Loading...
02-25-2003 PC MIN e MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2003 Members Present: Chair Pederson, Commissioners Anderson, Jenson, Lemke, Offerman and Ropp Members Absent: Commis~onerFranz Staff Present: Michele McPherson, Director of Planning; Scott Harlicker, Senior Planner; Chris Leeseberg, Planner; T eny Maurer, City Engineer; Debbie Huebner, Recording Secretary 1. Call Meeting 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 2/25/03 Planning Commission Agenda e COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 25, 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. COMMISSIONER JENSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 3. Consider 1/28/03 Planning Commission Minutes COMMISSIONER JENSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE JANUARY 28,2003 MINUTES. COMMISSIONER ROPP SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 4. Planning Commission Representative to Attend March City Council Meeting 5.1. Commissioner Lemke will attend the March 17, 2003 City Council meeting. Request by Schmidt Gravel Mining for Zone Change to Mineral Excavation Overlay. Public Hearing - Case No. ZC 03-01 Request by Schmidt Gravel Mining for Conditional Use Permit for Mineral Extraction. Public Hearing - Case No. CD 03-02 5.2. e Staff report by Steve Rohlf. Roger Schmidt is requesting a conditional use permit to mine 14.81 acres of a 66.06-acre site, and a rezoning to Mineral Excavation Overlay Zoning District. Mr. Rohlf stated that the most significant issue is access, which has not yet been resolved. He explained that the mining and crushing will be done on site, however, the applicant is proposing to haul the gravel approximately ~ mile south of the site for use at the Elk River Bittuninous Asphalt batch plant. Mr. Rohlf reviewed the three options under consideration for gaining access to the Elk River Bittuninous site. Mr. Rohlf then reviewed staff's recommendations regarding crushing, dust, hours of operation, fencing, ground water Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 2003 Page 2 e protection, wetlands, trees/oaks wilt, reclamation, and the presence of Blanding's Turtles. He noted that when the mining district overlay was established, the property owner at that time chose to be excluded. Mr. Rohlf noted that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet was not required, but that the petitioner chose to complete a discretionary one. Mr. Rohlf reviewed MN/DOT's comments regarding access onto Highway 169. Mr. Rohlf explained that Mr. Schmidt proposes to pave 219th Avenue from the mining site to Highway 169. Mr. Rohlf read a letter from a nearby property owner, Christopher Stokke, expressing his support for Mr. Schmidt's request. City Engineer Terry Maurer stated that it is the City's position to deny the applicant's request to allow slow-moving trucks to cross Highway 169, make a left turn onto the highway, travel 500 feet, and then make another left hand turn across northbound Highway 169 into the site. He stated that to cross the highway twice within 500 feet poses a very significant safety issue and a better route needs to be found. Commissioner Anderson asked if Mr. Maurer has received the details on the drainage and holding ponds he referred to in item #3 of his memo. Mr. Maurer stated that he has not received this information as of this date, but it is his understanding that the information will be provided. e Mr. Rohlf stated given the access issue, staff cannot recommend approval of the zone change and conditional use permit. He stated that if the Planning Commission recommends denial of the request, Mr. Schmidt could continue to negotiate for an easement to access the Elk River Bituminous site, without having to use Highway 169. Mr. Rohlf reviewed possible findings for approval or denial of the request. Commissioner Anderson asked if it is typical for an applicant to not have the wetland inventory and drainage calculations prepared at this point in the review process. Mr. Rohlf stated that it is typical not to have wedand delineation completed given the winter season, but that it is not typical for drainage information to be incomplete. Chair Pederson opened the public hearing. Roger Schmidt, applicant, stated that he disagrees with staff's recommendation, but commended staff for doing an excellent job in working with him. He stated that he feels mining is the best use of the property, noting that there currendy is mining on three sides of the site. Mr. Schmidt stated that gravel is a diminishing resource and that the gravel needs to be mined out before residential development occurs. He stated that although it is not their first preference, MN/DOT will allow the access if auxiliary lanes are constructed. He stated that he has tried to work with the property owner to the south for an easement, but they are not interested. Dave Tobare, Traffic Engineer representing the applicant, explained how the auxiliary lanes would function. Discussion followed regarding the amount of traffic in this area during the middle of the day, versus a Friday afternoon in the summer months. e Planning Commission Minutes Febmu)' 25, 2003 Page 3 e Commission Ropp asked if the auxiliary lanes could be located together with a center median between them. Mr. T obare stated that there would need to be separation between the south and north bound lanes and the highway. Commissioner Lemke asked Mr. T obare what his opinion was regarding trucks using the lanes as they currently exist. Mr. T obare stated that speed differential posed the greatest danger. Commissioner Lemke stated Highway 169 is used as a local access in this case and should not be, and he could not support this request. T eny Maurer explained that Highway169 was built to guarantee 65 miles per hour travel speed and that MN/DOT's goal is to eventually eliminate the stop lights through Elk River. Bob LeFavor, 11349 219th Avenue NW, stated that he could not see how a few tandem axel trucks using the auxiliary lanes would interfere with Highway 169 traffic. Dave Sheppard, 18984 Carson Street, asked who would pay for the lanes. Chair Pederson stated that the applicant would pay for the construction. Mr. Sheppard asked why a service road couldn't be built along Highway 169, as a continuation of what is already in place. Mr. Rohlf stated that the applicant has not been able to obtain approval from MN/DOT. Mr. Sheppard stated that allowing the slow-moving trucks to access Highway 169 does not make sense and will cause drivers to panic when they see the truck pulling out across the highway. Rose LeFavor, owner of the subject property, stated she did not feel Mr. Schmidt's proposal is unreasonable and that there is a high level of visibility in this section of the highway. e There being no further public comment, Chair Pederson closed the public hearing. Chair Pederson stated that he has very serious concerns regarding the access issue and that the best scenario would be for no trucks on Highway 169. He stated that he could not support the request based on the major problems which would be created for traffic flow and safety. Commissioner Anderson asked if there are residents on 217th Avenue. Mr. Rohlf stated no, that the road was used by Aggregate Industries to access their shop. Mr. Rohlf stated that Elk River Bituminous may potentially open up gravel sales on their site to other users. Commissioner Lemke stated that he felt the zone change was appropriate since it is compatible with the surrounding land uses, but that he would recommend denial of the conditional use permit because of the access issue. Mr. Rohlf stated that staff recommends denial of both the rezoning and conditional use permit. Mr. Schmidt explained that an alternate access was discussed, but it would involve obtaining an easement from 6 or 7 property owners, with some of them favorable to the idea and some were not. e Commissioner Anderson stated that the frequency/number of trips per day would have to be looked at. He stated he was not in favor of the request based on the fact that the property was not currently zoned for mining on either the zoning map or land use plan. He felt the request posed a public safety issue and that adequate drainage and wetland information has not been provided. Planning Commission Minutes February 25, 2003 Page 4 e Commissioner Offerman asked if information was available on the number of trips per day. Mr. Maurer stated that there were numbers alluded to in the EA W, but he felt there could be more. He explained that the type of trip is the issue - having large, slow-moving trucks entering on to a major highway. He stated that Fridays are not the only concern, but morning and evening rush hour traffic, as well. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MOVED TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUEST BY SCHMIDT GRAVEL MINING FORA ZONE CHANGE TO MINERAL EXCAVATION OVERLAY, CASE NO. ZC 03-01, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE OF THE EXISTING MINING OVERLAY DISTRICT. 2. THE REZONING IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 3. THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT SAFETY ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSED ACCESS ONTO HIGHWAY 169. 4. THERE IS A LACK OF DETAILED INFORMATION REGARDING THE WETLANDS AND DRAINAGE. COMMISSIONER JENSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-1. Commissioner Lemke opposed. e COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST BY SCHMIDT GRAVEL MINING FORA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CASE NO. CU 02-02, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST WAS DENIED. 2. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS OUTSIDE OF THE EXISTING MINING OVERLAY DISTRICT. 3. THE REZONING IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. 4. THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT SAFETY ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSED ACCESS ONTO HIGHWAY 169. 5. THERE IS A LACK OF DETAILED INFORMATION REGARDING THE WETLANDS AND DRAINAGE. 5.3. Request by the City of Elk River for an Ordinance Amendment. Amending Chapter 30. "Land Development Regulations". to Establish a Downtown Development District and Standards. Public Hearing - Case No. OA 03-01 Staff report by Chris Leeseberg. The Planning Commission is asked to consider an amendment to Chapter 30 "Land Development Regulations", to establish a Downtown Development District and Standards. Mr. Leeseberg explained the area to be included in the district. e Chair Pederson asked for clarification on the difference between a Class I restaurant and a Class II restaurant. Ms. McPherson cited the ordinance definitions. Chair Pederson asked if Metro Plains had reviewed the proposed ordinance and whether or not they were comfortable with it. Mr. Leeseberg noted that Metro Plains had reviewed the proposed ordinance and did offer some feedback. Ms. McPherson noted that any redevelopment Planning Commission Minutes Februaty 25, 2003 Page 5 e projects will require Planning Conunission and City Council review and that ultimately, the City will be responsible for what is built. Conunissioner Lemke asked if the standards will apply to the back of the buildings along the river, as well. Ms. McPherson explained that the riverfronts will be considered a "primary fa~ade" . Conunissioner Anderson asked if an overlay district was considered. Ms. McPherson stated that staff feels an overlay would add another layer of "bureaucracy", in that a rezoning would be required. Staff also feels that this is a very- unique part of the city, which calls for its own district. Conunissioner Offerman asked what restrictions would be placed on property owners, if repairs are necessaty. Ms. McPherson stated that this issue needs clarification with the City Attorney before the request is presented to the City Council. She explained the City would encourage maintenance of existing uses, and that a need for repairs should not initiate a full- scale renovation. Chair Pederson opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Pederson closed the public hearing. Conunissioner Lemke asked if the proposed standards would apply if someone wanted to build on the City property between the old cinema building and the Sunshine Depot. Mr. Leeseberg stated yes. e Chair Pederson asked if Comprehensive Task Force has reviewed the downtown area. Ms. McPherson explained that the Task Force is looking at a larger portion of the old core city and has suggested renaming this area to Old Town District. She noted that the Task Force would not be looking at the level of detail proposed in this ordinance amendment. Discussion followed regarding whether or not the downtown development district area should be expanded at this time. The Conunissioners concurred that Lowell Avenue would make a logical boundary- for now, and that the area could be reviewed and expanded at a later time. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER FORAN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ESTABliSH A DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AND STANDARDS, CASE NO. OA 03-01, AND TO INCLUDE THE C2-Z0NED PROPERTY EAST OF LOWELL STREET FROM HIGHWAY 10 SOU1H TO THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER IN THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. COMMISSIONER]ENSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 5.4. Request by the City of Elk River for an Ordinance Amendment. Amending Chapter 30 "Land Development Regulations". Article V "Subdivisions" to Establish a Lot Split Procedure and a Simple Plat Procedure. Public Hearing - Case No. OA 03-02 Staff report by Director of Planning Michele McPherson. The Planning Conunission is asked to consider an ordinance amendment establishing a lot split procedure and that Administrative Subdivisions be submitted and processed as simple plats. Ms. McPherson explained that the lot split procedure would only be used for subdividing currently platted e Planning Commission Minutes Pebru;uy 25, 2003 Page 6 e lots. The simple plat procedure would be used for subdividing property with a "metes and bounds" legal description and only for creating four or fewer lots. Ms. McPherson noted that these platting procedures are consistent with surrounding townships. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance amendment. Chair Pederson opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Pederson closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER JENSON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING A LOT SPLIT PROCEDURE AND A SIMPLE PlAT PROCEDURE, CASE NO. OA 03-02. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 6.1. Update on 2/18/03 CityCDuncilMeeting CDmmissioner Offerman provided an update on the February 18, 2003 City Council meeting. 6.2. CDmprehensive Plan Update by Commissioner Anderson Commissioner Anderson provided an update on the January Comprehensive Plan Task Force meeting. 7. Adiournment -- There being no further business, COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, IJ~~ Debbie Huebner Recording Secretary e