Loading...
5.2. 5.3. 5.4. SR 06-05-1995ITEMS 5.~., 5.3.&5.4. ver MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Steven B. Ach, City Planner~~ DATE: April 25, 1995 SUBJECT: Land Use Amendment and Rezoning Request by Dennis Anderson, Public Hearing Case No. LUA 95-4 and ZC 95-4 Reauest Dennis Anderson is requesting the following: (A) Comprehensive Land Use Plan Amendment changing the land use from MR (Medium Density Residential) to HB (Highway Business). • (B) Rezoning from R1C (Single Family Residential) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) based on the submitted concept plan. *(C) The Conditional Use Permit request for a development plan is not being considered at this time. *This application will be reviewed if the rezoning is approved and a specific development is eminent. Location Outlot A, Brentwood Subdivision, Sherburne County, MN (southwest corner of 197th and Highway 169). Attachments • Memo from City Engineer, Terry Maurer dated April 19, 1995 • Zoning and Land Use Plan Maps • Concept Plan for proposed PUD rezoning • Attachment A -Minutes from previous Planning Commission and City Council Meetings regarding Brentwood Subdivision • Attachment B -Information submitted by Dennis Anderson 13065 Orono Parkway • P.O. Box 490 • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax_ (612) 441-742 Memo to the Planning Commission Apri125, 1995 Page 2 • Attachment C -Staff report to the Planning Commission dated June 27, 1994 • Attachment D -Planning Commission Minutes dated June 28, 1994 • Attachment E -Steering Committee Minutes dated December 1, 1994 • Attachment F -Inventory of Commercial Property • Attachment G - PUD Ordinance • Attachment H -Goals and Policies from 1988 Comprehensive Plan Background Outlot A of the Brentwood Subdivision, a vacant seventeen (17) acre outlot, is currently zoned Rlc (Single Family Residential) with an underlying land use of MR (Medium Density Residential). The Brentwood Subdivision was platted in 1980 into 101 single family lots with an average lot size of approximately 2 to 2 1/2 acres. The request involves a land use amendment and rezoning from Rlc (Single Family Residential) and MR (Medium Density Residential) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) and HB (Highway Business). Historv of Outlot A Research into the Brentwood Subdivision shows that very few details on the • future use of Outlot A were recorded. The minutes of the March 3, 1980, City Council meeting indicated that the future use of Outlot A was discussed. The applicant indicated at this meeting that "the plans for the use of the outlot were dependent on community demands and needs." However, the current land use and zoning designation indicate single family residential. Attached is a copy of this material along with other minutes relating to the platting of Brentwood. Overview The subject 17 acre parcel is a relatively flat with virtually no trees. The outlot is encompassed on all sides by residentially-zoned property. To the north and west, parcels are zoned Rla, which has a minimum lot size of 2 1/2 acres. To the east side of Highway 169, parcels are zoned Rle with a minimum lot size of 20, 000 square feet in size. To the south, Rlc, which has a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet. The primary access to the site is 197th Street and Irving Avenue via Holt coming from the south. Outlot A is the only portion of the Brentwood Subdivision which is currently planned for City services. However, this site does not have City services available at this time. These services would have to be extended from 193rd and Jackson. Please refer to City Engineer Terry s:planning:pc:lua95-4 Memo to the Planning Commission Apri125, 1995 Page 3 Maurer's letter for additional information on traffic and utilities to serve the • property. Additional Information Included in this report is a considerable amount of information the Commission should review before considering the applicant's requests. This information will not be discussed in detail; rather, may be referenced during this report. Land Use AmendmentlZonin2 The first item the Planning Commission shall consider is the land use plan amendment. The applicant's request would change the land use plan from Medium Density Residential to Highway Business. The second item the Planning Commission shall consider is the rezoning of the property from Rlc (Single Family Residential) to PUD (Planned Unit Development). The applicant has submitted a concept plan illustrating how the 17 acre parcel could be developed under a PUD zoning. This plan is a "concept", however; demonstrates some of the fundamental elements to development of the site. For example, transportation, building size, • buffer/landscaped areas and general utility information. When considering the rezoning requests the Planning Commission may ""tie" the concept plan to the PUD zoning. In other words, the rezoning and concept plan can be approved with conditions that will address infringement upon the surrounding residential, adversely impacting the transportation system and/or other facilities. The Planning Commission should refer to Attachment G which is the current PUD Ordinance and specifically review the Regulations section. This section outlines criteria for granting a rezoning to PUD. The Planning Commission may want to consider the following when reviewing these two applications: 1. The effect of the proposed rezoning on the comprehensive planning of the entire municipality. 2. The changes in community characteristics that may take place because of the projected land use plan change and rezoning. 3. The relative effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the present • zoning map and land use plan, and whether a justification for s:planning:pc:lua95-4 Memo to the Planning Commission Apri125, 1995 change exists because of either special reasons or a change • in conditions. 4. Whether the rezoning is designed to correct an improper situation or would result merely in the granting of special privileges. 5. How can the surrounding areas be protected to establish a compatible land use between the two uses. Page 4 6. Is the proposed concept plan adequate for the proposed site and what design elements could should be made part of the project to eliminate impacts on adjacent land uses. 7. Have times and conditions changed enough to warrant a change in the use and zoning. In order to adequately assess the change of land use and zoning for the subject property, one needs to step back and ask a few "comprehensive" questions. 1. How far north along Highway 169 should commercial extend? 2. Should the City, through comprehensive planning efforts, guide this type of commercial to other areas of the City? 3. Can a transportation system be designed to serve this development without impacting the residential areas? 4. Would this rezoning be in conflict with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan? (R,efer to Attachment H). 5. Does the City have an adequate inventory of available and future commercial opportunities without this rezoning? Content Plan for PUD As mentioned earlier in this report, the concept plan is supposed to illustrate how the development can "fit" within a given area without causing undue hardship upon adjacent land uses and infrastructure. Staffs cursory review of the concept plans, as they relate to the PUD zoning, would include the following comments: • s:planning:pcaua95.4 Memo to the Planning Commission Apri125, 1995 Page 5 Site Plan • The subject property is somewhat separated from the surrounding residential by 197th Avenue and Irving Street. With this roadway and a large landscaped area, the opportunity exists to maximize the separation between the proposed commercial and residential land uses. By reducing the size of the building on Lot 1, Block 2, and possibly shifting the building towards Highway 169, this "buffer" area can be further enhanced. No loading dock locations are shown at this time. With a large retail business as proposed, a loading area will be necessary and quite active. Therefore, it would be recommended that all loading areas be located so they are not adjacent/visible to the homes on 194th Avenue nor from Irving Street. The green space along Irving Street (west) and towards the south should be maximized by increasing the width, berming and extensive landscaping. This will provide a maximum buffer to the surrounding residential area. • Based on the proposed building square footages, adequate on-site parking • can be provided. Streets/Storm DrainaeelUtilities Please refer to the City Engineer's letter dated 4/19/95. The proposed retention pond on Lot 2, Block 2 is in an area that is currently wooded. Rather than clearing trees to create a pond, every attempt should be made to utilize the opportunities upon the vacant land. However, buffer areas should not be compromised to accomplish these ponding needs. Si~na~e • Once again, to protect the surrounding residential areas, no signage should be allowed on the south or west side of the building and property. • Freestanding signage should be designed to be compatible with the building's architecture. Furthermore, the maximum height and overall area should be sensitive to the surrounding area. • s:plaaaing:pc:lua95.4 Memo to the Planning Commission April 25, 1995 Page 6 Uses • The proposed uses appear to be a large general retail business along with a freestanding gas/service station. The general retail may be appropriate; however, outdoor storage, displays, and open outdoor areas may present a detriment upon surrounding land uses. Furthermore, limiting the hours of operation may be a consideration for development. • The gas station convenience store may not be appropriate at its proposed location. Lights, traffic and hours of operation will directly impact the home north of 197th. Analysis The proposed land use plan amendment and rezoning requested by Dennis Anderson has arguments which support the change to commercial as well as leaving the land use something other than commercial. Some of the positive results of commercial include: • The property is relatively void of any natural or major wooded areas allowing commercial development to occur without impacting these sensitive areas. • The property is within the current urban service area. • Access off of 197th which connects to Highway 169. • The property has excellent visibility from Highway 169. • Although surrounded by residential zoning, only seven homes are adjacent to or immediately across the street from the proposed development. • Commercial development contributes handsomely to the City tax base. • If the project consisted of a "major tenant' (i.e. Big Box Retailer) it would strengthen Highway 169's commercial corridor. On the other side, there are also negatives to commercial beginning with: It is currently zoned Rlc with a residential land use, leading the residents in Brentwood and surrounding residential area to believe the property would be developed as some residential use. Road improvements would have to made to accommodate the proposed development. Some of those improvements may impact existing residential homes and quality of life for residents: The proposed project of approximately 120,000 square feet may be too intense for this particular property given its proximity to residential neighborhoods. u s:planning:pc:lua95-4 Memo to the Planning Commission Apri125, 1995 Page 7 • Rezoning of this property may lead to other applications for commercial e which will stretch commercial development further north on Highway 169. Conclusion As the City Engineer points out in his memo, the infrastructure to serve the proposed development can be accomplished. Furthermore, the commercial development could incorporate design and buffering to minimize the impact to surrounding residential areas. However, all these improvements would be done at the expense of impacting a residential area. Therefore, staff submits the following conclusions: • The development is too intense for this parcel and would better serve the community in another location. • The proposed rezoning and land use plan change would impact the character and integrity of surrounding residential areas. • The necessary transportation improvements north of 193rd to the development would be detrimental to the four single family homes along Holt. • The Steering Committee has not yet identified the commercial and industrial growth areas and therefore, this proposal maybe inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies. • The rezoning and comprehensive plan amendment to commercial would not be a logical extension of the existing commercial developments south of 193rd Avenue. Recommendation It is recommended the Planning Commission recommend one of the following: (1) Deny the rezoning and comprehensive land use plan amendment based on the findings mentioned above. (2) Approve the applications with certain conditions to accomplish compatibility between the commercial and residential area; or, (3) Recommend the plans be revised to include a reduced commercial area and return to the Planning Commission at a later date for further consideration. ~J s: planning:pc:lua95~4 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 Apri125, 1995 5.2. Dennis Anderson Reauest for Comprehensive Land Use Designation from MR f Medium Density Residential) to HB (Highwav Business) 5.3. Dennis Anderson Request for Rezoning from Rlc (Single Family Residential) to PUD f Planned Unit Development Staff report by Steve Ach. Dennis Anderson has requested a comprehensive land use plan amendment to change the existing land use from Medium Density Residential to Highway Business. The properly is described as Outlot A, Brentwood Subdivision, located at the southwest corner of 197th and Highway 169, approximately 17 acres in size. Also, Mr. Anderson has requested to rezone the property from its current designation of Rlc (Single Family Residential) to PUD(Planned Unit Development). Steve Ach provided background information regarding Outlot A. He also described the concept plan submitted by Mr. Anderson which proposes a 119,000 square foot retail facility and a smaller convenience/gos station use at the comer of 197th Avenue. Steve reviewed questions for the Planning Commission to consider in reviewing the applications which related to the impact on the surrounding residential community. He also reviewed issues to consider related to the extension of commercial development in the community, transportation issues, and inventory of existing commercial property. Steve Ach provided comments on the site plan, streets/storm drainage/utilities, signage and proposed uses for the PUD. He reviewed positive and negative • points regarding the proposed commercial use. Steve reviewed three options for the Planning Commission's recommendation on this issue. Dennis Anderson, developer, stated he felt the site would be logical extension of the commercial zoning along Highway 169. He explained that a commercial development would benefit the community's tax base, as opposed to 40 single family homes in that same location. Mr. Anderson stated he felt he had been honest in dealing with buyers in the Brentwood Addition. Chair Kuester opened the public hearing. Dale Miller, 11795 196th Avenue NW, stated when he bought his lot from Dennis Anderson, he was told the outlot would be townhomes and park area. He also submitted a letter from Jim and Janet Berg, 19760 Lowell Street, stated they were told a similar thing. Ron Peterson, 11625 197th Avenue NW, stated he was the owner of the single family home immediately north of the subject site. He expressed his concern that if it was the intent for Outlot A to be used as a commercial site, why it was not rezoned at that time rather than allowing expensive homes to built around the site and rezoning the property after Brentwood is developed. Wayne Troaseth, 11707 194th Avenue NW, requested that the Planning Commission address the traffic situation on 197th and Highway 169, and also on Holt Avenue. He also requested that the yield sign on Irving be changed to a • stop sign before a tragic accident occurs. Mr. Traaseth questioned how many times the developer can come back with a rezoning request. City Attorney Peter Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1995 Page 4 Beck stated that a property owner has the right to request a rezoning at any time. • Mr. Traaseth requested that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to deny Mr. Anderson's request. AI Fisher, 11946 196th Clrele, stated that Mr. and Mrs. Anderson clearly stated that Outlot A would be used for residential purposes. He expressed his concern that the Solid Rock Church built without a permit, started a daycare center, and now has afull-fledged school in their residential neighborhood. He stated he sees no logic in rezoning the outlot to commercial. Mr. Fisher questioned why the road work is being done on Holt and how it relates to this project. William Jones, 11763 194th Avenue NW, questioned why the intersection is being tom up at Holt and Jackson for the second time. He also questioned why there are no berms by the Elk Park Center project. Greg Olson, 19726 Irving Street, stated his property is twenty feet from the intersection of 197th and Irving. He stated he would not have purchased his properly if he had known Outlot A would be commercial. He felt the adjacent properly owners would be heavily impacted by the PUD, which would be in violation of the City's criteria for granting a PUD. Ted Travica, 19702 Irving Street, stated his properly would be directly impacted by the proposed commercial project. He expressed his concem for the trees that are being removed for development in the City. He stated Mr. Anderson's request should be denied based on the concerns of the neighbors. He also requested that the Planning Commission not allow Mr. Anderson to make further rezoning requests. Ken Williams, 19762 Brentwood Lane, stated that he has owned four parcels bf property in Brentwood, and that he is a friend and neighbor of Dennis Anderson. He spoke on behalf of Dennis Anderson's character and integrity. Mr. Williams stated that he was made aware of Outlot A and its close proximity to the heavily traveled highway (Highway 169). At this time, the Commission, staff and Planning Commissioners responded to questions and comments from the public, as well as stated misconceptions about the government process. Chair Kuester explained that the Planning Commission is appointed, not elected, and that the members represent the City as a whole. She also explained that even if Mr. Anderson's request is denied, proposals for the site will likely continue until it is ultimately developed. Terry Maurer, City Engineer, stated that the initial work at Holt and Jackson was done in conjunction with the Elk Park Center project. Due to complaints, the alignment was changed to allow left turns from Jackson onto Hoit, as well as left turns from Holt onto Jackson. Chair Kuester stated that bees have been an important issue for the Planning Commission and that their recommendations have not always-been successful. • Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 Apri125, 1995 Terry Maurer explained that Mn/DOT has agreed to allow access at 197th which • could be signalized, however, Mn/DOT does not have a signal programmed for 197th at this time. He stated the next logical signalized access would be County Road 33 and Highway 169. Ken Williams, 19762 Brentwood Lane, in response to comments regarding decreased property values near commercial development, cited information which indicated residential lots near the Ridgedale Shopping Center having a value in excess of $200,000. He stated that Outlot A is not desirable for residential development with its close proximity to Highway 169. Wayne Traaseth, 11707 194th Avenue NW, stated that he felt high traffic counts from the development will have an affect on property values. Gary Kleis, 19815 Irving Street, stated that he is in favor of keeping Outlot A zoned residential, and that the character of the neighborhood could be maintained if the property is developed as multi-family residential. Phil Johnson, 19440 Holt Street, expressed his concern that the proposed frontage road will provide a connection from this commercial center to the Target store, and the increased traffic will decrease his property value. He also was concerned that he would be assessed for city water and sewer. Mr. Johnson questioned the conflict of interest mentioned by Commissioner Kreger in the June, 1994 Planning Commission minutes and whether or not he intended to vote on this issue. Commissioner Kreger stated that his father's company built the roads in Brentwood and he was the foreman on the job. He explained that the • job was done approximately 15 years ago and it was his intention to vote on this issue at this time. Mr. Johnson cited reasons for denial of Mr. Anderson's request from the Planning Commission's 1994 minutes and stated he did not feel any of the conditions have changed since then. He stated that residents are concerned whether or not they should sell their property and when they should sell. Mr. Johnson stated that he felt the proposal is in conflict with the City's PUD ordinance. He expressed his concern that Mn/DOT would not put a stop light at 197th Avenue and Highway 169 until a sufficient number of accidents and fatalities occurred. Mr. Johnson questioned why the apartments were being constructed behind Central Lutheran Church if the City has a moratorium on multi-family development. Dwight Kirkeide, 11230 173rd Avenue NW, expressed his concerns that if residents threaten Mr. Anderson's rights as a property owner, their rights would also be threatened, and stressed that all property owners' rights must be respected. Harold Wilkinson, 19679 Lowell Street NW, stated he is not in favor of another stop light on Highway 169. He stated that when he and his wife purchased their land in 1984, they were told by Dennis Anderson's wife that Outlot A was probably going to be multi-family residential and possibly a park. He questioned why the property was not zoned commercial at the time of development. He asked the Steering Committee to let the current residential remain. Rohlf Anderson, 19411 Irving Circle, asked what would be allowed in Outlot A with its current zoning. He expressed his concern for pedestrians with children and strollers crossing Highway 169. He stated that the traffic light does not allow Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 April 25, 1995 enough time for them to cross and they end up waiting in the median for the light • to change. He felt that this is an unsafe situation, and that a similar situation will occur if another light is placed at 197th and Highway 169. He stated he does not feel Dennis Anderson's rights are being violated since he would be allowed to develop the property as residential. Kent Peabody, 11713 200th Avenue NW, stated that in contacting Mn/DOT, he was told there would not be any additional accesses on Highway 169 between School Street and County Road 33. He noted that there does not appear to be enough room to allow truck fraffic on 197th. Paul Ostmoe, 19644 Irving Street, questioned whether there is a precedent in any mefro area to develop a large commercial site in the middle of a residential area. Bob Sturgis, 11789 197th Avenue NW, expressed his concern that people have no way of knowing what intentions may be for a particular piece of property if it is not documented. He also expressed his concern that the property east of Highway 169 as well as Outlot A should remain residential. Perry Mason, 11847 196th Avenue NW, asked that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council deny the request. Ted Travica, 19702 Irving Street NW, expressed his concem that people should not be threatened with the prospect of apartments if Mr. Anderson's request is denied, since high density residential would not be permitted within this zoning • district. Robin Tuttle, 13390 Ranch Road, urged the Brentwood residents to follow this issue through to the end and also, to attend the Steering Committee meetings. There being no further comments from the public, Chair Kuester closed the public hearing. Staff and Commissioners gave the following responses to comments and questions that were raised by the public: -The apartment project behind the Central Lutheran Church was approved before the moratorium went into effect. -The precedent for commercial developments surrounded on three sides by existing residential in the metro area would have to be researched. -A complete berm along the Jackson Avenue side of Elk Park Center cannot be done and still save the trees. A combination of berming and trees v/ill likely be done. -Outlot A is cunently zoned single family residential; multi-family would not be allowed in its current zoning designation. Anything other than the uses allowed under the R 1 c zoning would require a rezoning. Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1995 Page 7 -Medium Density Residential zoning allows up to approximately 5 units per acre. • High density allows up to approximately 22 units per acre. -Roughly 377 acres are vacant for commercial development. However, much of this area does not have city water and sewer. -An access at 197th and Highway 169 is already in place. No "new" accesses onto Highway 169 will be allowed. -A conditional use permit is not required at this time for approval of a PUD rezoning request. The conditional use permit would be applied for if the rezoning was approved and a specific development plan was submitted. -The multi-family development moratorium is temporary and will be terminated when the Comprehensive Plan is approved. -A property owner will always have the right to petition their government for a legislative act, such as a rezoning. No property owner has a right to a specific zoning. Precedents have very little affect on decisions regarding rezonings made by local governments, as they are legislative acts. However, quasi-judicial actions such as conditional use permits where all conditions for approval can be met, may be somewhat affected by precedents. Also, the fact that a property owner may be able to develop a site at a higher return with a particular zoning, does not give him the right to that zoning. Highest and best use of a particular property is considered in comprehensive zoning and land use decisions, but it is not determinative in a rezoning contest. • Commissioner Minton expressed his agreement that the proposed use is too intense for the site. He did agree that some type of commercial use may be best for the site, especially with proper buffering. He felt that sewer and water will come to the area eventually. He expressed his concern that the impact on traffic would be significant. He stated he supported denial of the request and would not be in favor of considering any future requests regarding this site until the Steering Committee has completed its work. Commission Minton stated that he saw no conflict of interest for Commissioner Kreger and would encourage him to vote on this issue. Commissioner Dillon stated that based on the information submitted and discussed, he felt that the traffic throughout the residential was a great concern and was in favor of denial. He also was not in favor of reviewing any more requests regarding the subject property until the Steering Committee has made their final recommendations. Commissioner Kreger estimated that approximately 68 homes could be built in this area. Steve Ach stated that a typical method to estimate the number of homes with 10,000 square foot lots is to use a density of 2.5 lots per acre, including roads and improvements; therefore, approximately 42 homes could be built on the 17 acre site. Commissioner Kreger stated that he would recommend the developer submit a revised plan incorporating the following information: -show the location of homes adjacent to the proposed commercial project on . the same map Planning Commission Minutes April 25, 1995 Page 8 -need approximately 8 acres of green space including the pond (may include a neighborhood park) -need approximately 80% opacity screening on the west, south and north of the project. -a 100 foot strip along Irving and down 197th would be included in the number of required green space. This area would also accommodate approximately 3 rows of pine trees to meet the opacity requirements. -provide landscaped islands in the parking lot. -identify traffic control at the intersections of Highway 169 and 197th, Holt and 197th, Irving and 197th, the intersection of Irving and Lowell Street, and Holt Street and Jackson. -A map showing the location of Holt and the existing homes (how close to the street, etc.) -Address the driveway access for the neighbor to the north of 197th -Park dedication requirements -Letter from Mn/DOT regarding the location of a traffic light at 197th and Highway 169. • -Re-address the potential traffic count based on the revisions to the design. -Re-notify residents of a public hearing on the issue. -Request that the developer attempt to meet with residents and/or interested parties regarding changes to the project design. -Suggest that a committee be formed including neighboring residents to work out the design of the project. Commissioner Tacheny stated he did not feel this type of commercial development was appropriate for the area. He stated he concurred with the other Commissioner's comments, especially regarding haffic. He stated he was in favor of a park or some other type of development. COMMISSIONER KREGER MOVED TO TABLE THE REQUEST BY DENNIS ANDERSON FOR A COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE AMENDMENT UNTIL THE DEVELOPER THE DEVELOPER HAS MADE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO FIND AN ACCEPTABLE SITE PLAN DESIGN THAT ADDRESSES THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS' CONCERNS. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. COMMISSIONER DILLON MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST BY DENNIS ANDERSON FOR A LAND USE AMENDMENT, CASE NO. LUA 95-04, BASED ON THE INFORMATION IN . STAFF'S MEMO AND ALSO, BASED ON THE COMMENTS RECEIVED DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER MINTON SECONDED THE MOTION. • Planning Commission Minutes Apri125, 1995 Page 9 Commissioner Minton stated that he felt the Planning Commission would be willing to review a request for this site after the Steering Committee has completed their review of the Comprehensive Plan. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-1. KREGER OPPOSED. COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST BY DENNIS ANDERSON FOR A REZONING FROM R1C TO PUD, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. ZC 95-04, BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE LAND USE AMENDMENT REQUEST WAS DENIED, AND THE INFORMATION IN STAFF'S MEMO. COMMISSIONER TACHENY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-D. _ _ _ __ _ 5.5. Cihr of Elk (River Reauesf for Code Amei~etment. P.ubiia Nearfna Case: Na. CAA QS•iS3'. Staff report by Gary Schmitz. Gary updated the Planning Commission on the status of the zero lot line ordinance amendment. He stated that the City Attorney, Peter Beck, is working with him in drafting language for the proposed amendment, which will be presented at the next regular Planning Commission meeting. COMMISSIONER KREGER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE ZERO LOT LINE CODE AMENDMENT, PUBLIC HEARING CASE NO. OA 95-03 TO THE MAY 23, 1995 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. COMMISSIONER THOMPSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-0. Steve Ach noted a draft PUD Ordinance amendment will be presented to the Planning Commission at the workshop meeting. b.5~ P.lannina YsFOrksFton yaith CEty cif C~1sec~a Steve Ach distributed registration forms for this upcoming workshop. There being no further business, COMMISSIONER MINTON MOVED 70 ADJOURN THE MEETING. COMMISSIONER KREGER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 7-D. The meeting of the Elk River Planning Commission adjourned at 10:05 p.m. Res ecffully submitted, Debbie Kleckner Recording Secretary • ~l Ria ~ _- - - - _ r ~ _. ~ ',~ -- ~.. i, ~! ~ i F ~ ~, ~ ---~~ ~{ ,~ -- _ _ .,~ _. - _- ___._ 'r ~ ' 4 _ 1 ~ iY 1 `- ~ f, • !. i ~ -_ - - -- ~ 1( fl2'- , ~ '~ ~ ~ ~~ w ;t~ ~ _ _ -1-`~ IllCi 4W ~N ~~ __ ~ ~2 _ _ R4 - PL f -~~ -~ , _ ;, --- :~ ~~TIONE LOCATION ~, .-~,-~. ., -~.~ ; _ ~ ~' ... ~ ~ `~ i 0 ~ ~ ~' ' L __f _ ik i~ ._.. ~_ I`[rL I r ,~, trc.+. -. GiJ x _ v. ._~..__ ..__. r. ~ _ 1 n %_ ~~ .>~ ~~~ ~ i ZONING MAP ~ smw F~q ww.wW ® $pN F~Yy .~krMl~l ~~l9 esq. F.wF HngwWl aw. Frwr wrr.or l1 ~ aw. FamY~ M1ra.wir ~,~Te~' P.O. Sox 490 • 13ob5 Orono Parkway • ELk Rive:, biN 553:0 • (612) ?4I-7120 l+.e FaWy .rtlrnlM ~~ uam MumW ® rw~..nr+ia. F.nYy ...a.nua 12 .,a`,..a.m.i A4 yam- FNYIf Rntl~nlW ~ Said YYrb FrJp FIw1N NW Ow~Npe~l ~ AM~w Trwr ® c.~.r ~.~ar ®.u.~.~ Fxn.ebn © om~. ors CASE NO. ZC 95-4 ~ ~ -- --- - i ~ ~ 1 ~~~~ _ ~ --- ~ ~_-__ , LOCATION ~ -~ ~ •°~r~,,.~, _~ ~-- I~-- ~ ~,~.~___-_C_ ,.. "i _ 1 -~ /M r ~. -" ~~ _ ,. .. ,~ I \ ~~ ~ l f _d ~n~ ' a F± r _YC r ~ ~ li - '~~• r _. •-- ~,. MR _ ~ '; q - - ~ ~_ - W ~ yI .T - ~ I _ Y_ ..: i..~ __ ,~ ~ , - ~~ City of _ ~ .,_ h ~q fem. ~ ~;jJ COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE 11J~AP HR High Density Residential p public CS Central Business OS Open Space HB Highway Business A Agricultural L] Light lndustrial LR Lcw Density Residential ^!- MI Medium Industrial MR Medium Density Residential CASE NO. LUA 95.4 • - lYei P.~. Sox =F90 ~ 1~06~ Orono Par!cvay • Eik Rive:, tiiN X53_0 • (6I2) ul-7~Z0 - ~I-~ II ii II 1 1 1 111 I I\ i ~ i \ I+ r ~'~~ :~ ~ i _~1~, U. S. BLK << 1 ~~ ~ . _ s ... _ ..- __ 1 IiGf IW;1 Y ---_ - - Nn - -- -----~~- -- -- - -- i/, ---- ----- -- SiREEi.....__---------- ~ 169 -- J ~-- ---- -- --~- --- -- p/ /~~ ------- --- -- -- - `- .~ ---- -- _- a r -- ~ -. NW \I v~ ~~\ . a./ ~/ ~\ \ \ ___------------.-- G~~~' ~'~' `F/Z r jqs ., 9..~:e:.. r r. ])mn lS e.l rl. to Sr'.,SS a I> II. ~'-•-to k! .+~ mKSS e s r,. :! -I.~~ xT j\ Ln ~m+ttT.fl 0 ~-- Ta •Srl. ~- ~ ~ , -=1xIY0 Te s'+tts .err, -~r~5~~ 4 -+- -~ lr_ 1.` r _~ -_\ ~-_ _--.1 ~_ - ;sf ki RS. aII. r ~~ --_ -_ 2 '-`----~-_----- PROPOSED -'- RETENTION - .-_ POND AREA r' . _ :~,~ \\` v al .+aT e f ri. --~--._._~IZISo BUIDNG O ~s ~~ \ ~ __ r r S S r `` \ ~ BSI m+SIS . erl '0 a \1 iL77.R_S.erl,o ~ ~ ~ 4 ~~J i i ias try \ ~ \i • a: ^+'.°.°: •° a a ~«.~v, ~ .~ _ R ___.-_-.-.-.~__ a ~ CP[N necE ---~'- o \\ \ --_ tJ¢ U'~ \ S 1 n 1- 1- Z U ~ pa ~ ICO pOO Q~ 41 \\\ -~_~ i , ': ,m aln ~h nx uln ~ ---- - rl~~~', \ __L__l ~ I' ____ ___- ~' :;~ ~ I I ... -\- I . :: / r r 'r 1 J r r r r r .; I '.. I~ I I '~~ i I • I O ~ ' ~ ~ I I, r )~ ~ ~ 1 :\. D I ~ ~s ~1~. r --~< ¢' I ~; o _ ~m q 1 ~ - : i / ~ t I ~ . ~ .g :1 / m i %/ i ; / .% / 'J / J / r / e , V~ ' ~ _ g l i :~- ti~ : ~ :..__.._._.._. / '~ :'i . - -- ~ `r ~ ~ / . r m `~ I I ~:~ I - I I I o I ~ ~ ~ I ii '~ ;I J I .i I I ~ '1 I A ~ ~' __ ' N b _ ..t r -_~._ :: YY. N :I 7 ~ ' - ° ; ; ~ ° R C ti ~ __ ~- , ~ . y .._ = ~ I -... _._. .._..JS7.00 -... .I I I I N • :~_ i r 'I`t_-__~___~~~_-- I '. _... ,..:.. ~. l3BO.C5.. afi .....___. rq ,\°,' p r, -I I y ~ .: ~Y ~ ~ es4s (7 -^\~1\ a ~ \~C ~y~\ q Jp VJ ~° "ci'G~ (e2 ua"\'- ~ ..~ is m I `~\ . \', \ I \ ` ,~ ~~.. ~ ' ` . ; ~1 I i r r ~ ~ ~ ~ n ~ w ~ . ~ ~' .~ .:I I :~ I ~ ,: ii, ~ iii '- ii I , i ~' ~ ~ N m _ ~ ~ :I ~ - ! rn C I i , m ._ i I ~ .~ ;~ i ~ 1 I I r. eze ~~ l / `~ ~~ I ... ~ t. 1 ~ - r~ • ., I I k~ cc2 • i 4 r -~~ ~ ij L S ~ 111 s x