Loading...
03-27-1990 PC MIN e e ,- e MINUTES OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT THE ELK RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 Members Present: Chairman Kimball, Commissioners Johnson, Eberley, Schroeder, Morton and Nadeau Members Absent: Commissioner Fuchs Staff Present: Stephen Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator; Tim Keane, City Attorney; Janelle Szklarski, Zoning Assistant 1. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof; the meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman Kimball. 2. Consider 3/27/90 Plannin~ Commission A~enda Chairman Kimball requested that items 3.5 - Commissioners to attend Ci ty Council meeting on 4/16/90, and 18.5 - Informational items for staff, be added to the agenda COMMISSIONER EBERLEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE 3/27/90 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA AS AMENDED. COMMISSION JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 3. Consider 2/20/90 Plannin~ Commission Minutes COMMISSIONER EBERLEY MOVED TO APPROVE THE 2/20/90 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES. COMMISSIONER NADEAU SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 3.5 It was indicated that Commissioner Eberley and Nadeau would attend the City Council meeting on April 16, 1990. 4. Interpretation/Will Alterations to Landscapin~ Tri~~er a Condi tiond Use Permit by Elk River Ford Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, explained that Mr. Powell recently purchased Country Chrysler which is located adjacent to Highway 10 south of Highway 169. He indicated that Mr. Powell is planning some alterations to the landscaping on the site (which currently does not exist). This would include some plantings along the service road adjacent to Highway 10 and would help define the site entrances and exits. These changes would improve the site visually and for safety reasons. Steve indicated that car sales in a C-3 zone are a conditional use but staff does not feel that these alterations intensify the use, therefore, the landscaping does not necessitate a review of a conditional use permit. After discussion of this issue, the Planning Commission was in agreement with staff. 5. Interpretation/Which Zone does a Parcel Fall in/by Joe Barsody Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 2 ---" e Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, introduced the location of the property to the Commission. He stated that Joe Barsody's property is located at 503 Jackson Avenue (which is the site of the Cloverleaf building). Staff is asking for an interpretation of whether Mr. Barsody's property falls within the C-l commercial or C-2 commercial zone because the line on the zoning map is so wide it covers most of the parcel. Chairman Kimball asked for any concerns regarding this interpretation. He stated that the Commission could go with either a conservative or liberal interpretation. After discussion of this issue, it was the consensus of the Planning Commission to go with the more conservative interpretation (C-2 zoning classification). 6. Conditional Use Permit Reauest/A~ricultural Use/by Mark Martin/P.H. Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator; indicated that Mr. Martin is requesting a conditional use permit to build an agricultural building, 4,000 square feet in size, to accommodate up to four horses and a proposed riding stable. Mr. Rohlf indicated that he had received a letter from Lynn and Tom Lane. Their main concern with this proposal is that the building be used strictly for agricultural purposes. The letter was received and entered into public record. e At this time Mark Martin showed an aerial photo of his property. Mr. Martin indicated that he bought the property contingent upon his being allowed to put up an agricultural building. Since that time, the ordinance has changed, and now a conditional use permit is required. Mr. Martin indicated that he had contacted all of his neighbors and that no one had any major concerns with the request. Mr. Martin further felt they met the seven standards for a conditional use permit Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. Steve & Bev Taylor - 10975 205th Avenue indicated they had a number of concerns: 1) that the building be used strictly for agricultural purposes 2) will the size of the building affect taxes in the area 3) if the property was sold, would the building remain for agricultural use only or would that be subject to change with a new owner? Mr. Rohlf addressed their concerns by indicating that the building has to be used for agricultural purposes. This runs with the land, not the owner. Jean Schmidt - 11024 207th Ave. questioned where the barn would be located on the property. Ms. Schmidt indicated they would not be opposed to the request. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. . Discussion was held regarding the number of horses permitted, arena space, and fencing. Staff suggested limiting the number of horses to four. Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 3 ----------------------- e COMMISSIONER EBERLEY MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST BY MARK MARTIN FOR AN AGRICULTURAL STRUCTURE BASED UPON THE FINDINGS OF FACT AS OUTLINED IN STAFF'S MEMO DATED 3/18/90 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. THAT MR. MARTIN'S BUILDING IS OF THE DESIGN AND COLORS AS PROPOSED IN HIS APPLICATION. 2. THAT PROPER FENCING BE MAINTAINED TO ASSURE CONTAINMENT OF THIS HORSES. 3. THAT MR. MARTIN MUST KEEP THIS USE CLEAN TO AVOID ODOR AND DUST AND FURTHER THAT IF THIS CONDITION IS NOT MET IT COULD RESULT IN REVOCATION OF THIS PERMIT. 4. THAT ALL SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR FENCING AND. BUILDING BE MET. . 5. THAT THIS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS REVIEWED IN TWO YEARS. 6. THAT THE AGRICULTURAL BUILDING BE LIMITED TO 4,000 SQUARE FEET MAXIMUM. 7. THAT THERE BE A MAXIMUM OF FOUR HORSES. e COMMISSIONER SCHROEDER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 7. VariancelIncrease Size of Permanent Subdivision Identification SiJi(n/by Terry Lee DouJi(las/P.H. Terry Lee Douglas indicated they were withdrawing their request for a variance on a permanent area identification sign, but was requesting an extension to the temporary subdivision sign to help sell the lots in the plat. Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, explained that Mr. Douglas concedes he does not meet the five standards for the variance. Therefore he is asking for an extension until the review of the sign ordinance, in hopes that an extension mechanism will be added to it. Tim Keane, City Attorney, suggested tabling this until after approval of the sign ordinance. COMMISSIONER NADEAU MOVED TO RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO TABLE THIS ITEM. COMMISSIONER EBERLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 8. Zone ChanJi(e Reauest (R-3 to C-3) by Multiple Petitioners/P.H Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, indicated the property owners of an entire block are petitioning for a zone change from R-3 Multifamily to C-3 Highway Commercial. Mr. Rohlf reviewed the location of the property and its surrounding land uses. e Dick Enstad of Barthel Realty explained his request, indicating that there is a problem with developing this property as high density residential because of its location adjacent to the railroad tracks. Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 4 e Mr. Enstad felt that the land use map was in error, as this was looked at as commercial, but not added as commercial. Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. Mary Jo Nelson indicated she was concerned with what kind of businesses would be allowed if this parcel would be approved for commercial. Commissioner Nadeau reviewed the principle and conditional uses that would be allowed in a C-3 zone. All seven of the property owners who petitioned for the zone change request were present for this issue. Warren Hudson - 1154 6th Street questioned the uses permitted in a R-3 zone. Commission Nadeau reviewed these uses. Barb Marcia - 1234 6th Street indicated that she was concerned with her taxes being raised and how the rezoning would affect them. Al Osborn - 622 Proctor questioned who would be responsible for the assessments if their property was to be sold. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. - e Chairman Kimball reviewed Bill Weber's memo dated March 19, 1990 regarding his concerns and considerations to this request. Tim Keane, City Attorney, suggested considering an alternative and more comprehensive approach to the development of the site. Mr. Keane further indicated there is a high likelihood that if this parcel was rezoned without any further controls, you would see piece meal development. Mr. Keane indicated that he would recommend a PUD as this would assure some degree of control. Mr. Keane stated that the problem with the mechanism of rezoning is that once a parcel is rezoned you are basically giving your blessing to all the permitted uses that may be developed individually and collectively. Dick Enstad addressed the issue of the parcel being rezoned PUD. He indicated it would be difficult to do a PUD when you have seven different property owners because everyone has different ideas on what they would want to see done with this property. After discussing this issue, it was the consensus of the Planning Commission that they were in agreement with the City Attorney. The best way to properly develop this property would be a PUD so as to assure some degree of control. e COMMISSIONER JOHNSON MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF THE ZONE CHANGE REQUEST FROM R-3 TOWNHOUSE/MULTIFAMILY TO C-3/HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL BASED ON THE FINDINGS AS OUTLINED IN BILL WEBER'S MEMO DATED 3/19/90. COMMISSIONER EBERLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 5 ----------------------- e Commissioner Schroeder stated that there were two large parcels of property in the City that were put in a one year moratorium because of piece meal development. This is not just a concern of the petitioners' property but has happened a lot in the City. The City would like to stop this piece meal development from happening by developing an overall plan for the area. It was the general consensus of the Commission that this was not a negative vote against commercial, but rather a concern for the development needs of this property to be addressed up front. A short recess was taken at this time. 9. Si~na~e ReQuests in Barrin~ton Place PUD/by Linda Norha Gary Santwire spoke on behalf of Linda Norha. Mr. Santwire indicated he is requesting that the Planning Commission review three pylon signs to be erected in three separate locations: 592 Dodge Avenue, 710 Dodge Avenue, and 564 Dodge Avenue. Mr. Santwire withdrew the part of his request regarding the review of signage in general in Barrington Place PUD. e Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, indicated that the three signs proposed would each be approximately the same size (8' x 8' and 20 feet high) and would have double pylons holding them up. Staff pointed out the location of the three signs. Staff's major concern was with being able to see underneath the signs, although the 12 ft. of clearance alleviates most of their concerns. Staff was still concerned with having two pylons, which could impair the vision of traffic. Mr. Santwire indicated he would like to leave the safety factor strictly to staff's discretion. At the time the signs are constructed, they could be looked at on site. If staff is convinced that there is a vision problem with the two pylons, Mr. Santwire would agree to use only one. If staff finds that there isn't a problem, he would like the option to use two pylons. Mr. Santwire indicated that the cost factor is much more for a single pylon sign. Chairman Kimball indicated that Mr. Santwire should have a sign made that will fit on two pylons. If the sign is not approved by the City, it should be reduced to one pylon. Discussion on the signage took place regarding copy and color. Staff indicated that if the signage was a vision problem it would have to be removed. Commissioner Johnson questioned if it was advisable to allow the signage at all if it was causing this much concern, and since we do not have any concrete answers for safety. Mr. Santwire indicated that he felt there wasn't any evidence that they do have safety problems. e Steve Rohlf suggested a compromise for the current situation would be to put up a dummy sign. Then staff could review to see if the concerns were legitimate. The dummy sign would have approximately the same size Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 6 ----------------------- e pylons, the same distance apart. in the same location. Mr. Rohlf indicated the three signs being requested are on-premise free standing signs. Paul Bell (owner of Sneaky Petes) indicated that all businesses in Elk River do not have the same color signs and have different logos. No one wants a sign to look like the sign next door. Mr. Bell indicated the object of a sign is too advertise a business. Mr. Bell felt the Planning Commission was being unrealistic regarding the color of signs. COMMISSIONER NADEAU MOVED TO APPROVE SIGNAGE LOCATED AT 592 DODGE AVENUE, 564 DODGE AVENUE. AND 710 DODGE AVENUE WITH THE CONDITION THAT STAFF APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE A DOUBLE OR SINGLE PYLON FOR SAFETY REASONS. COMMISSIONER SCHROEDER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. Staff asked for an interpretation on Mr. Santwire's request for overall signage in Barrington Place PUD. Staff suggested that if a business changed hands it would not have to come back to the Planning Commission as long as it complied with the conditions placed on the original sign and only the wording has changed. The Planning Commission was in agreement as long as the new sign stayed reasonably consistent with what was previously approved. e 10. Variance Request/Reduction of Minimum Sin~le Family Lot Size and Width by R.E.P. LTD/P. H. Chairman Kimball read the 5 standards for granting a variance. Steve Rohlf. Building and Zoning Administrator. indicated the applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the minimum lot size and width for the version of the preliminary plat of Auburn Commons which would accommodate 7 single family homes. He indicated that all 7 lots fall short of our minimum lot size standard of 10,000 square feet. Staff is recommending denial as the request does not meet the standards for a variance. Mr. Rohlf indicated that the parcel of property involved is a flat empty parcel with nothing peculiar about it that would warrant a variance. Gary Santwire indicated because single family is allowed under the R-2b zone, and a twin home can be put on a 36 ft. wide lot, it would seem unnecessary to enforce an 80 ft. wide lot to put one home on. Doing so would constitute an unnecessary, unavoidable and extreme hardship. Chairman Kimball felt this did not speak to the uniqueness of the situation for granting a variance. Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. Carl Miller - 708 Auburn Place felt too much was being built in such a small area without any outlets. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. - e COMMISSIONER SCHROEDER MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF THE REQUEST BY R.E.P. LTD. BECAUSE THEY DO NOT MEET THE FIVE STANDARDS Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 7 e FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE. COMMISSIONER MORTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 11. Ordinance Amendment/Reduction of Minimum Size and Fronta/:te of Sinde Family Lots in a Multifamily Zone by R.E.P. Ltd/P.H. Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, explained that what is being requested is to reduce the minimum lot size and width for single family lots within multifamily zones (R-2b, R3, R4) from a minimum single family lot size of 10,000 square feet to 6,000 square feet, and to reduce the minimum width of the those single family lots within the single family zone from 80 feet wide to 60 feet wide. The reason for the request is to fill a need for smaller single family lots to accommodate starter homes. Gary Santwire felt this requested lot size would &ccommodate just about any type of housing. Mr. Santwire indicated if the housing is done wrong it can be just as bad on an 80 ft. lot as on a 60 ft. lot, and that this is a problem we cannot control. He indicated that this amendment would apply only in zones where it would create less density and more green space. Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. No one appeared for or against the request. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. e Chairman Kimball indicated he has taken a look at this issue City wide and he did not like the impact it would have on the City. Chairman Kimball indicated for this reason he would vote against this request. Commission Nadeau was in agreement with Chairman Kimball. COMMISSIONER KIMBALL MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF OF THE APPLICANTS REQUEST FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT. COMMISSION JOHNSON SECONDED THE REQUEST. THE REQUEST CARRIED 6-0. 12. Preliminary Plat/Auburn Commons/Sin/:tle Family Lots/by R.E.P. Ltd./P.H. Gary Santwire requested that items 12 and 13 be heard separately. Chairman Kimball requested an interpretation from Tim Keane, City Attorney. e Mr. Keane indicated that he had not encountered a request like this before working on either the development side or the City staff side. Mr. Keane indicated that he was not aware of any ordinance or statute that specifically addresses the fact that you may consider only one application for a development proposal for a parcel at a given time. He felt that the Council cannot approve two preliminary plats for a gi ven parcel, because preliminary plat approval at the council level carries with it certain vested rights that are protected for a period of a year. Mr. Keane recommended that the Planning Commission consider one or both plats, but he will advise the council that they should act on only one. Mr. Keane further recommended that the Planning Commission should consider either implementing a policy or an ordinance amendment to address this issue so that an applicant may have only one development proposal for his property at a given time. Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 8 e Chairman Kimball felt the applicant should choose one or the other proposal. Gary Santwire indicated that when this comes before the council he will be asking for approval on only one plat. Mr. Santwire indicated he was asking for a recommendation on both these issues. Tim Keane, City Attorney, stated that there was one more legal issue that needs to be considered. He recommended that staff not accept an application until it is 100% complete. An applicant is entitled to a decision within 120 days after submission of a complete application. If the applicant does not have an approval, denial, or approval wi th conditions within 120 days, the applicant may request the City to issue an order deeming it approved. Mr. Keane further indicated the applicant is entitled to a decision because the City accepted his application. Commissioner Schroeder questioned Mr. Keane regarding the previous variance request on the plat of 7 single family homes, on which the Commission recommended denial. Commissioner Schroeder asked whether this denial would make this plat void. e Tim Keane indicated the Commission should stay consistent with its action on this request. Therefore, he suggested that the Commission should recommend denial on this subdivision application also. Chairman Kimball indicated he was recommending denial for both of the requests because of inadequate site plans. The City Planner's memo stated that there is no drainage plan provided with this plat. Chairman Kimball further indicated that the Commission had insufficient information to review this plat. Tim Keane indicated that he would recommend that the Commission take action on both subdivision requests and handle them by opening the public hearing. Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. No one appeared for or against the request. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MORTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF THE REQUEST FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF AUBURN COMMONS FOR 7 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS REFERENCING BILL WEBER'S MEMO DATED 3/21/90 AND BASED ON THE ABSENCE OF A DRAINAGE PLAN AND ALSO UNDERSIZED LOTS. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 13. Preliminary Plat/Auburn Commons (10 Townhouse Lots) Ltd./P.H. by R. E . P. ........... e Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. No one appeared for or against the request. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MORTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF THE REQUEST FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF AUBURN COMMONS FOR 10 DUPLEX LOTS REFERENCING BILL WEBER'S MEMO DATED 3/21/90 AND BASED ON THE Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 9 e ABSENCE OF A DRAINAGE PLAN. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 14. Site Plan Review/24 Unit Apartment on Lot 2 & 4. Block 4. Barrinj:{ton Place PUD/by R.E.P. Ltd/P.H. Steve Rohlf, Building & Zoning Administrator, explained the request indicating the applicant is requesting site plan review to allow a 24 unit apartment building. Chairman Kimball indicated that he agreed with Bill Weber that this site plan is not adequate. Mr. Santwire indicated he was hesitant to go through the expense of having detailed plans drawn up prior to knowing how the proposal would be decided. Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, commented on the maximum density of the proposal. Mr. Rohlf felt 24 units would not fit on this site. He further indicated 22 units per acre would be extremely dense. It was the general consensus of the Planning Commission that they were also concerned with the maximum density for the residential area. e Mr. Santwire indicated that they could not be expected to supply appropriate plans if we do not know the legal limi tat ion as far as maximum density. COMMISSIONER EBERLEY MOVED DENIAL OF THE SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A 24 UNIT APARTMENT ON LOT 2 & 4, BLOCK 4, BARR I NGTON PLACE PUD BY R. E . P. L TD . BECAUSE OF AN INCOMPLETE SITE PLAN. COMMISSIONER NADEAU SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. Commissioner Johnson indicated that she was extremely annoyed that Mr. Santwire has been given this much time and resource from our City. She recommended a "just say no policy" to this kind of request coming before the Commission with incomplete plans. Commissioner Johnson felt this was disrespectful to the Commission. 15. Variance ReQuest Partnership/P.H. Rej:{ardinj:{ Sij:{naj:{e by Darkenwald Family Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, addressed this issue indicating Darkenwald Family Partnership is requesting an 86 ft. increase in the maximum size of a freestanding sign and a 21 ft. increase on the maximum height allowed for signs in a C-3 zone. The sign requested would be 150 sq. ft. in total size and 35 ft. high. Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. e George Duvall of 17994 NW Union Street indicated he was representing the Darkenwald Family Partnership request. Mr. Duvall addressed the 5 standards as stated in their memorandum submitted to staff. Mr. Duvall felt that they met the 5 standards for a variance. Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 10 e Wally 0 Dell - felt because of the access onto both the private drive and then back onto Main street in order to get proper circulation creates a situation that puts this particular parcel in a hardship. Steve Schiminski of Circle C Foods was not against the request but was asking for the same consideration if this variance was granted for an increase in his signage. Carol Mills representing the board of the Guardian Angels was opposed to the request. Ms. Mills indicated the good will with the Darkenwalds has been destroyed with the removal of the trees on the west corner of their property. Removing the buffer between the properties has created a hardship for the residences. We feel that signage should not be allowed beyond the current ordinance. Ms. Mills submitted a petition from the residents opposing this request. Chairman Kimball requested that this be submitted as part of the public recorq. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. COMMISSIONER MORTON MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST BASED ON THE FAILURE TO MEET THE FIVE STANDARDS FOR A VARIANCE. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. e 16. Ordinance Amendment/Si~n Ordinance/by City of Elk River/P.H. Steve Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator, introduced this item. Mr. Rohlf suggested freestanding signs in the C-3 zone and billboards be addressed first, as most of the people present were here for this part of the sign ordinance. Mr. Rohlf indicated he was convinced that our current sign ordinance, which limits freestanding signage in the C-3 zone to 20 ft. in height and 64 sq. ft. in size, was too restrictive. This was discussed by staff and the Commission. General comments were taken at this time. John Darkenwald felt the sign ordinance was too restrictive to attract national companies to Elk River. We are loosing our best prospects because of the restrictive sign ordinance. Paul Bell (Sneaky Petes) felt the sign ordinance was too restrictive. He indicated we can not compare metropolitan areas with Elk River. Mr. Bell indicated its important to stay competitive with neighboring cities and allow businesses to advertise. Charlie Houle (Houle Oil) indicated he understood the need to regulate the sign ordinance, but felt other factors should be looked at, such as the number of tenants on a premise. -- James Rogeness (JR Tech Automotive) agreed with Mr. Houle that the number of tenants on a premise should be considered when reviewing this sign ordinance. e Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 11 e Rob VanValkenburg indicated he did some research of other cities regarding their sign ordinances, and felt some consideration should be given regarding front footage of lot, building size, and traffic speed. Mike Majkrzak felt that frontage of property, size of building, and scope of property should be taken into consideration. Mike Leary indicated he would like to see highway traffic speed taken into consideration. He felt it was important to get people to slow down before they get to the exit. Steve Linegar of AME Ready Mix indicated the sign ordinance was too restrictive to fit their needs. He indicated he would like to see the formal speed function considered when the sign ordinance is reviewed. COMMISSIONER EBERLEY MOVED TO RECOMMEND CONTINU~TION OF THE MEETING PAST MIDNIGHT. COMMISSIONER MORTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. James Klenke (Franklin Outdoor Advertising) representing the outdoor advertising industry, reviewed their proposal as submitted to staff requesting three new amendments be added to the ordinance. e Due to the lateness of the meeting it was decided by staff and the Commission to table this issue until the following meeting. COMMISSIONER NADEAU MOVED TO RECOMMEND TABLING THIS REQUEST UNTIL THE FOLLOWING MEETING. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 17. Ordinance Amendment/Interim Use Ordinance/by City of Elk River/P.H. Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. No one appeared for or against the request. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. Because of the lateness of the meeting this item was tabled. 18. Ordinance Amendment/Landscape Ordinance (Section 900.24 & 900.30) by the City of Elk River/P.H. Chairman Kimball opened the public hearing. No one appeared for or against the request. Chairman Kimball closed the public hearing. Because of the lateness of the meeting this item was tabled. 18.5 Information Items for Staff e Commissioner Morton reviewed the information items discussed at their last work session: l)Requested that Tim Keane be present at all regular Planning Commission meetings 2) Joint meeting workshop scheduled for June 25, 1990. 3) Go over the list of ordinance changes that was submitted in January by staff. 4) Plan to complete sign ordinance and be ready to make motion at May 22, 1990 meeting 5) Cluster home plan to work on at April 17, 1990 meeting. 6) Landscape e ---- e . Planning Commission Minutes 3/27/90 Page 12 Ordinance work on at April 17th meeting. 7) Metal skin buildings work with and have ready in July. 8) Mini storage ready in June and review in October. 9) Shade tree ordinance, staff indicated Gary Schmitz was working. 10) Mobile work shop scheduled for May 15, 1990 and October 16, 1990. 19. Adjournment There being no further business, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON MOVED TO ADJOURN THE 3/27/90 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. COMMISSIONER EBERLEY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. The meeting of the Elk River Commission adjourned at approximately 12.35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Sharon Maue Recording Secretary