Loading...
09-22-1992 PC MIN . . . MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT THE ELK RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1992 Members Present: commissioners Tveite, Minton, Johnson, spotts and VanValkenburg Members Absent: Chairman Nadeau and Commissioner Eberley Staff Present: Stephen Rohlf, Building and Zoning; Janelle Szklarski, Zoning Assistant 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 7:00 p.m. by Acting Chair Johnson. 2. Consider 9/22/92 Planning Commission Agenda Acting Chair Johnson added Item 3.1, Planning Commission Representative to Attend City Council Meeting, to the agenda. Commissioner spotts added Item 11.1, Topics for October Workshop, to the agenda. Commissioner Minton added Item 11.2, Commission Goals, to the agenda. Stephen Rohlf informed the Commission that Item 7, Custom Motors Discussion, may need to be delayed until the applicants arrive. COMMISSIONER MINTON AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. MOVED TO APPROVE THE 9/22/92 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSIONER TVEITE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE 3. Consider 8/25/92 Planning Commission Minutes commissioner Minton noted that on Page 16, last paragraph, the word passed should be replaced with past. Acting Chair Johnson noted that on Page 1, Item 3, the motion should read 6-0-1, with Commissioner spotts abstaining from the motion. COMMISSIONER SPOTTS MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES AS AMENDED. COMMISSIONER MOTION CARRIED 5-0. THE 8/25/92 PLANNING COMMISSION TVEITE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE 3.1. Planning Commission Representative to Attend 10/19/92 City Council Meeting It was indicated that Commissioner Minton would attend the 10/19/92 City Council meeting to be held at the Elk River Public Library. 4. Consider Preliminary Plat and Variance Request for Lake Point Shores/Mike Leary and Marilyn VanPatten/Public Hearing (Continued) Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 2 . Janelle Szklarski, Zoning requesting that this item Commission meeting as they Assistant, stated that the applicants are be continued until the October Planning are working on revisions to the plat. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE OCTOBER 27, 1992, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. COMMISSIONER TVEITE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Gary Santwire questioned whether this item would be readvertised since this is the second time the item has been continued. Ms. Szklarski stated that this item will be republished and readvertised. If additional property is involved with this request, a new list of affected property owners would be notified. Steve Rohlf stated that the applicants may need to withdraw their current application and submit a new one, as the request would deal with new land and would essentially be a new request. Commissioner spotts questioned what would happen if the information not supplied for the October meeting. Janelle Szklarski stated staff would recommend denial of the request as there is a 120 day limit during which action must be taken on plats. was that time 5. Consider Preliminary Plat and Variance Request for Elk Park Center East/John Weicht and Associates/Public Hearing (Continued) . Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, introduced this item by stating that the property is located in the C3 zoning district and needs to have city sewer and water available to it before it can be subdivided. The issue of city sewer and water has not been resolved, therefore, staff is recommending denial of the request. Commissioner VanValkenburg questioned how long it would city sewer and water issue is resolved. Steve Rohlf feasibility study was prepared, however, the Council has it. be until the stated that a not approved Commissioner Minton questioned how Hillside Estates was able if these issues were not resolved. Steve Rohlf stated that enough capacity to handle a residential development, but not this commercial development. to develop there was enough for John Weicht, 13330 Island View Drive questioned when the extension of city sewer and water would be considered imminent and if they could resubmit their plat once a feasibility study was approved. Steve Rohlf stated that the feasibility study is only a part of the picture. Mr. Rohlf suggested that he thought once plans and specs are being prepared, Mr. Weicht could re-submit his application, but that ultimately, this decision should be left up to the City Engineer. . Commissioner Minton questioned if there applicant withdrawing the plat request Commission recommending denial. Mr. Rohlf wishes to have his request forwarded to staff is recommending denial. was an advantage to the rather than the Planning stated that the applicant the City Council, therefore, . . . Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 3 Mr. Weicht questioned if it would be possible to meet with the Planning Commission in a workshop setting with his engineers to discuss some of the issues related to Elk Park Center West. Steve Rohlf stated that he had some reservations with this issue being discussed in a workshop setting. He further cautioned the Planning Commission that they can only react to the applicant's suggestions. Mr. Rohlf also questioned whether it was proper for the developer to meet with the Planning Commission without staff being present. He further stated that the meeting must be advertised due to the open meeting law. Mr. Rohlf stated that he would like to check with the City Attorney and City Administrator regarding this request. Acting Chair Johnson requested that Mr. Rohlf follow up on this issue in a timely manner so that adequate notice could be sent. William Jones, 11763 194th with the workshop idea developer. He stated that deserves to be reviewed at Avenue, stated that as he felt it was a this is a very public public meetings. he was uncomfortable lobbying effort by the issue and therefore it There being no further comment from the public, Acting Chair Johnson closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER SPOTTS MOVED TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE PLAT OF ELK PARK CENTER EAST DUE TO THE UNRESOLVED ISSUE OF THE EXTENSION OF CITY SEWER AND WATER AND SPECIFICALLY THE ORDINANCE REQUIRING THAT THESE SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE PRIOR TO DEVELOPMENT. COMMISSIONER TVEITE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 6. Consider Conditional Use Permit Request by SuperAmerica/Public Hearing (Continued) Janelle Szklarski, Zoning Assistant, indicated that the proposed SuperAmerica at the corner of 193rd Avenue and Highway 169 also has an unresolved issue regarding the extension of city water and sewer to the site. Ms. Szklarski further stated that staff is recommending that this item be continued indefinitely until this issue is resolved. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING INDEFINITELY UNTIL THE ISSUE OF THE EXTENSION OF CITY IS RESOLVED WITH READVERTISEMENT AND RENOTIFICATION. TVEITE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. ON THIS ITEM SEWER AND WATER COMMISSIONER 7. Consider Action Plan by Custom Motors Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, requested that the Planning Commission delay this item until the owners and their attorney were present. 8. Consider Hearing Permit Request/Tailwind Trailers/Public Conditional Use Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 4 . Janelle Szklarski, Zoning Assistant, introduced this item. She stated that Tailwind Trailers is requesting a conditional use permit for their trailer sales lot located at 9784 Highway 10. Currently, Tailwind Trailers is operating without a conditional use permit. Tailwind Trailers is planning to expand their use by adding some more buildings to the lot. Ms. Szk1arski briefly summarized her memo to the Planning Commission dated September 17, 1992, which outlined several issues related to the request. Acting Chair Johnson opened the public hearing. Cheryl meaning stated display Atkins, Tailwind Trailers, of stipulation #5 outlined in that this stipulation places of trailers on the lot. stated that she was unsure of the staff's memo. Ms. Szklarski restrictions on the storage and . Tom Baillargeon, 9744 Highway 10, stated that he owns property to the east of Tailwind and that he has a 40 foot easement across Tailwind's property to be used for access to his property. He stated that if MnDOT ever removes his direct access to Highway 10 he will need this easement or his property would be landlocked. He also stated that frequently the easement is obstructed by the display of trailers, parking of vehicles, unremoved snow, etc. Mr. Baillargeon also stated that frequently customers come in larger vehicles, therefore, he felt larger parking stalls were needed than what was shown on the site plan. Ms. Atkins stated that they have always kept the road easement free of obstructions, so Mr. Baillargeon should not have a problem getting to his property. She further stated that Tailwind does pay for snow removal within this easement. Ms. Atkins also stated that they realize that their parking situation is not adequate and that they are before the Planning Commission to bring their use up to code. There being no further comments from the public, Acting Chair Johnson closed the public hearing. Commissioner spotts questioned the City's role in preventing encroachments or obstructions within the easement. Ms. Szklarski commented that the easement is a private easement between three parties and that it is not in favor of the City. Commissioner Minton stated that he felt that it was a legal matter that would need to be resolved between the private parties. Commissioner VanValkenburg questioned the City's right to put restrictions on the private easement. Steve Rohlf stated that because it is a private easement, it is not a City issue. Mr. Rohlf stated that he thought it was proper for the City to dictate that a drive remain open. other than that, it should be treated as a private issue. . Acting Chair Johnson questioned what happened after the conditional use permit was denied in 1989. Ms. Szklarski stated that because Tailwind Trailers did not make any changes to their site, they were grandfathered-in. . . . Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 5 Commissioner spotts stated that the applicant needs to provide twelve additional parking stalls according to staff's memo and questioned where they would be located. Janelle Szklarski stated that because the applicant needs to provide additional parking stalls, perhaps a stipulation stating that these parking stalls are larger than average should also be added to this request. Commissioner Minton stated that he felt that a stipulation stating that the applicants provide a 24 foot wide paved driveway should also be added. Acting Chair Johnson stated that she was uncomfortable with allowing the applicant to park or display trailers on the grass area as it is contrary to City Code. Commissioner Minton questioned if the issue of where the lot lines were was something that would trigger this item back to the Planning Commission. Ms. Szklarski stated that the issue could be resolved by staff. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TAILWIND TRAILERS CITING STAFF'S MEMO DATED SEPTEMBER 17, 1992, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: 1. THAT THE EXISTING PROPOSED DETERMINE APPLICANT PROVIDE PROPERTY LINES AND BUILDINGS. STAFF WHETHER CERTAIN PARCELS STAFF WITH A SURVEY THEIR PROXIMITY TO WOULD USE THIS WOULD NEED TO BE SHOWING EXISTING INFORMATION COMBINED. T~ AND TO 2. THAT THE APPLICANT PLANT 32 TREES AS REQUIRED BY T~ LANDSCAPING ORDINANCE. IN PARTICULAR, THAT THE BERM SHOWN ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE IS PLANTED WITH CONIFEROUS TREES TO HELP SCREEN IT FROM THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. 3. THAT THE DUMPSTER, MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT ARE ALL SCREENED PROPERLY ACCORDING TO ORDINANCE. 4. THAT LIGHTING FOR THE SITE MEETS CITY CODE. 5. THAT THE APPLICANT NOT BE ALLOWED TO STORE OR DISPLAY TRAILERS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE IMPROVED ROADWAY. THE APPLICANT SHALL MAINTAIN THE GRASSY AREA IN A NEAT MANNER. 6. THAT DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS AND THE GRADING PLAN FOR THIS SITE ARE APPROVED BY T~ CITY ENGINEER. FURT~R, THAT IF NECESSARY, MNDOT APPROVE GRADING FOR THE SITE AS IT RELATES TO T~ DITCH FOR HIGHWAY 10. 7. THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE 32 PARKING STALLS INCLUDING ONE HANDICAPPED STALL AS PER CITY ORDINANCE. . . . Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 6 8. THAT THE PROPOSED NEW STRUCTURE HAVE A BRICK FASCIA IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS FOR THE AREA. 9. THAT ALL EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT WERE REMODELED PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL BE BROUGHT UP TO THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE 1988 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE. 10. THAT THE APPLICANT VERIFY THAT THE INCREASED FLOW TO THE SOUTH WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THIS AREA AND THAT A LARGER PVC PIPE TO DISCHARGE OVERFLOW FROM THE SOUTH POND BE USED. 11. THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE A 24 FOOT WIDE PAVED DRIVEWAY WITHIN THE ROAD EASEMENT AREA. COMMISSIONER TVEITE SECONDED THE MOTION. Acting Chair Johnson stated that she did not feel the applicant should be able to display trailers on a grass area as the Code should be enforced consistently. Janelle Szklarski stated that she will check with the City Attorney as to whether the City can place any stipulations on the use of the private easement for storage or display. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Acting Chair Johnson stated that regardless of whether this conditional use permit is approved, she felt that the issue of parking on the site should be addressed as she feels it is an unsafe situation. 9. Consider Conditional Use Permit/Elk River Machine/Public Hearing Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator introduced this item by stating that the applicant is requesting to build a 26,250 square foot addition to an existing building located in the 11 zoning district. He stated this item requires a conditional use permit because it is an amendment to an existing conditional use permit which allowed multiple principal structures on one lot. In addition, the applicant is requesting that they be allowed to combine another lot with this parcel which would add another building to the same lot. Mr. Rohlf stated that the applicant is proposing to add parking to accommodate the potential new employees of the proposed addition. He stated that staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit. Acting Chair Johnson opened the public hearing. Larry Ebert, Elk River Machine, stated that they are not changing the use of the property, rather they are just enlarging their current use. He stated that the proposed addition would add employees and would also improve the view from the park as there would be trees planted and the outside storage would be relocated. There being no further comments from the public, Acting Chair Johnson closed the public hearing. . . . Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 7 commissioner the parking property. an easement Mr. Rohlf indirect. Minton questioned how the applicant would have access to lot if they do not acquire the additional piece of Mr. Ebert stated that the present owners are willing to give to Elk River Machine to access the proposed parking lot. added that they currently have access, however, it is Commissioner Minton questioned if the proposed addition would also increase the outside storage. Larry Ebert stated that the storage will not increase, however it will be moved from the east to the west side and would therefore be less visible to the public. Commissioner Minton questioned why the issue of the City planting trees is a stipulation of this request as it is the City's responsibility to fulfill this obligation. Steve Rohlf stated that the trees would be planted on the Elk River Machine property and therefore approval from Elk River Machine was needed. COMMISSIONER SPOTTS MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ELK RIVER MACHINE CITING STAFF'S MEMO DATED SEPTEMBER 16, 1992, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS: 1. THAT THEIR EXISTING PARKING LOT IS STRIPED. 2. THAT THE PROPOSED ADDITIONAL PARKING LOT IS HARDSURFACED AND STRIPED. FURTHER, THAT ACCESS TO THIS PARKING LOT IS FROM THE ELK RIVER MACHINE PROPERTY OR THAT THEY SECURE AN EASEMENT. 3. THAT ELK RIVER MACHINE PROVIDE ACCESS TO THEIR PROPERTY FOR THE CITY TO PLANT TREES. COMMISSION TVEITE SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. COMMISSIONER SPOTTS MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE COMBINATION OF LOTS WHICH WOULD ADD ANOTHER BUILDING ON THE SAME LOT. COMMISSIONER MINTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. A 10 minute recess was taken at this time. 10. Consider Ordinance Amendment to Section 900.22 Sign Regulations/City of Elk River/Public Hearing Janelle Szklarski, Zoning Assistant, stated that there were four issues to be discussed in regards to the sign ordinance. Large Commercial Signs Ms. Szklarski introduced this item by stating that staff was recommending that wall signage in the C3 district be increased to 2 square feet of sign area for each linear foot of building frontage and that the maximum size of wall signage be increased from 128 square feet to 300 square feet. Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, added that staff is also recommending that there be a mechanism to allow more than two wall signs per tenant as some businesses have frontage on three sides and may need additional wall signage. Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 8 . Commissioner Spotts stated that the businesses are also allowed pylon signs and that these could act as the third sign. Janelle Szklarski stated that in the case of gas stations, a canopy also needs a sign. Steve Rohlf indicated that a minimum size of sign may also be needed to accommodate small tenants. Commissioner Tveite questioned the signage requirements for tenants with no frontage at all. The issue of shared tenants and sub-leases was discussed in regards to dividing the signage allowed for that particular building amongst the tenants. Acting Chair Johnson opened the public hearing. There being no one for or against the item, Acting Chair Johnson closed the public hearing. The consensus of the Planning Commission was that two square feet of sign area per linear foot of building frontage be allowed in the C3 district and that the maximum size of wall signs be increased to 300 square feet. The Planning Commission also felt that three signs per occupant should be allowed with a minimum size of 50 square feet also allowed. . Commissioner spotts asked staff to check with other communities as it appears that they are leaning towards uniformity in signage for malls. Ms. Szklarski stated that strip malls are currently a conditional use permit and therefore the issue of signage can be addressed through that process. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that their recommendation into an ordinance amendment to the Planning Commission at the October 27 meeting. staff incorporate be brought back to Shimmering Discs - Steve Rohlf introduced this item by stating that the City Council had interpreted that the shimmering discs used on billboards fell within the definition of animated or flashing signs which are illegal in the City of Elk River. Mr. Rohlf further stated that it was the consensus of staff that these discs do not pose any safety hazards. Mr. Rohlf referenced the material supplied by Mr. Dick Mlodzik of Skoglund OUtdoor Advertising which outlined several cases involving the use of this glittering material. Mr. Rohlf stated that in addition to the three alternatives outlined in staff's memo dated September 14, 1992, a fourth alternative was also available. That alternative would be to change the definition of animated and flashing so as not to include this material. Dick Mlodzik, Skoglund Outdoor, stated that this material called solar rays, has been successfully used in traffic signs to prevent accidents, not cause them. He indicated that the solar ray business has been around for twenty-two years and that the City should not have an anti-business attitude towards their use. . Commissioner Minton stated that the issue before the Planning Commission was not the use of solar rays on traffic signs, but rather on advertising signs and he was concerned that by attracting attention, Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 9 . the solar rays could in fact cause some safety problems when used in advertising devices. James Kleinke, Franklin Outdoor Advertising, stated that their industry frequently meets with MnDOT and they have never indicated that they have a problem with the use of solar rays in regards to safety. Steve Rohlf questioned whether the Planning Commission wished to regulate a maximum percentage of a billboard which could be covered by solar rays. Acting Chair Johnson stated that she agreed that too many solar rays could be dangerous. Dick Mlodzik stated that the solar rays are a very expensive advertising tool and that they are best when used as an accent. He felt that it would be too expensive for businesses to use too many solar rays and that he did not think it would present a problem. COMMISSIONER TVEITE MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT SOLAR RAYS NOT BE INTERPRETED TO FALL WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF FLASHING OR ANIMATED SIGNS. COMMISSIONER VANVALKENBURG SECONDED THE MOTION. Commissioner spotts stated that he thought staff should use their discretion with the issue of safety and that if a sign presents a safety hazard by the use of too many solar rays, staff could order that it be taken down. . THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Acting Chair Johnson stated that she would like staff to check on another safety concern; that being the ballfield lights. When a person is headed eastbound on Highway 10, they present a major safety problem. Nowthen Country Store/Off-Premise Signs - Steve Rohlf introduced this item by stating that Nowthen Country Store has two off-premise signs which are non-conforming in regard to their location. Mr. Rohlf stated that he did not know how to address this specific case through an ordinance amendment without opening the door for other off-premise signs to be located in residential zones. Ed Klemesh, Nowthen Country Store, stated that the signs have been there for over seven years and that he has not had any complaints other than those of the City. Mr. Klemesh stated that his business is a rural business and he needs signs to direct people to the store. Mr. Rohlf stated that the Planning Commission and Council recently addressed the need of off-premise signage for rural based businesses. However, Nowthen Country Store does not meet the intent of this ordinance. . Mr. Klemesh questioned why this business definition. Commissioner rural based business refers to areas by necessity, not by choice. sign did not meet the rural based Tveite stated that the definition of those businesses that locate in rural Mr. Klemesh stated that he did not feel that the City should make him remove the signs as they are not hurting anyone. Commissioner Spotts . . . Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 10 stated that if these signs are allowed, then other signs in residential zones will follow and it will become very cluttered. Mr. Rohlf stated that staff is not recommending an ordinance amendment to address this specific case. Bill Kennedy, Kennedy Gardens, stated his support for the Nowthen Country Store signs. Commissioner VanValkenburg stated that he cannot see how the City could allow those signs to stay without opening the door to other signs. Commissioner Minton questioned why the signs could not be grandfathered-in. Mr. Rohlf stated that staff has found no evidence of permits being issued for these signs and that the billboard regulations did not allow off-premise signs in that area at the time these signs were constructed. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that no ordinance amendment was needed to address this situation. Farmers Market - of a Farmer's october S, 1992, Bill Kennedy, Market will meeting. Kennedy Gardens, stated that the issue be discussed with the City Council at the It was the consensus of the Planning commission that because so many issues related to signage for a Farmer's Market are unresolved, this issue would be better discussed when these details are ironed out with the City Council. Commissioner spotts requested that staff check with the St. Paul and Minneapolis Farmer's Market to determine what signage requirements they had. Ms. Szklarski stated that the City Council had directed the Planning commission to review the identification signs allowed in the C1 district as a result of the Bank of Elk River's sign request. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to work on this issue at the October 27, 1992, Planning Commission meeting. 7. Consider Action Plan by Custom Motors Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, distributed an updated action plan titled "Focus on Issues". Mr. Rohlf summarized the proposal. The decision on whether to screen or relocate is highly dependent on the amount of funding available and required for each alternative. Mr. Rohlf emphasized that staff, the Planning Commission, City Council and the applicant should all work together to resolve this issue. Mr. Rohlf reminded the Planning Commission that Custom Motors is a legal business as it has a conditional use permit and is located in the proper zoning district. He further stated that staff feels the salvage yard should screen in the interim even if the ultimate choice is to relocate it. Elk River Planning Commission Minutes september 22, 1992 Page 11 . Bob Miller, Attorney like the City Council's regarding the future further. for Custom Motors, stated input. They feel that of this use is needed that his clients would the Council's intent before they can go any Commissioner Tveite stated that he is sympathetic to Custom Motors situation, however he feels that screening is a top priority as it is one of the stipulations of their CUP. Mr. Miller stated that before they can implement a screening plan they need an indication from the City Council as to what the future of Custom Motors is. steve Rohlf stated that he felt this issue should be brought to the City Council at their October 19 meeting and that the applicants should also submit a landscape plan for the Council's review. Mr. Rohlf suggested that two plans be shown; a temporary plan if relocation is the ultimate decision and a permanent screening plan if the use is to remain. Mr. Rohlf further stated that he is recommending a more detailed action plan with firm deadlines incorporated in it. . Commissioner VanValkenburg stated long and questioned its ability to Miller answered that most likely, owners will be needed in order to property. that the parcel is rather narrow and be developed residentially. Mr. coordination with adjoining property develop the land as residential Commissioner Minton stated that be relocation and that the City achieve this goal as the primary he felt that the long range goal should should work with Custom Motors to factor is economics. Acting Chair Johnson agreed that the long range plan for this area should remain residential and that screening was a must. She further suggested that the applicant meet with Bill Rubin, Economic Development Coordinator, to discuss possible economic incentives. Commissioner Minton Rohlf stated that question. questioned the use of TIF for this Bill Rubin, should be contacted project. Mr. to answer that It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that relocation is the preferred alternative, but that a cooperative spirit between staff, the City Council and Custom Motors should be maintained to reach that goal. commissioner spotts questioned what the applicant's wishes were in regards to the future of Custom Motors as this was as important as what the City would like to see happen. 11. other Business . 11.1 October Workshop The topic of the proposed commercial development, Elk Park Center West, at the October Planning Commission workshop was discussed. Commissioner Minton felt that this was not an appropriate topic . . . Elk River Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1992 Page 12 for the workshop as it appeared to be a lobbying effort by the developer. Commissioner Tveite stated that as long as this meeting was open and published, there should not be a concern. Acting Chair Johnson stated that she really felt that the issue of traffic should be discussed at this meeting in order to understand the issue more clearly. Steve Rohlf stated that he would consult with the City Engineer, Terry Maurer, in regards to the traffic study and possibly arrange a worksession on this topic alone. Mr. Rohlf also stated that the developer should be invited, the meeting should be open to the public and that he needed to check with the City Attorney on this topic. 11.2 Planning Commission Goals Commissioner Minton reviewed the goals of the Planning Commission. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the Downtown Redevelopment Plan is a possible topic for the November workshop. 12. Adjournment There being no further business, COMMISSIONER TVEITE MOVED THE MEETING. COMMISSIONER SPOTTS SECONDED THE MOTION. CARRIED 5-0. TO ADJOURN THE MOTION The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at approximately 11:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Janelle Szklarski Zoning Assistant