Loading...
3.1. SR 04-11-1996.ty of iver ITEM 3.1. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Mayor and City Council Steven B. Ach, City Planner ~ April 11, 1996 Conditional Use Permit Request by Menards, Inc., Public Hearing Case No. CU 96-2 Issue Menards, Inc. is requesting a conditional use permit for site plan approval to construct a 160,680 square foot commercial building in Hillside Crossing II planned unit development. Location The southeast corner of Highway 169 and 197th Avenue Zoning/Land Use PUD (Planned Unit Development) / HB (Highway Business) Attachments · Memo from City Engineer dated 4/8/96 · Revised development plans dated 4/8/96 · Report to the Planning Commission dated 3/26/96 Planned Unit Development The proposed project is located in Hillside Crossing II planned unit development. The City Council recently approved the master development plan for this area along with a preliminary and final plat. Menard's plans are consistent with the development plans previously approved. Future projects will also have to comply with the PUD's guidelines. A conditional use permit for site plan review by the City Council will also be required for those future projects. 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 Memo to the Mayor and City Council/CU 96-2 April 11, 1996 Project Overview Page 2 Menards, Inc. is proposing a 160,680 square foot facility in Hillside Crossing planned unit development. The project is located on Lot 1, Block 1, which is an approximately 11 acre parcel. The Menards store will have a floor area divided up in the following fashion: · Sales area- 104,370 sq. ft. · Receiving area - 13,410 sq. ft. · Warehouse - 42,900 sq. ft. Surrounding the building on the south, east and north side will be a 14 ft. high screening structure (fence) constructed of 2' x 8' vertical wood siding and a pre-finished metal roof, extending toward the inside of the storage yard. The screening structure will provide complete screening and security for the outdoor storage area, as well as provide shelving or stacking opportunities for outdoor products to be stored. The outdoor storage area, or yard area, is approximately 2.75 acres in size. Li~htin~ Incorporated as part of the screening structure will be approximately 10 light standards surrounding the perimeter. The Planning Commission asked questions relating to lighting of the storage yard; however, were assured that the lights will not be on once the store closes. At the Planning Commission meeting, it was mentioned that the store hours do not exceed 9:00 p.m. any night of the week. It should also be noted that these lighting standards are designed to direct the lighting in a downward fashion and not directed upon adjacent properties. The development plans also indicate all wall pack lighting (mounted onto the building) will have metal deflectors to, once again, direct the light downward and not cause any nuisance to surrounding properties. Hours of Operation It is anticipated that Menards will be open seven days a week and operate between the hours of 9 a.m. and 9 p.m. each day. These hours are consistent with similar businesses along the Highway 169 corridor. Underground Irrigation One of the issues discussed at the Planning Commission meeting related to the type of underground irrigation proposed by Menards. This irrigation system is not a "typical" underground irrigation system, in that it requires garden hoses to be utilized to water the landscaped areas. Basically, the s:\council\cu96-2.doc Memo to the Mayor and City Council/CU 96-2 Page 3 April 11, 1996 Menards proposal is to use a frost-proof system, whereby the water lines are buried much deeper than a typical irrigation system. At various locations throughout the site, a pipe would extend up out of the ground where a garden hose can be attached. The Planning Commission expressed some concern whether this type of irrigation system actually meets the City's ordinance. Also, with this type of irrigation system, garden hoses would most likely remain in the landscaped areas. Since the Planning Commission meeting, staff has considered this type of irrigation system proposed by Menards and would recommend that a standard underground irrigation system by installed throughout all landscaped areas. Menards has indicated that they have had problems with the typical underground irrigation system freezing in the wintertime and causing them maintenance problems. However, based on staffs conversation with various underground irrigation contractors, ff the irrigation is properly maintained, the owner should not experience any problems throughout the year. Landscal~ ing Another area of the Menards development plans which needs to be modified is the landscaping. As part of the overall planned unit development, typical landscaping themes are provided both in Hillside Crossing I and in Hillside Crossing II. These landscaping themes typically occur at all entrance points into the developing sites and at other intersections where landscaping can be provided. It is staffs understanding that Menards will be adjusting their plans to include the landscaping themes at each of their entrance points, as well as the southeast corner of 196th and Evans where there is an opportunity to provide additional landscaping consistent with the planned unit development standards. Also, following up on the Planning Commission's comments, staff is recommending to increase the landscaping in various locations around the perimeter of the site. For example, along Evans Avenue, additional conifers can be provided, creating groups of three approximately every 150 feet. Also, additional landscaping may be necessary along the east and southeast portions of the site to properly screen and buffer the residential areas to the east. However, it is uncertain at this time how much of an effect the grading will have on the existing trees in this area; therefore, it is (]ifficult to determine whether additional landscaping will be needed at this time. It would be best to assess this condition at a later point during the construction period. s:\council\cu96-2.doc Memo to the Mayor and City Council/CU 96-2 April 11, 1996 Si~na~e Menard's sign package includes a freestanding sign along Highway 169 which will be incorporated into the project's development sign (advertising Hillside Crossing II). (See attached exhibit). As far as wall signage, the following is proposed for the front building wall: SIGN LEGEND SIGNS HEIGHT LENGTH SQ. FOOTAGE Menards 6' - 0,' 52' - 0,' 312 Welcome To .... 1' - 6" 40' - 0" 60 Millwork 2' - 0" ff - 4" 18.7 Paint 2' - 0" 5' - 2" 10.3 Lumber 2' - 0" 7' - 10" 15.7 Carpet 2' - 0" 7' - 4 1/2" 14.8 Cabinets 2' - 0'' 10' - 0'' 20.0 Electrical 2' - 0" 9' - 9" 19.5 Plumbing 2' - 0" 9' - 4" 18.7 Hardware 2' - 0'' 9' - 10'' 19.7 Page 4 Total Sq. footage = 509.4 sq. ft. The total wall sign square footage is 509.4 square feet. The ordinance allows up to 300 square feet; however, since the project is a planned unit development, the Council has the latitude to vary from the ordinance requirements. This variance from the ordinance can be either more or less restrictive. One issue staff has noticed since the Planning Commission meeting is the product signs on the building are not individual lite letters. These signs resemble a cabinet sign where the letters are not individually mounted; rather made part of a panel that has a white background. To be consistent with other planned unit developments as well as recent commercial projects, staff would recommend the proposed product signs be individual lite letters. Planning Commission Recommendation Highlights of the Planning Commission discussion on the proposed Menards included the following topics: · Hours of operation · Type of metal material used on the screening structure · Outdoor storage area in general · Underground irrigation system · Hours of operation and lighting · Proposed materials for the yard gate canopy s:\councfi\cu96-2.doc Memo to the Mayor and City Council/CU 96-2 April 11, 1996 · Proposed outdoor display for the yard barns and fences · Landscaping in general Page 5 The Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit request by Menards, Inc. to construct a 160,680 sq. ft. facihty with the conditions as outhned in the staff report dated March 26, 1996. Please refer to the attached report for additional information. Recommendation It is recommended the City Council approve the conditional use permit request by Menards, Inc. to construct a 160,680 sq. ft. retail facility in Hillside Crossing II planned unit development with the following conditions: o o All staffs comments outhned in the report to the Planning Commission dated March 26, 1996, be incorporated into the revised set of plans prior to issuance of a building permit. All the City Engineer's comments in the memo dated March 22, and April 5, 1996, be incorporated into the development plans prior to issuance of a building permit. A grading and drainage plan be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. Staff work with Menards in enhancing the landscape plan to be consistent with the intent of the planned unit development. Outdoor display and sales in front of the building be hmited to the 20' x 90' yard barn display and fence display as proposed to be mounted to the building. Any additional outdoor sales shall be approved by the City Council. An underground irrigation system be provided throughout all landscaped areas including landscaped/traffic control islands. All product wall signs shall consist of individual hte letters similar to the signage in other planned unit developments. Outdoor storage contained within the enclosed yard area shall not be stacked higher than the screening structure. s:\councfl\cu96-2.doc CONSULTING ENGINEERS File: 230-302-11 1326 Energy Park Drive St. Paul, MN 55108 612-644-4389 1-800-888-2923 Fax: 612-644-9446 Mr. Steve Ach City Planner City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway P.O. Box 490 Elk River, MN 55330 RE: MENARDS GRADING AND UTILITY PLAN Dear Mr. Ach: CIVIL ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL MUNICIPAL PLANNING SOLID WASTE STRUCTURAL SURVEYING TRAFFIC TRANSPORTATION ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL ENGINEERING: HVAC POWER DISTRIBUTION SCADA SYSTEM CONTROLS We have now received the grading plan and utility plan for the proposed Menards facility to be located in Hillside Crossing II addition. As you recall, when this item was before the Planning Commission, we had not received either of these plan sheets. Having had an opportunity to review the utility plan and to coordinate the easement needs with the surveyor preparing the final plat for Hillside Crossing II, we find that the Menards site utility plan is in accordance with the approved utility plan for the entire plat. The one comment we would have is that the Menards utility plan indicates a 12-inch watermain both in front of and behind the proposed facility. The approved utility plan for the Hillside Crossing II developmem showed a 12-inch watermain in from of the Menards Store and a smaller diameter watermain looping around the rear of the facility. We assume that the 12-inch indicated behind the Menards facility is an error, and we will proceed assuming that it will be of a smaller diameter. The grading plan fro the Menards site is in accordance with the overall grading plan for the Hillside Crossing II development, with a couple of minor exceptions. One of these areas in question is the extreme northeast corner of the site. The Menards grading plan shows elevations in this location approximately 11/2 feet lower than the approved grading plan indicated for the street just north of this area. If the grades inside the Menards yard cannot be raised at all, this would indicate that approximately 11/2 feet of fill material will be retained on the north side of the fence around their yard. The street itself in this area north of their site cannot be lowered down to the proposed elevation inside their fence due to the topography of the remainder of the Hillside development further to the east and north. OFFICES IN: MINNEAPOLIS PRIOR LAKE ST. PAUL WASECA The other area in question is the northwest corner of their site. The overall grading plan for the development had the contours wrapping around their parking lot along the right-of- way line to match the street. Their proposed grading plan shows them running directly An Equal Opportunity Employer Mr. Steve Ach April 8, 1996 Page Two to the north property line. This would result in approximately a 5-foot difference in elevation between their parking lot and the street in this location. We are contacting the engineer who prepared the Menards site to see how this difference can be worked out. We are confident that there can be a workable solution arrived at which will allow for reasonable grades within the Menards parking lot and the street section at this location. If you have any questions regarding any of these comments, please call. Sincerely, MSA, CONSULTING ENGINEERS Terry J.~Maurer, P.E. TJM:tw 302-0806.apr 196 TH AVE N i i~ty of iver MEMORANDUM ITEM 6.1. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commi ssion Steven B. Ach, City Planner.S._ March 26, 1996 Conditional Use Permit Request by Menards, Inc., Public Hearing Case No. CU 96-2 Request Menards, Inc. is requesting a conditional use permit for site plan approval to construct a 160,680 square foot commercial building in Hillside Crossing II. Location The southeast corner of Highway 169 and 197th Avenue. Zoning/Land Use PUD (Planned Unit Development) / HB (Highway Business) Attachments · Memo from the City Engineer dated 3/22/96 · Location Map · Zoning Map · Letter from the Fire Chief · Letter from the Police Department · Letter from Resident · Letter from Menards regarding parking · Development sign · Development plans Project Overview Menards, Inc. is proposing a 160,680 square foot facility in the Hillside Crossing II planned unit development. The project is located on an 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 Memo to Planning Commission/CU 96-2 March 26, 1996 The Menards store will have its floor area divided up in the following fashion: Page 2 Sales area - 104,370 sq. ft. Receiving area - 13,410 sq. ft. Warehouse - 42,900 sq. ft. Surrounding the building on the south, east and north side will be a 14 foot high wall constructed of 2'x 8' vertical wood siding and a pre-finished metal roof extending towards the interior of the storage area. On the inside of this wall will be a series of racks to accommodate product (i.e., lumber and other products) storage. This fenced-in storage area will be completely secured with customer control at the southwest corner of the building. The fire chief has also asked for a emergency access point into the storage area at the northwest corner. However, that access will be secured at all times except in the event of an emergency, whereby the access may be utilized. Traffic/Access/Park ing Two curb cuts are proposed off of Evans Avenue, both of which are consistent with the development plans that were approved for Hillside Crossing II. The southerly access is slightly larger to allow convenient semi traflSc accessibility, as well as customers leaving the site following their pick up of lumber and other home improvement supplies from the yard storage area. The site plan includes a total of 410 parking stalls (including handicap) as recommended by the Planning Commission. As discussed in the staffs previous report to the Planning Commission, the parking stalls proposed by Menards is less than the City's standards for retail space. Typically retail space is required to have one space for every 200 square feet of floor area. Menards' proposal provides parking based on a ratio of one stall for every 255 square feet of retail (104,370 square feet) space. Attached is a letter from Menards outlining the number stalls that have been provided at other stores. The Police Department has also included a memo referencing the parking issue. Outdoor Display The proposed site plan illustrates a 20' x 90' yard barn display area at the northwest corner of the building. In addition to this yard barn display area, Menards will also be proposing to have various fence displays attached to the front face of the building between the northwest corner of the building and the main entrance to the building. There is no additional outdoor display proposed for the sidewalk areas along the front of the building. The Planning Commission may want to discuss whether these outdoor display areas should occur in the areas proposed or be relocated either within the s:\plannin g\pc\cu96-2.doc Memo to Planning Commission/CU 96-2 March 26, 1996 Page 3 yard storage area or at another location on site. Relocating the yard barn display area will provide additional opportunity for impervious landscaped areas. If the barn display remains at its proposed location a ten foot setback will need to be established. Site Plan Review Staff has reviewed the proposed site plans submitted by Menards and would offer the following comments: Site Plan The perimeter screening structure (14 ft. wall) will need to maintain a 10 ft. setback from the property line. As presented the setback appears to be met. If the outdoor yard barn display area is to occur at its proposed location, it will need to be set back 10 feet from the property ]~e. Parking and Circulation The southerly access off of Evans Avenue should have a width no greater than 36 feet. The curb cut radius' onto Evans Avenue can be increased to improve the turning movements for both semi trn~c and customer traffic. o Traffic control/landscaped islands will need to be provided throughout the parking area. These locations are generally at the ends of every other parking row, with the exception of islands being provided at the end of each parking row along the northerly entrance into the site. Revised plans should include a typical parking stall detail with dimensions for staff review. Parking area will need to be bound with B612 concrete curb and gutter. Refuse Collection Menards has indicated that all of their refuse collection will occur within the enclosed yard area; therefore, no screened enclosures will be necessary. s:\planniug\pc\cu96-2.doc Memo to Planning Commission/CU 96-2 March 26, 1996 Fire Protection Page 4 An emergency access will need to be provided just north of the northwest corner of the Menards building, providing a secondary access to the enclosed yard storage area. This access can be secured at all times with the exception of emergency events where the access may be utilized. o Fire hydrant locations will need to be identified and included as part of the final set of plans. These locations will need to be verified and approved by the fire chief. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will need to be provided primarily along the west side of the building and possible other locations throughout the site. Once again, the exact location and spacing of these signs will need to be coordinated with the fire chief. * Please see attached memo from the fire chief dated March 8, 1996. o The quantity of landscaping proposed on site meets the City's ordinances. However, staff would recommend having the number slightly increased to improve the buffering to the east residential area, as well as increasing some additional landscaping along Evans Avenue. In talking with Menards apparently a typical under~ound irrigation system will not be provided; however, Menards will be installing a system that they have utilized in their other facilities. The proposed landscaping along 196th Avenue will have to be placed outside of the right-of-way. It is recommended that additional landscaping be provided in the southeast corner of the site to improve the buffering to the residential. There may be some existing trees that are saved immediately south of the proposed building. If this is to occur, obviously the landscaping plan will need to be revised. All of the traffic/landscaped islands in the parking lot should include landscaping as shown on a typical landscape island detail on the proposed plans. s:\planniu g\pc\cu96-2.doc Memoto Planning Commission/CU 96-2 March 26, 1996 Page 5 As part of the planned unit development, a landscaping theme has been utilized within Hillside Crossing I and is proposed to continue into the Hillside Crossing II. These themes will need to be incorporated along Evans Avenue and at the entrance points to the Menards facility. o Size of proposed landscaped material will need to meet the City's performance standards. Overstory trees will need to be a minimum of two inches in diameter and conifers 6 feet in height. Building Materials The building is proposed to be pre-cast concrete insulated wall panels with a decorative smooth band along the front entrance (west elevation) of the building. It is recommended that an attempt be made to incorporate common architectural elements that may be implemented throughout the planned unit development. Signage As shown on the proposed plans Menards will have eight product identification signs along the west elevation of their building, along with a red neon internally lit '~Menards" sign between the entrance and exit. In addition, an internally lit "Welcome" sign will also be provided between the entrance and exit to the building. No signage will be used on the north, east or south elevations of the building. ° Free-standing sign will be limited to the project development sign as approved as part of the planned unit development. See attachment A. Drainage and Utilities The City Engineer will be reviewing the grading and utility plan. At the time of this memo a grading plan had not been submitted. Recommendation It is recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the conditional use permit request for site plan review by Menards, Inc. to construct a 160,680 sq. ft. facility with the following conditions: s:\plannln g\pc\cu96-2.doc Memo to Planning Commission/CU 96-2 March 26, 1996 Se Page 6 All of staffs comments outlined in the report to the Planning Commission dated March 25, 1996, be incorporated into the revised set of plans prior to issuance of a building permit. All of the City Engineer's comments in the memo dated March 22, 1996, be incorporated into the development plans prior to issuance of a building permit. All outdoor storage and display along the front of the building shall be approved by the City Council. s:\planning\pc\cu96-2.doc CON~IiLTEG EGINEERg March 22, 1996 File: 230-302-11 1326 Energy Park Drive St. Paul, MN 55108 612-644-4389 1-800-888-2923 Fax: 612-64a-9~6 Mr. Steve Ach City Planner City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway P.O. Box 490 Elk River, MN 55330 RE: MENARDS SITE PLAN REVIEW Dear Mr. Ach: CIVIL ENGINEERING: ENVIRONMENTAL /:""'h MUNIC PAL · ~ PLANNING SOLID WASTE STRUCTURAL SURVEYING TRAFFIC TRANSPORTATION As requested, we have reviewed the site plan for the proposed Menards facility to be located in the Hillside Crossing II development. The site plan we received was prepared by Menards and dated February 20, 1996. As of the date of this memo, we have not received a drainage and utility plan or any drainage calculations. Based on our review, we would offer the following comments: ELECTRICAL/MECHANICAL 2. ENGINEERING: HVAC POWER DISTRIBUTION SCADA 3. SYSTEM CONTROLS One of the proposed driveway entrances off of Evans Avenue is shown as 40 feet wide. The ordinance limits commercial driveways to 30 feet. Unless a reason can be shown to allow a wider driveway, we would recommend that the driveway be reduced to 30 feet and larger radii used to facilitate turning movements of trucks. The plantings shown around the perimeter of the site Will generally fall in the drainage and utility easements. This may cause a slight conflict with the placement of utilities in these easements. The sign located in the southwest corner of the site will also fall within the drainage and utility easement. The parking stalls located along the south line near the west end are undesirable, given the traffic expected to be entering and exiting the yard at that point. Additional concrete islands should be placed on the east end of the parking lanes to delineate the parking from the drive isles. OFFICES IN: MINNEAPOLIS PRIOR LAKE ST. PAUL The Fire Chief has reviewed the site and indicated his desire for an additional emergency entrance into the yard at the north side of the building. This will require some reconfiguration of the yard barn display, landscaping in this area, and parking. WASECA An Equal Opportunity Employer Mr. Steve Ach March 22, 1996 Page Two o I have had a number of conversations with the engineer working on the grading, drainage, and utility plan for this site. From these conversations, I am reasonably confident that the plan when submitted will comply with the overall grading, drainage, and utility plan for the Hillside Crossing II development. If you have any questions regarding any of these comments, please call. Sincerely, MSA, CONSULTING ENGINEERS TJM:tw 302-2211 .mar LOCATION City of LOCATION · MAP vel- CASE: 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 Elk River. MN 55330 CU96-2 N (Ftla) LOCATION R1c City of vet 13065 Orono P~kway · P.O. Box 490 Elk Kivcr, MN 55330 ZONING IVIAP CASE: ' / ; :PUD PUD CU 96-2 ity of iver FROM: MEMORANDUM Steve Ach Bruce A. West Fire Chief DATE: March 8, 1996 SUBJECT: Menards, Elk River Minnesota Proposed Site Plan After review of the Menards proposed site plan, and with discussion during staff review, I have a few comments that I would like to make reference to at this time. Designated no parking fire lane area. The entire westside of the Menards complex which entails the front elevation or entrance area shall be designated a "no parking fire lane" area. This includes the entire west area north to south side. Emergency access in the northwest corner of the complex near the yard barn display area. After review of the site layout plan, one of my concerns is access to the west side of the building in an emergency situation. A gate added to the northwest corner chainlink fence near the yard barn display, would allow emergency vehicles access to all area of the Menarcls complex. This gate could be locked at all times with accessibility only in an emergency situation for Police or Fire. We would like to see a gate with a fourteen foot clear opening in this area. o After review of the hydrant locations surrounding the complex, I have one change or concern referencing the hydrant in the southwest corner by the yard gate canopy. I would like to see the hydrant moved from the present proposed location along the parking stall area east into the landscape island and landscape planter area. The remaining hydrant locations have been reviewed and are acceptable at this time. If you have any questions referencing the issues raised, please feel free to give me a call at the Elk River Fire Department 441-4919. s:\offsiteksachmen.doc 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 490 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 'Elk Rive From: r Date: Police Department Subject: Memorandum '- Steve Ach, City Planner Michelle Masica/Cheryll Edinger March 8, 1996 Menards Future Site Cheryll and I have a few questions regarding the site plan. We were wondering how high the chain link fence is going to be. We also checked one of our reference books on parking and the book recommended 600 parking stalls for the size of the retail store. We are not sure what the city codes require. We also were looking at the parking lot lighting. We would like to recommend that some changes be made. We feel that certain spots will not have adequate lighting due to the positions of light poles. Our last question is about the landscape planter. The plan shows it will be 5' high and have shrubs. With the barn display behind it, we feel this may obstruct natural surveillance. If you would like further explanations on any of our recommendations, feel free to contact one of us. 13065 Orono Parkway · P.O. Box 723 · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-2324 · Fax (612) 441-8937 Planning Department Elk River City Hall PO Box 490 Elk River, MN. 55330 Cheryl Becker 11452 197th Avenue NW Elk River, MN. 55330 Attention Debbie Kleckner and Planning Commission, I would like this information to be in the packet that goes to the Planning Commission prior to the M~rch 26, 1996 meeting concerning the M~nnards Project P96-1. Please address this at the meeting. I have to writa this because with my business and other obligations with my children I cannot always make it to the meeting. I was at the public hearing with the Council on March llth. My house is only 40 feet from where the Mast line of the project intersects my back property line. My home sits on the South side of 197th and only 30 feet from the back property line which is a common property line for the project. At the Council meeting on March llth it was decided: 1. The "trail corridor" be removed because there shouldn't be public walkways across backyards of residences and because of how close it was to my back door. 2. The 75 foot no-cut strip on the North end of the project was then decreased to 50 feet without knowledge to me or the Council of how close this puts the parking lot to my house. 3. The developer was able to decrease the footage of 25 feet to 10 feet from the no-cut strip to start his parking lot for this Outlot w_~ knowledge to the Council or me how much closer this put the parking to my house. Therefore, a parking lot with cars and public will be only 90 feet from my hous~ and only 50 feet from my back property line. I am extremenly happy with the trail corridor being removed but decreasing the no-cut strip and increasing his parking lot puts the public right back only 90 feet from my house and only 50 feet from my property line. The developer · gained 40 feet on the north side of his Outlot B, and I still ~ave the public ~d now the outio~, ~uzidzng ~o~-~-~t an. , a~g closer I run a daycare and have done so for 10 years. I am very concerned about the children wandering off, following strangers, or disappearing. The state will require me to put up a fence for the safety of the children. As for my home and privacy, I do not want the public so close with easy access to my property for vandalis~ theft, and crime. Suggestions: 1. Increase the North no-cut strip back to the 75 feet that it was origionally set for. This would help me with my privacy and by business and the w~rry for the safety of the children. I was established here first and the~ developer ~greed to this before. It was changed by the Council and developer without the Council or myself knowing how close the intersection of this project was to my home. 2. As a neighborhood this 75 foot no-cut strip verses the 50 foot helps us as homeowners so we do not have to look at backs of buildings, parking lots, lights, parked cars and dumpsters. ! feel we were here first and this re-zoning occured afterwards. If I knew this re-zoning was going to happen and this project was coming in, I wouldn't have purchased this property nor built in this neighborhood. A~ a single mom raising three children, maintaining my home and running my daycare business, I am asking for your help in this situation and with these issues. I do not have funds available to put up a fence for the safety of the children and for my privacy that is. being taken away, and I feel I have been put in jeapardy for vandalism, and crime with the public having close access to my property, and my daycare business is being infinged upon. Thank you for your time in reading this and addressing these 'issues. Very concerned, February2,1996 Mr. Steve Ach City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway P. O. Box 490 Elk River, MN 55330 RE: Par-king requirements for the proposed Menards store, Elk River, MN Dear Mr. Ach: Menards parking needs are not as high as most of the typical major retailers. Our use is somewhat different, our aisles tend to be wider, our products tend to be bulkier and our outdoor storage area is larger. I am prm4ding you with an updated store list of Menards old and n~w prototype stores. The list indicates the number of available parking stalls at each location and the store opening date. As you can see fi.om the list, the number of parking stalls we are proposing for Elk River is consistent with the number of available par-king stalls at our other locations. The total square footage of the new prototype store is 160,680 square feet. But, not all of that is actual sales area. Only 104,370 square feet is sales area with the remainder consisting of 42,900 square feet of unheated warehouse area and 13,410 square feet of receiving area. The old prototype store had about 60,000 square feet of sales area and about 50,000 square feet of warehouse and receiving area. It should be noted that at any one time, during business hours, we've found that appro.ximately 25% of our customers are in the outdoor storage area with their vehicles pie'king up products they purchased in the store and not parked in the front par'king lot. Finally, keep in mind that we do not receive the mad Christmas rush that most retailers count on. These retailers design their parking lots mainly around this one month of file year. Our busier times are a little more spread out, generally occurring in file spring and fall. Thank you for your consideration in tltis matter. Sincerely, Senior Project Manager Menard, Inc. GC/sw EAU Q..NRE, W1 54703-9625 Menards .Home Improvement Centers Available Parking Proto _type III (160,000 s.f.) Location Appleton, WI Batavia, IL Bellevue, NE Bellevue, WI Cottage Grove, M2q Dolton, IL Eau Claire West, WI Fox Lake, IL Madison, WI Minot, ND Onaiaska, WI Stefling~ IL Ankeny, IA Bradley, IL Cedar Rapids, IA Chicago, IL Council Bluffs, IA Elkhart, IN Fond du Lac, WI Goshen, IN Grand Island, NE Grand Rapids, M~ Gurnee, IL Hudson, WI Indianapolis North, IN Indianapolis South, IN Iowa City, IA Machesney Park, IL Mason City, IA Matteson, IL Mishawaka, IN Norfolk, NE Norton Shores, MI 403 407 411 422 405 426 415 397 444 401 407 417 Prototype~II (145,000 s.f.) 298 343 356 249 319 319 350 327 335 374 317 317 363 311 319 363 330 3O2 339 323 Store 9-7-95 T.B.A. 12-21-95 T.B.A. T.B.A. T.B.A. 2-08-96 T.B.A. T.B.A. T.B.A. 2-15-96 T.B.A. 8-11-94 12-15-94 8-10-95 T.B.A. 1-94 12-22-95 8-03 -95 1-5-95 3-16-95 1-26-95 3-94 6-30-94 2-94 3-94 9-1-94 10-19-95 12-15-94 4-28-94 1-05-95 3-09-95 2-16-95 Sioux City, IA Sioux Falls, SD Springfield, IL Urbandale, IA Waterloo, IA Waukesha, WI Wausau, WI West Allis, WI West Burlington, IA ~__P_a. r..k'Ln.g_S_ !..a!..Ls. 256 228 232 211 198 248 221 236 249 Store 1-91 4-90 1-90 1-86 12-84 12-83 10-78 8-87 1-91 RIVERSIDE DEVELOPMENT 612 ~1 ~5-~5 P.OJ/OJ ATTACHMENT "A" GAS STATION MOTEL RESTAURANT ¥ I O'Cv£LoPMENT SiGN (ALONG I,.{w'T 169) SCALE: 1/4' = l'-O" RIVFR~iO~ DEVELOPMENT EL~ RIVER. ~N 55350 PHOw~ blZ 241 ]80~ TOTAL P.03 a March 22, 1996 Letter to City Council, Let me start this out by saying that I'm all for the Menards project. Just a couple of issues I need to get of my chest. gl-WOODLANDS. I hope the city council can come to a compromise with the developer and find a way to preserve some of the natural beauty this plot contains. We all know that the easiest way to build a development is to start from scratch. (NO TREES-FLAT LOT). Well the easiest way isn't always the best. I understand that there are'some elevation concerns involved, but with all the timber in there I would think some trees match up with final grade; that aren't in the way of buildings. Also, why not save as many trees possible along Hwy. 169? With the signs that will be on the highway informing motorist of what is in the development, I don't believe knowing what is in there will be a problem. Let's add to it's beauty by preserving it's beauty. If we continue to destroy trees that have been around for 75 to 100 years, Elk River will have to hire a forester to take care of all the small trees that take there place. #2-TRAFFIC. I live three houses east of Hwy. 169 and on the north side of 197th Ave. By adding 12,000 to 14,000 cars per day on this already busy residential street; you will be increasing the number of people that think my driveway is some kind of turn-around I suggest adding a right-in right-out off of 169. this would reduce traffic on 197th Ave. I am aware of a deal that was made with MN-DOT that hampers city in adding this option. but if city made that deal, why not make another one to allow this to happen? There are several right-in right-outs along HWY. 10 at many businesses in Ramsey and Elk River. There will also definitely have to be stoplight installed at HWY. 169 and 197th Ave. Just try and get across 169 sometime on a Friday afternoon in the summer time. This has to be one of the busiest highways for boats and campers I have seen. In my opinion we need to try and develop to the east & west on Hwy. 10 in the future. If this trend of building to the north on 169 continuesl we will have to install a walkway over the highway just so our kids can cross safely. JeffMeyer 11475 197th Ave. Elk River .) Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 March 26, 1996 Staff report by Steve Ach. Menards, Inc. is requesting a conditional use permit for site plan approval to construct a 160,680 square foot commercial building on Lot 1, Block 1, Hillside Crossing II. The subject property is an 11 acre site locate at the southeast corner of Highway 169 and 197th Avenue. The Menards site will have access off Evans Street, which will extend from Sax Foods up to 197th Avenue. Steve reviewed comments in the staff report relating to the site plan, traffic, access, parking, fencing, outdoor display, fire protection, landscaping, building materials, and signage. Steve noted 412 parking stalls have been included, with 9 of them being handicapped accessible. Also, he noted staff recommends a landscaping theme be continued throughout the PUD similar to the Hillside Crossing I PUD. Terry Maurer, City Engineer, indicated they have completed the grading and utility plan for the Hillside Crossing II plat and have submitted the plans to the engineer for Menards. He noted that he has received the plans back from Menards and anticipates there will be no problems with compliance. Commissioner Anderson asked the 14 foot fence will be made of wood. Mary Prochaska, Engineer representing Menards, Inc., explained the fence will be made of vertical 2' x 8' brown treated lumber. Commissioner Sullivan asked when the lights shown near the fence will be lit. Mr. Prochaska stated the lights will be lit during the hours the store is open. He noted the lights have visual side cut-offs and should not be visible outside of the fenced area. Commissioner Minton asked for clarification regarding the yard barn display. Mr. Prochaska stated the yard barns will be constructed, painted and decorated for display at the north end of the site. Commissioner Minton asked if the proposed metal cover for the storage racks located next to the fence would cause a glare problem. Mr. Prochaska stated that he did not feel there would be a problem, given the 14 ft. height of the fence. Commissioner Anderson questioned if there would be any other outdoor displays, other than the yard barns. Mr. Prochaska stated the various types of fencing they sell will be displayed on the front of the building in the same area as the yard ham display. Commissioner Minton asked for clarification on the underground sprinkling system. Mr. Prochaska explained that the system is an underground frost-free type system which is hooked up to garden hoses. Commissioner Minton asked questioned in some trees could be saved in the triangular shaped area. Steve Ach stated it would not be possible due to the grading. Commissioner Sullivan asked for clarification on Terry Maurer's comment regarding the parking stalls n-~ar the yard entrance. Terry Maurer explained that he felt customers may have a problem backing out of these stalls if there were a Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 1996 Page 3 line of cars waiting to access the yard. Mr. Prochaska stated these stalls will be used primarily by the yard attendants and should not be a problem. Commissioner Anderson asked if Menards planned to use speed bumps in the parking Icl. Mr. Prochaska explained since the traffic will be entering off the street and making parallel routes throughout the lot, he did not feel there would be a problem. Commissioner Minton asked if the Police Department concerns had been addressed. Mr. Prochaska explained felt given the geomeffics of the plan, there would not be a problem with lighting. Also, Mr. Prochaska stated the lighted product signs on the wall of the building would be set on a time clock fo go off approximately 1 hour after store closing. Chair Dillon opened the public hearing. There being no comments from the public, Chair Dillon closed the public hearing. Commissioner Minton that two letters have been received which stated concerns regarding the proposed Menards facility; one from Cheryl Becker and one from Jeff Meyer. Chair Dillon expressed his concern for hoses lying on the ground with the type of sprinkling system proposed by Menards. Chair Dillon felt the City should require the same type of sprinkling system for all developments to remain consistent. Chair Dillon also expressed concern for the yard entrance canopy and felt some type of building material which would be compatible to the Menards structure should be used. Discussion followed regarding the yard canopy, The Commissioners were in general agreement they did not have a problem with the yard canopy as proposed, with the exception of Chair Dillon. Chair Dillon stated he felt the outdoor display should be located within the outside storage yard. He noted Sox and Target requested outdoor displays and were denied. Discussion followed regarding the location of the yard barn and fencing display. Commissioner Sullivan stated she did not have a problem with the yard barn display. She felt the type of storage was unique. Commissioner Anderson stated when visiting other Menards stores, outdoor displays include patio and lawn furniture, patio bdck and other items. Mr. Prochaska stated those stores had chain link fencing around the outdoor storage display area for security and this area would not; therefore, those items would not be displayed in the yard barn display area. Chair Dillon questioned if the display area could become a secudty issue in the future. Commissioner Anderson concurred with staff's recommendation for additional landscaping along the fence. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY MENARDS, INC. FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. CU 96-2, BASED ON THE FINDINGS IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE CITY ENGINEER'S LETTER, AND THE FACT THERE Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 1996 Page 4 WAS NO OPPOSITION DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: ALL OF STAFF'S COMMENTS OUTLINED IN THE REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION DATED MARCH 25, 1996, BE INCORPORATED INTO THE REVISED SET OF PLANS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. o ALL OF THE CITY ENGINEER'S COMMENTS IN THE MEMO DATED MARCH 22, 1996, BE INCORPORATED INTO THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT. ALL OUTDOOR STORAGE AND DISPLAY ALONG THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. COMMISSIONER SULLIVAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-1. CHAIR DILLON OPPOSED.