Loading...
05-08-2001 PC MIN - SPECIAL . . . SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL- TRAINING ROOM TUESDAY, MAY 8,2001 Members Present: Chair Pederson, Commissioners Baker, Franz, Ropp and Schuster Staff Present: Pat Klaers, City Administrator; Peter Beck, City Attorney; Michele McPherson, Director of Planning; Catherine Mehelich, Executive Director; Marc Nevinski, Assistant Director; Scott Harlicker, Senior Planner; Steve Rohlf, Building & Zoning Administrator; Cliff Skogstad, Chief Building Official; Debbie Huebner, Recording Secretary City Council and Other Committee Members Present: Mayor Stephanie Klinzing, City Council, HRA and EDA Representative Paul Motin, City Council and EDA Representatives Dan Tveite and Louise Kuester. HRA Members Larry Toth, Stewart Wilson and Daryl Thompson, EDA Representative Pat Dwyer, EDA Finance Committee, EDA Commissioner's Gongoll, Carlson, and Koenig Also Present: Downtown River's Edge Committee member Cliff Lundberg, Perleberg, AI Nadeau, and Frank Galli Rick Martens of Brookstone, Inc, Anthony Gleekel, representing Elk River Associated Investors 1. Call Meetina To Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chair Pederson. 2. Consider Mav 8,2001 Aaenda COMMISSIONER FRANZ MOVED TO APPROVE THE MAY 8, 2001 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. COMMISSIONER SCHUSTER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 3. Downtown Master Plan - Workshop Executive Director Cathy Mehelich explained that last fall the HRA authorized staff to draft a downtown redevelopment plan. The plan focuses on redevelopment and rehabilitation areas, to serve as a guideline for new development as well as improvements in the downtown. Phase 1 consisted of an inventory of the properties, basic assessment of property values and historic significance. This information was compiled into a spreadsheet and map. Phase Planning Commission May 8. 2001 Page 2 . 1 also included a market analysis for the downtown. In Phase 2, the vision and future of the downtown is to be developed. She noted that HRA, Planning Commission and River's Edge members all have a stake and an interest in what happens downtown. Ms. Mehelich stated she expects there will be a follow-up workshop to the meeting tonight. The third and final phase will include staff drafting an implementation plan based on the priority redevelopment areas and issues discussed. The final plan will then be presented to the HRA and City Council for adoption of the plan. She noted that the Planning Commission will be a part of the process if there are any ordinance changes. The agenda for this evening is: 1 . Present information gathered by staff in phase 1, including market analysis. 2. Cliff Skogstad, Chief Building Official will review the criteria which was used for building conditions. 3. Steve Rohlf will discuss the criteria used for determining historical significance. . Jay Thompson of Maxwell Research Group, stated that in their analysis, they looked at the market potential for retail. office and housing in the redevelopment area over the next ten years. He stated that this was done by reviewing recent development trends in the three areas. the current situation in the entire Elk River area, and the demographics and growth potential. The current mix of businesses in the downtown was assessed to determine market interest and percentage of growth of the entire City of Elk River that the downtown could potentially capture. The downtown was divided into three areas based on the existing mix of businesses, building characteristics, and barriers such as Highway 10 and the railroad. The Three areas are the Core CBD, Western Transition Area, and Northern Area. The mix of uses. and strengths and weaknesses of each area were reviewed. Mr. Thompson then discussed the conclusions and recommendations for each of the three areas as described in their market analysis. Mr. Toth asked Mr. Thompson about other communities where they have done market studies. Mr. Thompson stated that cities include Lake City; downtown Anoka; Marshall; Otomwa, Iowa; Fargo and Moorehead. Cliff Skogstad, Chief Building Official, explained that a walk-by inspection was done of the building exterior. and based on 15 years and newer, or 15 years and older, and beyond. Building code inspection would include Energy Code, Handicap Accessibility Code, the structural aspects of building, and health-safety aspects. A good rating was given to a building 15 years or newer because of the fact that building code issues have likely been addressed. A fair rating would be a building 15 years and older. since limited codes have been met, structure load issues, energy code issues and would require some work to bring the building back into compliance. A poor rating was given to older buildings based on code issues and condition of the building itself. including lack of regular maintenance. . Steve Rohlf, Building & Zoning Administrator, stated that Heritage Preservation Commission spent a Saturday doing a quick review of the downtown buildings. He explained that the Heritage Preservation Commission strongly recommends Planning Commission May 8,2001 Page 3 . that a professional do a context study. A context study will help the City to understand what we have. The Heritage Preservation Commission consists of an archeologist, Sherburne County Historical Society Coordinator. and a number of long-time residents that know the history of Elk River. Mr. Rohlf reviewed the 8 categories to determine historic significance, as taken from the City's ordinance. He cited examples from the map of possible locations of historic significance, such as the hitching posts from the 1800's, and other sites as described in his memo dated May 8,2001. Mr. Rohlf strongly encouraged the City to authorize the context study. Commissioner Baker asked how much the study would cost. Mr. Rohlf stated that the study would cost between $10,000 - $15,000, with the actual cost being closer to $10,000. The City has applied to become a certified local government through the State Historic Preservation Office. He felt that approximately one-half of the cost of the study could be funded by a grant, reducing the City's cost to $5,000- $7,000. City Administrator Pat Klaers asked how long it would take to do a study. Mr. Rohlf stated that he was unsure. Mr. Franz asked if any of the downtown buildings may be eligible to be on the National Historic Register. Mr. Rohlf stated yes. . Ms. Mehelich thanked staff for their help in the downtown evaluation. She distributed copies of a Downtown Elk River Planning & Improvement History - 1970 - 2000. Ms. Mehelich noted that consistent themes through the history included (1) utilizing the river for public space and recreation, events and activities, and also business attraction such as restaurants, art centers, (2) historic or small-town character in both rehab and reconstruction through design standards. She noted that design standards were mentioned numerous times but were never drafted and implemented; (3) safer pedestrian and vehicle movement (pathway for riverwalk, parking ramp, etc.) Larry loth, HRA Commissioner, asked for clarification on possible traffic generators for the downtown. Mr. Thompson reviewed his recommendations for retaining the post office, locating a restaurant in the downtown, the potential riverwalk, and conducting events to bring people to the downtown. Ms. Bujold felt that events can sometimes overtake the downtown. Mr. Toth asked how issues with park could be resolved. Ms. Bujold suggested that shared parking options and writing specific ordinances for parking in the downtown. City Administrator stated that if the parking lot property were developed, there would be a parking problem in the downtown. He noted that there is parking across Highway 10 but it is very difficult to get people to use it. Cliff Lundberg suggested ramping the existing parking lot behind Kempers and build a skywalk to parking on the north side of the highway. He had concerns regarding building on the east City parking lot. He felt this would close off the new view to the river. . Commissioner Baker suggested working on a couple significant ideas such as parking. Cliff Lundberg suggested bringing back the 1950's fac;ade of the Planning Commission May 8. 200 1 Page 4 . Houlton building. Commissioner Baker felt that the first project should have high visibility. Ms. Mehelich felt there are developers who would be interested in Elk River. especially with the amenity of the river. She asked the group for suggestions on redevelopment areas. Commissioner Baker stated that the historical significance of an area must also be considered. Ms. Mehelich felt that the Historical Preservation Commission would be asked to review the area. Council member Motin asked if the representatives from Maxfield felt maintaining a 3-4 block historical area in the downtown was viable for the long term. He suggested using a theme for along the river to preserve the long term future of the City. rather than preserving of the history. Ms. Bujold stated that she felt it is a combination of both. She explained that new development has to come. She stated that the existing character makes the downtown different and that is what draws people downtown. Mr. Motin stated that his clients are telling him that is not happening. Ms. Bujold stated that is why redevelopment needs to occur. She felt that once a project is started. the momentum will begin. She felt that the downtown can be viable. long-term. but it will require that something new comes in to attract people beyond 9am-5pm or 5pm to 9pm. She felt they need to look at the diverse groups that use the downtown. . Commissioner Schuster discussed the difficulty of access to downtown. He stated that he supported the idea of a downtown event. AI Nadeau. downtown business owner. stated that he has been located downtown for 30 years. He felt the downtown will never be a retail center again and is now a service center. He stated that the group needs to envision the future. He felt that that is an opportunity to take advantage of the river view from his location. Mayor Klinzing explained that various groups have been studying the downtown for 30 years. She felt that the City has now crossed a threshold so that ideas which were discussed in the past now do not seem so crazy. such as the suggestion for a parking ramp. She felt that that we need to open ourselves up to new possibilities. . Chair Pederson stated that when he first drove into downtown Elk River. he thought the downtown was dead. He stated that he feels the whole north side of Highway 10 from Boelter's down to Martin Plaza needs to be looked at. He agreed that the downtown is no longer a retail center and is more a financial and personal services center. He felt Mr. Nadeau's site would be ideal for a bed- and-breakfast or a hotel which would also draw in a restaurant. He also agreed with Commissioner Schuster that access to downtown is difficult and that the crossing at Highway 10 is a nightmare. He felt that the historical study should be done. He felt that low interest loans to help the downtown business owners improve their sites needs to be discussed. He felt that another meeting is needed. Ms. Mehelich stated that she felt that the specific ideas for implementation need to be discussed. Planning Commission May 8, 2001 Page 5 . 4. T own home Development Moratorium - Public Hearing Chair Pederson relinquished the gavel to Vice Chair Baker and stepped down at this time. Director of Planning Michele McPherson explained that at its April 9th meeting, the City Council directed staff to draft an ordinance establishing a moratorium on townhome developments in the City of Elk River. The purpose of the moratorium is to provide staff adequate time to draft a revised ordinance to address density, building materials, open space, pedestrian connections and building setbacks. No townhome development applications will be accepted during the moratorium period. Ms. McPherson noted that letter was received from John Peterson of Oakwood Land Development, requesting a waiver from the moratorium restriction for the Elk River Station development proposal. Vice Chair Baker opened the public hearing. . John Peterson, Oakwood Land Development, stated that his group has been working with the City on a proposal to develop a 75 acre site owned by Leonard Pratt and that he will be closing on the property Wednesday, May 9th. When he began working with the City, he was told that the existing townhome ordinance was outdated and that he may wish to develop the property under the PUD (Planned Unit Development) ordinance. He stated even with a new townhome ordinance, they could design a better project under the PUD guidelines. The City will have the ultimate authority on the design standards. He requested that the Elk River Station project be waived. Commissioner Baker asked Mr. Peterson what his timeline was for the project schedule. Mr. Peterson stated that he was prepared to submit his application for the April 30th deadline when he received notification of the moratorium. If his project were waived from inclusion in the moratorium, he would be able to submit his application within a matter of days. He noted that he would like to start work in the fall. Don Patten, Vice President of D.R. Horton (Trout Brook Farms), stated that he is also requesting a waiver from the moratorium in order to develop the recently purchased Stoffel Reitsma property. Mr. Patten explained that they will be requesting a rezoning to PUD in order to develop the site with single family and multi-family housing. He stated they currently have 108 units under construction in the $120,000 - $150,000 range. The "coach" 4-plexes will sell for $250,000. He stated that of the 60 villas sold, there are only 10 children. 35 of the 70 units have been sold to seniors and there are only 4 children. He stated that they will be out of product in 180 days if they are not allowed to continue development of the Reitsma property. He stated that the construction type will be the same as what is currently being constructed in Trout Brook Farms. Chair Pederson closed the public hearing. . Commissioner Baker asked how staff felt about the requests for waivers from the moratorium. Ms. McPherson explained that Mr. Peterson's group (Elk River Station, LLP) has already been before the Planning Commission and City Council. There is a commercial component to their project, in addition to townhomes. She stated Planning Commission May 8, 2001 Page 6 . that the PUD ordinance allows increased density and they must ensure that the City's needs are met. Ms. McPherson explained that the townhome ordinance needs to be revised so that a fair evaluation can be done from one project to another. Commissioner Franz asked if the City Attorney could clarify the term "hardship". City Attorney Peter Beck stated that determination would be open to interpretation by the City Council. There are some standards in the ordinance for variances, and the Council could use these standards but they would not be bound by them. The standards include unique circumstances that more than an issue of just economic consideration, a whether a developer is being put in an unfair position by the proposed ordinance. Mr. Beck stated that the ordinance does have an opportunity to request a waiver. If the ordinance is adopted, a person could apply for a waiver and submit it with his application package. The waiver would then be considered by the Council first before land use application. He stated that a waiver could be requested without having an application complete if there were unusual circumstances, but that would likely help support the wavier request. . Commissioner Ropp asked if it was feasible to finish the new ordinance in less than 180 days. Ms. McPherson explained that the revised ordinance is an amendment to the zoning ordinance which requires that a public hearing is held by both the Planning Commission and City Council. She explained that there is a period of approximately 3-4 weeks between the two hearings. Staff will begin drafting a new ordinance, which will need be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council for their input. When a final draft is completed, a public hearing will then be held by both the Planning Commission and City Council. She stated that the process may take less than 6 months, but this is typically the busy season for land use applications and staff needs to balance time spent on drafting the new ordinance and time spent processing new applications. Ms. McPherson stated that since this is an important issue, the City does not want to artificially hurry the process. The ordinance needs to ensure that the City's long term needs are met to provide a balance of housing styles and housing types for all age groups. She reviewed some of the issues which will be included in the new standards. The City Attorney felt that six months to complete such an ordinance is a very aggressive schedule. Commissioner Baker stated that the issue before the Planning Commission is whether or not to approve the interim ordinance, and that a request for a waiver would be heard by the City Council. Commissioner Baker asked if it would be possible to process an ordinance amendment for the town home standards without a moratorium. Ms. McPherson explained why it would be difficult to do so, while continuing to receive and process townhome applications. . Commissioner Schuster questioned whether the language in the interim ordinance regarding common walls could impact office projects. City Attorney Peter Beck stated that the language refers to dwelling units. Commissioner Schuster asked if projects in process which are being phased would be stopped Planning Commission May 8, 2001 Page 7 . by the ordinance. Ms. McPherson stated that projects which are already approved would not be affected. Councilmember Motin stated that he has not seen a draft of the interim ordinance and had concerns how the Eull property project would be affected. Commissioner Baker read from the ordinance the clause for allowing a waiver. COMMISSIONER FRANZ MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE INTERIM ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON TOWNHOME DEVELOPMENTS, CASE NO. OA 01-05, CITY NO PUBLIC OPPOSITION. COMMISSIONER ROPP SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-1. COMMISSIONER SCHUSTER OPPOSED. 5. Business Park Desian Standards - Workshoo Director of Planning Michele McPherson explained that this discussion is a follow- up to a previous meeting with Brookstone regarding their concerns of the City not allowing the use of concrete tip-up panels in the Business Park zoning district. A video presentation by Rick Martens of Brookstone, Inc. was shown at this time, in order to demonstrate both desirable and undesirable designs which can be achieved using concrete tip-up panels. He explained how complementing decorative materials can be used to enhance the building design. Distribution buildings and office warehouse buildings in various other cities were videotaped. Mr. Martens explained that the building they are proposing to build in Elk River Business Park would be 30-40% office finish with the balance a variety of light industrial uses. . Anthony Gleekel, representing Elk River Associated Investors, explained that ordinances from other cities in which some of the buildings were videotaped were used to draft the proposed ordinance amendment they submitted. Cities included were Plymouth, Shoreview, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, and Maple Grove. The buildings included front-loaded distribution buildings, exteriors of both raked and smooth finish panels, painted and unpainted, combination of materials, such as integrally colored rock face block, glass, brick, cut-in tile accents, cast stone, use of contrasting bands, efface and decorative metal columns, glass entry, columns of reversed panels (smooth), Discussion followed regarding the language in the proposed ordinance amendment "if the surfaces have been integrally colored...". Chair Pederson stated that he felt a percentage of materials needs to be included. He stated he was not opposed to concrete tip-up panels, but not 100 percent use of them. Commissioner Schuster stated he did not have a problem with the use of concrete tip-up panels, provided they blended with the surroundings. Commissioner Franz stated he was also in favor of requiring that a certain percentage of other materials be used. He stated that some of the building designs shown in the video would be appropriate in the business park, such as the radius entry, exposed aggregate and columns. He felt it was important to specify these types of detail in the ordinance. . Commission Baker questioned whether it would be possible for staff to enforce what is envisioned for these buildings, with the ordinance as proposed. He stated Planning Commission May 8,2001 Page 8 . that he appreciated the efforts of Brookstone, but felt that more input is needed from other developers. Mr. Martens explained that in all of the buildings shown in the video, there is consistency in the use of either raked or smooth faced concrete tip-up panels. The use of design techniques and other materials sets the morel appealing buildings apart from the plain, gray, rectangular box-type buildings. Ms. McPherson stated that the City has received a booklet of design styles by Kraus-Anderson Construction Co. recently, which she distributed to the Commission for their review. Designs included cornice detailing, facades that are either recessed or set out, concrete block columns, radius corners, interesting entry features, etc. Commissioner Baker questioned where the more "plain" type buildings would be appropriate. Ms. McPherson stated that the unpainted block buildings or basic concrete buildings would found in the Medium Industrial zoning district. The higher standards for the Business Park District were adopted in order to promote higher quality businesses and more jobs. Ms. McPherson stated that they are trying to balance the developer's need to utilize a certain building material with the City's desire to have architecturally interesting buildings. It is the City's intent to promote Elk River as a vibrant community; to let people know that there are jobs here, and viable businesses which provide services not only to Elk River. but the surrounding community, as well. . Mr. Martens stated that they have no intention of locating a purely "distribution center" type business in the Elk River Business Park, as was shown in some of the examples in the video. Ms. McPherson stated that language could be added to require the building facades include one or more of the following: changes in depth, cornice detailing, etc. City Attorney Peter Beck stated that most quality ordinances do include a percentage for detailing. Mr. Gleekel, representing Elk River Associated Investors, stated they did not have a problem with using a percentage. Commissioner Baker stated that the buildings he preferred in the video included multi-material, multi-texture, multi-color, especially in the earthtones. He stated that challenge is how to quantify those details in the ordinance, and to exclude those they don't want to see. Mr. Gleekel stated that their intent is to get to the point where the Commission is comfortable with the ordinance amendment. He noted that he would anticipate that the Commission would like to hear from other developers, as well. Ms. McPherson stated that comments have been provided by United Properties. . Ms. Mehelich stated that United Properties felt that not being able to utilize concrete tip-up panels in construction would restrict them from doing business in Elk River. The critical issue seems to be timing; buildings using concrete tip-up panels can be put up quickly. Mr. Martens stated he felt that that the tip-up panel construction provides a better quality building over the long term. Planning Commission May 8. 2001 Page 9 . Commissioner Baker stated that he would like to receive input on the proposed revision from other developers interested in doing projects in Elk River. He stated that he does not want economics to be the primary consideration in allowing the use of concrete tip-up panels. Pat Dwyer, stated that he was president of the EDA when the Business Park zoning district was first proposed. Concrete tip-up panel construction was included in the business park standards, as a preferred material to metal-skinned construction. He stated that the type of building being proposed by Brookstone is what the EDA had in mind. He cautioned that the market only supports a certain amount of rent. If they were to go overboard in demanding that expensive building materials be used, they would be placing the City's business parks at a disadvantage in comparison to surrounding communities. He felt that it is not the City's intent to put developers in such a position that it is economically unfeasible to build in Elk River. Mr. Gleekel stated that staff could review the proposed revisions with other developers to obtain their input. Ms. McPherson stated that Ms. Mehelich could arrange for review by other groups they have been working with. Ms. McPherson stated that she was in favor of requiring a percentage in the ordinance. A developer's architect would be able to provide a breakdown for staff. . Commissioner Baker stated that he did not feel it is the City's intent to restrict creative design. Council member Tveite cautioned that the City should keep in mind that there will be developers that will submit the bare minimum requirements and they need to be sure that the minimum standards are acceptable. Mr. Martens stated that the existing ordinance would allow a solid wall of rock- face block with flat windows, no protrusions, and no recessed entries. He felt the buildings which were shown on the video ranged from a low of 15% to a high of 40-50% in supporting materials. Mr. Marten stated he had no problem with establishing a percentage, but he did feel that establishing a long list of design criteria would not accomplish their goal. Commissioner Franz asked if the pre-cast panels can be painted. Mr. Martens stated yes. Chair Pederson stated that he was open to looking at pre-cast concrete tip-up panels, but he had a problem with a developer proposing an ordinance. Ms. McPherson stated that the developer was asked by staff to suggest language for an ordinance amendment. She stated explained that staff will get other input, revise if appropriate, and bring the ordinance amendment back to the Commission. . Chair Pederson stated that the City does have the right to set design standards. He asked how long ago the Business Park District was established. Ms. McPherson stated that it was approximately 7 years ago. Chair Pederson stated that things . . . Planning Commission May 8, 200 1 Page 10 change in 7 years and minimum standards set back then may not be appropriate today. He did not want to shut the door to businesses coming into Elk River, but he did not want to see buildings put up quickly just to get them here. Commissioner Ropp felt the ordinance should ensure the type of buildings the City wants to see in Elk River. Mr. Martens stated that the building in Champlin which was shown in the video probably was very attractive, but probably had only a 15% use of other materials. The reason it was so appealing was because of curved lines. City Attorney Peter Beck stated that a variance could be granted in this type of situation. Commissioner Franz asked if each project could be reviewed individually by the Commission. Ms. McPherson explained that could be accomplished through site plan review, requiring a conditional use permit. or writing building design standards for each business park, but any of the options would significantly add to the Commission's workload. She felt that the ordinance could be written to allow staff some administrative latitude, so that individual review by the Commission would not be necessary. Councilmember Tveite stated that he felt the ordinance would provide some consistency, since Commissions and Councils will change over time. Peter Beck stated that he felt the City should give the ordinance their best. and then if a developer wants to go beyond that, a PUD or variance could be pursued, which would require individual review. Ms. McPherson felt that if minimum design standards and percentages were established, the City would be one step ahead of most other cities. Mr. Beck stated that the trend is to establish more specific design standards. Ms. McPherson summarized by stating that staff will review the proposed revisions, send these revisions out to the development community, and the ordinance will then be reconsidered at the June 12th workshop meeting. The distribution warehouse issue will also be reviewed at this meeting. 6. Adjournment There being no further business, COMMISSIONER FRANZ MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. COMMISSIONER BAKER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ww'd~~ Debbie Huebner Recording Secretary