08-24-2004 PC MIN
.
.
.
MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL
TUESDAY, AUGUST 24, 2004
Members Present:
Chair Ropp, Conunissioners Anderson, Curtis, Lemke, Offerman, Pederson
and Stevens
Members Absent:
None
Staff Present:
Michele McPherson, Director of Planning; Scott Harlicker, Senior
Planner; Chris Leeseberg, Planner; Stephen Rohlf, Building &
Environmental Administrator; Rebecca Haug, Environmental Technician;
Debbie Huebner, Recording Secretary
1. Call Meeting To Order
2.
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Planning Conunission
was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chair Ropp.
Consider 8/24/04 Planning Conunission Agenda
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER CURTIS TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 24, 2004 PLANNING
COMMISSION AGENDA WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES:
ITEM 5.2. - CASE NUMBER SHOUlD BE - CU 04-23
ITEM 6.1. - UPDATE ON AUGUST 16,2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING BY
COMMISSIONER LEMKE
ITEM 6.2. - DELETE
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
3. Consider 7/27/04 Planning Conunission Minutes
MOVED BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER OFERMAN TO APPROVE THE JULY 27, 2004 MINUTES.
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
4. Planning Conunission Representative to Attend September City Council Meeting
Conunissioner Anderson will attend the September 20, 2004 City Council meeting.
5.1.
Consider Resolution for TIP District No. 22 for Downtown Revitalization Project -
Catherine Mehelich
Director of Economic Development Catherine Mehelich provided a brief overview of the
proposed Downtown Revitalization Project. She explained that the City Council will hold a
public hearing regarding the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Plan for the project. Prior to
adopting of the TIP plan, the Planning Conunission must determine that the Plan conforms
to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the city as a whole.
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24, 2004
5.2.
Page 2
Staff recommends approval of the resolution as presented.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER CURTIS TO APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 04-01, A
RESOLUTION FINDING A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR
DOWNTOWN PHASE I TAX INCRMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 22
CONFORMS TO mE GENERAL PLANS FOR THE DEVELOPOMENT AND
REDEVELOPMENT OF mE CITY. MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
Request by Schuer. Inc. for Conditional Use Permit for Mineral Excavation. Public Hearing
- Case No. Cu 04-23
Rebecca Haug, Environmental Technician, provided an overview of the mining project
proposed by Schuer, Inc. to mine an additional 5.5 acres of their existing mining site. She
noted that they are proposing to excavate 15 feet below the ground water elevation using a
dragline, and that the site will not be dewatered. Ms. Haug reviewed issues associated with
the project including traffic, groundwater, wedands, and setbacks. She also reviewed the
comments from Liesch Associates, Matt Ledvina of Natural Resource Group, Inc., and the
Wedand Conservation Act Decision for the project. Staff recommends approval of this
request under the conditions contained in conditional use permit attached to the staff report
dated August 24, 2004.
Commissioner Stevens asked for clarification for the term "perched". Ms. Haug explained.
Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Ropp closed
the public hearing.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE
REQUEST BY SCHUER, INe. FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
MINERAL EXCAVATION, CASE NO. CU 04-23, WIm mE CONDITIONS
OUTLINED IN THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PREPARED BY STAFF;
AND TO INCLUDE mE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
L. NO DEWATERING WILL OCCUR FOR MINING ON THE SITE.
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
5.3.
Request by J & B Mining for Conditional Use Permit for Mineral Excavation and Peat
Mining. Public Hearing - Case No. CO 04-21
Request by J & B Mining for Rezoning from A1 (Agricultural Conservation) to ME (Mineral
Excavation Overlay). Public Hearing - Case No. ZC 04-08
5.4.
Building & Environmental Administrator Steve Rohlf explained the request by J & B Mining
to mine 39.42 acres of a 60.23-acre site. He explained that 1,190,000 cubic yards of material
are proposed to be mine, one-third of which will be peat. J & B Mining proposes to
excavate 40 feet below the ground water elevation using a dragline. Mr. Rohlf explained that
restoration and wedand mitigation of this site and the Schuer, Inc. site are tied together. Mr.
Rohlf reviewed issues associated with the request regarding traffic, groundwater, wedands,
and setbacks. He also the reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, Wedand
Conservation Act Decision, and comments by Matthew Ledvina of Natural Resource
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24, 2004
Page 3
Group, Inc. on the project. Staff recommends approval of the request under the conditions
in the conditional use permit attached to the staff report dated August 24, 2004.
Ms. Haug explained the request by J & B Mining for a rezoning of the proposed mining area
from A1 (Agricultural Conservation) to ME (Mineral Excavation Overlay). She stated that
staff recommends approval of the rezoning based on the findings listed in the staff report
dated August 24, 2004.
Commissioner Offerman asked if it would be appropriate to add a condition regarding no
dewatering to this conditional use permit, as well. Mr. Rohlf stated yes. Mr. Rohlf explained
the dragline process that would be used to mine. He noted that if the applicant requested
approval for dewatering, a new review process would be required.
Commissioner Offerman asked if the construction on Highway 169 is related to this request.
Mr. Rohlf stated no, and explained that the new access construction is for a new mining
operation in Livonia Township. He stated that the applicant will use the existing access.
Commissioner Stevens asked how often the mining operations are inspected. Mr. Rohlf
stated that they are inspected prior to work commencing, and then once a year or if a spill
occurs. He noted that they have the right to inspect at the Landfill at any time, but that they
usually inspect it in early June.
Commissioner Ropp asked what kind of assurance the City has that no dewatering will occur
and what mechanism is in place to alert the City if it does.
The consultant for the project explained that in addition to the monitoring, they have done
soil borings to determine whether or not the water table is perched. He explained that while
the mining is taking place, the wells are monitored monthly for contaminants, but also to
monitor the water level.
Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Ropp closed
the public hearing.
Commissioner Stevens stated that he had no issues with the request, but that he would like
to see the City take a proactive approach and set up inspections ahead of time.
Commissioner Offerman stated his support for approval of the conditional use permit and
rezorung.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER STEVENS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE
REQUEST BY J & B MINING FORA REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY
FROM A1 (AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION) TO ME (MINERAL
EXCAVATION OVERLAY). MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE
REQUEST BY J & B MINING FORA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
MINERAL AND PEAT EXCAVATION, CASE NO. CU 04-21, WITH THE
CONDTIONS OUTLINED IN THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PREPARED BY STAFF; AND TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24, 2004
Page 4
L. NO DEWATERING WILL OCCUR FOR MINING ON THE SITE.
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
5.5.
Request by Vanman Architects & Builders for Conditional Use Penmt for Expansion of
Existing Building. Public Hearing - Case No. CO 04-22
Senior Planner Scott Harlicker reviewed the request by Vanman Companies for a conditional
use penmt to allow LeFebvre Trucking to construct a 70'x100' storage building. He
discussed issues related to setbacks, building elevations, and connection to the City's sanitary
sewer and water system.
Commissioner Curtis asked why a 13-foot side yard setback is being proposed. Mr.
Harlicker stated that the reason is based on the layout of site, and that since the site is part of
the LeFebvre PUD, the setback can be allowed. He noted that the Fire Chief has reviewed
the site pan and is comfortable with the distance between the two buildings.
Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Ropp closed
the public hearing.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE
REQUEST BY VANMAN ARCHITECTS & BUILDERS FORA CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT TO EXPAND THE LEFEBVRE TRUCKING FACILITY, CASE
NO. CU 04-22, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THE COLOR OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING SHALL MATCH THE
EXISTING BUILDING.
2. THE APPLICANT SHALL HOOK-UP TO CITY WATER AND SANITARY
SEWER.
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
5.6. Request by 10-24 Developers for Preliminary Approval (Wmdsor Meadows). Public Hearing
- Case No. P 04-18
Planner Chris Leeseberg stated that the applicant, 10-24 Developers, have requested that
their request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide approximately 64 acres into 35 single
family lot cluster development be tabled to the September 28, 2004 meeting. Mr. Leeseberg
stated that the public hearing would be opened for those present so that they may express
their comments at this time. He reviewed the location of the property, zoning/land use,
existing conditions, overview of the project, density, lot and street layout, landscaping, and
park dedication recommendation. Mr. Leeseberg stated that staff has concerns regarding
the following issues:
. Whether or not the project establishes a theme to qualify for density bonuses
. Weclands into property lines
. Grading/septic issues
. Easement for future road connection
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24, 2004
Page 5
Mr. Leeseberg reviewed photographs of the Jackson Meadows development near Stillwater
as an example of creating a theme. He also reviewed the road connections recommended by
staff.
Commissioner Lemke asked if the trails in this plat would connect to other plats. Mr.
Leeseberg stated no, but there has been some discussion regarding a private trail to the
north. Ms. McPherson explained the location of the trails and past history of the trails in
adjacent plats.
Commissioner Stevens asked where the septic system will be located and if there is adequate
room for it. Mr. Leeseberg stated that the system will be located on Outlot B and that the
Gty Engineer has several issues with the location of the septic system. Commissioner
Stevens asked if this plat would link to Ogden Street. Mr. Leeseberg stated yes. He noted
that there would be a sharp turn in the road connection. Mr. Leeseberg explained staff's
proposal for location of the cul-de-sac.
Chair Ropp opened the public hearing.
Renee Larson, 13796 211th Avenue - Stated that she owns 10-acre piece adjacent to the
proposed development. She has a concern as to how the extension of Ogden Street would
affect her property if she were to develop it in the future. She also had concerns regarding
the community septic system and how it functions. Ms. McPherson explained that the
system would function very similar to an individual system and that the areas that are active
are rotated so that some areas of the system rest for a time period. Ms. Larson asked how
many homes will be on the system. Ms. McPherson stated that there will be 35 homes.
Shiela Dokken, 13563 212th Avenue - Stated that she was present representing the
Wmdsor Park Homeowners' Association. She stated her concerns regarding construction
traffic, safety of children, lack of vegetation on the site, dust, and trees. She stated that the
Homeowners' Association has a concern with the plat being named Windsor Meadows.
They felt that the proposed development should be consistent with the Windsor Park
addition and be required to have the same standards.
Brad Erickson, 13523 212th Avenue - Felt that traffic should be re-routed to keep it out of
Wmdsor Park. He asked what the Gty's long-range plans are for County Road 1 and if there
any plans for controlling or stopping growth. Ms. McPherson stated that the County plans
to upgrade the County Road 1 from the golf course north to the Gty limits sometime
between 2005-2006. She stated that development of this area is consistent with the existing
zoning, which has been in place since 1988. No changes are proposed for this area in the
newly-revised Comprehensive Plan. She stated that the Gty Council has no plans for any
type of development moratorium and that development will continue to be allowed in
accordance with the existing land use and zoning. She noted that current Gty growth is 5
percent per year.
Marquerite Wedel, 13483 212th Avenue - Asked if there has always been a plan for 212th
Avenue to be a through-street. Ms. McPherson stated yes.
Pam Erickson, 13523 212th Avenue - Asked if the northern roads in the plat could be
developed first, to keep the construction traffic out of Windsor Park. Ms. McPherson stated
that regardless of which area is developed first, someone's neighborhood will be impacted.
She stated that staff will take their concerns under advisement for possible traffic calming
methods. Ms. Erickson asked if the Gty was suggesting that this development use the
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24, 2004
Page 6
theme of all white houses, as shown in the example provided by staff. Ms. McPherson
stated that the photographs were provided as an example of an architectural theme.
Chair Ropp stated that the public hearing would be continued to the September 28, 2004
Planning Commission meeting.
Mr. Leeseberg asked for comments from the Commission regarding architectural themes.
Discussion followed regarding what elements constitute a theme. Commissioner Offerman
stated he did not want to design the project for the developer. Commissioner Curtis
suggested looking at exterior finishes, as they do for townhomes. Commissioner Anderson
did not feel it was appropriate to get that specific. He felt that a theme should have
significant ties to the adjacent landscape or uses, or it could be unique in itself.
Commissioner Offerman stated that the number of amenities and design standards
contribute to a theme. Ms. McPherson stated that it appears the consensus of the
Commission was that an architectural theme consists of a combination of elements and
amenities. She felt that it is necessary for developers to illustrate a theme, as opposed to a
written narrative.
Commissioner Lemke asked what the City receives back when a density bonus is allowed.
Ms. McPherson explained that when density bonuses are allowed, open space is permanently
preserved and can be linked to other open spaces, which also provides wildlife connections.
She stated that a trail should have been provided along 212m Avenue, but that they did not
foresee the possibility of inter-connected trails between cluster developments. She felt that
there was some merit in creating a larger loop trail and that some credit should be given for
it.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC
HEARING FOR THE REQUEST BY 10-24 DEVELOPERS, LLC FOR
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF WINDSOR MEADOWS, TO THE
SEPTEMBER 28, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
5.7.
Request by City of Elk River for Ordinance Amendment to Land Use Regulations Regarding
Signs - Section 30-866.30-991 (R1a District). 30-1562 (A1 District). and 30-1565 (AR
District). Public Hearing - Case No. OA 04-02
Planner Chris Leeseberg stated that the Commission is asked to consider an Ordinance
Amendment to the Land Use Regulations regarding signs. Mr. Leeseberg reviewed the
details of the proposed language changes to the ordinance.
Commissioner Anderson asked if Item 8 of the amendment affects non-residential uses or
apartments. Ms. McPherson stated no.
Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. There being no further public comment, Chair Ropp
closed the public hearing.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE
REGULATIONS REGARDING SIGNS, CASE NO. OA 04-02, AS PRESENTED
.
.
.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24, 2004
Page 7
IN MODIFIED lANGUAGE DISTRIBUTED BY STAFF AT THIS EVENING'S
MEETING.
Commissioner Offerman asked if this amendment was initiated in response to the request
for an additional development sign for Lafayette Woods. Mr. Leeseberg stated yes.
Commissioner Offerman expressed his concern that there are entrance monument signs in
the City that are not on arterial streets, which is in conflict with the ordinance. He stated he
does not oppose more than one development sign, but that he would like to see language
included that the sign must be architecturally designed and of materials that are aesthetically
pleasing. He stated that he would not want to see more than on sign, if the sign is a 4'x8'
plywood sign attached to two posts.
Ms. McPherson stated that 4'x8' plywood signs are typically temporaty for construction or
leasing purposes. She asked what the Commission's minimum expectations were, and at
what point do they wish to require a certain level of signage. She stated that it would be
difficult to regulate aesthetics and to incorporate that into an ordinance. Mr. Offerman
stated he would like to see a distinction made between entrance monument signs and cheap
plywood construction or leasing signs.
Commissioner Anderson stated that he did not feel it was appropriate to legislate materials
for all signage districts throughout the City.
Commissioner Stevens concurred with Commissioner Offerman's comments. He stated
that minimum standards should be established for uniformity of monument signs.
Commissioner Lemke asked if there are any standards in place now. Ms. McPherson stated
that staff reviews requests to ensure that they meet the ordinance requirements for size
(square footage) and setbacks, unless they are part of a Planned Unit Development with
specific standards for size, materials, and location. He asked if standards were established
for these signs, would the standards apply to all signs throughout the city. Ms. McPherson
stated yes.
Commissioner Offerman asked why not simply make a distinction between residential
entrance monument signs and other types of signs. Ms. McPherson stated that they are all
"signs" .
Commissioner Curtis stated that the city she is employed by recendy adopted an ordinance
requiring any ground sign to be a monument sign, and to require certain standards for
construction materials, such as brick, masonry, or similar to the exterior finish of the
building.
Ms. McPherson suggested that the Commission approve the ordinance amendment as
proposed at this time, and the Commission could either tour the city or staff could provide
photos of neighborhood development signs before making a decision on whether or not
they wished to fine-tune the ordinance as it relates to materials. Issues such as aesthetics and
minimum standards for residential, commercial and industrial developments could be
discussed at the October workshop meeting and a second amendment could be processed.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WITHDREW THE MOTION TO APPROVE.
COMMISSIONER LEMKE WITHDREW THE SECOND.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24, 2004
Page 8
.
MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER CURTIS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE
PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE
REGUlATIONS REGARDING SIGNS, CASE NO. OA 04-02, AS PRESENTED
IN MODIFIED LANGUAGE DISTRIBUTED BY STAFF AT THIS EVENING'S
MEETING.
Commissioner Stevens stated that he was uncomfortable voting on a motion that the
Commission plans to change. Ms. McPherson stated that the City Council has called a
special meeting to deal with this issue and asked that the Commission act on it tonight. She
stated that the issues could be split by acting on Item 10 and leaving Item 8 for a later date.
MOTION CARRIED 4-2. Commissioners Stevens and Anderson opposed.
6.1. Update on August 16.2004 City Council Meeting
Commissioner Lemke provided an update on the August 16, 2004 City Council meeting.
7. Adiournment
There being no further business, MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND
SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO ADJOURN THE MEETING.
MOTION CARRIED 6-0.
The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
. Respectfully submitted,
IJ~.~
Debbie Huebner
Recording Secretary
.