Loading...
03-22-1988 PC MIN . . . MINU'1'IS or 'l'H1 ILK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AT THE ELK RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY MARCH 22. 1988 Members Present: Chairman Kropuenske. Commissioners. Fuchs. Barrett. Johnson. Morton and Kimball Members Absent: Commissioner Olson arrived at approximately 10:45 but did not take a seat at the table. Staff Present: Stephen Rohlf. Building & Zoning Administrator 1. Pursuant to due call and notice thereof. the meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. Consideration of 3/22/88 Planning Commission Agenda Under Item 11.5. Commissioner Fuchs added general discussion regarding City Council Action on zoning of properties east of Lowell. Under Item 11.6. Commissioner Fuchs added discussion of "City Council's Action of Temporary Real Estate Office/Model Homes." "- COMMISSIONER BARRETT MOVED TO APPROVE THE 3/22/88 PLANNING COMMISIION AGENDA AS AMENDED. COMMISSIONER MORTON SECONDED THB MOTION. TIll MOTION PASSED 6-0. 3. Consideration of 1/26/88 Planning Commission Minutes eOMMilliONlB rUCBS MOVln MiNU'l'I1 AI IUlMI'l"l'm) . MOTION CARRIED 6-0. '1'0 APPROVE THE 1/26/88 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE 4. Consider Multiple Principal Building on a Lot by Martin/P.H. Edmond "Chip" Stephen Rohlf. explained Mr. dwelling units. the property. grandfathered-in Building & Zoning Administrator. introduced this item. He Martin is proposing to add bathrooms to each of his five Currently there is one bathroom serving all the units on The multiple principal buildings on this lot are a nonconforming use. Chairman Kropuenske opened the public hearing. Carole Dahmen of 1184 6th Street questioned whether this area was going to be rezoned. Allan Orsborn of 622 Proctor was concerned if this was going to affect the value of his property. Fern Komar of 617 Proctor questioned whether these units would be large enough to accommodate a family and also whether they would remain a grandfathered-in nonconforming use. if the property were ever sold. . .' . Page 2 Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 1988 Chip Martin explained that these units would be used to house mostly single individuals. He would like to make improvements on these units. Mr. Martin felt that this was not a dream lot to build on as it was next to the railroad tracks and was a hard lot to do anything with because of its odd size. Mr. Martin further noted that he wanted to see if it was economically feasible to do the necessary repairs or perhaps remove the units and build something else. There being no further comments or questions, Chairman Kropuenske closed the public hearing. Stephen Rohlf, Building & Zoning Administrator explained that Russ Anderson and himself reviewed the property and discussed with the Commission their concerns: 1) wiring appeared dangerous 2) structural soundness of the buildings 3) units served with oil stoves had improper clearance 4) sewer line for the one bathhouse is reportedly below the City sewer line in the street 5) there are not proper fire walls between the units 6) there were no smoke detectors (these were installed immediately after the inspection). He further explained that the Fire Chief and State Electrical Inspector will be dealing with the most serious of these problems immediately. The Planning Commission discussed parking. Commissioner Kimball asked if it was possible to get the amount of parking required. The Building & Zoning Administrator stated that he thought there wasn't enough room for garages but would like to see 1-1/2 hardsurfaced off street parking stalls. Commissioner Johnson was concerned about the parking and felt there were too many buildings for such a small lot. Commissioner Fuch noted that he had reviewed the site and could not see it being restored. He felt this was detrimental to adjoining property owners and neighborhood. Commissioner Fuchs indicated that he would like to see a better sketch of what this site would be like redone. Chairman Kropuenske felt much the same as Commissioner Fuchs. He felt it was hard to visualize what this would look like restored and felt this was detrimental to the rest of the area. COMMI SSIONER FUCHS MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR CHIP MARTIN'S CHANGES TO HIS PROPERTY AS THIS WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE AREA. COMMISSIONER MORTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 5-1. COMMISSIONER BARRETT VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION. Commissioner Barrett was in favor of the improvements. He would like to see Mr. Martin be allowed to make the necessary improvements to bring the units up to code. . . . Page 3 Planning Commission Minutes March 22. 1988 5. Signage Request by Goodyear Auto and Tire Stephen Rohlf. Building & Zoning Administrator indicated that Goodyear Auto and Tire lies within Barrington Place PUD. There is no set limitation on the amount of signage within a PUD except those 1iminations governed by the Planning Commission. Lot frontage is used as a basis for signage in a PUD same as would be allowed in a commercial zone to stay consistent. The Planning Commission discussed signage. Commissioner Morton would prefer to see something smaller and comply more with total amount of signage allowed. Chairman Kropuenske and Commissioner Kimball were also in agreement with Commissioner Morton and felt the signage could be somewhat smaller and still get highway exposure. The Building & Zoning Administrator suggested rearranging the signage on the building. Commissioner Barrett was in agreement. Commissioner Kimball asked if another sign could be taken down and put the additional signage on the building as long as it did not exceed the existing 253 square footage. Commissioner Johnson was concerned about the other businesses in the area and what was the determining factor for their signage. Jeff Bradway of Goodyear discussed his reasoning for the additional signage. They have a new program "Certified Auto Service" which is nationwide and not all Goodyear Auto Stores meet the criteria to handle this service. He would like to see this advertised on a pylon sign with highway exposure. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to have Goodyear stay within the total amount of signage they have but rearrange it and stay within the 253 sq. ft. of signage. Mr. Bradway agreed to accept the requirements that no additional signage be added to the pylon sign but make additional changes to the building signage instead as long as it does not exceed the 253 sq. ft. COMHI SSIONER MORTON MOVED TO NOT ALLOW GOODYBAa AUTO AND '1'111 TO ADIJ ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE TO THE PYLON SIGN BUT TO ALJ.,OW aoODfIAi T@ MAiM CHANGES TO THE BUILDING SIGNAGE AS LONG AS '!'HI! DO NOT IXCIIIJ mIl EXISTING 253 SQUARE FEET OJ!' SIGNAGE. ALSO '!'HI NIW IIfJlMi MAY Ii LIGHTED.COMMISSIONER KIMBALL SECONDED THE MOTION. TlI MOTION 'AlliIJ 6-0. . . . Page 4 Planning Commission Minutes March 22. 1988 6. Consider Request for Multiple Principal Commercial Buildings on a Lot by Mark Zieska/P.H. Stephen Rohlf. Building and Zoning Administrator introduced this item. He indicated Mr. Zieska is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a second commercial building on the same lot for retail rental space. The lot in question. lies directly east of Sneaky Petes. He felt the lot could accommodate two buildings. Chairman Kropuenske opened the public hearing for both the variance and multiple principal commercial buildings per lot at this time. No one appeared for or against this request. Chairman Kropuenske closed the public hearing. Discussion took place regarding parking. Mr. Zieska indicated that there would be ample parking with or without the variance. Mr. Zieska explained. if allowed the variance. the building would be much more pleasing to the eye. concealing Sneaky Pete's dumpster and storage area. Mr. Zieska explained Sneaky Pete's had no problem with crowding the lot line. COMMl SSlONER BARRETT MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A RIQUEST I'OR MULTIPLE COl4MERCIAL BUILDING ON A LOT BY MARK ZIESKA WITH THE I'OLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. EACH BUILDING ON SITE IS REQUIR.ED AT LEAST ONE LOADING BERTH AS SHOWN ON SITE PLAN OR BE ALLOWED TO USE PARKING STALLS AS LONG AS IT IS DURING NON-PEAK BUSINESS HOURS. 2. THAT THERE IS A MINIMUM OF 70 PARKING STALLS STRIPED AND HARD SURF ACED . 3. THAT THB PARKING LOT IS LIT TO 1-1/2 FT. CANDLES AND THAT THE LIGHT IS DIRECTED AWAY FROM ADJACENT ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. 4. THAT THE SlGNAGB BE AS PER CITY CODE OR REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 5. THAT A MINIMUM 01' 201 OF THE LOT BE GREEN SPACE. LANDSCPAED WITH AT LEAST GRASS. 6. THAT THE SITE PLAN AS DRAWN SHOWS ADEQUATE AREA FOR DRAINFIELD. THE SIZE SHOULD BE DBTERMINED BY DARRELL MACK. SEWER SUPERINTENDENT PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE. 7. THAT A DRAINAGE PLAN BE APPROVED BY TERRY MAURER. CITY ENGINEER. SHOWING THAT THE INCREASED DRAINAGE FROM THIS LOT WILL NOT BE A PROBLEM TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. ' 8. THAT THE DUMPSTER I'OR THE PROPOSED BUILDING BE SCREENED AT LEAST ON THB NORTH AND WEST SIDES IN A DBSIGN HARMONIOUS TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE BUILDING. 9. THAT ALL SETBACKS REQUIREMENTS ARE MET. Page 5 . Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 1988 10. THAT THI BUILDING BE BAKED ENAMEL COLORED STEEL INCLUDING THE ROOF, II IT IS STIIPll THAN A 1/2 IN 12 PITCH. THAT THERE BE TWO PILLARS, 4 rT. IN WIDTH ON THE I'RONT CORNERS OF BOTH BUILDINGS ON THE SITE AND A MINIMUM 01' 3 FT. HIGH AND 15 FT. FROM EACH CORNER OF THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE NEW BUILDING. 11. THAT A PA1U.CING STALL IS ILIMINATED IN FRONT OF EACH EXIT FROM THE BUILDING AND THAT ALL DRIVES BE A MINIMUM OF 20 FT. IN WIDTH FREE OF OBSTRUCTION AS PER THE FIRE CHIEF'S RECOMMENDATION. COMMISnONll lUCRS SICONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 6-0. 7. Consider Variance Request by Mark Zieska/P.H. Stephen Rohlf, Building & Zoning Administrator explained that Mr. Zieska does not meet the five standards for granting a variance. Wanting a second building on a lot does not constitute a hardship. Mr. Zieska's building could be accomplished on this lot without a variance. Therefore, staff is recommending denial of the 15 ft. encroachment on the 20 ft. sideyard setback. . Chairman Kropuenske reviewed the five standards for a variance and felt he could not vote for this variance as the five standards are not met. He felt we had to stay uniform in our variance procedures and not set a precedent. Staff was recommending denial for this variance because it did not constitute a hardship. Commissioner Kimball also felt because Mr. Zieska does not meet the standards for a variance he could not approve this request. (;i_I ~~I@WI IAlUTT MOnD TO llCOMMBND TO THE CIn COUNCIL TO DENY THE VAlIANCI lilQUIST rOR MARK ZIISK' S SICOND BUILDING AS IT DOES NOT MEET THE fIVI ITAfI)Am)S 1'01 A VAlIANCE. COMMISSIONER MORTON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 8. Consider Zone Change Request by Dennis Anderson/Public Hearing Stephen Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator explained that Mr. Anderson is requesting a zone change on a parcel of property from R- 1C/Sing1e Family Residential to R-2B/Townhouse and Multi-Family Residential. Probably the most intensive principal use of R-2B zoned property is a 4 unit townhouse or multi-family dwelling. Commissioner Kropuenske cautioned the Planning Commission a zone change should be consider by itself and not in conjuction with another matter due to the fact zone changes can not have conditions set upon them. . Chairman Kropuenske opened the public hearing. Carol Mills representative of Guardian Angels Nursing Home, stated that she was in favor of this request. She felt that Mr. Anderson's development was of good quality. There being no further comments from the public, Chairman Kropuenske closed the public hearing. . . . Page 6 Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 1988 Discussion took place regarding the height of the building. Mr. Anderson stated that the building would be 1 foot above the flood plain. The Building & Zoning Administrator explained that the State law dictates that a zone change can only be approved if it is an original mistake, changed circumstance or consistency with the Land Use Plan. COMMISSIONER BARRETT MOVED TO RECOMMEHD TO THE CITY COUNCIL A"lOVAL 1'01 A ZONE CHANGE REQUEST BY DENNIS ANDERSON FROM R-IC/SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R-2B/TOWNHOUSE AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDDTIAL BECAUSE IT MEETS THE CRITERIA OF THE STATE LAW AND COMPLIES WITH THE LAND USE MAP. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 6-0. At this time a short recess was taken. 9. Consider Conditional Salonek/P.H by Airport" Cbarles Permit "Private Use Tbe Building & Zoning Administrator explained Airports are a conditional use within an A-l zone. Tbe runway in question is a grandfathered-in nonconforming use. The petitioners wish is to expand this use by adding a hanger. Mr. Salonek stated their intention was to design a building to look like a horsebarn to fit tbe character of the neigbborbood. They did not want to disrupt the area. This would be a private airport (private planes only) and not used for commercial. Chairman Kropuenske opened tbe public bearing. There being no one for or against tbe matter. Chairman Kropuenske closed the public bearing. Commissioner Johnson questioned tbe obstruction to the soutbeast of the airport mentioned in the FAA letter. Mr. Salonek noted that the obstruction was powerlines which is not in tbe immediate vacinity of the runway. The Building and Zoning Administrator stated be would like to suggest tbat since the property is not in one single ownership, but is to be used by more than one party, staff is recommending tbat the runway is described with an easement and recorded with tbeir properties. The runway physically sets on Salonek's and Varner's property. Commissioner Johnson was concerned about take off noise. Mr. Salonek indicated that tbe noise would not be any louder than that of a cbain saw. Mr. Salonek explained that the only time tbey would use tbe runway at night would be to land, whicb does not make much noise. Tbe following concerns were discussed by the Planning Commission: That tbe runway be used for private and not commercial uses; the number of planes using the runway; and lighting of tbe runway. . . . Page 7 Planning Commission Minutes March 22. 1988 The Building & Zoning Administrator stated he felt comfortable with this request after talking to experts regarding runways. COMMISSIONER KIMBA1.1. MOVED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PEUIT REQUESTED BY CHARLES SALONEK TO ALLOW THEM TO BUILD A HANGER IN AN A-l/AGRICULTURAL ZONED DISTRICT WITH THE FOL1.0WING STIPULATIONS AS OUTLINED IN THE BUILDING & ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S MEMO: 1. THAT THI RUNWAY IS DISCRIBED BY AN EASEMENT AND RECORDED WITH VARNER'S AND SALONEK'S PROPERTY. 2. THAT A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BE ESTABLISHED FOR THE ACCESS TO THE IUNWAY AND HANGIR. A 1.EGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCESS MUST BE 'IOVI))II) BY TUB PITITIONERS. THI ACCESS MUST BE A MINIMUM 7 TON DISICNID ROAD, AT 1.IAST 8 FT. WIDI WITH A MINIMUM OF 14 FT. OF HIIOIIT C1.IAIANCI AS PER RUSS ANDERSON'S RECOMMENDATION. ~. THAT TIll MAXIMUM NUMBIR OF PLANES USING THE RUlfdAY IS FIVE. VARNER Mm ItnsANIK All USPONSlB1.1 FOR THI FIVE AIRPLANES USING THE RtJRWAY AND THAT THEY USE IT SAFELY. 4. THAT '1'111 RUNWAY IS NOT USED FOR ANY COMMERCIAL USE ;. THAT TIll 'ITITtONERS ARI A1.1.0WED TO 1.IGHT THE RUNWAY WITH LANDING tICHTS IN TIll ruTUU WITHOUT AN ADDITIONAL CONDITIONAL USE PEUIT. 6. THAT THIRE I S A TWO YEAR REVIEW. eJ@MMu,noult rvCHS SICONDtm THI MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 10. Ordinance Amendment Amending Section 500.06 - Commercial Vehicles on Residential Lots Chairman Kropueneske opened and closed the public hearing. COMHI SSIONER MORTON MOVED TO RECOMMAD TO '1'111 CITY COUNCIt AI OImINAI~ AMENDMENT AMENDING SECTION 500.06 PUB1.IC NUISANCIS AFFECTING 'IACI AIm SAFETY AS PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER FUCHS SECONDED Till MOTIOI. THI MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 11. Planning Commission Representative to Attend Council Meeting on 4/18/88 It was indicated that Commissioner Fuchs and Commissioner Johnson would represent the Planning Commission at the April 18. 1988 City Council meeting. Page 8 Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 1988 ~ 11.5 Other Business General discussion was held regarding the City Council's request for the Planning Commission to review the zoning of properties west to Lowell Avenue and south of Main Street. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the property south of Main Street and east of Lowell to King Avenue (one lot south of Main) be zoned C-2/Central Commercial and south of that be zoned R-2B/Two-Family Residential. 11.6 Time Frame for Model Homes Discussion was carried on Commission reaffirmed that from the City Ordinance. in regards to Model Homes. The Planning temporary Real Estate Offices be eliminated 12. Adjournment There being no further business, COMMISSIONER MORTON MOVED TO ADJOURN THE ~1'1N@ or TUI ILK RIVIR PLANNING COMMISSION. COMMISSIONER FUCHS IICONDID TIll MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 11:15 p.m. ~ ~4fM, Sharon Maue Recording Secretary .