7.1. SR 12-20-1993
I-\.(
( ;;
rlk River
e
e
ITEM 7. 1.
TO:
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
STEVEN B. ACH, CITY PLANNE~
FROM:
DATE: DECEMBER 20, 1993
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR ELK PARK CENTER
COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
ISSUE
Attached is a memo from Peter Beck and the Resolution approving
the conditional use permit for the development of Elk Park
Center Commercial Planned Unit Development. The Resolution as
prepared addresses the findings set forth in the Resolution of
Denial, seven standards for granting a conditional use permit,
and specific conditions which need to be addressed in order to
effectuate the conditional use permit.
I think it is worth noting a few conditions stated in the
Resolution. First of all, reference is made to the
preparation, execution, and Council approval of a Developers
Agreement. This agreement references necessary on and
off-site street, utility, and other infrastructure
improvements. In addition, the Developers financial
responsibility in making these improvements, and when the
improvements need to be completed will all be addressed.
Secondly, a PUD Agreement will be prepared outlining the
development standards, setback requirements,
permitted/conditional uses, signage requirements, and other
necessary issues to assist in the administration of the
development of Elk Park Center.
These two agreements are essentially the backbone to implement
the conditional use permit. Both of these agreements will be
brought back to the City Council for consideration at a later
date.
PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS
All of the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission
have been incorporated in the resolution except for the
condition referring to the level of service at various
intersections not being degraded. As Terry Maurer discussed in
the preliminary feasibility study, some intersections cannot be
improved to maintain the same level of service after the
project as existed previously. Therefore, this condition has
been modified; however, the intent is to maintain the same
level of service at as many intersections as possible.
P.O. Box 490 · 13065 Orono Parkway · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425
e
e
e
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council
approving a conditional use
Commercial Planned Unit Development.
approve Resolution No. 93
permit for Elk Park Center
e
e
e
MEMORANDUM
TO:
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD.
Attomers at Law
lSOO NOlWest Financial Center
7900 Xerxes Avenue South
Bloominiton, Minnesota SS431
Telephone: (612) 835-3800
FAX: (612) 896-3333
Mayor Henry A. Duitsman and Members of the City
Council
Peter Beck, City Attorney
December 17, 1993
Elk Park Center
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Attached is a resolution making findings of fact, approving a
conditional use permit, and setting forth the conditions for
issuance of a conditional use permit for Elk Park Center. This
resolution has been prepared from the Minutes prepared by the
City Clerk and my notes from the public hearing on December 13,
1993. If this resolution is inaccurate or incomplete, the City
Council should revise and supplement it as necessary before
adoption. For instance, Section I.e. on pages 8-9 of the
Resolution lists several "General Findings" regarding the
Project. If the Council would like to include additional
findings, this would be the place to do so. Likewise, Section
III.E. on pages 14-15 lists a number of "Special Conditions" for
approval of the Project. If I have missed a condition the
Council would like to include, this would be the place to do so.
I will be at the Council meeting on December 20, 1993, to assist
in making any revisions or additions to the resolution. In the
meantime, please feel free to call me over the weekend (929-8877)
if you have any questions or suggestions.
PKB:IN9s
e
CITY OF ELK RIVER
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 93 -
A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING THE ELK PARK CENTER
PROPOSAL, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ELK PARK CENTER,
AND SETTING FORTH THE CONDITIONS FOR ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT 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
e
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 per.rnit 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
e
e
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, at the close of the public hearing on
October 26, 1993, identified a number of concerns and
issues with the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, following the public hearing and Council
discussion of the Project on October 26, 1993, adopted
motions denying the Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary
Plat for Elk Park Center; and
WHEREAS, the motions to deny were subsequently amended by separate
motions of the City Council on October 26, 1993, which
motions rescinded the denials of the Conditional Use
Permit and Preliminary Plat and directed City staff to
prepare Findings of Fact in a Resolution of Denial of the
Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary Plat, for
consideration by the City Council on November 15, 1993;
and
WHEREAS, City staff subsequently prepared a proposed "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" for
consideration by the City Council, which resolution
identified 12 reasons for denial of the Conditional Use
Permit and Preliminary Plat; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed and considered the proposed
Resolution for Denial at its regularly scheduled meeting
of November 15, 1993 and took the following actions:
o
The Council amended Section C.3. of the proposed
Resolution of Denial regarding enclosure of the
holding ponding area;
2.
e
o
The Council called a special meeting of the City
Council for December 13, 1993, and continued any
action on the proposed Resolution of Denial until
that meeting;
o
The Council directed staff to advertise a public
hearing for the December 13, 1993, meeting to allow
citizens to express their opinions on any revisions
or new information to be presented on the Conditional
Use Permit and Preliminary Plat;
The Council directed staff to work with the
Developers to address the issues identified in the
proposed Resolution of Denial;
The Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility
study prior to December 13, 1993, addressing the
traffic and drainage issues related to the proposed
project; and
o
o
WHEREAS, on November 22, 1993, a Work Session on Elk Park Center
was held to identify specific traffic and drainage issues
to be addressed by the City Bngineer in the Feasibility
Study; and
WHEREAS, this Work Session was attended by the City Council, City
staff, and representatives of the Developers and the
Citizens Who Care organization; and
e
WHEREAS, the Developer subsequently submitted a revised site plan
addressing the issues identified in the Resolution of
Denial; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on December 13, 1993, held a public
hearing on the revised site plan submitted by the
Developer, at which time:
o
City staff reviewed the revisions to the site plan;
o
the City Engineer presented his feasibility study on
the drainage and traffic issues identified by the
City Council as major concerns;
the Developer addressed the 12 grounds for denial set
forth in the proposed Resolution of Denial; and
WHEREAS, the public hearing on December 13, 1993, was properly
noticed as a public hearing on the Project and the City
Council received testimony from all those present who
asked to speak on the matter; and
e
o
3.
e
WHEREAS, following the presentations from staff and the Developer,
and the testimony received from the public, the City
Council discussed the proposed project and the grounds for
denial set forth in the Resolution of Denial; and
WHEREAS, at the close of its discussion on December 13, 1993, the
City Council determined to take no action on the proposed
Resolution of Denial, and directed City staff to prepare a
Resolution of Approval of the Project, setting forth the
grounds for approval and all conditions of approval, for
consideration by the City Council at its regularly
scheduled meeting on December 20, 1993; and
WHEREAS, in its lengthy consideration of this Project the City
Council has reviewed all of the written materials
submitted by the Developers, the staff and the public
before and during the public hearings held on this matter,
and has considered the recommendation of the Planning
Commission and the testimony received at the public
hearings on October 26, 1993, and December 13, 1993; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Elk River sets forth
in Section 900.42(4) seven criteria for the issuance of a
Conditional Use Permit;
e
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Elk River makes the following findings, and approves a
Conditional Use Permit for Elk Park Center, subject to the
conditions set forth herein:
I. FINDINGS
A. Specific Findings on the Issues Set Forth in
Resolution of Denial
1. Drainage. The revised plan conforms to City
standards and requirements by providing that all
drainage for the Project will be accommodated on
site.
2. Traffic.
o
Access from Hiqhw~ 169.
The Developers have fully investigated the
possibility of obtaining full access to the
Project from Highway 169. The Minnesota
Department of Transportation analysis, as
well as the City Engineer's analysis, is
that full access from Highway 169 is not
necessary at this time. The existing
intersections on Highway 169 will handle
the traffic anticipated from this project.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation
e
4.
e
e
e
has indicated a willingness to look at
other solutions if levels of service
deteriorate at the existing intersections
on Highway 169.
o
Highway 169/School Street Intersection.
The City Bngineer's feasibility study has
addressed how the impacts on this
intersection can be mitigated.
o
School Street and FreepOrt Avenue
Intersection.
The City Bngineer's feasibility study
illustrates how this intersection can be
designed to manage traffic to and from the
Project.
o
School Street. from Highway 169 to Jackson.
The City Bngineer's feasibility study
indicates that proposed traffic
improvements on School Street will maintain
full access to Parker School. Although
Burger King will lose direct left-in, left-
out access from School Street, access will
continue to be available via School Street
to Freeport and into Burger King off
Freeport.
o
Jackson Avenue.
The Developers have eliminated the access
off of Jackson into Taco Bell and have
added a secondary access to the Project off
of Jackson Avenue. This access will reduce
the impacts of traffic from the Project on
the intersections of Jackson/Highland and
Jackson/Freeport, as well as reducing
traffic on School Street.
o
Highland Road.
The City Bngineer's feasibility study
indicates that increased traffic on
Highland Road will be within acceptable
levels.
o
Highway 10 Traffic.
The City Engineer's feasibility study
indicates that traffic traveling to and
from the Project from Highway 10 will
5.
e
3.
e
increase existing volumes only
approximately 3% to 6%, which is an
imperceptible increase.
Public Health and Safety.
o
Impact on schools.
Although the project will increase traffic
along School Street, the new access to the
Project off Jackson Avenue will reduce
traffic levels on School Street.
Furthermore, new signals at School Street
and Freeport will improve safety for
children who need to cross School Street.
The City Engineer has discussed the
increased traffic levels and proposed
redesign of School Street with the School
District. The School District has not
indicated that the increased traffic or
redesign will present any unreasonable
danger to school children.
o
Air Ouality.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA), in its review of the Environmental
Assessment Worksheet for the Project, has
not indicated any concern regarding air
quality in the area surrounding the
Project. Air quality will be looked at in
detail when the Developers apply for an
Indirect Source Permit from the MPCA.
o
HOlding Pond.
The Developers have proposed a one-inch
mesh fence around the proposed holding pond
which will be very difficult for children
to climb over.
o
Neighboring Prqperty.
Increased traffic from the Project will
have an impact on neighboring properties.
However, revisions to the Plan, such as the
new access off of Jackson Avenue, will
reduce these impacts to the point where the
project will not unreasonably affect
neighboring property.
B. Specific Findings on the Standards for Issuance of a
Conditional Use Permit.
e
6.
The City Council of the City of Elk River finds that
the Blk Park Center Project:
e
Will not endanger, injure or detrimentally
affect the use and enjoyment of other property
in the immediate vicinity or the public health,
safety, morals, comfort, convenience or general
welfare of the neighborhood or the City.
This Project will bring increased traffic
to the City of Elk River and in particular
to the area surrounding the proposed
Project. However, it is the City Council's
judgment that this traffic will not
endanger, injure or detrimentally affect
the use or enjoyment of other property.
The increased tax base and additional
services which the Project will provide the
community result in a substantial net
benefit to the City, including the
immediate surrounding area, from the
Project.
2. will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
e
.
1.
3 .
The City's Comprehensive Plan designates
this property for Highway Business uses,
which the Project proposes.
Will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding
vacant property.
The Project will have no negative impacts
on the development of surrounding property;
and will have a positive benefit by helping
fund the extension of public utilities
which will serve surrounding properties.
will be served adequately by and will not
adversely affect essential public facilities.
The Project can be served by existing and
proposed public utilities, and will help
fund the extension of public utilities
which will benefit and contribute to the
development and growth of residential and
commercial property in the City. Off-site
traffic impacts of the Project will be
managed by the redesign of surrounding
roads as necessary to ensure that the
Project will not create traffic congestion
or interference with traffic on adjacent
and neighboring public thoroughfares.
4.
7.
e
5.
Will not be detrimental to other persons or
property.
This Project has been carefully designed,
and the impacts of traffic on surrounding
streets carefully studied, to ensure that
the Project will not detrimentally impact
other persons or property.
6.
Will not result in the destruction, loss or
damage of any natural, scenic or historic
feature of major importance. ,
The Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EAW)for this Project, which has been
approved by the City Council, did not
identify any scenic or historic feature of
major importance on the site of the
proposed project.
Will fully comply with all other requirements of
the City's Code of Ordinances.
Following approval of a Conditional Use
Permit for this Project, the Developer will
be required to enter into a Development
Agreement and Planned Unit Development
Agreement. These agreements will ensure
that the Developer and the Project will
fully comply with all requirements of the
City's Code.
C. General Findings.
e
e
7.
In addition to the specific findings set forth above,
the City Council further finds that the Project meets
the standards for issuance of a Conditional Use
Permit for all of the reasons stated by the City
Council, the Planning Commission and the public
during the October 19, October 26, and December 13,
1993, public hearings on the Project, including, but
not limited to:
o
The plan revisions presented on December 13,
1993, have significantly reduced the off-site
impacts of the Project and made the Project
considerably better than when it was presented
to the City Council in October.
8.
e
The revised plans and new information submitted
on December 13, 1993, have addressed all of the
major issues with this Project.
II. Decision.
o
It is the determination of the City Council of the
City of Elk River, for the reasons set forth above,
that the Developer has met the requirements for the
issuance of a Conditional Use Permit. Therefore, the
City Council hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit
for the Project, subject to the conditions set forth
below.
III. The Conditional Use Permit for Elk Park Center is
contingent upon the Developer complying with the
following conditions.
A. Plat Approval
1.
Approval of the Conditional Use Permit is
contingent upon the Developer submitting
and the City Council approving a revised
Preliminary Plat which conforms to the
conditions of this Conditional Use Permit
approval, including the recommendations of
the City Planner and the City Engineer as
set forth during the December 13, 1993,
public hearing.
e
2. The revised Preliminary Plat will be
considered by the City Council at a future
date, and will be approved subject to such
conditions as the Council shall deem
appropriate.
3. Final plat approval for the project will
not be granted until the Developer has
entered into a Planned Unit Development
Agreement and Developers Agreement as
required by the conditions of this
Conditional Use Permit approval.
B. Planned Unit Development Agreement.
1. Approval of the Conditional Use Permit is
contingent upon a Planned Unit Development
Agreement (POD Agreement) being entered
into between the Developer and the City
outlining the standards; uses, and
procedures for development within the Elk
Park Center PUD.
e
9.
e
e
e
2.
The Developer shall submit the following
materials, which the City shall use to
prepare a PUD Agreement:
o
A proposed "Development Plan" for the
Project. The Development Plan will
provide the foundation for future site
plan reviews and shall include the
following elements:
o
A Site Plan for the Project which
incorporates all of the plan
revisions submitted to the City
Council and all of the conditions
for approval imposed by the City
Council.
o
A Landscaping Plan for the entire
Project. The Landscaping plan
should include a landscaping
theme and demonstrate landscaping
continuity for the entire
Project.
o
A Grading Plan for the entire
Project. The Grading Plan shall
include tree protection measures
to preserve as many of the
existing trees as possible,
particularly along Jackson Road,
to provide maximum screening to
the residential areas towards the
west. The grading plan shall
also provide for extensive
berming along Jackson Road and
Freeport Avenue. The Plan shall
show undulating berms along
Freeport Avenue and appropriate
berming along Jackson Road to
screen loading facilities from
the residential areas towards the
west.
o
A Setback Plan showing minimum
and maximum setbacks for each
proposed building in the Project.
A complete Sign Plan for the.
entire Project outlining the
types and sizes of signs. The
Sign plan shall also be
incorporated into the PUD
Agreement.
o
10.
o
A written narrative of
Development Standards which shall
set forth and describe:
e
(1) the architectural theme for
the Project, which shall be
carried out through the
entire Project and
incorporated into the PUD
Agreement;
(2) the proposed building
materials' for the Project
which shall, at a minimum,
consist of a combination of
decorative rock face block,
face brick, decorative and
glazed concrete block, and
prefinished metal materials;
(3) the proposed permitted and
conditional uses within the
Project area;
e
(4) the proposed operational
performance standards for
the Project, including hours
of operation, etc.; and
(5) such other development
standards for the Project as
the Developer shall propose.
3. The Planned Unit Development Agreement
will be prepared by City staff, in
consultation with the Developer, based
upon the materials submitted by the
Developer, the feasibility report
prepared by the City Engineer, and the
conditions of approval of the
Conditional Use Permit as set forth in
this resolution of approval.
4. The Planned Unit Development Agreement
shall include and incorporate the
following:
o
The Project Development Plan,
including:
o Site Plan
o Landscaping Plan
e
11.
,..,. 4
e
e
C.
e
o
Grading Plan
Setback Plan
o
o
Sign Plan
o
The development standards for the
Project, including:
o
permitted and conditional
uses
o
permitted building materials
o
operation requirements and
restraints
such other development
standards as the City
Council shall require.
5. The Planned Unit Development Agreement
shall be approved by the City Council.
Amendments to the PUD Agreement,
including amendments to the plans
incorporated in the PUD Agreement,
shall also be apprqved by the City
Council.
o
Developers Agreement
1. A Developers Agreement shall be
prepared and executed outlining the
terms and conditions for approval of
the Preliminary Plat for the Project,
including the on-site and off-site
infrastructure improvements that will
be required for development of the
Project.
2. Prior to execution of the Developers
Agreement, a complete feasibility
report shall be prepared by the City
Engineer specifying the necessary on-
site and off-site improvements
relating to the project.
The Developers Agreement shall provide
that the Developer will pay the costs
of all on-site public improvements
necessary for the project to proceed;
and further that the developer shall
bear its fair share of the costs of
off-site public improvements necessary
3 .
12.
e
4.
for the Project to proceed, as
determined in the feasibility study
prepared by the City Engineer. This
Conditional Use Permit approval is
specifically contingent upon Developer
agreeing in the Developers Agreement
to so pay its share of on-site and
off-site public improvement costs.
The Developers Agreement shall provide
that Developer will construct, or
cause to be constructed, all on-site
or off-site public improvements which
the City Engineer shall deem necessary
for development of the Project to
proceed.
5 .
The Developers Agreement shall also
provide for Developer'S compliance
with the other requirements of the
City Code of Ordinances for
preliminary and final plat approval,
including park dedication, etc.
The Developers Agreement shall be
approved by the City Council prior to
approval of the final plat for the
Project. Amendments to the Developers
Agreement shall also be approved by
the City Council.
D. Site Plan Approvals.
e
e
6.
1. Following approval by the City Council
of the POD Agreement and the
Developers Agreement, the City Council
will consider site plan approval for
Phase I of the Project.
2. Developer shall commence the site plan
approval process by filing an
application therefor with City staff.
This application shall include such
plans and supporting materials as City
staff shall require.
3. Site plan approval shall be required
for each phase of the Project, and for
any substantive amendment to any
previously approved phase of the
Project, prior to obtaining a building
permit.
13.
4.
Each site plan approval request shall
be reviewed by the Planning Commission
and City Council and a public hearing
held thereon before approval.
5. Site plan approval shall be granted to
a particular phase of the Project, or
amendment thereto, only if the City
Council finds that the proposed site
plan is consistent with the terms and
conditions of this Conditional Use
Permit, the PUD Agreement (including
all plans incorporated therein), and
the Developers Agreement.
e
6. The City Council may, when approving
individual site plans, impose such
conditions as it shall deem necessary
to ensure that the Project complies
with the requirements of this
Conditional Use Permit approval and
the City Code of Ordinances.
E. Special Conditions.
e
The Conditional Use Permit for the
Project is contingent upon preliminary
and final plat being approved by the
City Council.
2. A five (5) foot high chain link
security fence with a one inch mesh
shall be provided around all storm
drainage ponds.
1.
3. The appropriate permits shall be
obtained from the Minnesota Department
of Transportation authorizing the
necessary grading and improvements for
right-in/right-out access off
Highway 169, all occurring within the
highway right-of-way.
4. All storm drainage ponds shall be
designed in accordance with the Best
Management Practice guidelines. This
calls for a 4:1 side slopes above the
static water level with a bench area
of approximately 10:1 at the water
level and 3:1 beneath the standing
water level.
5.
The Developer shall indemnify and hold
the City harmless from any claim from
e
14.
e
e
.
the owner or operator of the Burger
King facility located at Highway 169
and School Street related to loss of
access due to a median being
constructed down the middle of School
Street.
6.
Approval of this Conditional Use
Permit is also specifically contingent
upon developer complying with such
other conditions aSlthe City Council
shall require for approval of the
preliminary and final plats, the PUD
Agreement, the Developers Agreement
and the site plan(s) for any phase.
Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Elk River
this ____ day of I 1993.
Henry A. Duitsman, Mayor
ATTEST:
Sandra A. Thackeray, City Clerk
PKB:IQ5s