Loading...
12-28-2004 PC MIN . . . MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL TUESDAY, DECEMBER 28, 2004 Members Present: Chair Ropp, Commissioners Anderson, Lemke, Offerman, Scott, Stevens and Westgaard Members Absent: None Staff Present: Michele McPherson, Director of Planning; Scott Harlicker, Senior Planner; Chris Leeseberg, Planner; 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. Consider 12/28/04 Planning Commission Agenda MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN TO APPROVE THE DECEMER 28, 2004 PlANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 3.1. Consider 11/9/04 Special Planning Commission Minutes MOVED BY COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 3.2. Consider 11/23/04 Planning Commission Minutes MOVED BY COMMISSIONER WESTGAARD AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 23,2004 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 4. Planning Commission Representative to Attend January 18. 2005 City Council Meeting Commissioner Scott will attend the January 18, 2005 City Council meeting. 5.1. Request by Peter Specht for Ordinance Amendment to Allow Bus Storage in Ii (Light Industrial) Zoning District. Public Hearing - Case No. OA 04-07 The staff report for this request was presented by Chris Leeseberg. He explained that Peter Specht is requesting an ordinance amendment to allow bus storage as a conditional use in the Ii district. Staff recommends that the use be allowed provided the property has direct access to an arterial or collector street if there are more than 10 buses. Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 28, 2004 Page 2 Commissioner Anderson asked if the language will include both coach and school buses. Mr. Leeseberg stated yes. Commissioner Anderson asked if there was limit on the number of buses in the current ordinance. Mr. Leeseberg stated no. Commissioner Anderson asked if the proposed ordinance change will impact any existing bus storage facilities. Director of Planning Michele McPherson stated there will now be a limit on the number of buses if a property is not on an arterial or collector street, but no existing facilities would be impacted by the amendment. She noted that the size of a particular property would also limit the number of buses. Commissioner Stevens stated that he felt limiting the number to 10 buses was reasonable. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY PETER SPECHT FORAN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW BUS STORAGE IN THE 11 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) ZONING DISTRICT, CASE NO. OA 04-07. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 5.2. Request by Peter Specht for Conditional Use Permit to Allow Bus Storage In Light Industrial Zoning District. Public Hearing - Case No. CD 04-37 Staff report presented by Planner Chris Leeseberg. Mr. Leeseberg reviewed the request by Peter Specht for a conditional use permit to allow bus storage at 18940 York Street. The site will used to store four highway coach buses and three school buses, as well as office space. Mr. Leeseberg discussed the size of the building, access, hours of operation and number of employees. Staff recommends approval of the request with the six conditions listed in the staff report dated December 28, 2004. Commissioner Lemke asked if more than 10 buses would be allowed on this site. Mr. Leeseberg stated no. Chair Ropp opened the public hearing. Jerry McChesney, developer of the McChesney Business Park - Stated that he was the original developer of the property. He asked if there would be any outside storage of buses. He stated that he did not have a problem with the request if the buses would be garaged and there was no other type of outdoor storage. He questioned how the buses would operate from the site in the Spring, since the road would be posted, and wondered if the applicant was aware of this. Chair Ropp noted that the conditions recommended by staff include no outdoor storage and that bus maintenance shall occur within the building. Peter Specht, applicant - Stated that no "parts" buses would be stored outdoors. He explained that the buses would be operated on a daily basis. The site will be kept neat, with no clutter or junk. He noted that buses might be parked outside overnight occasionally when they come in late, but that they would be moved in the morning. Commissioner Stevens asked staff if there have been any discussions with the County to upgrade Meadowvale Road (County Road 44). Ms. McPherson stated the road has been off and on the County's improvement schedule for some time, and she does not know when it will be upgraded. She noted that it is the intent to turn staff's and Council's attention to this road when County Road 40 has been improved and turned back to the City. Mr. . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 28, 2004 Page 3 MeChe.sney stated that County Road 44 was listed in Star News to be improved this upcommg year. Commissioner Stevens stated that he was concerned about traffic on Meadowvale Road and felt that the coach buses would add to the problem. Discussion followed regarding the overnight outdoor parking of the buses. Commissioner Anderson suggested that parking be restricted to no more than 24-48 hours. Mr. Specht stated that he would be agreeable to 24-48 hours. He explained that sometimes a bus will come in at 10:00 p.m. or later. He stated that generally someone is at the garage seven days a week. Commissioner Offerman asked how many buses the building will hold. Mr. Specht stated that the building could hold seven buses. Mr. Harlicker asked how many buses might be parked overnight. Mr. Specht stated that one, or possibly two buses could potentially need to be left outside overnight. Ms. McPherson suggested that Condition #1 be amended to add the language, "except for occasional overnight parking". She noted that Mr. Specht has a crew of night people, so the buses would be cleaned and parked inside in a relatively short period of time. She stated that the intent is that there is no long-term outdoor parking. Commissioner Offerman asked what the current use is for the property. Rich Duggan, previous owner of the building, stated that the building was used for light manufacturing, but that the building has been sold and is currently empty. There being no further public comment, Chair Ropp closed the public hearing. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY PETER SPECHT FORA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW BUS STORAGE IN THE 11 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT, CASE NO. CU 04-37, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. OUTDOOR STORAGE OF INOPERABLE BUSES OR BUS PARTS IS PROHIBITED. OCCASIONAL OVERNIGHT OUTDOOR PARKING OF BUSES IS ALLOWED. 2. ALL BUS MAINTENANCE SHALL OCCUR WITHIN THE BUILDING. 3. THE BUILDING SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL BUILDING CODES. 4. THE BUILDING SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL FIRE CODES. 5. IF MORE THAN 7 BUSES ARE TO BE STORED IN THE BUILDING, THE APPLICANT SHALL APPLY FORAN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 6. IF MORE THAN 7 EMPLOYEES ARE TO BE ON SITE, THE APPLICANT SHALL APPLY FORAN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. MOTION CARRIED 6-1. Commissioner Stevens opposed. 6.1. Update on December 20, 2004 City Council Meeting Commissioner Westgaard provided an update on the December 20, 2004 City Council meeting. . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 28, 2004 Page 4 6.2. Townhouse Concept Plan - South Side of 175m Avenue The staff report for this request was presented by Senior Planner Scott Harlicker. Mr. Harlicker reviewed the concept plan to include six acres located south of 175th Avenue in the Urban Service District, rezone the property to R3, and plat the property for 32 townhouse lots. He discussed the surrounding land uses, layout of the site, and the location of wetlands. Mr. Harlicker presented the issues associated with each of the three components of the concept, including timing, expanding the area to include adjacent properties, appropriateness of density, street widths and public vs. private streets, layout, and setbacks. Commissioner Offerman asked if the surrounding properties would be included in the Urban Service District. Mr. Harlicker stated that would be an option. He stated that changing the land use of the property to High Density as part of the newly revised Comprehensive Plan, implies that the property eventually would be included in the Urban Service District. He stated that the Commission needs to make a decision whether the entire 80 acres should be included now, or to do it "piecemeal". Commissioner Offerman asked how the surrounding properties would be impacted. Mr. Harlicker explained that if they were included, they would be assessed as they are developed. If they are not included, there would be no impacts. Commissioner Offerman asked if there are wetlands south of this property. Mr. Harlicker stated that there is a large wetland between this site and the Elk River Station development. Commissioner Stevens asked if there was still an issue of sewer capacity. Ms. McPherson explained that a study has determined that there is no issue with capacity, and that there is the option to expand the capacity when it is needed. She noted that the City Council approved the expansion of the headworks at the Wastewater Treatment Plant to handle 3.5 million gallons per day, which is double what is being handled today. Commissioner Stevens stated that he was not in favor of the reduced road width to 24 feet, and would recommend a normal width of 32 feet. He further recommended that normal setbacks be maintained. He felt the layout of the concept plan fits well on the site. He noted that economically, the project should be able to stand on its own. Chair Ropp asked if parking is allowed on only one side of a standard 32-foot roadway. Mr. Harlicker stated that parking is allowed on both sides. Chair Ropp recommended that sidewalks be placed on one side of all streets within the plat. Commissioner Anderson stated that since the sewer capacity was not an issue, he felt that it would be better overall for development to include the entire 80 acres in the Urban Service District. He asked for clarification of densities for the various zoning districts. Mr. Harlicker explained the average number of units per acre for Rlc, Rid, R3 and R4 zoning districts. Commissioner Anderson stated that he was not in favor of the 24 foot street widths and felt the sidewalks were a must. He felt the Commission should look at what will best service the entire 80 acres, not just a single plat. Chair Ropp concurred. Discussion followed regarding how to approach consideration of including the entire 80 acres in the Urban Service District. Ms. McPherson suggested that staff could look at transportation issues and come up with a general layout of streets, utilizing the Natural Resources Inventory information. She felt it was important for zoning and land use to be consistent. Ms. McPherson suggested that each site could be brought in and rezoned . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 28, 2004 Page 5 appropriately. She noted that high density residential was a good transition next to the Elk River Station townhomes. Chair Ropp stated he liked the idea of having staff look at the entire 80 acres, and to look for opportunities to connect neighborhoods. Ms. McPherson stated that they need to make sure that a concept plan for the area makes sense, from a transportation standpoint. Commissioner Offerman stated that he would like more information regarding the 24 foot street widths, in order to determine why or why not to allow them. He asked if the townhomes to the east met the 30 foot setback. Mr. Harlicker stated that the townhomes are 20'-21' from the street, and roughly 15 feet from the lot line. Commissioner Stevens stated that he would like to see how many accesses there would be onto 175th Avenue. Joel Larson, developer for the property, stated that due to the wedands, only about 20 acres of the total 80 acres is developable. He noted that on the site under consideration, only about 3.0 acres of the 6.0 acre site is useable. He noted that there is an existing house on 1 ~ acres that is high and dry. Commissioner Stevens asked if the street accessing 175th Avenue would line up with the street on the north side of 175th Avenue. Mr. Harlicker stated yes. Commissioner Lemke stated that he was in favor of rezoning the entire 80 acres to an R1 zoning if the property were included in the Urban Service District. Commissioner Westgaard asked why the 80 acres was not included in the Urban Service Area. Ms. McPherson explained that initially, the Urban Service Area ended at 175th Avenue, Twin Lakes Road and parallel to the railroad tracks, and that the City Council was not interested in bringing any more property in. She stated that it was a recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan Task Force to re-guide the property, due to its proximity to the transit facility and future commuter rail station, and future retail opportunities. Commissioner Lemke asked if this property was previously hooked to city services and then disconnected. Ms. McPherson stated yes, and that the service was disconnected due to nonpayment of fees. Commissioner Scott asked what the impact would be on the properties if the 80 acres were rezoned. Ms. McPherson stated that there would be the potential for assessments, but that it has been the policy of the City Council to not assess properties until they are developed. If property owners wished to connect, they would then pay the fees. She stated that she was not sure of the impact on property taxes. She stated that she would not expect them to change much, but that the property value would increase, creating a potential impact. Chair Ropp stated that he would not expect the taxes would change if a property were sold for the same type of residential use. Commissioner Anderson stated that he would like more information on the impact to the affected properties, i.e., worst case, vs. least impact. . . . Planning Commission Minutes December 28, 2004 Page 6 Commissioner Offerman concurred that high density use of the property appears to be consistent, given the proximity of the transit station. He also concurred that sidewalks were needed. 8. Adiournment There being no further business, MOVED BY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER OFFERMAN TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 7:40 p.rn. Respectfully submitted, /)Jt.e; ~ Debbie Huebner Recording Secretary