05-10-2005 PC MIN
.
.
.
WORKSHOP MEETING NOTES
ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION
HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
TUESDAY, MAY 10, 2005
Members Present:
Vice-Chair Stevens, Commissioners Lemke, Offerman, Ropp, Scott and
Westgaard
Members Absent:
Chair Anderson
Staff Present:
Michele McPherson, Director of Planning; Scott Harlicker, Senior
Planner; Chris Leeseberg, Planner
Conncil Liaison:
Conncil Member Motin - Absent
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 Vice Chair Stevens.
2. 17Sth Avenue Study Area Meeting with Neighbors
Neighbors present included:
Mrs. Geraldine Graham and son
Mr. & Mrs. Schneider
Mr. & Mrs. Ejaz
Mr. Robinson
John Howard of Hecker & Holmers Real Estates
Senior Planner Harlicker provided an overview of the purpose of tonight's meeting. He
provided an aerial photo of the area in question and discussed the presence of wetlands.
Commissioner Stevens asked for clarification of the wetland areas and inquired as to
whether or not the proposed wetland buffer area would be included on the delineation noted
on the aerial photo. Mr. Harlicker noted (on the aerial photo) that the bonndary from the
National Wetland Inventory and was not an accurate delineation of the wetlands.
Mr. Robinson asked what "high density" meant. Mr. Harlicker stated that high density
residential would allow for apartments at 12 units per acre, townhomes, and mixed use
which could include some commercial.
Mr. Ejaz stated that he was concerned with the odd lot shapes and with piecemeal
development. He stated he was also concerned with not obtaining adequate value from the
property and what would happen in the event that property owners did not sell and would
be surronnded by incompatible developments.
Mrs. Graham stated that developers have approached them to purchase their property.
However, the prices offered would not allow them to replace their existing home and
property with comparable real estate elsewhere. Developers have no restrictions in regards
.
.
.
Planning Commission Meeting Notes
May 10, 2005
Page 2
to the amount that they are required to pay. She stated she is concerned with the cost to
hook up to City sewer and water.
Mr. Ejaz asked if the wetland could be filled in order to make more buildable area. Director
of Planning McPherson stated that State regulations limit the amount of area to be filled and
City policy does not allow wetlands to be filled for the purposes of creating buildable sites;
only for addressing public safety needs.
Mr. Schneider stated that he felt the City was forcing out the residents and that he had lived
on his property for 45 years and had no interest in moving. He also does not want
townhomes or apartments next door looking down on his property. He stated he was
interested in determining what the developers were interested in.
Victor Pacheco, attending for another item on the agenda, stated that as a developer he
would be interested in identifying what the City's interest was for development of the area.
He understands that the City Council would not allow piecemeal development in this
neighborhood and that a developer would need to enter into contracts with multiple
property owners with simultaneous closings in order to make a project work.
Mr. Graham stated that in the last five years more and more townhomes have appeared in
the neighborhood and that property owners are being forced to sell out at a lower rate
because of the fact that the adjacent townhomes are adversely affecting property values.
Director of Planning McPherson noted that the City Council wants staff, the Planning
Commission, and the neighborhood to prepare a plan that can be adopted in order to guide
developers. The Council understands the impact of the land use change to the residents and
want to make sure that the market responds to the residents, but developers also need
guidance in terms of what the City's vision is for the area.
Commissioner Offerman asked how a change in zoning would impact the assessed value and
therefore, the tax rate. Ms. McPherson stated that she would contact Jerry Kritzik, the
County Assessor, for an answer to this question.
Commissioner Stevens stated that it is his understanding that there will be no change in
assessed value or zoning until a developer or developers acquire enough properties to bring
forth a project. He stated that he would like to see commercial uses at the west end near the
intersection with a transition to lower density to the east end of the site.
Commissioner Westgaard stated that he felt that the site was very limited in terms of its
opportunity due to the presence of wetlands on the site. He questioned where the
transportation connections would be and indicated that it makes sense to align streets and
. .
mtersectlOns.
Commissioner Offerman stated that assuming that there are willing sellers in the
neighborhood that high density is the destiny for this parcel. He felt that with the Business
Park zoning to the west and the train station to the southwest, that this is a good site for
high density so that owners can live and walk to the future train station to take advantage of
Northstar Commuter Rail.
Mr. Howard stated that while commercial would be an option for their development group,
they are not interested in apartments due to the current market. With interest rates
.
.
.
Planning Commission Meeting Notes
May 10, 2005
Page 3
remaining low, renters are difficult to come by and they would prefer to do an owner-
occupied type product.
Mrs. Graham noted that the townhomes to the north have "for rent" signs in front of them.
Ms. McPherson stated that staff would develop multiple concepts for discussion purposes
for the June 14th meeting and that information would be obtained assessments and wedands
to be forwarded to the residents at the same meeting. She noted that the residents are
invited back to the June 14th meeting in order to provide input in revisions to the concept
plans developed by staff.
Mr. Schneider stated that he would like the property to go back to being low density
residential.
3. Victor Pacheco - West Triangle Property
Senior Planner Harlicker provided a brief overview of the location and site conditions for
the west triangle property. This is a parcel in joint ownership by Mr. Chuba and Mr.
Kincannon, and a remnant part of West Oaks owned by George Sanford. Victor Pacheco
described the proposed project which include 76 townhome units, all one level, as they are
interested in attracting the 55 and older age group. They had projects that were much denser
with up to 90 units but this appears to be a good mix of units for this project.
Commissioner Stevens asked if there was a possibility for some commercial in the project,
for instance, office condominiums or limited retail. Mr. Pacheco described the research that
had been completed in order to identify whether or not retail would be viable on this site.
They spoke with restaurants and hotels and neither group was interested in the site, due to
its distance from Highway 169 and from Interstate 94.
Commissioner Offerman stated that he would prefer the site remain commercial. He felt
that even if the market is soft, it would be inappropriate for the City to give up prime
commercial property along Highway 10. He stated that if it were to be residential, he would
like to see higher density and units with more vertical height versus one level.
Commissioner Stevens stated he would like to see the amenities located farther away from
Highway 10 to the interior of the site where it would be quieter and more private.
Staff reviewed the transportation improvements that will need to occur in relation to this
project. A frontage road will need to be constructed along Highway 10 connecting the
frontage road in Big Lake Township to the Waco Street/Business Center Drive intersection
to the east.
Commissioner Westgaard stated that even though there is no demand for commercial, it
does not mean that we should change our priorities. He agreed that the frontage along
Highway 10 should remain commercial.
Commissioner Lemke stated that he did not have an issue with the residential development.
He noted that the City changes its priorities when it rezoned the site south of Home Depot
for Tractor Supply and the furniture store.
Director of Planning McPherson noted that perhaps there was a compromise position in
that the bulk of the site could be residential with higher density adjacent to Highway 10 and
.
.
.
Planning Commission Meeting Notes
May 10, 2005
Page 4
the small triangular piece to the east of Yankton Street could remain commercial and
ultimately be combined with the five-acre residential property to make a larger commercial
site. The Commission indicated that this would be an acceptable compromise in order to
preserve some commercial and allow some residential to occur on the site.
Having no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
Submitted by,
Michele McPherson
Director of Planning