Loading...
06-23-2020 PC MINMeeting of the Elk River Planning Commission Held at Elk River City Hall Tuesday, June 23, 2020 Members Present: Chair Jill Larson -Vito, Commissioners Perry Beise, Alexander Feinstein, Eric Johnson, John Jordan, and Brad Thiel Members Absent: Commissioner Robert Rydberg Staff Present: Planning Manager Zack Carlton, Senior Planner Chris Leeseberg, and Sr. Admin. Assistant/Recording Secretary Jennifer Green I . Call Meeting to Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission was called to order at 6:59 p.m. by Chair Larson -Vito. 2. Consider June 23, 2020, Planning Commission Agenda Moved by Commissioner Jordan and seconded by Commissioner Thiel to approve the June 23, 2020, Planning Commission agenda. Motion carried 6-0. 3. Consider Planning Commission Minutes Moved by Commissioner Thiel and seconded by Commissioner Beise to approve the May 26, 2020, Planning Commission minutes. Motion carried 6-0. 4.1. CommonBond Elk River Housing Limited Partnership — 19522 Holt St. NW — continued from April 28, 2020 and May 26, 2020 ■ Land Use Amendment from Highway Business to High Density Residential, Case No. LU 20-02 ■ Preliminary Plat for a 60 -unit 3 -story apartment building to be known as Elk Ridge Lodge, P 20-05 * Conditional Use Permit to establish a residential PUD, Case No. CU 20-07 Mr. Leeseberg presented the staff report. Commissioner Johnson asked if there were finalized plans for the Highway 169 redesign project. Mr. Leeseberg stated he thought there were finalized plans but had not seen them. Planning Commission June 23, 2020 ----------------------------- Page 2 Since the public hearing remained open from the May 26, 2020, Planning Commission meeting, Chair Larson -Vito asked for members of the public to speak. Steven Casey — 19453 Irving Cir. NW — stated he was opposed to the project and did not feel it belonged in this neighborhood. He stated while he was not opposed to low-income housing, he had concerns with approving this location as he felt it would increase traffic and crime and decrease property values if approved. He submitted an opposition letter to the Commission that was included in the packet. Andy Hughes, the director of Acquisition and Development and Cecile Bedor, the Executive Vice President of Real Estate, both representing CommonBond, and Matt Finn, Senior Architect from LHB, presented a PowerPoint explaining the CommonBond company and their Elk River proposed project, a 60 -unit apartment building project. Mr. Hughes indicated their project would provide the needed affordable service -rich housing in Elk River with an aesthetically pleasing building to fit the surrounding area. He outlined some myths and questions raised during this application request. He stated that although a representative from Hemple Companies was not able to attend tonight's meeting, Hemple supported CommonBond's request for a Land Use Amendment. Mr. Hughes addressed the city parking requirements and indicated that they felt the proposed parking of 120 stalls, or 1 per bedroom and 2 per unit, none enclosed, is adequate based on experience with their other properties. He addressed concerns raised regarding decrease of property values, increase in crimes, and increased traffic with affordable housing developments. Rick Pool, 11800 194s' Ave. - stated he lives 520' from this project and outlined his opposition against it. He submitted an opposition letter to the Commission that was included in the packet. He indicated part of the proposed property now known as Elk Ridge Center Second Addition was originally planned as a city park, but the city amended the use to Highway Business. He indicated there was opposition to the property being reclassified to allow an apartment building. Gary Tonseger —19576 Holt St. NW — owner of the Pearle Vision building for 15 years, which also houses the Noble Quilter, presented a PowerPoint opposing the land use amendment application and explained the history behind his building and the area, and requested to keep the property as commercial as the city originally intended. Tom Halbaken -11744194`' Ave. NW - stated he has lived at his home for 30 years, loves his neighborhood, and outlined the reasons he was opposed to this project. Matt Walliczek — 19666 Lowell St. NW, opposed the CommonBond project and asked if anyone considered the impact this project would have on the elementary schools as Parker and Lincoln Elementary Schools are at maximum capacity. There being no one else to speak, Chair Larson -Vito closed the public hearing. MVEI it uRE Planning Commission June 23, 2020 Page 3 Chair Larson -Vito discussed the Land Use Amendment and shared her feelings regarding sticking to the rules and guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan, noting the time and energy spent to guide the city and to change that would have to be compelling. She was not convinced this project meets the requirements of what was planned for this property. Commissioner Johnson stated he really likes the project and felt it was a good project but did not feel it was in the right location. He explained the site currently zoned Highway Business is an opportunity for new commercial development, and especially with the upcoming redesign of Highway 169, noting the city has limited commercial land available for redevelopment. He also felt the upcoming review of the Comprehensive Plan may identify other areas where this project would be a better fit. Commissioner Beise was in support of providing affordable workforce housing but did not feel this was the proper location. He felt the Commission would be short- sighted to amend the land use of this property before the highway redesign and the upcoming review of the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Thiel stated he agreed there was a need for affordable workforce housing. His main concern with this proposal was the parking plan and felt it would cause problems in the future if enough parking stalls or covered parking is not addressed now, as well as parking space for snow removal. He stated he would welcome folks coming to Elk River to live in this type of housing and participate in our community and stated he was disappointed and personally offended by the tone and statements made in some of the project opposition letters written to the city and stated some things written were unfounded. Commissioner Feinstein agreed with some of the comments made by the other commissioner this evening including the tone of the letters. He indicated this area is already busy with traffic for people dropping off kids at New Horizon and increasing traffic going through that area is asking for trouble. Commissioner Jordan stated he has seen a lot of these types of housing developments in other cities where he lived and worked. He indicated planning commissioners are made up of the same people as the residents, and do not make decisions to increase the tax base or because "we don't live there" because they do live here. As he read the letters, he understands the frustration. He states he makes decision from his heart and every decision is made in the best interest of everyone. He stated because there was a need in the current Elk River apartment market he wondered if a moratorium on apartment developments should be considered to allow time to do a study. Mr. Leeseberg stated he was not aware of any discussion regarding an apartment development moratorium and noted this project would need to continue due to application deadlines. He stated perhaps it will become part of the comprehensive plan update when discussing uses especially along Highway 169. DAIAIIII I NATE Planning Commission Page 4 June 23, 2020 ----------------------------- Commissioner Jordan asked about the history of the city park idea. Mr. Leeseberg stated he vaguely remembered it might be a city park for residents when this development came through, but it was never dedicated as a park. Commissioner Jordan asked Mr. Hughes the process for background and credit checks for renters and asked about monthly rent rates. Mr. Hughes indicated they would do credit checks and approximate costs of rent for a 1 bedroom: $800, 2 bedrooms: $925, and 3 bedrooms: $1125. He explained amenities would be rental affordability and the location, a common area laundry, second bathrooms in 2- and 3 -bedroom units, and durable finishes. Commissioner Feinstein asked Mr. Hughes about the type of response from the mailings he sent to the neighboring properties within 750' of the project. Mr. Hughes stated out of 40 mailings, they received 6-8 responses and scheduled two neighborhood meetings. He indicated there were two genuinely curious attendees looking for information and the remaining attendees were negative about the project. He stated they spoke to every person who reached out. Commissioner Jordan stated he has prior experience as he was involved in a high- end housing project built by Kelly Doran in Brooklyn Park near 610 and Zane with rents nearing $1700. He stated he would like to see a current study which outlines the most current housing need, type (low or high end), and location in Elk River and where the best location would be for this housing. He stated while he likes the idea of this proposal and what this company does and their mission to help those in need, he does not support the location for this project. Moved by Commissioner Beise and seconded by Commissioner Feinstein to recommend denial for the request by CommonBond Elk River Housing Limited Partnership for a Land Use Amendment from Highway Business to High Density Residential based upon the following justifications: 1. The city has limited developable commercial/business land and amending the property to residential will further reduce the limited inventory. 2. The property is located adjacent to a regional highway and within the Urban Service Boundary and removing it from a Highway Business land use will not accommodate increased demand for retail and service opportunities. Motion carried 6-0. Moved by Commissioner Johnson and seconded by Commissioner Jordan recommend denial of the request by CommonBond Elk River Housing Limited Partnership for the Preliminary Plat for Elk Ridge Lodge as the Land Use Amendment was not recommended for approval. V EItTURd Planning Commission Page 5 June 23, 2020 ----------------------------- Motion carried 6-0. Moved by Commissioner Beise and seconded by Commissioner Feinstein recommend denial of the request by CommonBond Elk River Housing Limited Partnership for a Conditional Use Permit as the Land Use Amendment was not recommended for approval. Motion carried 6-0. 4.2. Phoenix Enterprises on behalf of Northway Academy, Inc. — 19437 Evans St. NW, unit S ■ PUD Amendment to allow out-patient medical services, Case No. CU 20- 011 Mr. Leeseberg presented the staff report. Chair Larson -Vito opened the public hearing. There being no one to speak, Chair Larson -Vito closed the public hearing. Moved by Commissioner Thiel and seconded by Commissioner Jordan to recommend approval of the request by Phoenix Enterprises on behalf of Northway Academy, Inc., supporting an amendment to the Hillside Crossing II PUD Agreement allowing Outpatient Health Care Facilities as a permitted use. Motion carried 6-0. 4.3. Gary Schwartz — 12457 194`" Ln. NW • Conditional Use Permit for private kennel, Case No. CU 20-13 Mr. Leeseberg presented the staff report. Chair Larson -Vito asked about clarification of condition #4 and asked about how to require the invisible fence remains in place. Mr. Leeseberg indicated the applicant has an invisible fence. He stated the city does not require properties to have a fence. Commissioner Thiel asked about the definition of potentially dangerous or dangerous dog as he lives in this neighborhood and while he walks by this house daily he didn't realize they had dogs but to him a rottweiler would be considered a potentially dangerous animal. Commissioner Beise explained the ordinance definition of potentially or dangerous animals, noting they attack aggressively and their defined based upon their behavior and not breed specific. IIIIRII IT NATURE Planning Commission June 23, 2020 Chair Larson -Vito opened the public hearing. Page 6 Linda Sivolda, 12469 194`'' Ln., stated she lives next door to the property and opposes the request for the CUP. She explained her family's experience with the applicant's dogs and their barking, snarling, and growling at them, charging the property line, and causing fear in them. She discussed an incident with her 12 -year- old daughter playing with a skateboard in the front of her house and one of the dogs got out of the invisible fence and scared her daughter. Ms. Sivolda is afraid of the electric fence not working in the future and feels her quality of life and enjoyment of her own property is limited, commenting on the dog's behavior when she was trying to fix a sprinkler head. She asked the commission to enforce the rules already in place and not allow the applicant any additional dogs. Laura Schwartz - 12457 194''' Lane — asked for approval of this permit and requested changes to some of the conditions. She explained people have a predisposition to the rottweiler breed and indicated Ms. Sivolda told only 50% of the skateboard story, stating the dog loves skateboards and only wanted to play with it. She stated the dog was sitting quietly by the skateboard. She stated that was the only issue they have had in six years and tries to bring the dogs inside when she notices the neighbors outside. She said dogs are dogs and do bark and stated they only bark at Linda Sivolda. She displayed photos on her computer to the commission in support of her request to modify the condition of limiting the number of dogs outside at a time as she considered this cruel for the other dogs to watch them from inside. She also explained there's no need for the condition of animal waste, stating they have a good system of where the dogs are trained to relieve themselves in one area of the yard and they keep their yard very clean. She stated the police when evaluating the property found the dogs were not vicious, aggressive, or dangerous. Gary Schwartz — 12457 194`h Lane — stated the invisible fence goes around entire property and noted there is a division between the front fence and back fence. He stated there have been no issues with these dogs and the one time the dog went through the invisible fence was from a dead battery. He stated he understands Mrs. Sivolda's concerns and does everything he can to mitigate the barking or dog's behavior. He does not want to be without their dogs. He explained the landscaping they have done to their yard to bring up the value of the neighborhood. He stated the Sivoldas never requested to get to know their dogs. Eric Sivolda —12469 194`' Lane — he clarified he is not intimidated by the dogs, but they do snarl and growl and they are aggressive. He spoke of a sledding incident where his daughters were charged by the dogs and they now avoid that side of the yard. He stated a sprinkler head contractor declined to do maintenance on the sprinkler heads nearest the neighbors because of the dogs being out and came up to the property line. He stated he has noticed there are times the dogs are not being monitored and they do not always have their electric fence collars on. It is tough because they will come to the property edge and aggressively bark even if they are out in the center of their back yard. UIE1 IT ME Planning Commission June 23, 2020 Page 7 Bradley Nelson - 12282 195`' Lane NW — stated he has lived in the neighborhood his entire life and walks his dogs through the neighborhood to get to Woodland Trails and he never knew the Schwartz's had dogs. He stated they are the sweetest dogs ever once he met them, well trained, and love skateboards, and never once were aggressive towards him. He stated the micro bullies are small dogs but muscular. Valeria Reyes —12457 194`h Lane - stated the two rottweilers, Loki and Coco, have lived with them for six years and will not be leaving their home. She stated earlier this year they added Louie and Chanel, micro bullies. She stated Coco is her therapy dog and none of their dogs are vicious or seemingly dangerous to anyone who knows their dogs. She stated they have only had issues with the Sivoldas and wished they would make efforts to get to know their dogs. She stated her family has made changes to address the concerns with the dogs as she felt anyone has a right to live and feel comfortable in their own home. There being no one else present to speak, Chair Larson -Vito closed the public hearing. Chair Larson -Vito stated based upon what she was heard this evening, wondered if they should add a condition of the invisible fence being operated on the property. Commissioner Jordan asked if a real fence could be required on the one side. Mr. Leeseberg stated any fencing condition could be recommended. Commissioner Johnson stated by reducing the number of animals by one will not change the current issues occurring between the Silvoda's and the Schwartz's. Commissioner Jordan was thinking if there was a fence the dogs could not see through, perhaps the neighbor could feel comfortable in her yard. Mr. Schwartz stated a privacy fence would take away from the natural openness which is why they chose the invisible fence. Mr. Sivolda stated they were told the original proposed fence by the Schwartz's was a chain link fence and they were opposed to that. Mr. Schwartz indicated they have evidence to support they were approved by the Lafayette Woods HOA to install a buff -tech privacy fence but instead put in the invisible fence to keep the look of the back yards natural. He stated if he were required to install a physical fence, he would have to install it for the entire yard as just one side would look odd and would ruin the natural look of the back yard. He stated the variable that does not change in this equation is there will still be two rottweilers living at his home, barking, and snarling at Mrs. Sivolda, and she calls the police to complain about his dogs. p I I f R I I I NAWRf Planning Commission June 23, 2020 Page 8 Commissioner Jordan stated he is trying to find the right solution for both the applicant and the neighboring property owners. He said Mrs. Sivolda can contact the police if she feels the barking dog ordinance is not being followed. Commissioner Beise stated he did not agree with the condition of a fence on one side of the property and felt the current conditions as outlined are sufficient, noting you cannot discriminate dog breeds. Commissioner Johnson felt comfortable with conditions as outlined and did not feel a privacy fence would deter dogs from barking. Chair Larson -Vito stated she felt they should add a condition that the invisible fence needs to be maintained and in operating order. Commissioner Jordan stated he is not in favor of this CUP request due to the number of animals in a residential neighborhood. He explained how he felt certain numbers of animals, including chickens and dogs, in a suburban environment should be restricted so all neighbors have the right to enjoy their property. Commissioner Johnson stated he does not feel adding this CUP for a private kennel will not change the outcome for the neighbors and will make stronger requirements for the applicant, bringing them into compliance and adding additional restrictions. He stated he is in favor of the CUP. Moved by Commissioner Johnson and seconded by Commissioner Beise to recommend approval of the request by Gary Schwartz for a Conditional Use Permit with the following conditions to satisfy the standards set forth in Section 30-654: 1. The private kennel shall be limited to eight (8) animal units. Additional animal units will require an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. 2. No more than six (6) animal units shall be allowed outdoors at once. 3. The removal of animal waste shall comply with Section 10-9. All on-site waste shall be picked up and properly disposed of twice a week. 4. No more than two (2) animals per supervisor shall be allowed outside of the fenced area. 5. All dog waste shall be cleaned up immediately when dogs are off-site. 6. The applicant shall receive a private kennel license from the city. 7. No dogs designated as dangerous or potentially dangerous are allowed to be kept on site, and the keeping of such dog shall be grounds for revocation of the permit. 8. Fencing, around the entire perimeter of the property, shall always be maintained and if underground invisible fencing is utilized, shall always be functioning. Motion carried 4-2 with Commissioners Jordan and Thiel opposing. 9NVAAW "rRE Planning Commission Page 9 June 23, 2020 S. Council Liaison Update Mr. Carlton indicated Councilmember Gvall was not available that evening to provide an update on recent city council meeting items. 6. General Business There was no general business to discuss. The Planning Commission adjourned to work session at 8:49 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:50 p.m. 7.1. Discuss Proposed Land Swap with Copart Mr. Carlton presented the staff report. After discussion, it was the consensus of the Planning Commission that they were in support of the land swap with Copart if the conditions regarding screening of the property were recommended. Mr. Carlton asked for two to three volunteers from the Planning Commission to serve on the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CPAC). He explained the additional time commitment of 7 meetings with the first set of meetings during the week of August 10, including a joint Planning Commission/City Council meeting. Chair Larson -Vito and Commissioners Johnson and Jordan volunteered to be involved and members of the CPAC meetings. Commissioner Beise stated he will attend as Planning Commission representative City Council meeting on July 6, 2020. 8. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:01 p.m. Minut pr . a d by Jennifer Green. L 7( Tina Allard City Clerk rkLr � 1 Jill ..arson -Vito Planning Commission Chair IIIIaII Ir ��►ruRE