Loading...
4.3. SR 12-13-1993 e e e CITY OF ELK RIVER CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 93 - A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING THE ELK PARK CENTER PROPOSAL AND DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR ELK PARK CENTER WHEREAS, Elk River Associates, Ltd., together with Kraus Anderson Construction Company (the Developers) have applied for a Conditional Use Permit to develop a shopping center (the Project) on certain property located north of the School District property between Jackson Avenue and Highway 169 (the Property); and WHEREAS, the City Council, on September 31, 1991, and June 15, 1992, took action to rezone the Property to Planned Unit Development and designate the Property for Highway Business Uses on the City's Comprehensive Land Use map; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 900.12(15) and 900.42 of the Elk River City Code of Ordinances, a Conditional Use Permit and preliminary plat approval must be obtained to develop the Property as proposed by Developers; and WHEREAS, an application for a Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Plat approval was submitted to the City in July 1992; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on this application before the Elk River Planning Commission on August 25, 1992, at which time the Planning Commission heard a presentation on the Project, took testimony from all those present who asked to speak on the matter, and continued action on the application due to a lack of sufficient information; and WHEREAS, the Developers subsequently submitted additional information and a second public hearing was held before the Elk River Planning Commission on June 10, 1993, at which time the Planning Commission heard a presentation on the Project, took testimony from all those present who asked to speak on the matter, and the application was continued again for lack of sufficient information; and WHEREAS, the Developers subsequently revised the site plan for the Project and submitted additional information in support of the application for a Conditional Use Permit and preliminary plat approval; and e WHEREAS, the Elk River Planning Commission held a public hearing on the revised site plan on October 19, 1993, at which time the Planning Commission heard a presentation on the Project and received testimony from all those present who asked to speak on the matter; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at its meeting on October 19, 1993, recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Plat subject to a number of conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the application for a Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Plat on October 26, 1993, at which time the City Council heard a presentation on the Project and took testimony from all those present who asked to speak on the matter; and WHEREAS, the City Council also received a number of written comments on the Project both before and at the public hearing held on October 26, 1993; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed all of the materials submitted by the Developers, the staff and the public, and has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the testimony received at the Public Hearing on October 26, 1993; and e WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Elk River provides that a Conditional Use Permit shall not be granted unless seven (7) specific criteria set forth in Section 900.42(4) of the Elk River City Code of Ordinances have been met; and WHEREAS, the materials and testimony received by the City Council on the Project have raised a number of questions and concerns among the City Council Members regarding the Project and the compliance of the project as presented with the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance for issuance of a Conditional Use Permit; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Elk River finds that the Project, as proposed, does not meet the standards for issuance of a Conditional Use Permit set forth in Section 900.42(4) of the City's Zoning Ordinance, for the following reasons: A. Drainage. 1. The Plans as submitted do not make adequate provision for drainage of the Project site. No easement has been obtained or submitted which e 2. e B. e e would allow drainage of the Project as proposed, and no alternative drainage solution has been identified. Traffic. 1. Access from Highway 169. The major entrance to the Project from Highway 169 has only right- in/right-out access. This restricted access at the major entrance to the Project from Highway 169 will adversely affect the existing intersections of Highway 169 with School Street and Jackson/193rd Avenue, as well as the School Street/Freeport and Jackson/Freeport intersections. The Developers have not adequately addressed the need for or the possibility of obtaining full access to the Project from Highway 169. 2. Highway 169/School Street Intersection. The Project will adversely affect traffic movement at the intersection of Highway 169 and School Street/Elk Hills Drive. The Developers have not adequately addressed how these impacts will be avoided or mitigated. 3. School Street and Freeport Avenue Intersection. The Project will have an adverse impact on the intersection of School Street and Freeport Avenue. The Developers have not addressed how the adverse impact on this intersection and the flow of traffic between Highway 169 and Freeport on School Street will be managed. 4. School Street, from Highway 169 to Jackson. The Project will result in increased traffic levels on School Street between Highway 169 and Jackson Avenue. The plans presented by the Developer at the Council meeting on October 26, 1993 show medians in School Street which will restrict access to Burger King and to Parker School. The adverse impact of the proposed medians on those property owners has not been addressed by the Developers. 5. Jackson Avenue. The Developers have not adequately addressed the impacts of the Project on Jackson Avenue. Particular concerns include the proposed access off of Jackson into Taco Bell and the intersections of Jackson/Highland Road and Jackson/Freeport. 3. 6. H~9hland Road. The Developers have not adequately identified or addressed the impacts of increased traffic ~olurnes on Highland Road. e 7. Highway 10 Traffic. The Developers have not adequately addressed the impact of traffic travelling to and from the Project from Highway 10 west of Downtown Elk River, nor the impact of this traffic on Procter Avenue and School Street. C. Public Health and Safety. 1. ~pact on schools. Increased traffic along School Street and Jackson Avenue in close proximity to the existing schools will adversely affect the schools and the safety of school children traveling to and from school and from the schools to Lions Park. The shopping center will alSo have an impact on the schools located immediately south of the Project. The Developers have not adequately addressed how these impacts will be mitigated nor how the Project will be buffered from these schools. 2. Air ~ality~ Increased traffic along the School Street corridor will ad~ersely affect the health and safety of children by creating higher levels of carbon monoxide around the schools. e 3. HQlding pond. The holding pond located between the Project and the SchoolS will be a danger to children playing in the school playgrounds and should be enclosed as adequately as possible to keep children out of the pond. 4. Neighboring procerty_ The increased traffic congestion and activity whic~ the Proje~t will bring will detrimentally affect the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity including properties located along SchOOl Street, Jackson Avenue and Highland Road. NOW, THEREFORE, BB IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Elk River, based upon the findings set forth abo~e and all of the materials submitted to the Council on this matter, and the testimony received at the public hearing, does hereby: 1. Deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit for the project as presented; and e 4.