not the City could control the quality of twin homes the would be built. Chair Minton stated that the City is limited to enforcing health and safety issues, not quality and value (price) of the homes. John Weicht explained that the type of twin home he is proposing would be similar but upscale to the twin homes just north of the TLC Daycare at Proctor and County Road 1. Mr. Weicht provided further information regarding proposed roadways, extension of water and sewer, and hiking and biking trails. At this time, Chair Minton welcomed the government students from the high school in attendance: Shawn Sanborn, Kirsten Austin and Jerry Krueger. Ken Williams, resident, commented that he hopes that the Planning Commission and City Council are aware of the position the City has in attracting new businesses to Elk River, in that they can control the level and quality of development that occurs. 7. Other Business Tom Harmes, resident, questioned what kind of housing inspection program was planned. Steve Ach explained that it would be done through the building department, and was geared toward health and safety issues for multi-family residential property, as well as commercial and industrial. • Steering Committee Minutes Page 7 December 1, 1994 8. Future Meeting • The next meeting of the Steering Committee will be held Thursday, January 12, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. to discuss the Southeast Planning Area. CHRIS KREGER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING. MARY EBERLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 11-0. The meeting of the Elk River Steering Committee adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, LejtAto. Debbie Kleckner Recording Secretary • • ATTACHMENT F ITEM NO. 4 S INVENTORY (:)COMMERCIAL PROPERTY 4;,7170TALACRE.S20NED GOMMER IAh. ` ' ACRES 0 C1/ Central Commercial - 55 Acres 0 C2/ Office District - 56 Acres 0 C3/ Highway Commercial - 622 Acres 0 Planned Unit Development (Business Park) - 140 Acres TOTAL ACRES DEVELOPED469 ACRES • TOTAL ACRES VACANT . ..VACANT14.gi 404 ACRES 0 Restrictive Areas for Development - 27 Acres • TOTAL 27 ACRES TOTAL..NET ACRES AVAILABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT 377 ACRES HIGH ABSORPTION RATE . 377 ACRES 14 AC/YR Years Worth of Commercial Property 26.9 Years '+ LOW ABSORPTION RATE 377 ACRES 2 AC/YR Years Worth of Commercial Property 188.5 Years Page 1 of 2 • TOTAL ACRES WITHIN CURRENT URBAN SERVICE AREA 375 ACRES 0 Developed - 227 Acres 0 Vacant - 148 Acres 0 Restricted - 10 Acres 0 NET AVAILABLE ACRES - 138 ACRES TOTAL ACRES OUTSIDE CURRENT URBAN SERVICE AREA 499 ACRES 0 Developed - 242 Acres 0 Vacant - 257 Acres 0 Restricted - 17 Acres 0 NET AVAILABLE ACRES - 240 ACRES Page 2 of 2 • • STEERING COMMITTEE 1 l 1 I i City of Elk River 1 1 1 I I I New Commercial Development : . (Total =Acres)I" 1988 I 1989 1 1990 1991 I 1992 1993 I Total _ I _ 3.5 2 1 11 1.5 8 14.2 40.2 I 1 1 I 1 I I I - I Number of Acres Per Year III 16 14 - 12 - / 8 - / \ / 6 - Z \ / 4 _ r N / 0 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Page 1 • ATTACHMENT G ( I . Signage i . Not withstanding the provisions of Section 900 .22, the following requirements shall be met : a. All freestanding signage shall be of a monument style sign and have a maximum size of sixty-four (64) square feet and height of eight (8) feet. b. One (1) on-premise business wall sign per occupancy, not to exceed two (2) square feet in sign area for each linear foot of the building frontage up to a maximum of one hundred and twenty-eight (128) square feet per occupancy is permitted. J. Standards for Retail Shops and Stores i . Freestanding retail shops and stores shall be limited to those which compliment other uses within the business park, provide a service to those other • businesses, and shall not exceed 20, 000 square feet in size. ii . Retail/wholesale sales incidental to products manufactured, assembled, or warehoused on the premises, may be permitted as an accessory use provided no more than ten percent (10%) of the building is used for retail/wholesale sales . K. Hazardous Material i . Any business which involves the handling or storage of hazardous material shall provide data information sheets to the City for review and receive appropriate permits from applicable agencies . 16 . PUD Planned Unit Development District STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: The purpose of this district is to provide design and locational flexibility and variety tracts of land with adequate sewer and water systems by allowing modification of lot and building area, width, setback and other dimensional requirements . PUD' s shall be developed in accordance with an ' • overall design and an integrated development plan in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations . PUD' s shall be consistent with 9.39 the intent and purpose of this Ordinance and shall not adversely affect the property adjacent to the land area to be developed. • 1. Regulations A. A PUD may be authorized on land in a PUD district following the issuance of a conditional use permit and subdivision approval. A PUD shall comply with the provisions of this Ordinance except as expressly modified herein. B. Permitted conditional and accessory uses in residential and commercial districts may be allowed in a PUD if the Council determines that such uses are compatible. C. The area of land to be included in a PUD shall be in uniform control of the applicant. D. A PUD shall be designed to form a desirable unified environment within its proposed boundaries. E. A PUD shall not cause undesirable impacts on adjacent lands and land uses . In particular, uses in the PUD perimeter shall be compatible with adjacent uses outside the PUD. • • F. A PUD shall be served by adequate water and sewer systems . G. A PUD shall not adversely affect existing or proposed parks, schools, streets or other public facilities. H. The Council may establish varied and reasonable lot area, frontage, side yard, and setback requirements for a PUD and may authorize a density which it determines to be appropriate under the circumstances. Any permitted density shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Development Plan and not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare. I . More than one principal building may be constructed on a lot within a PUD if authorized by the Council . Uses within PUD' s should be constructed on individual lots having no less than eighty (80%) of the minimum area for similar uses within that district where they are permitted subject to the most stringent minimum requirements. 2 . ,Administrative Procedure41111 • 9.40 r A. Prior to the commencement of formal review, any person may submit a PUD concept plan to the City requesting staff • and Planning Commission review and advisory comment. B. The proponents of a PUD shall submit a preliminary subdivision plat and a site plan, along with an application for a conditional use permit to the Planning Commission and Council . The Planning Commission shall review PUD proposals _. and make recommendations to the Council based on the provisions contained herein, in the Subdivision Ordinance, and in Section 900 .42 . Such preliminary plat and site plan shall conform to the provisions of this Ordinance to the Subdivision regulations. Such site plan shall show: • Proposed sanitary sewer and water systems, including size, type and capacity and paving • Proposed roadways, location, type, capacity and paving • The proposed site and existing adjacent development • Size and location of building and dwelling unit density 46 • Landscaping • Parking areas and arrangement of stalls • Site and lot dimensions • Location and size of park and open space • Type of use and use density of each building, including a relief drawing of the general building design intended for all buildings other than single and two family units. • The proposed schedule for the development of the site • Location, type and size of signage • Statement of the reasons why the PUD will be in the public interest, consistent with the purposes and requirements hereof and those in Section 900 .42 The Council shall review a PUD proposal pursuant to the provisions contained herein and in Section 900 .42 . C. If the conditional use permit and the preliminary plat and site plan are approved, the preliminary plat and site 9.41 plan shall be attached to and become part of the conditional use permit. Any modification of the conditional use permit, • preliminary plat or site plan must be approved by the Planning Commission and the Council. The Council may approve the entire PUD or one or more stages of the same and may establish conditions respecting the approval as provided in Section 900 .42 . D. If the conditional use permit is approved, the final plat shall be submitted to the City in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations and the provisions of this ordinance. 17 . SWF Solid Waste Facility overlay Zoning District STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: The purpose of the Solid Waste Facility Overlay Zoning District is to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare by providing a specific zoning district for the use of land for the establishment and operation of Solid Waste Facilities. Since these uses are so unique, their demands upon public services, such as transportation, are so intense and their potential for causing harm to the environment and to the public health, safety, and general welfare is so great, a special zoning district is necessary. Solid Waste Facilities shall not be permitted nor conditional uses in any other Zoning District. • 1. Uses - The Solid Waste Facilities Overlay District is an overlay zoning district. Land zoned into the Solid Waste Facilities Overlay District will also remain in its original zoning district (the Underlying Zoning District) . All permitted, accessory, and conditional uses allowed in the Underlying Zoning District will continue to be allowed on land zoned into the Solid Waste Facilities Overlay District, subject to all restrictions and requirements applicable in the Underlying District. In addition to the uses allowed in the Underlying Zoning District, there shall be allowed in the Solid Waste Facilities Overlay District the following conditional uses, subject to all requirements of the City Code for the establishment and operation of such uses: A. Solid Waste Facilities licensed under Section 604 of the City Code. B. Solid Waste PrOCeBsin• , Facilities licensed under Section 604 of the City COde C. Sanitary Landfi 'J A' .nsed under Section 604 of the City Code. ATTACHMENT H V. COMMERCIAL A. INTRODUCTION The City is concerned with providing a variety of commercial opportunities for retail and office use and ensuring the vitality of existing commercial centers. This will encourage a broad base of employment and business opportunities which will strengthen the economic self-sufficiency of the community. B. GOALS 1. GOAL: Encourage the development of a quality community which retains a semi-rural atmosphere,while providing necessary commercial development to serve a growing residential population. POLICIES: •Guide the type and location of development to achieve an orderly develop- ment pattern consistent with the semi-rural character of the community. •Provide for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) approach which, through the use of site design standards, allows for a mix of compatible commercial • and residential development in appropriate areas. 2. GOAL: Maintain and encourage the continuation of a well-designed employment and business opportunity in close proximity to the community. POLICIES: •Direct future commercial development to those sites which support and strengthen the existing downtown area. •Limit development of strip or scattered site commercial and industrial opera- tions along the City's major roadways. •Allow commercial expansion only in close proximity to existing services. •Evaluate all proposals for commercial and industrial development to deter- mine impact on municipal and natural systems. 3. GOAL: Preserve, maintain and/or strengthen the physical and visual qualities unique to the community. • POLICIES: •Adhere to controls for the size and placement of signage and landscaping for commercial and industrial applications within the City limits. V-13 1 3. Highway 10 Southeast Sector The plan calls for highway commercial development along portions of Highway 10 in the southeast sector of the City (Figure 5-F). This is consistent with the existing C3 zoning designation for these commercial lands. Sewer and water utilities are not intended for this area. Therefore, all development will be subject to state and local regulations pertaining to on-site waste disposal. The Transportation Plan calls for a frontage along both sides of Highway 10. This will provide access to and from Highway 10 at a limited number of intersections. 4. Highway 169 North of School Street The plan calls for commercial development north of Elk Hills Drive along Highway 169 to 197th Avenue. It is the City's objective that such development occurs under the guidance and control of a Planned Unit Development. 5. Timing It is the City's position that the marketplace will play a significant role in determining the timing of development in the designated commercial areas. 6. Neighborhood Commercial • The City recognizes a possible need for future m neighborhood commercial o mercial (small convenience store) development within outlying areas of the urban service district. However, exact location for such activity has not been determined. I E. NECESSARY ACTIONS 1. Designation of commercial areas on the City Land Use Plan. 2. Designation of commercial areas on the City's Zoning Map,including Planned Unit I Development where appropriate. 3. Extension of sewer and water utilities to the Waco Street and Highway 10 area. I 4. Promotion of the City's commercial areas by the Economic Development Authority. IL5. Eliminate unnecessary zones. 6. Extend sewer and water, as needed, to the area east of Highway 169 between Elk I Hills Road and 197th Avenue. • I I • (,--,- 4,,,L2, LC__CO- Y)/(`Y' - 22.&-,__ � 4t . - ---e" --Jyj � -'-f)i . .a--e..A2 x_zy-, OJf. U -__} U ,n J . / / 11-0e.zz-,,,z_, "71(1--. LL 'C___7\3 , _., ( 0 a_e_ir 7. 2_,,,,,_, . _,. (..__ _./..,„,_ y,.,_ .,:., ---/-,____„...,, ekci.J. , g/..„,.,,,_) ,7---„___,_Wiz_ , &'2 e -J -„, - - z‘h„r_z / , . �� c.�',, �. o � , :I ca,,,,,,, ,, , ,,, a „....e, ,,,,,,,,, // ,, a_z_. ,,,,, ,,,,, , , 7 - .„,.,"_, .., „ _..z., ,..- - i . 4- , . , ., , . I/- , .Af "&---,4-1 e2--? /.._, _ 4---;(-_, e-4-e----- / i9£‹ - Z%-. A. _ • - - -7"2--,,- Z.,j7-2--,----"--4/ e_d-)--)-2 ,-e_e_i_ z_e ,0/..2. ,„2 . /�CJ d ) ` c:; ' ;;:, � ;/J7jc APR 1 4 1995 April 20, 1995 I City Council City Hall Elk River, MN 55330 Dear City Council: We are writing to voice our opinions about the proposal of a large retail store being constructed in Brentwood along Highway #169. We do not want this area of Elk River to be rezoned for commercial use! We do not want city sewer and water to extend further north on Highway #169. We do not want the traffic that would come with this type of development. It seems that there is ample room elsewhere in Elk River for any additional commercial development. We are not against growth in Elk River, but we think common sense should be used in planning new developments. Sincerely, 0-iL L-PI-C- • Elk River Residents Ate A • MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER STEERING COMMITTEE HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL APRIL 20, 1995 Members Present: Chair Minton, Committee Members Dick Hinkle, Dave Anderson, Mark Lucas, Mary Eberley, Pat Dwyer, Arne Engstrom, Keith Holme, Lloyd Barthel, Marly Glines and Chris Kreger. Hank Duitsman arrived at 7:05 p.m. Members Absent: Merry Sipe, Bill Birrenkott and Mary McDevitt Staff Present: Steve Ach, City Planner; Bill Rubin, EDA Executive Director,Terry Maurer, City Engineer; Debbie Kleckner, Recording Secretary 1. Call Meeting To Order The April 20, 1995 meeting of the Elk River Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee was called to order at 7 p.m. by Chair Minton. 2. Consider 4/20/95 Steering Committee Agenda CHRIS KREGER MOVED TO APPROVE THE 4/20/95 STEERING COMMITTEE AGENDA. DAVE ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 11-0. • 3. Consider Steering Committee Minutes March 23, 1995 Minutes DICK HINKLE MOVED TO APPROVE THE MARCH 23, 1995 STEERING COMMITTEE MINUTES. PAT DWYER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 12-0. April 6, 1996 Minutes The following correction was noted: Page 5, Paragraph 5, first line, add the word, "the" before the word "charge". MARY EBERLEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE APRIL 6, 1995 STEERING COMMITTEE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MARK LUCAS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 12-0. 4. Consider Commercial Development Staff presentation by Steve Ach. Steve reviewed the inventory of commercial property in the City, citing locations and number of acres in each area. He stated that 469 acres has been developed and 377 acres are available for future development. Steve explained that in using a high absorption rate of 14 acres per year, there are 26.9 years worth of commercial property. In estimating a low • absorption rate of 2 acres per year, there would be approximately 188.5 years Steering Committee Minutes Page 2 April 20, 1995 worth of commercial property. 375 acres of commercial property are located within the current urban service area and 499 acres are outside of it. In response • to Chair Minton's question, Steve estimated that approximately 100 acres of commercial were absorbed last year including Elk Park Center, although it has not been fully developed. EDA Executive Director Bill Rubin provided an overview of the Elk River Central Business District (CBD), highlighting the following topics: A. Review/define CBD boundaries- Defined the core area and extensions which include the East Main Street office corridor, Railroad Drive/3rd Street NW area, and the Jackson Avenue corridor. He identified the Mississippi River, the Otsego bridge, U.S. Highway 10 and the railroad tracks as constraints to development in the central business district, but added that they contribute to defining a central focus for the downtown. B. Existing Uses in the CBD- Bill identified existing uses including financial institutions, drug stores, automotive, professional , hospitality, medical providers, and other services providers. C. Preservation of CBD's Character-Although the CBD lacks true historical buildings, other characteristics can be implemented to create and sense of place such as signage, lighting, sidewalks, streetscapes, landscaping, etc. D. Parking Issues- Bill described the existing municipal lots. He noted that it is not practical for existing businesses in the core area to provide of-street • parking, but that minimal parking standards should be required when reviewing businesses just outside the core. Further out, commercial users could be required to meet or exceed the city's standards. He suggested that the city/HRA should consider adding off-street parking in the CBD. E. Riverfront Initiatives- High priority should be placed on the river pathway project which will add to the CBD's character, reinforce the community's sense of place, create a place for activity, and establish the basis for a showpiece in the city's multi-base trail system. F. Redevelopment Opportunities-These sites include: -Northwest corner of King and Main -Southeast corner of Lowell and Main -Highway 10 corridor from Main Street/l0 intersection to Proctor and 10 -Jackson Avenue-Railroad Drive-4th Street triangle -Railroad Drive/3rd Street towards Gates Avenue -East Main Street Bill also mentioned the Morrell site as a possible extension of the C2 district for redevelopment. Mary Eberley suggested that design standards be established for the downtown area to identify its character. Bill added that these standards could tie into the river pathway theme. • Steering Committee Minutes Page 3 April 20, 1995 Chair Minton stated that the City Council has indicated they would like the • Steering Committee to address the parking requirements in the downtown area and perhaps provide some relief to encourage development/redevelopment activity. Chair Minton opened the meeting for comments from the public at this time. Phil Johnson, 19440 Holt Street, stated that there were a number of residents in attendance from the Brentwood area that want to know what is being proposed for Dennis Anderson's property (Outlot A), how it fits with the current land use plan, and the role of the Steering Committee in addressing this issue. Steve Ach explained that Outlot A has been included in the areas to be considered for possible changes in land use to commercial. He stated that there are two properties on either side of Highway 169 which are currently zoned residential. The property on the west is zoned R 1 c (10,000 square foot lots) and is located within the current urban service district. The property on the east side of Highway 169 is currently zoned R 1 e (20,000 square foot lots). The entire area has be discussed for an overall planned unit development, and preliminary plans have identified this area as a potential commercial area. The property has not been rezoned at this time. Steve explained that an application for Outlot A will be reviewed by the Planning Commission on Tuesday, April 25th, to rezone the property to PUD with an underlying commercial land use. The proposal includes a 120,000 square foot retail facility on the 17 acre parcel. Chair Minton noted that the Committee has received a copy of the covenants for the Brentwood Addition and a letter from Councilmembers that served at the time Brentwood was platting, stating that the intent was that Outlot A be used for commercial development. Also, he stated that they have testimony from residents. Mr. Johnson's questioned whether there was record in the minutes if the Councilmembers' intent that Outlot A be commercial in the future. Chair Minton stated that the intention was not stated in the minutes. Arne Engstrom stated that he served on the Council at that time, and it was his recollection that Outlot A was pulled from the residential part of the plat, and reserved for commercial use in the future when city water and sewer became available. Hank Duitsman,who also served on the Council at that time, agreed with Arne Engstrom's comments. Mr. Johnson questioned whether the intentions were valid if they were not in the official minutes. Chair Minton stated that the minutes could be researched further. Discussion followed regarding the Brentwood covenants. Mark Lucas read from the covenants as follows: "no lot other that Outlot A shall be used except for residential purposes." A resident commented that it was deceiving to intend that something be commercial and zone it residential until all the lots around it are bought up and • Steering Committee Minutes Page 4 April 20, 1995 then change it. She stated that it does not seem right that if Outlot A was intended to be commercial that it was not changed at that time. 111 Dick Hinkle stated he served on the Planning Commission at the time in question, and that the conversation as he remembered was that someday the outlot would be commercial. He explained that the minutes were not as detailed at that time since they were not recorded, and were prepared from the notes of someone listening to the meeting. Dick stated that he stated that the property was not rezoned to residential, because it had always been residential. He concluded by stating that it was the intent that the outlot would be commercial, whether or not the minutes reflected the conversation. A resident stated that she had not found any reference to Outlot A being used for commercial purposes in the future, and questioned how intentions could be verified if the minutes did not reflect it. Chris Kreger stated that as a contractor in the Brentwood Subdivision, and it was clearly his understanding that the outlot would be used for commercial purposes. He explained that the Planning Commission's charge Tuesday will be to determine if it is appropriate to change the zoning to commercial now. A resident questioned whether or not a topographic map was available which showed the outlot area at the time Brentwood was platted. He questioned whether the outlot was left out of the residential plat because of the steep slope it had. Hank Duitsman stated that the Council granted approval to mine Outlot A at the time Brentwood was platted. A resident of the Brentwood expressed his objection to commercial development • of Outlot A. He stated he would not have bought his lot two years ago if he known what the plans were for the outlot. He stated that in coming from the military, he chose the home in Brentwood for the peace and quiet, and that if this proposal goes through, he will be forced to look at a large commercial building and a parking lot. A resident questioned how they could research intentions of people when looking at property. Bob Sturgis, resident on 197th Avenue, Brentwood Addition, stated that at previous meetings on this issue, residents were led to believe that the property owner was proposing a smaller type neighborhood commercial use, not a 120,000 square foot building. He expressed his objection tc changing the zoning from residential. He stated that he felt the commercial zone change would destroy their neighborhood. Mr. Sturgis expressed his support for the idea to preserve the downtown and the river pathway concept. Dale Miller, 197th Avenue, stated that he was told Dennis Anderson when he purchased his lot that it would be used for a park or possibly townhomes. A resident who lives across from Outlot A stated that they were also told the lot would be used for a park or townhomes. She stated that the idea of a neighborhood convenience-type use appeals to her much more than what Dennis Anderson is proposing. She expressed her concern that once the lot is • Steering Committee Minutes Page 5 April 20, 1995 rezoned to commercial, the residents lose all their say in what type of commercial • goes in. A resident questioned how mining could be done in a residential zoned area. Chair Minton stated that it is not uncommon to allow gravel mining in areas that have an underlying residential zoning. John Polden, 11751 196th Street NW, stated that he dealt with Mrs. Anderson when purchasing his lot at 196th and Irving. He said she stated that the outlot would be used for their retirement and one day they would make the lot into a park. He expressed his objection to the proposed commercial development. A resident on 197th stated that he was also told Outlot A would be used for multi- family, with a park and playground. He stated that he felt the residents were misled until all the lots were sold and now he wants to change it. He questioned if Mr. Anderson knew his intent,why was the zone change not requested in 1982, 1983 or 1984, after the mining was done. He stated he felt the lots near Outlot A would not have sold if the rezoning had been done at that time. He expressed his objection to the zone change. Michael Fox, 11747 197th Avenue NW, questioned whether the Committee will be responsive to the residents of the neighborhood or to the developers. A resident of the Brentwood Addition stated he was told the property would be developed with townhomes in the $125,000-$140,000 range. He stated he would like to go on record as being against the proposal. • A resident questioned the difference would be in value of the land whether it was residential or commercial. Chair Minton stated that he would ask that this issue not be discussed by the Steering Committee, since it would be brought up before the Planning Commission next Tuesday. A resident requested that the Steering Committee request the Planning Commission to table this application until the Comprehensive Plan is completed. Chair Minton stated that there are legal requirements to act on Mr. Anderson's request in a timely manner. Another resident questioned how many times Mr. Anderson would be able to make requests for zoning changes. Steve Ach explained that if a request is denied, he would not be able to reapply for a period of one year. Chair Minton stated that he would be able to request another type of zoning if the current request were denied. A resident questioned what the difference in taxes would be if the property were residential vs. commercial. Chair Minton explained that property taxes are determined by use, not by zoning. Dick Hinkle questioned whether or not there may be legal ramifications if the Steering Committee does not make a recommendation on the property. Chair Minton stated that it is his preference that no action be taken, but that if any of the Steering Committee members wish to act on the issue, he would preside over the action. Steering Committee Minutes Page 6 April20, 1995 Chris Kreger explained that he and Chair Minton served on the Planning • Commission and would carry forward the information they received tonight in order to make a decision Tuesday night. John Polden questioned the Steering Committee's role in making recommendations. Chair Minton stated that the Committee will be developing broad goals and policies on a number of issues which will be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council in one package. The Planning Commission and City Council will then hold public hearings before the Plan will be adopted. Mr. Polden recommended that the City purchase the property from Mr. Anderson and develop it as a municipal park and swimming pool. Mark Martin, resident on 205th Avenue NW, encouraged residents to attend the Steering Committee meetings if they care about their community in general, and not just specific issues that relate to only themselves. Kent Peabody, resident on 200th Avenue NW, expressed his concern that citizens be aware of what it going on their city. A resident asked that the Steering Committee make a motion to table this issue. Chair Minton requested that staff have the minutes of this meeting made available to the Planning Commission at Tuesday night's meeting. Steve Ach stated that the reason the information on the two areas located on • Highway 169 was in the Committee's packet was to determine which direction should commercial development continue; should it extend further north along Highway 169. He stated that it is unlikely that sewer and water will extend past 197th Avenue. Steve explained the extension of the urban service area east and west on Highway 10. He stated that the Highway 10 corridor is mainly comprised of industrial area, business park and limited types of commercial uses such as convenience-service type uses. Chair Minton stressed the importance of setting land aside for industrial use long in advance. He explained that enough land must be preserved for business and industry to keep taxes in balance and to provide balanced growth in the City. (Insert text here from Tape 2, Side 1) A resident questioned the why the property was not rezoned to commercial if the intent was commercial. Ted Travica, 19702 Irving Street, stated he feels the residential quality of life is changing since he moved here. He expressed his concern that all the trees are being cut down as the commercial development continues northward. He questioned why the residential development was allowed on Highway 169 if it is to be commercial. He urged that the Committee turn down the request to rezone Outlot A to commercial. • Steering Committee Minutes Page 7 April20, 1995 A resident stated that the Focus Area Study refers to the area in the northeast • corner of 193rd and Highway 169 as one of Elk River's natural treasures. He noted that some of this area has already been taken by Sax Foods. He stated that he would like to see that area and the area north of there preserved and not allow clear cutting. (Insert Text here from Tape 2, Side 2) 7. Tentative Schedule of Upcoming Meetings Schedule was reviewed. 8. Other Business Chair Minton requested that letters from Mark Martin,Scott Brabec, and Roger and Jean Eull, be entered into the official record. 9. Future Meeting The next meeting of the Elk River Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee will be Thursday, April 20, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. 10. Adjournment • ARNE ENGSTROM MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. DAVE ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 12-0. Respectfully submitted, Debbie Kleckner Recording Secretary • City of Llk River Request ITEMS 5.2.15.3.&S.4. MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Steven B. Ach, City Planner,,40/-- DATE: April 25, 1995 SUBJECT: Land Use Amendment and Rezoning Request by Dennis Anderson, Public Hearing Case No. LUA 95-4 and ZC 95-4 Dennis Anderson is requesting the following: (A) Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment changing the land use from MR (Medium Density Residential) to HB (Highway Business). (B) Rezoning from RIC (Single Family Residential) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) based on the submitted concept plan. *(C) The Conditional Use Permit request for a development plan is not being considered at this time. *This application will be reviewed if the rezoning is approved and a specific development is eminent. Location Outlot A, Brentwood Subdivision, Sherburne County, MN (southwest corner of 197th and Highway 169). Attachments • Memo from City Engineer, Terry Maurer dated April 19, 1995 • Zoning and Land Use Plan Maps • Concept Plan for proposed PUD rezoning • Attachment A - Minutes from previous Planning Commission and City Council Meetings regarding Brentwood Subdivision • Attachment B - Information submitted by Dennis Anderson 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425