Loading...
03-23-2004 PC MIN . . . MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT LIONS PARK CENTER TUESDAY, MARCH 23, 2004 Members Present: Chair Ropp, Commissioners Anderson, Curtis, Lemke, Offerman and Stevens Members Absent: Commissioner Pederson Staff Present: Michele McPherson, Director of Planning; Scott Harlicker, Senior Planner; Chris Leeseberg, Planner; Terry 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 Ropp. 2. Consider3/23/04 Planning Commission Agenda MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS TO APPROVE THE MARCH 23,2004 PlANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 3. Consider 2/24/04 Planning Commission Minutes MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 24,2004 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 4. Planning Commission Representative to Attend April City Council Meeting Commissioner Offerman will attend the April 19 , 2004 City Council meeting. 5.1. Request by Jeffrey Roehl for Zone Change to Rezone Property from R1c (Single Family Residential). to R3 (Townhouse/Multiple Family Residential). Public Hearing - Case No. ZC 04-03 The staff report for this item was presented by Planner Chris Leeseberg. Jeffrey Roehl requests a zone change fromR1c (Single Family Residential) to R3 (Townhouse/Multi- Family Residential) for property at 732 Vemon Street. Mr. Leeseberg stated that the single family residence has been divided into three separate living quarters. He reviewed the surrounding land uses, density issues, parking, garage requirements, building design and construction standards. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial of the request for the zone change based on the findings listed in the staff report. Commissioner Stevens asked if the lower unit meets the fire code requirements. Mr. Leeseberg stated that he did not have that information. . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 2 Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. Jeff Roehl, 20663 Ulysses Street, applicant, stated that when he recently purchased the home, it was already set up as a rental property. The lower level has a few steps to a walk- out entry and does have some egress windows, but that the three additional bedrooms do not. Mr. Roehl stated that he plans to put in egress windows. He stated that the garage space could either be separated or a detached garage could be constructed if required for approval. Mr. Roehl stated that he felt that because of they way the entrances are set up, it would be impossible to convert the home back to a single family residence. He stated that if he could not use the property as a rental, he would sell it. Mr. Roehl noted that he has spoken with his neighbors and two are supportive and the others are indifferent. Commissioner Curtis asked staff if the property were resold, would the City check to make sure it was not used as a multi-tenant rental. Mr. Leeseberg stated that these types of issues are complaint-driven, and that the City does not typically inspect homes around the City for violations of this type. Commissioner Curtis asked if the property was being rented at this time. Mr. Roehl stated that he has one family renting one unit at this time and that he checked with Director of Planning Michele McPherson and was told he would be allowed to have one rental unit. There being no further public comment, Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. Chair Ropp as if one attached garage was required for each unit. Mr. Leeseberg stated yes. Commissioner Stevens stated that he was not in favor of approving the request. Commissioner Anderson stated that he concurred with staff's recommendation and would :ecommend denial based on the issue of spot zoning, and also the parking and garage space Issues. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUEST BY JEFFREY ROEHL FORA REZONING TO R3 (TOWNHOUSE/MULTIFAMILY, CASE NO. ZC 04-03 BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY DOES NOT ACT AS A TRANSITION BETWEEN SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICTS. 2. "SPOT ZONING" IS NOT RECOMMENDED. 3. THE SITE CANNOT PROVIDE THE REQUIRED PARKING SO THAT IT FUNCTIONS PROPERLY. 4. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE HAS ONLY ONE ATTACHED GARAGE. THREE WOULD BE REQUIRED. 5. THE EXCISTING STSRUCTURE COES NOT COMPLY WITH DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE R3 DISTRICT. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 3 5.2. Request by Guardian Angels/Evans Place for a Conditional Use Permit for Pullman Place Cooperative Senior Housing. Public Hearing - Case No. CO 04-05 The staff report for this item was presented by Senior Planner Scott Harlicker. Guardian Angels requests a conditional use permit to construct a 65-unit senior housing cooperative in the Elk River Station Planned Unit Development. Mr. Harlicker reviewed the site design, building elevations, parking and access, landscaping, and exterior building materials. Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit with the five conditions listed in the staff report. Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. Mike Trossen of Trossen Wright Architects, Inc. , provided samples of exterior building materials for the Planning Commission and explained where each of the materials would be used. There being no further public comment, Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. Commissioner Anderson asked if the private road would impact the access to the proposed daycare. Mr. Harlicker stated that the daycare would be part of the commercial office area site and would have a separate access. Commissioner Offerman asked if staff was satisfied with the color samples provided by the applicant. Mr. Harlicker stated yes. Commissioner Anderson asked if the materials presented met the standards for diversity. Mr. Harlicker stated that the different finishes offered provides the variations required in the standards. Commissioner Curtis asked if the additional boulevard trees proposed by staff could potentially be a visual obstruction. Mr. Harlicker stated that the trees would not be located in the site lines. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY GUARDIAN ANGELS FORA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A 65-UNIT SENIOR HOUSING COOPERATIVE IN THE ELK RIVER STATION PUD, CASE NO. CU 04-05 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ALL COMMENTS OF THE CITY ENGINEER BE ADDRESSED 2. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SHALL BE REVISED TO INCLUDE STREET TREES ALONG 171ST AND 172ND AVENUES. 3. THE ADJACENT STREETS SHALL BE SIGNED "NO PARKING" PER DIRECTION OF THE FIRE CHIEF. 4. THE LOOP IN FRONT OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING SHALL BE SIGNED "NO PARKING". 5. EMERGENCY ACCESS SHALL BE PROVIDED FROM POLK STREET PER DIRECTION OF THE FIRE CHIEF. MOTION CARRIED 5-1. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON OPPOSED. . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 4 5.3. Request by S & A Family Investments. LLLP for Preliminary Plat Approval of Woodland Hills. Public Hearing - Case No. P 04-02 The staff report for this item was presented by Senior Planner Scott Harlicker. S & A Family Investments requests preliminary plat approval for Woodland Hills to subdivide 50.95 acres into 111 single family lots and 7 outlots. Mr. Harlicker reviewed access and street connections, sidewalk locations, street layout, landscaping, and park dedication requirements. Mr. Harlicker then reviewed the findings from the Subdivision Ordinance for approval of the preliminary plat. Commissioner Anderson asked what was the purpose of Outlot G. Mr. Harlicker stated that it is a drainage area which will be split and added to the adjacent lots. Chair Ropp asked for clarification on the condemnation proposed by the Park and Recreation Commission. Director of Planning Michele McPherson explained that 1.89 acres above and beyond the 10 percent land dedication would be required in order to maintain a 200-foot buffer. The Park and Recreation Commission is recommending that the Gty negotiate the sale of this property at a fair market price, and if no agreement can be reach, that the Gty proceed with condemnation of the 1.89 acres. Mr. Harlicker explained the difference between the two buffer layouts and distances from property line to property line along the buffer zone. Commissioner Anderson asked what the purpose of Outlot C would be. Mr. Harlicker stated that the parcel is not large enough for a lot and would need to be combined with the adjacent lot. Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. Scott Breuer, representing the applicants, referenced the Park and Recreation memo dated September 10, 2003 regarding the buffer being between the homes and the trail. He explained that widths of the proposed buffer along the east property line in both the submitted proposal and a modified plan. He stated that they are willing to make the buffer work, but that it will require them to be more creative in the home designs. Commissioner Anderson asked if the buffer is measured from the trail or from the property line. Mr. Breuer stated that the buffer zone is measured from the property line. Commissioner Anderson asked if Mr. Breuer knew where the homes will be located on each lot at this time. Mr. Breuer stated yes, that the grading plan shows the potential house pad locations. Commissioner Offerman asked for clarification on the differences between the two plans. Mr. Breuer explained. Mr. Harlicker noted that there is no difference in the total number of lots, just in the location of the lots. John Kuester, representing the Park and Recreation Commission, stated that the Park and Recreation Commission is willing to purchase the additional property in order to achieve a 200-foot buffer, but that they have recommended condemnation if negations are not successful. He stated that the Commission has concerns regarding the density, deforestation and elevations, and that the Commission does not feel this property is suitable for the scale of development proposed by the applicant and recommends that the Planning Commission recommend denial. . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 5 Jim Nord, 19165 Hudson Circle, joint applicant, stated that he did not feel they should be held to any higher standards than other developers of wooded properties have been such as Lafayette Woods. He stated that in 1993, his family granted a 70-foot utility easement to the City which was clear-cut by the City. Steve Parker, 19530 Albany Circle, stated that he feels it will be a disaster to develop the property as proposed and did not see why the City was willing to give up such a valuable resource. Neil Christy, 19488 Boston Street, expressed his concern for traffic and the narrow street width. City Engineer T eny Maurer explained that the streets will be the same width as those in Nordic Hills and Nordic Woods. He stated that the developer of Nordic Hills requested to have the widened street access and median at County Road 1; it was not a requirement of the City. The City agreed to allow the access and he anticipated that a similar access would be done for Woodland Hills. Mike Niziolek, 12275 Rush Circle, representing the Park and Recreation Commission, stated that he feels this is a priceless opportunity to save a significant forest. There being no further public comment, Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. Commissioner Anderson stated that even though this proposal is less dense than the previous proposal, he still felt there would be a significant impact to the environment of the area. He stated that he will vote to oppose the plat because of the physical characteristics of the property including the trees, vegetation, and topography. He stated that he felt the dev~loped should be able to come up with a more creative plan with less impact on the enVIronment. Commissioner Stevens stated that he concurred with Commissioner Anderson's comments. He did not feel the site was suitable for the level of development being proposed. He stated that the developer needs to work around the topography and try to maintain the environmental characteristics. Commissioner Stevens stated that preservation of trees should go beyond a 200-foot buffer. Commissioner Ropp stated that he concurred that the site is not suitable for the density proposed. He stated that the topography of the site will be changed entirely and that he is not in favor of approving the request. Commissioner Lemke stated that the request complies with the R1c standards. He stated that if the Commission denies this plat, they are treating it different than the adjacent plats were treated. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CURTIS TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUEST BY S & A FAMILY INVESTMENTS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF WOODLAND HILLS, CASE NO. P 04-02, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO TOPOGRAPHY, SOILS, VEGETATION, SUSCEPTIBILITY TO EROSION AND SILTATION, SUSCEPTIBILITY TO . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 5.4. 5.5. 5.6. 5.7. Page 6 FLOODING, AND DRAINAGE ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE AND DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT AND USES CONTEMPLATED. 2. BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF GRADING REQUIRED AND THE LARGE NUMBER OF MATURE TREES THAT WILL BE REMOVED, THE PROPOSED SUBDMSION WILL CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-1. Commissioner Lemke opposed. Request by Menard. Inc. for a Land Use Map Amendment to Change the Land Use of Certain Property from MR (Medium Density Residential) to HB (Highway Business). Public Hearing - Case No. LU 04-01 Request by Menard. Inc. for a Zone Change to Rezone Certain Property from Rlc (Single Family Residential) to PUD (planned Unit Development). Public Hearing - Case No. ZC 04-02 Request by Menard. Inc. for Conditional Use Pennit for an Expansion of the Menards Facility. Public Hearing - Case No. CU 04-04 Request by Menard. Inc. for Preliminaty Plat Approval of Menards Addition. Public Hearing - Case No. P 04-03 Senior Planner Scott Harlicker explained that Menard, Inc. is requesting a land use amendment, rezoning, conditional use pennit and preliminaty plat in order to allow an expansion of their lumber yard, including a 67,700 square foot storage building and a covered garden center. Menards will be purchasing Outlot A of Hillside Estates 10th Addition, and adding a strip of Lot 1, Block 1 Northbound Crossing and replatting them with the existing lot as Menards Addition. Mr. Harlicker reviewed the existing land use and zoning and the impacts of the proposed land use and Zone change. He then reviewed the proposed 67,773 square foot warehouse/storage building, canopy for the new garden center, relocation of the emergency access, and construction of a new public access into the lumber yard. He noted that additional landscaping will be planted and the parking lot layout will be modified to accommodate the new flow of truck traffic through the lot. Mr. Harlicker noted that there are no significant issues associated with the plat and that park dedication requirements were previously satisfied with the Hillside 8th plat. Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. Marv Prochaska, representing Menards, stated that he was present to answer any questions from the Planning Commission. John Kuester, 19824 York Street, NW, stated that the Park and Recreation Commission requests that the Planning Commission recommend that an analysis is done of the trees located in the 50-foot buffer strip, to detennine what should be saved and what could be taken out and that an understory of white pines be planted to enhance the buffer. Melissa McColloch, 19416 Dodge Street, read a letter from Arthur Jackett, resident at 19435 Dodge Street, expressing his opposition to the addition to Menards. Mr. Jackett's . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 7 letter addressed negative impact on property values, tree replacement for trees in the buffer zone which were impacted by the construction ($500 fine), noise suppression of audio loudspeakers, provision for green space and landscaping with trees 10-15 feet in height, directing lighting downward, restriction of truck traffic on Dodge Street, impact on sewer systems, and flooding. Ms. McCulloch stated that she did not feel the traffic impacts would be lessened as suggested by staff. A resident at 19333 Dodge Street asked if their residential development would be rezoned as part of the commercial PUD zone change. Mr. Harlicker stated that only Oudot A of Hillside Estates 10m Addition would be included in the commercial PUD rezoning. The resident asked who would maintain the green space. Mr. Harlicker stated that Menards would be responsible for maintenance. Terry Askin, 19204 Dodge Street, asked how far it was from the south property line to the north lot line of the existing homes. Director of Planning McPherson stated that it was approximately 480 feet. Mr. Askin asked where the runoff would go. City Engineer T eny Maurer stated that runoff will drain to the pond behind the Goodwill building. Mr. Askin questioned if anything would be done to protect the view of the residents from the Menards addition. Marv Prochaska of Menards stated that the residents will only see the gable of the roof and will see vel}' little of the new addition. Mr. Askin asked if there would be outdoor speakers on the new addition. Mr. Prochaska stated there will no longer be any outside speakers. Michael Brastad, 19428 Dodge Street, asked why the fencing is being moved and how far south will it be moved. Senior Planner Harlicker stated that the fence needs to be moved in order to get around the building and that it will be moved approximately 35 feet. Mr. Brastad asked what the additional lot would be used for. Mr. Harlicker stated that the lot would serve as a buffer for the residential homes and that it would likely stay as it is. Ms. McPherson stated that the Planning Commission could recommend that some additional hardwoods and conifers be planted on the lot. Mr. Prochaska stated that the lot might be sold as a residential lot. Ms. McPherson stated that the lot is included in the commercial PUD zoning request and could not be used for residential purposes if the rezoning is approved. Mike Brastad asked what would happed around the pond. He stated that he felt there should be some consequence if some of the trees in the buffer zone were lost due to the construction, including replacement and future maintenance of the buffer. Terry Askin asked if there were any provisions to address litter and maintenance of landscaping. Mr. Harlicker stated that these issues would be addressed in the same manner as other commercial conditional use permits. City Engineer T eny Maurer stated that the retaining wall will be similar to the one by 193rd Avenue. The applicant will submit plans that will be reviewed by staff prior to construction. Mr. Maurer noted that there will be some trees along Dodge Street that might have to be removed in order to provide utility boxes and snow storage, as well as a strip of grass that will need to be maintained. John Kuester, representing the Park and Recreation Commission, asked that attention be paid to the contents of the buffer strip and that the Commission felt successive layers of green space should be required including a grassy area and various types of vegetation. . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 8 There being no further public comment, Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. Commissioner Offerman stated that he had concerns with a commercial development located across from a residential neighborhood and felt that a condition should be included to require that the applicant meet the current Business Park standards for the building exterior which faces the residences (at least 30 percent other materials). He felt there was an opportunity to enhance the south wall, as well. Mr. Prochaska stated that he has agreed to "dress up" the back of the building. Commissioner Anderson asked staff how the Commission could ensure the vegetation in the buffer zone was addressed. Ms. McPherson suggested that Condition #3 could be modified to include that a forester evaluate the trees in the buffer zone, and that an understory of white pines be provided per the forester's recommendation. Commissioner Lemke suggested that language be included to require planting of additional trees in the southerly point of Outlot A and that trees be planted below the retaining wall as well. Mr. Prochaska asked for clarification. Commissioner Lemke asked if would be possible to randomly spread out the trees located by the retaining wall. Mr. Prochaska stated that the trees could be planted in tiers. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY MENARD, INC. TO AMEND THE LAND USE PLAN FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM MR (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) TO HB (HIGHWAY BUSINESS) BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. THE DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN HAS IDENTIFIED A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL PROPERTY GUIDED AS HIGHWAY BUSINESS. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT MEETS THAT NEED AND ALLOWS FOR THE UPDATING OF AN EXISTING BUSINESS SO THAT IT CAN REMAIN COMPETITIVE. 2. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CONTIGUOUS WITH PROPERTY THAT IS CURRENTLY GUIDED HIGHWAY BUSINESS. 3. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE AFFECT ON ADJACENT RESIDENCES. IT WILL HAVE A POSITIVE AFFECT IN THAT IT WILL ALLOW THE CREATION OF A 140 FOOT WIDE BUFFER BETWEEN THE RESIDENCES ON THE EAST SIDE OF DODGE STREET AND MENARDS. IT WILL ALSO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ON DODGE STREET; THE TRAFFIC ASSOCIATED WITH THE NINE LOTS APPROVED FOR OUTLOT A WILL NOT BE CREATED BECAUSE THE LOTS WILL NOT BE PLATTED. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CURTIS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY MENARD, INC. FOR REZONE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM R1C (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) TO PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 9 1. THE PROPOSED REZONING TO PUD IS CONSISTENT THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF HIGHWAY BUSINESS. 2. THE DESIGN OF THE PUD, AS WELL AS THE VEGETATION TO BE PRESERVED AND PROPOSED SCREENING, WILL REDUCE THE IMPACT ON NEIGHBORING RESIDENCES. 3. THE REZONING WILL REDUCED THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ON DODGE STREET. THE NINE RESIDENCES THAT WOULD BE LOCATED ON DODGE STREET WILL NOT BE CONSTRUCTED, THEREFORE, THE ASSOCIATED TRAFFIC GENERATED BY THOSE RESIDENCES WILL NOT OCCUR. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MENARDS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT: (1) WILL NOT ENDANGER, INJURE OR DETRIMENTALLY AFFECT THE USE AND ENJOYMENT OF OTHER PROPERTY IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OR THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS, COMFORT, CONVENIENCE OR GENERAL WELFARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE CITY. (2) WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. (3) WILL NOT IMPEDE THE NORMAL AND ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF SURROUNDING VACANT PROPERTY. (4) WILL BE SERVED ADEQUATELY BY AND WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES INCLUDING STREETS, POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION, DRAINAGE, REFUSE DISPOSAL, WATER AND SEWER SYSTEMS, PARKS AND SCHOOLS; AND WILL NOT, IN PARTICULAR, CREATE TRAFFIC CONGESTION OR INTERFERENCE WITH TRAFFIC ON ADJACENT AND NEIGHBORING PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES. (5) WILL NOT INVOLVE USES, ACTMTIES, PROCESSES, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND CONDITIONS OF OPERATION THAT WILL BE DETRIMENTAL TO ANY PERSONS OR PROPERTY BECAUSE OF EXCESSIVE TRAFFIC, NOISE, SMOKE, FUMES, GLARE, ODORS, DUST OR VIBRATIONS. (6) WILL NOT RESULT IN THE DESTRUCTION, LOSS OR DAMAGE OF A NATURAL, SCENIC OR HISTORIC FEATURE OF MAJOR IMPORTANCE. . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 10 (7) WILL FULLY COMPLY WITH ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CODE, INCLUDING ANY APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A LICENSE OR PERMIT TO ESTABLISH AND OPERATE THE PROPOSED USE IN THE CITY. AND, THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ALL COMMENTS OF THE CITY ENGINEER BE ADDRESSED. 2. THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BE AMENDED TO REFLECT THE AMENDED PUD. 3. A 50 FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPED BUFFER BE PRESERVED ALONG DODGE STREET AND, THAT THE TREES IN THE BUFFER ZONE BE EVALUATED BY A FORESTER, AND THAT AN UNDERSTORY OF WHITE PINES BE PROVIDED PER THE FORESTER'S RECOMMENDATION. 4. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN BE REVISED TO SHOW OVERSTORY TREES ON THE 2 RELOCATED PARKING LOT ISLANDS. 5. NO OUTSIDE LOUDSPEAKERS ARE ALLOWED. 6. NO STORAGE OR DISPLAY OF MATERIAL OR GOODS ASSOCIATED WITH THE GARDEN CENTER SHALL OCCUR OUTSIDE OF THE GARDEN CENTER. 7. THE NEW EMERGENCY GATE SHALL BE 20 FEET WIDE AND A 20 FOOT WIDE DRIVE AISLE SHALL BE MAINTAINED AROUND THE BUILDING. 8. ANY ITEM OR CONDITION FOUND THAT INDICATES THE SITE IS LIKELY TO YIELD INFORMATION IMPORTANT TO PRE-HISTORY OR HISTORY SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE CITY IMMEDIATELY. FURTHER, THE CITY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO STOP WORK AUTHORIZED IN ITS APPROVAL UNTIL THE SITE IS APPROPRIATELY INVESTIGATED AND WORK IS AUTHORIZED TO CONTINUE BY THE CITY. 9. STORAGE OF MATERIALS OR PLACEMENT RACK SYSTEMS SHALL NEED NOT IMPEDE EMERGENCY ACCESS. 10. ALL BUILDING EXTERIOR SURFACES INCLUDING THE FENCE WHAT MEET THE BUSINESS PARK STANDARDS FOR EXTERIOR SURFACES. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISIONER ANDERSON TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: 11. THAT THE LANDSCAPING PLAN BE REVISED TO PROVIDE A MORE . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 11 NATURAL ARRANGEMENT OF PLANTINGS NEAR THE RETAINING WALL, AND THAT THE ADDITIONAL PLANTINGS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE SOUTHERLY NON-TRED PORTION OF THE BUFFER STRIP ALONG THE FENCE. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PlAT FOR MENARDS ADDITION BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: (1) THE PROPOSED SUBDMSION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING REGUlATIONS (ARTICLE VI OF THIS CHAPTER) AND CONFORMS IN ALL RESPECTS WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CODE, INCLUDING THE ZONING REGUlATIONS AND THIS ARTICLE. (2) THE PROPOSED SUBDMSION IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL APPLICABLE GENERAL AND SPECIALIZED CITY, COUNTY, AND REGIONAL PLANS, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. (3) THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO TOPOGRAPHY, SOILS, VEGETATION, SUSCEPTIBILITY TO EROSION AND SILTATION, SUSCEPTIBILITY TO FLOODING, AND DRAINAGE ARE SUITABLE FOR THE TYPE AND DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT AND USES CONTEMPlATED. (4) THE PROPOSED SUBDMSION MAKES ADEQUATE PROVISION FOR WATER SUPPLY, STORM DRAINAGE, SEWAGE TRANSPORTATION, EROSION CONTROL AND ALL OTHER SERVICES, FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS OTHERWISE REQUIRED IN THIS ARTICLE. (5) THE PROPOSED SUBDMSION WILL NOT CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. (6) THE PROPOSED SUBDMSION WILL NOT CONFLICT WITH EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR WITH EASEMENTS ESTABLISHED BY JUDGMENT OF A COURT. (7) THE PROPOSED SUBDMSION WILL NOT HAVE AN UNDUE AND ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT OF NEIGHBORING lAND. (8) THE PROPOSED SUBDMSION IS NOT PREMATURE. A SUBDIVISION IS PREMATURE IF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING EXISTS: A. lACK OF ADEQUATE STORMW ATER DRAINAGE. B. lACK OF ADEQUATE ROADS. C. lACK OF ADEQUATE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS. D. lACK OF ADEQUATE OFF-SITE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS OR SUPPORT SYSTEMS. . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 12 AND, THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ALL COMMENTS OF THE CITY ENGINEER SHALL BE ADDRESSED. 2. ANY TREES OFF SITE OR ON SITE, NEAR THE LIMIT OF GRADING THAT ARE TO BE PRESERVED SHALL BE FENCED WITH A SNOW FENCE AT THE DRIP LINE TO PREVENT GRADING, COMPACTION, OR STORAGE OF EQUIPMENT, DEBRIS OR MATERIALS. STAFF SHALL INSPECT FENCING PRIOR TO CLEARING OR GRADING COMMENCING. 3. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. 4. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT FEE FOR OUTLOT A, IN THE AMOUNT REQUIRED BY THE CITY AT THE TIME OF FINAL PLAT, BE PAID PRIOR TO RELEASING THE PLAT FOR RECORDING. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 5.8. Request by the City of Elk River for a Land Use Map Amendment for Certain Property to Change the Land Use From CC (Community Commercial) to LI (Light Industrial), Public Hearing - Case No. LU 04-02 The staff report for this item was presented by Director of Planning Michele McPherson. The City of Elk River requests that the Planning Commission consider a land use amendment for City-owned property from CC (Community Commercial) to LI (Light Industrial) located in the southwest comer of Business Center Drive and Joplin Street (Lot 1, Block 2, Country Crossing Business Center). She explained that the City purchased the property as tax forfeit in 2001 to provide future additional business park development. The City has a proposal for a 20,000 square foot multi-tenant industrial building to be developed by Orluck Industries. In order for the development to move forward, the underlying land uses must be consistent with the Business Park permitted uses. Approval of the land use amendment would allow uses such as light manufacturing, research and development laboratories, offices, mail order operations, as showroom space, and repair and maintenance uses excluding auto repair. Staff recommends approval of the land use amendment. Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER CURTIS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER FOR A LAND USE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2 COUNTRY CROSSING BUSINESS CENTER FROM CC (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL) TO LI (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL), BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. THE PROPOSED LAND USE IS CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING LAND USES. . . . Planning Commission March 23, 2004 Page 13 2. THE PROPOSED lAND USE WOULD NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING lAND USES. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 6. Other Business 6.1. Update on 3/15/04 Cio/Council Meeting Commissioner Ropp provided an update on the March 15, 2004 City Council meeting. 8. Adiournment There being no further business, MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKETO ADJOURN THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /)JJu ~ Debbie Huebner Recording Secretary