Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout052404 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, MAY 24, 2004 1. Call to Order: Chairman Stamson called the May 24, 2004, Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Atwood, Lemke, Perez and Ringstad, Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier, Planner Cynthia Kirchoff and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2. Roll Call: Atwood Lemke Perez Ringstad Stamson Present Present Present Present Absent 3. Approval of Minutes: The Minutes from the 2004, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. 4. Consent: None 5. Public Hearings: Commissioner Atwood read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting. A. Case #04-61 Tollefson Development is requesting a rezoning of approximately 36 acres of property owned by Margie Schiltz Revocable Trust and Jeff and Alyssa Schneider to R-t. This property is located directly east of CSAH 17 (Marschall Road) north of 165.b Street and the Autumn Acres development. Planning Coordinator Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated May 24, 2004, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. On June 2, 2003, the City Council adopted a resolution annexing approximately 36 acres of land located on the east side of CSAH 17 (Marschall Road), north of 16Sth Street and the Autumn Acres development, and immediately west of the Stemmer property. On August 18, 2003, the City Council also approved an amendment to the City Comprehensive Plan to include this property on the 2020 Comprehensive Plan Map and to designate this property for Low to Medium Density Residential uses. The applicant is now requesting the property be designated as R-l on the Zoning Map. Kansier read the criteria and recommended approval of the zone change as proposed. L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMIS\04 pc Minutes\MN052404.doc 1 Planning Commission Meeting May U. 2004 Ringstad questioned the Shoreland District and townhome mix. How does the townhomes work? Kansier explained the density. Lemke questioned the shoreland boundary. Kansier pointed out the actual lake boundary and wetland. Perez questioned if this was the best designation for the Shoreland District. Kansier explained it was. The densities are limited by the Shoreland Districts. Comments from the public: Todd Bodem of Tollefson Development said they planned on a single family quality development with 20,000 square foot lots and 100 foot lot widths. They would like to work with the Stemmer project and move forward. Lemke questioned if they knew the number of units for the project. Bodem said it would be approximately 30+ units. Chris Kleven, Autumn Acres, said his only concern was to have a new road off Marschall Road for construction. The neighborhood does not want the construction going through their development. Bodem said they met with the County who felt the access would be off Marschall Road. The public hearing was closed at 6:43 p.m. Comments from the Commissioners: Ringstad: · Staff did a nice job in laying this out. It appears to be a bit of a hole in our current designation since it fell in before the City automatically designated annexed property into the Rl zone. . Makes a lot of sense - will support. Perez: · Questioned when the property to the north would be annexed in. Kansier said it was in the orderly annexation area around 2006. There has been no information on that property at this time. Utilities will be extended through the Aroon development. · Is there a time limit to zone the property? Kansier said it was 9 months to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. . Agreed with Ringstad - the staff did a good job. . Support. L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMIS\04 pc MinutesIMNOS2404.doc 2 Planning Commission Meeting May 24, 2004 Lemke: · Support the zoning change to bring the property in line with the Comprehensive Plan. Atwood: . Agreed with the zoning. Support. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECOND BY PEREZ, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT REZONING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY TO THE Rl DISTRICT. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This item will go before the City Council on June 7, 2004. B. Case #04-64 Doug Nagel of Diggers Polaris is requesting an amendment to the approved conditional use permit for motor vehicle sales and motor vehicle repair, service on the subject site, which is zoned C-4 (General Business). This amendment would aUow outdoor sales and a testing track. Planner Cynthia Kirchoffpresented the Planning Report dated May 24,2004, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. The City Council approved a motion on April 19, 2004, directing staff to prepare an amendment to Digger's Polaris' Conditional Use Permits for property located at 16450 Anna Trail SE. On August 18,2003, the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle sales and a Conditional Use Permit for motor vehicle repair and service for Digger's Polaris. The proposed amendment specifically addresses the following two conditions of approval for the motor vehicle sales: n) No outdoor storage of vehicles or equipment shall be located outside of the designatedJenced storage area and w) A test track shall be prohibited in conjunction with motor vehicle sales. Also, the amendment addresses the following condition of approval for the motor vehicle repair: d) A test track shall be prohibited in conjunction with motor vehicle repair. The property is zoned C-4 (General Business) and is guided C-CC (Community Retail Shopping) on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. Motor vehicle sales and motor vehicle repair are separate conditional uses in the C-4 zoning district. Digger's Polaris wishes to conduct operations with outdoor storage of merchandise and a test track. The existing Conditional Use Permits prohibit both activities, so the Conditional Use Permits must be amended. The motor vehicle sales Conditional Use Permit precludes the storage or display of merchandise outside of the fenced area. Digger's Polaris is currently storing merchandise L:104 F1LES\04 PLAN COMMISI04 pc MinutesIMN052404.doc 3 Planning Commission Meeting May 24, 2004 in the front yard abutting Anna Trail. The City Council supports amending the permit to remove the condition that explicitly prohibits outdoor storage and display. However, the Council supports placing limitations on the amount of merchandise displayed. On May 7, 2004, staff conducted an inspection to determine the amount of outdoor display, and 19 pieces of recreational equipment were parked in the front yard abutting Anna Trail, including I boat, 6 jet skis, 3 carts, and 9 all-terrain vehicles. The City Council is comfortable allowing a modest amount of outdoor display, but supports a limit on the amount and the location. The Conditional Use Permits for motor vehicle sales and motor vehicle repair prohibit a test track. A "test track" can be defined as a designated course created and maintained by Digger's Polaris that permits interested buyers to test drive a vehicle or equipment sold by Digger's Polaris prior to purchase. The intention of the test track is to permit onlv Digger's Polaris products to be tested or driven. It is for sales purposes only. The City Council directed staff to prepare an amendment to the Conditional Use Permits approved for Digger's Polaris to operate motor vehicle sales and repair on property located at 16450 Anna Trail. The purpose ofthe amendments is to allow limited outdoor storage of merchandise and a test track within the designated, fenced outdoor storage area. Staff has prepared conditions to mitigate the adverse impacts of intensifying the use. Attaching conditions to the amended Conditional Use Permits are important because these amendments will set new standards for other uses within the C-4 use district, particularly those adjacent to TH 13. Amendment to Conditional Use Permitfor Motor Vehicle Sales: Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment, the following conditions may apply: I. The outdoor storage of merchandise shall be placed only between the principal building and Anna Trail. 2. Not more than 8 pieces of recreational equipment can be displayed on the property outside of the designated, fence area at anyone time. 3. All recreational equipment and merchandise on display outside the designated, fence area must be for sale by Digger's Polaris. 4. New or used automobiles or trucks are not considered recreational equipment. Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Motor Vehicle Repair: Should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment, the following conditions may apply: I. Only merchandise for sale by Digger's Polaris may be operated on the test track. L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMJS\04 pc MinutesIMNOS2404.doc 4 Planning Commission Meeting May 24. 2004 2. The test track must be confined within the designated, fenced outdoor storage area. 3. The test track must maintain a 30 foot setback from the 100 year flood elevation of the wetland. 4. Hours of operation of the test track shall be limited to the store hours of Digger's Polaris. Atwood questioned the conditions for motor vehicle and test track. Kirchoff responded it was not addressed as a permitted or conditional use in the Zoning Ordinance. It is probably considered more of an accessory use. Atwood questioned if the neighbors were notified? Kirchoffresponded "Yes, within 350 feet." Ringstad questioned the number of people contacted. Kirchoff responded "26". Ringstad noted that it looked like the City Council commented on supporting placing limitations on the amount of merchandise displayed. Did they also comment on the test track? Kirchoffresponded City Council did support both amendments. Lemke said the survey said 19 pieces stored and the report states 8. How was that arrived at? Kirchoff explained the storage for this type of use and location. Atwood asked where the entrance was located. Kirchoff responded it was on Anna Trail. There were no comments from the public and the hearing was closed at 6:58 p.m. Comments from the Commissioners: Lemke: · Diggers have been using the test track and there have been no complaints. It is in a fenced area. . Support the test track and outdoor display of new merchandise for sale. . The number can be flexible 8 - 10. Eight seems reasonable. . Would like to have heard from the applicant. . If the dealership were repairing someone else's machine and it wasn't for sale, under this they wouldn't be able to take it around the track. What is the intent? Kirchoff stated it was intended to require only items that are being sold by Digger's Polaris or repaired are operated on that test track. It is not to be used as a community test track. · I would support some language to clarify that. The intent is that there would not be races on Saturdays. · An item in for repair might not be considered for sale by Diggers but they still might have to run it to see if the problem is fixed. . Support some kind oflanguage chance. L:\04 FILES\04 PLAN COMMJS\04 pc MinutesIMNOS2404.doc 5 Planning Commission Meeting May 24, 2004 Perez: · Agreed with Lemke with the proposed change. · Also wish the applicant was here to see if 8 was an appropriate number for display. · All the other conditions are appropriate. · As long as it doesn't affect the neighboring properties - will support. Ringstad: · Agreed with Commissioners - wish the applicant could be here to answer some questions. Hesitant to increase the numbers. · The people most affected (26) do not have a problem with it as they are not present. . Support both changes. Atwood: · Disappointed the applicant is not present. · Assuming the neighbors are not present they are okay with the track. · Not knowing the hours of operation makes me hesitant to forward on. · Agree with Lemke the language should be changed to allow test repaired vehicles. · Open to being convinced that I may be a little bit too picky. Although there is no one in the audience present to disagree. · Would like to know what the applicant was using for a test track before this property. · Comfortable with 8 - would like to have different language defining storage and display. I am against outside storage. . Display is appropriate. There was a brief discussion on the hours of display along with the following comments: · This is a Conditional Use Permit and may be changed at a later date if there are problems. May have to revise some conditions. · Forward on to City Council with our concern for the hours of operation. . List hours of operation. · Storage versus display. Displays are showroom definition. Storage is different. MOTION BY PEREZ, SECOND BY LEMKE, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MOTOR VEHICLE SALES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16450 ANNA TRAIL SE WITH CONDITIONS. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION BY PEREZ, SECOND BY LEMKE, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ANY AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MOTOR L:104 FlLESI04 PLAN COMMISI04 pc MinutesIMN052404.doc 6 Planning Commission Meeting May 24. 2004 VEHICLE REPAIR ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 16450 ANNA TRAIL SE WITH CONDITIONS. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. This matter will go before the City Council on June 7, 2004. 6. Old Business: None 7. New Business: A. Discussion on potential Zoning Ordinance Amendments for Mixed Use projects. Planner Cynthia Kirchoffpresented the Planning Report dated May 24,2004, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. This memorandum provides an overview of potential regulations that could permit the mix ofland uses proposed in the Jeffers Pond project. At a recent City Council work session, Wensmann Homes presented a concept plan indicating commercial uses at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of CSAH 42 and CSAH 21, as well as a range of residential uses on the remainder of the property. During the presentation they mentioned that dwelling units would be incorporated into the commercial buildings. The Zoning Ordinance does not provide for mixed uses in any zoning district but the C-3 (Specialty Business). The C-3 district is intended for downtown uses and is not appropriate for any other location. In order for the City to approve a "mixed use" development, the Zoning Ordinance must be amended to permit different uses in one district because state law precludes use variances. So commercial uses cannot be located with a residential district, unless the Zoning Ordinance permits those two distinct uses in one zoning district. As noted above, the C-3 use district is the only use district that permits the mix of commercial and residential uses in Prior Lake. This use district is not appropriate for the Jeffers' property. The City has three options for permitting a mixed use project: (1) adopt either a mixed use district ordinance or (2) special use district ordinance, or (3) amend the existing PUD ordinance to consider the PUD the zoning for the property rather than an overlay district. Regardless of which use district is adopted for a mixed use development, the zoning district must be consistent with the comprehensive plan land use designation, pursuant to state law. So for the Jeffers Pond project, the land use designation will have to be changed to be consistent with the use district. A rigid designation such as residential or commercial will not comply with state law. It is important to note that land use designations do not have to be simply "Low Density Residential" or "Community Commercia1." For example, Chanhassen has a "Mixed Use" land use designation for one L:104 FILESI04 PLAN CQMMISI04 pc MinutesIMN052404.doc 7 Planning Commission Meeting May 24, 20114 project with residential and commercial components. The designation can be whatever the City wants, provided that it is defined and at least one corresponding use district is listed. This is important because the purpose of the zoning ordinance is to implement the goals, policies, and objectives of the comprehensive plan. Considering the purposes of each ordinance, it appears as though an amendment to the PUD ordinance would be the most appropriate. The PUD can be drafted to require high standards in exchange for mixed uses and flexibility in selected bulk standards. Moreover, the City could be vested with the authority to either approve specific uses in the PUD ordinance or defer approval of uses until a plan is submitted for review, considering the site in question and proposed uses. Discussion and Comments from the Commissioners: Lemke questioned the downtown Lakefront Plaza. Kirchoff explained the zoning. Perez felt staff did an excellent job looking into this. Agreed with the PUD. Atwood agreed with staff that the PUD ordinance should be amended. Change "should" to "could". Perez: · We've looked at the Jeffers Pond area for several years. Changed the zoning and in the last 6 months we haven't heard from anyone. . Agree with the PUD informal process. Atwood: . Have always been against site specific - however, this will work. · Kansier mentioned the "Mixed Use" is the new phrase. This is a major amendment and the Commissioners will see it again Lemke: . Mixed use can be a wonderful tool. 8. Announcements and Correspondence: Cynthia Kirchoffwill be leaving at the end of the week. 9. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 7:24 p.m. Connie Carlson Recording Secretary L:104 FILESI04 PLAN COMMISI04 pc MinutesIMN052404.doc 8