Loading...
06-12-2007 PC MINMEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL JUNE 12, 2007 Members Present: Chair Stevens, Commissioners Austad, Lemke, Scott and Westgaard Members Absent: Commissioners Anderson and Staul Staff Present: Jeremy Barnhart, Planning Manger; Sheila Cartney, Senior Planner; Chris Leeseberg, Planner; Terry Maurer, Public Works Director; Debbie Huebner, Recording Secretary 1. Call Meeting To Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the meeting of the Elk River Planning Cotntnission was called to order at 6:40 p.m. by Chair Stevens. 2. Consider 6/12/07 Planning Commission Agenda MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO APPROVE THE JUNE 12, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 3. Consider 5/8/07 Planning Commission Minutes MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO APPROVE THE MAY 8, 2007 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 4. Planning Comnssion Ret~resentative to Attend June 18 2007 City Council Meetin Commissioner Scott will attend the June 18, 2007 City Council meeting in place of Commissioner Anderson. 5.1. Reouest by Alliance Machine for Ordinance Amendment to Section 30 1284 Business Park Re~ulattons Case No OA 07-07 -Public Hearin Alliance Machine requests an amendment to allow accessory structures in the Business Park zoning Districts in order to provide separate warehousing space to store certified material (Steel and aluminum bars) for an aerospace customer, to meet military and aerospace compliances, which are mandated. Mr. Leeseberg stated that the applicant proposed to construct the building to match the existing structure. He noted that the applicant could construct an attached structure to house the materials, but that the applicant plans to expand the building in 5-10 years. Also, if they attach a new structure to the existing building, it will block emergency vehicle access to the back of their building, which they built per the City's specific request. Staff recommends denial of the request based on the fact that the request is open-ended in what would be allowed for sizes and design guidelines. He stated that if the Planning Comtission chose to approve the request, staff would recommend that the accessory structures be limited to a maximum of 1,200 square feet per property. Mobility of a variance or conditional use permit, but neither met the criteria. Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Page 2 Chair Stevens asked if the request could be considered as a conditional use permit, rather than an ordinance amendment. Mr. Barnhart stated that staff is forwarding the request to the Commission as presented, and that staff is recommending denial. He stated that if the Planning Commission concurs that the request should be allowed as conditional use with certain conditions, this language could be considered in an amendment at a future meeting. Chair Stevens asked if the request could be allowed as an interim use. NIr. Barnhart stated that Planning Commission could also consider that option. Chair Stevens opened the public hearing. Brad Provo, Alliance Machine, applicant -Stated that this application appeared to be is only avenue to pursue what he needed. He stated that there are other machine shops with outdoor storage that is hanging out from the buildings and is rusted. He stated he has no intention of letting that happen. He stated that he is forced to store his bobcat and lawn mowers in space inside the building that he needs for machinery. Commissioner Lemke asked why the material had to be stored separately. Mr. Provo stated that he is required to isolate incoming material. He stated that he could build a wall within the building to separate the material, but that that it cannot interfere with his future planned expansion and fire access around the back of the building. Commissioner Lemke stated that he wants to support businesses in Elk River and felt that the issue could be worked out. Commissioner Scott asked what type of material would be stored. Mr. Provo stated that it consisted of round and square bars of aluminum, which is getting harder to find, creating a need to stockpile. Commissioner Scott asked when he would like to build the structure. Mr. Provo stated as soon as possible and that he would like to get the block work done before winter. Commissioner Scott asked if the building would be secure. Mr. Provo stated that it would be attached to the main building security system. There being no further public comment, Chair Stevens closed the public hearing. Chair Stevens stated that he felt an amendment could be worked out at the next workshop meeting. He stated he could understand why the applicant wanted a detached structure, given the proposed expansion plans. He stated that he is not generally in favor of accessory structures but felt if they were to minimize the impact, it would be more acceptable. Commissioner Scott stated that he did not want to see a lot of small buildings in the business parks, but felt he could support an interim use. He felt the issue was similar to the use of temporary trailers at the schools and should be a temporary solution. Commissioner Austad stated that he was in favor of addressing the request quickly at the next workshop meeting, in order not to jeopardize the businesses operations Mr. Barnhart stated that the request could be tabled to the June 26th workshop in order to come up with alternative language for an ordinance amendment, and then address at the July 10th Planning Commission meeting, forwarding on the July 16th City Council meeting. Mr. Barnhart explained that the 60-process could be extended if needed. Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Page 3 MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO TABLE THE REQUEST BY ALLIANCE MACHINE FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, CASE NO. OA 07-07, TO THE JUNE 26, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 5.2. Request by Tonv Powell for Conditional Use Permit to Create Open Water Pond in a Wetland Case No. CU 07-11 -Public Hearin Ms. Blake-Bradley reviewed the request by the applicant to excavate a 9,000 square foot pond in a wetland near his home which will result in 500 cubic yards of spoils (wetland soils) being excavated. She reviewed the conditions recommended by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) and staff. She noted that the site is listed as a State Historical Site and that if archaeological artifacts are found during excavation (or spreading the spoils), work must stop on the project. Staff recommends approval of the request with the conditions as stated in the memo dated June 12, 2007. Chair Stevens asked why the site was listed as a historical site. Ms. Blake-Bradley explained that the site was determined to likely have had water on it hundreds to thousands of years ago and that archaeological artifacts are often found in these types of areas. Coimnission Austad asked what would happen if anything were found. Ms. Blake-Bradley stated that there would be a representative from St. Cloud State University out to investigate. Chair Stevens opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Stevens closed the public hearing. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY TONY POWELL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CASE NO. CU 07- 11, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • ALL EXCAVATED SPOILS MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE WETLAND BOUNDARY PRIOR TO SPREADING AROUND THE HOME; • EROSION CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S), I.E. SILT FENCE, MUST BE INSTALLED BEWTEEN TEH WETLAND AND UPLAND AREAS PRIOR TO EXCAVATION AND PLACEMENT OF SPOILS; • BPM'S MUST BE REMOVED FOLLOWING FINAL STABILIZATION OF SOILS; • ATTACH THE STANDARD ARCHEOLOGICAL DISCLAIMER REQUIRING WORK TO STOP IF ARCHAEOLOGICAL ARTIFACTS ARE FOUND DURING EXCAVATION (OR LAND SPREADING THE SPOILS); • APPROVAL BY THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR THE PROJECT (SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF ELK RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT); • HOURS OF OPERATION DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE OPEN WATER POND AND PLACEMENT OF SPOILS AROUND THE HOME WILL BE 7AM TO SPM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Page 4 5.3. Re uest b Envision Co. LLC for a Zone Chan e from IA Li ht Industrial to PUD Planned Unit Development (Ar-Mon Commercial Park 2nd, Case No ZC 07 05 Public Hearing 5.4. Request by Envision Co. LLC for Conditional Use Permit (Ar Mon Commercial Park 2nd Addition) Case No PCU 07-12 5.5. Request by Envision Co. LLC for Preliminary and Final Plat (Ar Mon Commercial Park 2nd Addttion Case No. P 07-05 Ms. Cartney provided background information regarding the request, history of the original plat, current zoning and site conditions. The applicant would like to split the property into four individual lots with common access and parking to create a campus layout for their current operations. Ms. Cartney explained how parking, access, the well and drainage system would be shared. She noted that cross access agreements would be required for the proposed Lots 2 and 4. Staff recommends approval of the requests based on the findings and conditions listed in the staff report. Chair Stevens asked if there would be shared parking for Lot 4. Ms. Cartney stated that the recommendations stated that some type of association be formed to provide for the shared well, access, parking, well and maintenance, as noted in Condition #5 of the report. Chair Stevens asked if there were other associations in industrial parks. Mr. Maurer stated he was not aware of any others, but that the situation would be similar to commercial areas. Chair Stevens opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Stevens closed the public hearing. Commissioner Scott asked if there would be internal roads. Ms. Cartney stated no, only the access drives. Commissioner Scott asked Mr. Maurer if he could foresee a problem with the shared well. Mr..Maurer stated that he did not see any more of an issue with the well than with snowplowing, and that the association would deal with those types of issues. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER AUSTAD TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY ENVISION CO., LLC FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, CASE NO. P 07-05, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ALL COMMENTS OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S MEMO DATED JUNE 7, 2007 SHALL BE ADDRESSED. 2. THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL MEET ALL APPLICABLE FIRE CODES. THE FIRE CHIEF SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL FIRE HYDRANTS, AND MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL HYDRANTS NECESSARY TO PRESERVE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE RESIDENTS. 3. IN ADDITION TO THE EASEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, THE FOLLOWING EASEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED: A. TRAIL EASEMENT OF 10 FEET ALONG JARVIS STREET B. CROSS ACCESS AND PARKING EASEMENTS BETWEEN ALL FOUR LOTS C. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER THE PONDS D. CROSS ACCESS EASEMENTS FOR SHARED SEPTIC AND WELL 4. THE APPLICANT SHALL EXECUTE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OUTLINING THE TERMS AND Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Page 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE FINAL PLAT, USES, SETBACKS ETC. 5. AN ASSOCIATION SHALL BE DEVELOPED TO MAINTAIN THE COMMON ELEMENTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT, ONCE THE LOTS ARE SOLD. 6. ALL REQUIRED SUBDIVISION INFORMATION SHALL BE PROVIDED IN AN ELECTRONIC FORMAT (.DWG FILE) AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY ORDINANCE AND LAND USE APPLICATION PRIOR TO RECORDING OF THE PLAT. 7. THIS APPROVAL OF THE PLAT SHALL EXPIRE AFTER 1 YEAR, UNLESS THE PROPERTY OWNER OR OWNER'S AGENT HAS SUBMITTED A FINAL PLAT OR LETTER OF REQUEST FOR EXTENSION. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY ENVISION CO., LLC FOR A ZONE CHANGE FROM Il LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO PUD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, CASE NO. ZC 07- 05. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY ENVISION CO., LLC FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CASE NO. CU 07-12 WITH THE CONDITIONS LISTED IN THE PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT APPROVAL. MOTION CARRIED 5-0. 5.6. Request by Riverside Combanies for Interim Use Permit for Spectrum High School Case No. CU 07-13 -Public Hearin Mr. Barnhart reviewed the request for Spectrum High School to construct a 10,500 square foot temporary modular building for classrooms, offices, and common areas on property north of County Road 12 (181st Avenue) as an interim use. The building will be located to the north of a proposed parking lot, and northwest of the future proposed high school. Mr. Barnhart noted that the parking lot will eventually be converted as bus and staff parking. A concrete block building is also proposed to serve as a severe weather place of refuge to address concerns raised by the Fire Department. Mr. Barnhart reviewed information regarding natural resources, transportation, utilities and landscaping. He noted that a lot split will be considered by the City Council along with this request. Staff recommends approval of the request with the seven conditions listed in the staff report, including the recommendation that the interim use expire in three years Quly 1, 2010). Chair Stevens asked if this property was previously considered for a residential plat. Mr. Maurer stated that there was a concept but it was not economically feasible to get in the improvements. He stated that he felt the request was an excellent use of the property in that it will limit traffic generation and would have different peak traffic times than would residential. Commissioner Lemke asked if a school speed zone for this area has been considered. Mr. Maurer stated that it was not an issue raised by the County. Chair Stevens opened the public hearing. There being no comment, Chair Stevens closed Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 200 Page 6 the public hearing Commissioner Lemke stated that he was not a fan of modular units and his first choice would be a permanent structure. He stated that he understood the economic concerns. He asked if the temporary structure would be removed when the new school is constructed. Mr. Barnhart stated yes. Commissioner Lemke stated that they could look at the details of the building and access when the new school was constructed, since it was an institutional use and would require a conditional use permit. Mr. Maurer noted that if the interim use is approved, the City would virtually be giving approval for the future use as a permanent school site. Mr. Barnhart concurred and stated that the site has good separation from the residential and has access to a collector street. Mr. Maurer noted that a residential use would have generated more trips. Commissioner Scott asked what is on the other side of Trott Brook. Mr. Maurer stated that the applicant has a significant amount of property (260 total acres) to the north that could be developed. Commissioner Scott stated that he had no objection to the school and that if staff and the City Engineer recommended approval, he respected their opinions. He asked if the speed limit on County Road 12 would be an issue for the school. Mr. Maurer stated that since it is a county road, that issue would need to be addressed by the county and the school. He stated that as the area develops, the road will likely have a 4-lane urban design. Chair Stevens stated that he would anticipate the school would need a safe crossing. He stated that they need to discuss the removal of the temporary buildings if the use ceases, or after 2010 when the interim use expires. Mr. Barnhart stated that the conditional use permit for the permanent school could address the removal of the buildings. Mr. Barnhart stated that staff recommended approval of the interim use permit with the seven conditions listed in the staff report. Chair Stevens stated that the site was not appropriate for multi-family residential and abuts a wetland. He stated that a school fits the size of the property and he would like to see a permanent facility as soon as possible. He stated he would also support athletic fields installed, as well. Commissioner Lemke stated he had no issues with the request for a temporary school or a permanent school. Mr. Maurer stated that Conditions #1 and #2 address his comments and the County's comments and that he will discuss with the County was is reasonable or a temporary and a permanent solution regarding the access for the property. He stated that the County representative has given the impression that he is open to working out the issue. Chair Stevens asked if Vision Bus Company will serve the school. The representative for the school stated yes. Commissioner Lemke asked who bears the financial responsibility for the improvements. Mr. Maurer stated that the property will be split and the property owner will be responsible for water and sewer connections. He stated that these issues will be discussed at the time of platting. Commissioner Lemke questioned if an escrow for removal of the temporary buildings was appropriate. Mr. Barnhart stated that it could be a requirement for the conditional use permit. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER AUSTAD TO RECOMMENT APPROVAL OF THE Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Page 7 REQUEST BY RIVERSIDE COMPANIES ON BEHALF OF SPECTRUM HIGH SCHOOL FOR AN INTERIM USE PERMIT TO LOCATE A HIGH SCHOOL ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, CASE NO. CU 07-13, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ALL COMMENTS OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S MEMO DATED JUNE 7, 2007 SHALL BE ADDRESSED. 2. ALL COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF THE SHERBURNE COUNTY MEMO DATED MAY 11, 2007 SHALL BE ADDRESSED. 3. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE SHALL MEET ALL APPLICABLE FIRE CODES. THE FIRE CHIEF SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL FIRE HYDRANTS, AND MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL HYDRANTS NECESSARY TO PRESERVE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE RESIDENTS. 4. A WETLAND BUFFER OF 25 FEET APPLY TO ALL WETLANDS AND A STRUCTURE SETBACK OF 20 FEET FROM THE BUFFER APPLIES. 5. A NPDES PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. G. A LETTER OF CREDIT IN THE AMOUNT OF 100% OF THE COST OF THE LANDSCAPE, SITE STABILIZATION IMPROVEMENTS, TO A MAXIMUM OF $50,000 SHALL BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE RELEASING OF THE BUILDING PERMIT. 7. INTERIM USE PERMIT SHALL EXPIRE ON JULY 1, 2010. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. 5.7. Request by City of Elk River to Amend a Conditional Use Permit (William Matthews) Case No. CU 07-15 -Public Hearin Mr. Barnhart explained that Mr. Matthews previously received approval for a conditional use permit (CUP) for his auto repair and sales business in 2006. Due to the need to vacate a prescriptive easement on the YMCA property which is used to provide access to Mr. Matthews property, staff has been working with him to amend his conditional use permit, specifically, the layout of the parking lot. Mr. Barnhart explained the reconfiguration which permits atwo-way drive aisle with 90-degree parking. All conditions of the original CUP will remain in effect and staff recommends approval of the amendment as presented. Chair Stevens suggested that a sign be posted "no cut-through" to prevent vehicles from crossing Mr. Matthews property. Mr. Barnhart stated that if cut-through traffic became an issue, Mr. Matthews could probably take care of the problem by moving his vehicles around on the site. Chair Stevens opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Stevens closed the public hearing. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER AUSTAD TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER ON BEHALF OF WILLIAM MATTHEWS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, CASE NO. CU 07-15, WITH THE SAME 16 CONDITIONS AS THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. CU 06-28. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. 5.8. Reouest by Ci of Elk River for Preliminary and Final Plat (Civic Campus Addition Case Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Page 8 No. P 07-07 -Public Hearin 5.9• Request by City of Elk River for Conditional Use Permit for YMCA Case No CU 07 14 Public Hearin Mr. Barnhart reviewed the requests by the City of Elk River for a plat to subdivide property owned by the City into three lots: (Lot 1) to house the proposed YMCA health and community center; (Lot 2) location of the existing water tower and equipment; and (Lot 3) for future park expansion. He reviewed the location of the property and lot sizes. Mr. Barnhart then provided details of the proposed 56,000 square foot YMCA which will include a lap pool and play pool, gymnasium, office space, studio space and fitness area. He reviewed utility connections, proposed building materials, future expansion areas for the building and future park area. He noted that the City Council will approve the architectural details of the final design. Chair Stevens stated that the Planning Commission typically looks closely at the design of other buildings in the city and that he was disappointed with the renderings of this building. He stated that it has an industrial look and is not what he had envisioned. He stated that he was happy with the library design. He asked if the city was leading the design of the building. Mr. Barnhart stated that the materials are consistent with the City Hall, Library, and Public Safety facility, although it does not look the same. He felt that the green glass on the front of the building lends a striking appearance to the design. Chair Stevens opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Stevens closed the public hearing. Commissioner Scott stated he felt he has some sense of what the building would look like and since they would be using four materials, the design should be acceptable. He agreed the glass was a different element, but felt there was enough distance from the City Hall campus, it would not matter. Commissioner Scott stated that it appears there are some spans on the building that are greater than 30 feet, and that some type of design element is needed to break it up. He stated that the Comtnission has held others to the same standards, and the City should follow the same requirements. Commissioner Austad stated that he was not in favor of the design and agreed that it had an industrial look. He stated more glass should be incorporated on the building in the location of the workout and pool areas. He stated that he likes the overall design but feels the building needs improvement aesthetically. Chair Stevens stated that the lighting should be a cut-off design and softened, and that the current design seems harsh and square. Mr. Barnhart stated that the photometric layout was included in the packet and that it appeared there was very little "over bleed" of lighting, except on the Matthews property, which would probably be beneficial to his car sales business. Mr. Barnhart stated that there is consistency in texture with the other city campus buildings, and that additional windows could be suggested or some alternative. Chair Stevens stated that appeared the utilities on top of the building would be quite prominent and asked if they could be covered in some way. Mr. Barnhart stated that if what Chair Stevens was referring to was the air conditioning, it could be covered, if not, perhaps metal siding could be used to screen. Chair Stevens stated that he would like to see more texture on the buildings, maybe some pillars, similar to design elements on the City Hall and Public Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Safety facility. Page 9 Commissioner Lemke asked if they are trying to achieve some type of theme. Mr. Barnhart stated that the original design started out as a campus theme. Commissioner Lemke stated he felt the plan was acceptable, but felt a campus theme would improve the design. Chair Stevens stated it seems square and blocky, and that there could be more windows, especially on the view from the east. Commissioner Scott he concurred that some expanses of the building could use some work. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF CIVIC CAMPUS ADDITION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ALL COMMENTS OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S MEMO DATED JUNE 6, 2007 SHALL BE ADDRESSED. 2. IN ADDITION TO THE EASEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, THE FOLLOWING EASEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED: A. AN ACCESS EASEMENT IN THE NORTHWEST AND SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1 FOR ACCESS PURPOSES FOR THE ADJACENT EXCEPTION PARCEL. 3. ALL REQUIRED SUBDIVISION/PARK INFORMATION SHALL BE PROVIDED IN AN ELECTRONIC FORMAT (.DWG FILE) AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY ORDINANCE AND LAND USE APPLICATION PRIOR TO RECORDING OF THE PLAT. 4. RESOLUTION OF THE GAS MAIN ISSUE WITH CENTER POINT ENERGY. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. ------------------ MOTION BY COMMISSIONER AUSTAD AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A YMCA FACILITY, CASE NO. CU 07-14, WITH FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. ALL COMMENTS OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S MEMO DATED JUNE 6, 2007 SHALL BE ADDRESSED. 2. THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL MEET ALL APPLICABLE FIRE CODES. THE FIRE CHIEF SHALL VERIFY THE LOCATION OF ALL FIRE HYDRANTS, AND MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL HYDRANTS NECESSARY TO PRESERVE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE RESIDENTS. 3. A NPDES PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS. MOTION CARRIED 4-0. Planning Commission Minutes )Une 12, 200 Page 10 5.10. Discussion Re ardine Commercial Recreation Uses in the Business Park NIr. Barnhart provided background information regarding the development of the draft ordinance amendment. He noted that the draft will go to the city attorney for comments. Chair Stevens stated that he still has a problem with recreation uses in the business park district, and would like to see industrial uses. Commissioner Lemke asked if, as an example, Sherburne County wanted to put in a fitness center or pool for their employees. Mr. Barnhart stated that the predominant use of the property would not be affected. Commissioner Stevens stated that in business park properties with an underlying I-1 use, recreational uses were not appropriate. In predominantly manufacturing areas, the two uses may not even be compatible due to issues such as noise. Commissioner Scott stated that he was reluctant to lump all business park zoning t together, since the underlying land use can make them very different. He felt there should be criteria that would need to be met, such as a limit on the amount of these types of uses, and would favor a percentage of a structure. He asked what would be required if the use were a permitted use in a particular area. Mr. Barnhart stated that only site plan review by staff would be required. Discussion followed regarding the 5,000 square foot limitation for permitted and conditional uses in the business park district. Mr. Barnhart noted that no commercial outdoor recreation would be allowed, with the current wording of the proposed amendment. The suggestion was made to continue discussion of the proposed amendment to the next Planning Commission workshop. Chair Stevens opened the public hearing. Pat Briggs, Briggs Properties, property owner at 11110 Industrial Circle -Stated that his client, Pamela Sitts of P.S. Dance has been in the City of Elk River for over 10 years. He asked if her business would be permitted at his location if the business was less than 5,000 square feet, if the proposed ordinance was adopted. Mr. Barnhart stated that it would not be permitted, since the underlying land use of the property is industrial. Mr. Briggs asked where she could go. He stated that these types of uses in business parks were consistent in other cities such as Ramsey, Plymouth, St. Cloud, Clearwater and others. Commissioner Scott asked if there were business park-zoned properties with an underlying land use of commercial. Mr. Barnhart stated the Mulvany Point/Town Office Park site was zoned business park with an underlying land use of commercial. Mr. Briggs again questioned where there was an affordable site for his client could go. Chair Stevens stated that it was not the Planning Commission°s charge to find sites for businesses. Mr. Briggs stated that his application for a conditional use permit was denied and that he is looking for a viable solution for this business to stay in Elk River. Planning Commission Minutes June 72, 2007 Page 11 Mr. Barnhart explained that Mr. Briggs application for a conditional use permit described the use as an educational use, and staff did not believe the use met the criteria of an educational use. He stated that Mr. Briggs could appeals staffs interpretation. He stated that staff is attempting to determine where the use might be appropriate. Chair Stevens stated that they are trying to narrow down the definitions and determine where the use will best fit. Mike Olson, also representing the Briggs Properties -Stated that he attended the Planning Commission workshop and was amazed that he was not given an opportunity to give input. He stated that he felt sometimes the applicant's input is equally important as the Planning Commission's and staffs input. He stated that he was not aware of a formal appeal process. He stated that P.S. Dance is providing a service to the area by educating children, and that the structure of the business is educational. Mr. Briggs' stated that he has been working with staff for many months to help is client find a new location in Elk River, and that she will have no choice but to leave if this issue is not resolved. Commissioner Scott stated that Mr. Briggs may have been talking with staff or the Council for months, but that the Planning Commission has only been aware of the issue for one month. Mr. Briggs stated that he disagreed the use was a commercial recreational use. He stated that 7,000 square feet of his building is offices and 7,000-8,000 square feet is vacant. He stated that most of the traffic from the dance studio would be after 5 pm and would only be 3 days a week. He stated that there are no case studies on these uses to show a detrimental impact on business parks. He stated that they are driving businesses out of the city. He stated that he was aware they are trying to get the issues resolved regarding definitions and appropriate zoning before attending to his application. Tom Rigal, 14857 92~a Circle NE, Otsego -Stated that he feels that P.S. Dance°s program builds confidence, has a very positive impact on its students, and provides a sense of community. He stated that it is not just for the kids, and that moms and dads also can participate in classes. He felt the dance studio was a valuable asset to the City of Elk River and was a good outlet for kids. There being no further public comment, Chair Stevens closed the pubic hearing. Commissioner Scott stated that they need to clarify where the business is appropriate and maybe using the underlying land use is not the best definition. Commissioner Lemke stated that the question is to determine if the use is harmful to the economic goals of the city. He stated that they are not making a decision tonight on Ms. Sitt's application; they are attempting to make a recommendation based on the last workshop's discussions. He stated that if Mr. Olson had requested to speak at the workshop, he likely would have been able to. He stated that the Commission was not aware of why he was at the workshop. Chair Stevens re-opened the public hearing. Pamela Sitts, owner of P.S. Dance -Stated that it is hard to find space in the commercial areas that would allow her to make her classes affordable for families. She stated that her Planning Commission Minutes June 12, 2007 Page 12 first priority is the safety of her kids and that her current location is not safe. She stated the reason businesses like hers want to locate in business parks is that can keep their costs down. She stated that this is about other sports, not just dance. There being no further public comment, Chair Stevens closed the public hearing. Commissioner Lemke stated that this ordinance amendment would allow physical recreation/training in the C1, C3, and Business Park zoning districts, where the underlying land use is Mixed Use or Highway Business. He stated that he feels the Commission is being pressured to fill space in Mr. Briggs building. Commissioner Lemke asked what the impact would be if the use was allowed in all Business Park Districts as a Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Barnhart stated that it would be difficult to deny a conditional use permit, since it virtually is a permitted use with conditions. Mr. Barnhart reviewed the details of the proposed ordinance amendment. Commissioner Lemke stated that he would prefer to move the amendment forward to the City Council. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER AUSTAD TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED IN THE STAFF REPORT TO THE COMMISSION DATED JUNE 12, 2007. MOTION CARRIED 4-1. Commissioner Scott opposed. 6. Other Business -None Adjournment There being no further business, MOVED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ ,~.c, Debbie Huebner Recording Secretary