Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout072495REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, JULY 24, 1995 7:00 p.m. Call Meeting to Order. a) Review Minutes of Previous meeting. HEARINGS: ao Case #CU95-03 - Consider Conditional Use Permit for the City of Prior Lake to locate a public works and park maintenance building in a B-P, Business Park Zoning District. Case #VA95-12 - McKnight & Associates - variance request for 46XX Lords Street. Property owned by Fred Mainor. Applicants are agents for the purpose of marketing the property, and are seeking variances for side, front, lakeshore and impervious surface. OTHER BUSINESS' a) Comprehensive Plan Discussion. AG72495.DOC PAGE 1 16200 Eagle Creek Ave., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1714 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 24, 1995 The July 24, 1995, Planning Commission Meeting was called to order by Commissioner Vonhof at 7:00 p.m. Present were Commissioners Arnold, Roseth, Loftus and Vonhof, Intern Commissioner Criego, Planning Director Don Rye, Assistant Planner Deb Garross, Associate Planner Michael Leek and Secretary Connie Carlson. ROLL CALL: Amold Present Kuykendall Absent Vonhof Present Loftus Present Roseth Present REVIEW MINUTES OF THE JULY 10. 1995 MEETING: MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY LOFTUS TO APPROVE THE JULY 10, 1995 MINUTES. Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth and Vonhof. MOTION CARRIED. CASE #CU95-03 - CONSIDER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CITY OF PRIOR LAKE TO LOCATE A PUBLIC BUILDING .(PUBLIC WORKS AND PARK MAINTENANCE BUILDING) IN A B-P, BUSINESS PARK ZONING DISTRICT: Assistant Planner Deb Garross presented the information in the Planning Report dated July 24, 1995. The purpose of this item is to consider a conditional use permit, (CUP), filed by the City of Prior Lake to locate a public building, (Public Works and Park Maintenance Facility), on Outlot B, Waterfront Passage Addition. In order to construct the maintenance facility as proposed, the City of Prior Lake must review the site according to the performance criteria for CUP's listed in section 7.5 of the Zoning Ordinance. Public buildings are listed as a CUP within the Zoning Ordinance for the B-P, Business Park District. The subject site consists of approximately 12 acres and is a triangular piece of property located south of CSAH 21, east of Adelmann Street and north of the south corporate boundary of Prior Lake. The subject site was subdivided by the City of Prior Lake in July, 1993 and later purchased by the City, (in 1994), with the express intent of constructing a new maintenance building on the property. The site was chosen by the City due to its close proximity to the existing maintenance building, (located north of Prior Lake Baptist Church), and to serve as a major "anchor" to MN72495.DOC PAGE 1 Waterfront Passage Business Office Park. The City Council selected the architect BRW Elness, to prepare plans and specifications for the 3.0 million dollar project. The City Council approved the building design and authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for construction of the maintenance building on June 19, 1995 via Resolution 95-54. The site and building plans have been designed to conform to City codes and be aesthetically sensitive to the planned future industrial development within the Business Office Park. The building will be constructed with brick and decorative block on the front office area, and aggregate surfaced concrete panel walls on the larger storage areas of the building. The proposal contains a flat roof system however, a sloped standing seam metal roof is used for accent at the front office areas. The building has been designed to be compatible with the new fire station. The site plan indicates a salt/sand storage building which is proposed to be located behind the principal structure, and nestled in a wooded area, to screen the structure from public view. Staff recommends the landscape plan be amended to provide additional trees along the berm, located on the north side of the principal building. Staff is of the opinion that the site and buildings have been designed in a manner that is consistent with the performance criteria outlined in the Zoning Ordinance. The approval criteria for conditional uses primarily focus on conformity and integration of the use into the existing neighborhood. The landscape plan and exterior building design have been developed in order to complement the B~P District and anticipated future land uses. One issue that is outstanding related to the CUP proposal concerns the 6,000 square foot, accessory building proposed to house sand and salt. The current B-P zoning standards are extremely limited with respect to permitting accessory buildings. Staff is in the process of drafting language to permit accessory structures within the B-P Zone provided they be totally screened from public view; are limited in size to 15% or less of the principal building; are constructed with materials similar to the principal building and are located in the rear yard of the subject site. Staff recommended approving Resolution 95-19PC to City Council for approval of the proposal to locate a public building (Public Works and Park Maintenance facility), within the B-P, Business Park Zoning District. Jeff Ortel of BRW Elness Architect, Inc. explained the process of the project. Mr. Ortel expressed the excellent working relationship with City Staff and the overall impact the facility will have on the City. There were no comments from the audience. Comments from Commissioners: Arnold: concern of business/office parks for the City to provide the facilities that are the anchors for such a park; (Garross - not typical, but the City did the initial subdivision.) supports the facility; economic savings for the City. Roseth: questioned the main 3 story building (Mr. Ortel explained the mezzanine area and the tower); the tower is a non-functional item similar to the fire hall and city hall MN72495DOC PAGE 2 buildings; (Mr. Ortel also explained the salt and sand storage building and its function.); site for runoff of salt - will not go into the neighboring pond or woods; sewer and water available; expansion was considered in the design. Loftus: Would anything negative happen if the ordinance was amended? (Garross - when the business office park regulations were put together the allowance for accessory buildings were omitted. It does specify "accessory uses" but there is nothing that is permitted house any of those types of uses.); important to identify the limitations and external appearance of the accessory structure. Criego: Comment on the fuel tanks and gas pmnps; (Rye -nothing to prohibit in the office park as long as rigid conditions are met.) (Ortel- decided on below grade for fuel tanks; all you will see is a concrete slab and 2 dispensing tanks; the entire storage system is below grade with extensive monitors around it.) Vonhof: having the detention pond on site is a good plan; issue of a salt and sand facility and buying the salt and sand off season at a lower price; no impervious surface issues; further anticipation for development on this site; (Rye - designed for expansion); facility needs should last approximately 10 years - depends on how fast the City grows; possible city park in the future; all maintenance, park and public utilities of the City will be stored on site. MOTION BY ARNOLD, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 95- 19. There was no discussion. Vote taken signified ayes by Arnold, Loftus, Roseth, Vonhof. MOTION CARRIED. A recess was called at 8:03 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:08 p.m. CASE #VA95012 - CONTINUATION OF THE MCKNIGHT & ASSOCIATES REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR THE PROPERTY AT 4660 LORDS STREET; Associate Planner Michael Leek stated he and Planning Director Don Rye met with Bud Waund and Brent Johnson of Edina Realty representing the applicants. As a result of the meeting the site plan was redrawn to reflect the changes in the side yard setback, front yard setback and a lower impervious surface coverage of 32.9%. The City received a letter from Pat Lynch, of the Department of Natural Resources recommending denial of the requested variances. Staff received two calls in opposition to the variances: Barb Stark, 15283 Edgewater Circle, calling on behalf of herself and husband, stating their objection to the lakeshore variance and impervious surface coverage. A similar call was also received from Jerry Meysenbourg. There was no comment from the applicant. MN72495.DOC PAGE 3 Commissioner Vonhof read a letter from Walter and Kitty Jobst in opposition to the variance request. Bill Packer, 4633 Lords Street, also speaking for John Packer, 4653 Lords Street, is highly opposed to a two story house. He also stated the City maded him conform to the regulations for his deck two years ago. He is highly oppoSed to moving the house 30 feet back from the lake as suggested by the DNR. Mr. Packer feels there is a sincere hardship on the neighbors; he's ready to look at the home where its been proposed and move ahead. He expressed opposition to a two story house on the site. Comments from the Commissioners: Roseth: The DNR requested moving the house back 30' from the lake which would result in building a substantially smaller house; the trend seems to be build as much of a house as you can on a piece of property; the request substantially meets what the Commission has been doing the last couple of years; with all of the comments made in the last few meetings, he is in support of the request. Loftus: The deck was not included in the impervious surface coverage but does affect the lot lines and setbacks to the lake; tried to compromise with the ranch vs. two story house and the restricted building envelope; in previous meetings, it was stated that in character with the neighborhood, homes were within 20' the lake; cannot support the DNR's recommendation given with the limitations we have to deal with; suggest to change Resolution to reflect the modifications on the lakeshore setback. Arnold: The impervious surface has been reduced significantly; moving to the east is better; will support. Criego: The DNR is an advisory body; (Rye - The DNR can appeal in district court challenging the City's authority to grant that particular variance.); based on all the information, this is not ideal but a better solution. Vonhof: concurs with the Commissioners. MOTION BY ROSETH, SECOND BY LOFTUS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 95- 18PC. JUSTIFICATION: The uniqueness of the lot, the fact the road takes a substantial section out of the property which includes the cul-de-sac which makes it a very small lot to begin with and a pre-existing development pattern in the neighborhood. DISCUSSION: Item #3 should be added - lakeshore setback of 20 feet instead of the normal 75 foot setback requirement. MN72495.DOC PAGE 4 Commissioner Vonhofthanked everyone for coming to the meetings. The comments were helpful to all. Vote taken signified ayes by Roseth, Lofius, Arnold and Vonhof. MOTION CARRIED. Commissioner Vonhof explained the appeal process to the audience. OTHER BUSINESS: Consultant Blair Tremere explained some of the changes in the updated Comprehensive Plan. Information came from City Council, State Law, new studies and the existing policy. There are timely issues that were never covered in the old plan. Commissioners talked about the use of acronyms. Discussion on uses of the undeveloped lakeshore property. MOTION BY LOFTUS, SECOND BY ARNOLD, TO ADJOURN MEETING. Vote taken signified ayes by Loftus, Arnold, Roseth and Vonhof. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Donald Rye Connie Carlson Director of Planning Recording Secretary MN72495.DOC PAGE 5