Loading...
09-10-2008 PC MINSPECIAL MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER PLANNING COMMISSION HELD AT ELK RIVER CITY HALL WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2008 Members Present: Chair Westgaard, Commissioners Anderson, Austad, Lemke, Scott, Staul and Westberg Members Absent: Commissioner Anderson Staff Present: Jeremy Barnhart, Planning Manger; Debbie Huebner, Recording Secretary Call Meeting To Order Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the special meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chair Westgaard. 2. Consider 9/10/08 Planning Commission Agenda MOVED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STAUL TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 10, 2008 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 3.1. Consider 7/08/08 Planning Commission Minutes MOVED BY COMMISSIONER STAUL AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO APPROVE THE JULY 8, 2008 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 3.2. Consider 8/12/08 Planning Commission Minutes MOVED BY COMMISSIONER WESTBERG AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 12, 2008 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 4. Planning Commission Representative to Attend September 15, 2008 City Council Meeting Chair Westgaard will attend the September 15, 2008 City Council meeting. 5.1. Request by Janet Adams for Rezoning from R1c (Single Family Residential, to C2 (Office Commercial. Public Hearing -Case No. ZC 08-01 Mr. Barnhart stated that the applicant is requesting a zone change from R1c (Single Family Residential) to C2 (Office Commercial) to allow a small business in the existing home at 913 Main Street. The business would house up to 12 customers for crafting events such as scrap booking and quilting. The applicant would not live in the home. Mr. Barnhart stated that the guests would stay a minimum of 2 nights. He explained that C2 is the least intensive commercial use. He stated that the neighbors he has spoken with are not concerned with the use proposed by Janet Adams, but are more concerned with a possible future use that may be allowed in rezoning the property to C2. Planning Commission Minutes September 10, 2008 Page 2 Mr. Barnhart explained that property is located in a transition area between the downtown commercial and what is known as "old town". He noted that a number of houses to the east have been transformed to commercial uses, and that the issue is mainly a policy decision; how far the downtown commercial area should expand. Mr. Barnhart stated that the neighbors' concerns are valid, since other types of C2 uses would be allowed in the future. Chair Westgaard opened the public hearing. Janet Adams, applicant -stated that there is adequate room for parking. She explained that the site has a comfortable, aesthetical retreat setting. She noted that they would be a quiet neighbor, with very little outdoor activity. Ms. Adams stated that she intended to use the property "as is", with only some electrical updating required. Councilmember Nick Zerwas, 13700 182°d Avenue -stated that he is excited about the proposed use, but has concerns regarding the use of the property when Ms. Adams decides to sell or retire. Councilmember Zerwas asked that the Planning Commission take into consideration the impact on the neighborhood if a different type of use were to acquire the property in the future. Charles Martin, 943 Main Street -stated that the current property owner has an easement across his property for his driveway. He stated that he has no problem with the current use, but was concerned with additional traffic with a commercial business using the private driveway, and who will maintain it. He also had concerns regarding the resale value of his property with a commercial use next door. He suggested the property have its own driveway access onto Main Street. Cindy Sykes, 212 Morton Avenue -stated she is not too concerned with the use, but is concerned with the changing the zoning. She stated that her sister lives at 234 Morton, and was unable to make the meeting. She stated her sister's property abuts the subject property and she had concerns with traffic coming and going from the site. Kathy Rehfeldt, owner of 936 Lookout Place -Stated she rents her property to her grandchildren. She has no concerns with the proposed use, but what might come after. She stated that there is a steep hill from the subject property to her property, and felt there could be drainage issues if more parking (impervious surface) were added. She noted that two adjacent homeowners were not represented, since one home is in foreclosure and the other property owner is in Los Angeles. There being no further public comment, Chair Westgaard closed the public hearing. Commissioner Staul stated he shared the neighbors' concerns. He stated that he would have liked input from the downtown redevelopment committee, but since that is not an option at this time, he was opposed to a "piece meal" rezoning of the property. He suggested that staff work with the applicant on another option. Chair Westgaard concurred. He stated he also was not against the use as proposed, but was concerned with rezoning. He felt that the parking issues could be resolved, and was in favor of the applicant working with staff on another option, such as amending the "bed and breakfast" ordinance, home occupation ordinance, or as an interim use. Chair Westgaard stated he would have a hard time supporting a rezoning. Planning Commission Minutes September 10, 2008 --------------------------- Page 3 Commissioner Westberg concurred with Commissioners Staul and Westgaard. He asked what impact the C2 zoning might have on the residential. NLr. Barnhart stated that staff has not evaluated the impact, but that generally; commercial property is more expensive and is more valuable. He suggested that the Planning Commission could recommend the Ciry Council initiate an amendment could which would allow the use. He noted that if the use were allowed as a conditional use permit, the neighbors would have an opportunity for review and input. Commissioner Austad concurred with the other Commissioners. He felt the business was idea for the structure and the area. He was in favor of recommending another option, and could not support the rezoning. Commissioner Lemke concurred, stating that he felt the business would be well used. Commissioner Scott asked for input from the applicant regarding the discussion. Ms. Adams stated that she was comfortable with proceeding with an ordinance amendment. Commissioner Staul stated he also was in favor of an ordinance amendment. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO DENY THE REQUEST BY JANET ADAMS FOR A REZONING TO C2, AND TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL INITIATE AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW THE PROPOSED USE. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 5.2. Request by Anchor Sign for Conditional Use Permit to Amend Signage for Elk River Crossing_(Dollar Tree, Public Hearing -Case No. CU 08-18 Mr. Barnhart stated that Anchor Sign has requested an amendment to the Elk River Crossing PUD agreement to allow signage on the north side of the Dollar Tree retail site. He stated that staff does not support the request, since a great deal of thought was put into the PUD standards, and the applicant has not demonstrated a need for the additional signage. Chair Westgaard opened the public hearing. Joe Funderburk, representing Anchor Sign -stated that the current signage for Dollar Tree is not visible from Highway 169. He presented photographs to support his position. He stated that the proposed signage would be identical to what is on the front of the building. Mr. Funderburk stated that the Game Stop and Taco Johns businesses have signage on three sides, and the Tractor Supply has signage on the front and side of the building. He stated the request would not set a precedent, since one has already been established. Also, he noted that businesses one-third the size of Dollar Tree already have much more signage. There being no further comments, Chair Westgaard closed the public hearing. Mr. Barnhart agreed that the PUD agreement has been changed several times to allow additional signage. He stated that staff's recommendation is based on the fact the City Council has taken the stance to keep to the original PUD plans. The original goal of limiting the signage was to minimize impacts to the adjacent residential properties. He stated that this is an example of how departing from the original plan can tend to snowball, and now the request seems to fit in, since a precedent has already been established. Planning Commission Minutes September 10, 2008 Page 4 Commissioner Scott stated that he applauded the City Council in their efforts, but he was not sure now is the time to draw the line. He supported taking a firm approach with the next PUD that comes in for development. Commissioner Staul concurred with Commissioner Scott. He stated that denial of the request takes away the ability of the business to share in visibility. He agreed that Dollar Tree is not visible from Wal-Mart. Commissioner Staul stated he also agreed they should start by maintaining consistency with original standards in the next PUD. Mr. Barnhart stated that even though this PUD is largely built-out, there will always be another PUD. He stated it was clear what the PUD regulations were when the business purchased the property, and should not have been purchased based on changing them. He stated that applicant has presented a good argument to support approval, but that the Commission should be cautious on their reasons. Chair Westgaard asked how much of the site is left to be developed. Mr. Barnhart stated there are 2 or 3 lots left. Chair Westgaard stated that the design standards specified what signage was allowed, and that he would have to recommend denial since the request did not meet the standards. Mr. Funderburk stated that he understood Chair Westgaard's reasoning, but felt that the development is a highly competitive, commercial area, and citizens would wonder why Dollar Tree would not have more signage. He did not feel the business should be restricted to guidelines that have not been followed in the past. Commissioner Austad concurred with Commissioners Scott and Staul. He stated that given the commercial activity in the area and the applicant's strong argument, he would support a recommendation for approval. Chair Westgaard questioned the precedent issue. He asked what would happen if Wal-Mart and Home Depot requested to advertise on the back and sides of their buildings. Mr. Barnhart stated that this request does not open the door to them and they are still governed by the original standards. He noted that these businesses are advertised on the large pylon sign. Commissioner Westberg asked if there was an opportunity for Dollar Tree to advertise on the large pylon sign. Mr. Funderburk stated they have already explored that option and they are not allowed to use it. Commissioner Westberg asked the applicant if the size of the signage was "set in stone". Mr. Funderburk stated that 36-inch letters are consistent with other signage in the area, with the exception of one of Taco Johns' side signs, because it would not fit on the building. Commissioner Staul stated that he would like to be consistent, but that the exception is the rule in this case. He did not see the distinction between this building and others, and at this point, he saw no reason to deny the request. Chair Westgaard stated that regardless of past actions, the Planning Commission's job is to hold the benchmark. The intent of the standards was to keep the lighting away from the residential areas. He stated that the smaller businesses have a 360-degree exposure and require more signage than the larger buildings. Planning Commission Minutes September 10, 2008 Page 5 Commissioner Scott stated that the distinction may be the fact that Dollar Tree is attached to Home Depot. Commissioner Westberg added that the Dollar Tree signage being requested would be in view of the Trott Brook residences. Commissioner Lemke read language from the Elk River Crossing PUD agreement. He stated that he agreed with staffs recommendation and felt they should follow the PUD agreement. Mr. Funderburk stated that Game Stop is only 150 feet from Dollar Tree and also has visibility to the residential area. Commissioner Lemke explained that the 1999 agreement clearly states no signage will be allowed on the north side of the business proposed to be attached to Home Depot. Commissioner Scott stated that he also would like to be consistent with the agreement but that has not happened. He stated that he understands Commissioner Lemke's viewpoint and that what the Commission would like, is not what we have. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STAUL AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER AUSTAD TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FO ATHE REQUEST BY ANCHOR SIGN ON BEHALF OF DOLLAR TREE TO AMEND THE ELK RIVER CROSSING PUD TO ALLOW SIGNAGE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THEIR BUSINESS. MOTION CARRIED 4-2. Chair Westgaard and Commissioner Lemke opposed. 5.3. Request by City of Elk River for Ordinance Amendment Relating to City Entrance Signs. Public Hearing -Case No. OA 08-08 Mr. Barnhart stated that staff is finalizing an ordinance which would allow civic signs, such as a "welcome to Elk River" sign along Highway 10 near the eastern city limits. He stated that the challenge is to draft an ordinance that will allow signage which promotes the city, while not opening the door to unforeseen uses. Chair Westgaard opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Westgaard continued the public hearing to the October 14, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER AUSTAD AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEMKE TO TABLE THE REQUEST BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING CITY MONUMENT SIGNS TO THE OCTOBER 14, 2008 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 5.4. Request by City of Elk River for Land Use Amendment Relating to East Co. Road 40 Area Public Hearing -Case No. LU 08-01 Mr. Barnhart explained that a condition of the Liberty Heights Estates land use amendment to extend urban services was that the preliminary plat be approved by March 2007. Since the preliminary plat was not approved by that time, the City proposes to return the land use to rural residential. He explained that it would not be prudent to leave the property in the urban service district with no development plan. Planning Commission Minutes September 10, 2008 Chair Westgaard opened the public hearing. Page 6 Ron Middlestadt,19681 Twin Lakes Road -stated his concern for the property value if the land use was changed back to rural residential. He stated that the property across the street sold for 25 percent more because it was zoned for sewer and water. Brent Christian -18835 Cleveland Street -stated the residents made concessions for the Liberty Heights proposal. He noted that property owners gave up 17 - 28 feet of frontage for the improvements to County Road 40, and there were costs for putting city services under the road. He stated that he was concerned his property will be trapped on three sides with no access if he decided to develop in the future. Mr. Christian stated he is not opposed to the land use amendment, as long as his property is not cut off. Chris Holzem, 19256 Baugh Street, Anoka County resident -asked what happened to the project. Mr. Barnhart explained that there were several reasons the project did not happen. He stated that the City Council wishes to change the land use back to rural residential so as not to take away future development opportunities. He noted that they do expect this area to be developed at some point. Mr. Holzem asked if staff expected the same type of development to come back. NLr. Barnhart stated that he did not know, but that he was aware a large amount of discussion was given to lot sizes. Mr. Holzem stated that he would like to request access to his property when a future development is considered. NLr. Barnhart stated that there would be public hearings for Mr. Holzem to provide input. Ron Middelstadt -stated that on behalf of Pat Holzem, who could not attend the meeting, his opposition to the proposed land use amendment. Brent Christian -stated that he asked the previous developer for access and was denied. Chris Holzem -stated that he would like the minutes to reflect his request for a road to be stubbed in to the property line to provide access to his property. Mr. Barnhart noted that it is staffls intent to provide as many access opportunities as possible when considering projects. Mr. Holzem asked if he would be informed of a future project. Mr. Barnhart stated yes, if his property is within 350 feet. NLr. Holzem stated that he was, and he did receive notice of this meeting. Chair Westgaard asked if all components of a new project would have to be re-considered. Mr. Barnhart stated that a new project will start from "square one". He explained that an applicant may chose to "pick up the pieces" of the former project and move forward, but the City Council may feel differently. He noted that a future project will likely be residential with city sewer and water, with the same wetland issues, and negotiating of lot sizes and types of housing. Chair Westgaard stated that the urban residential land use made sense at the time the project was proposed, but since the timelines have not been met he supported reverting back to the rural residential land use until the see a new plan. Commissioner Scott concurred, stating that he was opposed to the land use when it was changed to urban residential. He asked what the status of the proposed junior high school was. Mr. Barnhart stated that the land offering for the school goes away with the project, and that if the school is still considering building another school on the site, they would have to buy the land on the open market. Planning Commission Minutes Page September 10, 2008 --------------------------- Commissioner Staul stated he would support taking the property out of the urban service district until the city receives a new plan. Commissioner Westberg concurred, stating that the boundaries of a future project would be modified unless an applicant bought the same property. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER AUSTAD AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WESTBERG TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER TO AMEND THE LAND USE OF CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE VICINITY OF EAST COUNTY ROAD 40 FROM URBAN RESIDENTIAL TO RURAL RESIDENTIAL. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 6.1. September Planning Commission Workshop MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STAUL AND SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER WESTBERG TO CANCEL THE SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP. MOTION CARRIED 6-0. 7. Adjournment There being no further business, MOVED BY COMMISSIONER STAUL TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Minutes Prepared by: Debbie Huebner Tina Allard, Ciry Clerk