Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3 June 5 2017 Meeting Minutes Draft 1 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Monday, June 5, 2017 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance: Commissioner Fleming called the Monday, May 15, 2017 Prior Lake Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Dave Tieman, Mark Petersen, William Kallberg and Dan Ringstad. Also present were Liaison Zach Braid, City Planner Jeff Matzke, Community Development Director Casey McCabe, Project Engineer Monserud and Development Services Assistant Sandra Woods. 2. Approval of Agenda: MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, JUNE 6, 2017 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA. VOTE: Ayes by Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. 3. Approval of Monday, May 15, 2017 Meeting Minutes: MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO APPROVE THE MONDAY, MAY 15, 2017 PRIOR LAKE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. VOTE: Ayes by Tieman, Petersen and Ringstad. Abstained by Kallberg. The Motion carried. 4. Public Hearings: A. PDEV17-001016 – 14138 Orchard Circle NE – Variance – The homeowner is requesting setback variances to build a 2nd floor addition to an existing structure without increasing the foundation footprint on the original structure in the R -1SD (Low Density Shoreland) Zoning District at 14138 Orchard Circle NE. PID: 259300480. Planner Matzke introduced the request to consider a Resolution approving variances from the minimum side yard setback and minimum Lot area to allow major remodeling of a home on a property located at 14138 Orchard Circle NE. The property is located along the northern shores of Lower Prior Lake, east of Conroy Street. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, alternatives and recommended a motion. He presented a draft resolution, location map, proposed survey dated May 8, 2017 and a building elevation dated April 25, 2017. Commission Comments/Questions: Petersen asked about the eves/overhangs and if they were staying the same. Planner Matzke said yes and explained what is being proposed with the side yard setback request and the minimum eve allowed in this type of setback. Petersen asked about the height guidelines. Planner Matzke explained our height regulations and said this is well within the height ordinance. Applicant: None. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 6:10 P.M. 2 VOTE: Ayes by Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Public Comment: None. MOTION BY RINGSTAD, SECONDED BY PETERSEN TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 6:12 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Ringstad said staff gave a well written report; he will be supporting the variance tonight. Petersen stated he is in support of this variance as it doesn’t seem to be asking too much, there are no neighbors here to oppose, likes that they are sticking with small footprint on small lot, improving the neighborhood, the applicant is not asking for too much and it is a small footprint on a small lot. Kallberg said he appreciates the applicants maintaining the footprint without enlarging impervious surface, rather removing impervious surface to get below the allowable. He has no objections and does support this agenda item. Tieman stated he does support this agenda item. It appears to be a good change to the neighborhood and to the house. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION APPROVING THE VARIANCE REQUESTED FOR 14138 ORCHARD CIRCLE NE WITH THE LIST OF CONDITIONS AS STATED ON 4A AT 6:14 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. B. PDEV17-001017 – Universal Motors – 16720 Welcome Avenue SE – Conditional Use Permit – Universal Motors, LLC is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow motor vehicles sales and a Conditional Use Permit to construct a pole building in the I-1SD (General Industrial Use Shoreland) Zoning District at 16720 Welcome Avenue SE. PID 259010086. Community Development Director Casey McCabe introduced the consideration of an approval of two resolutions; a resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow Motor Vehicle Sales in the I- 1, General Industrial Use District and a resolution approving a CUP to allow construction of a Pole Building within the I-1, General Industrial Use District, at 16720 Welcome Avenue SE. He explained the history, current circumstances, issues, alternatives and recommended a motion. He presented a location map, site plan and exterior elevation. Commission Comments/Questions: Tieman asked about large space uses. Director McCabe explained the large spaces for office type or retail type buildings. Ringstad asked if this business is mostly internet based sales of vehicles rather than retail? Director McCabe said yes, correct and he stated that most sales are done online with very few visits to the site and if there are customers coming to the site, it is one at a time and by appointment only. Petersen questioned if there are typically hours of operation for this zoning. Director McCabe said we have not proposed any hours of operation; however, there are restrictions on exterior hours of operation. He explained the internal hours of operation is 24/7 and the typical exterior hours of operation. Petersen asked about our ordinance and their lighting plan. 3 Director McCabe explained our lighting ordinance and if a complaint was received, how that would be handled. He explained the foot candle measurements on the entire site. Petersen asked about the lighting of the headlights on the cars and etc.; and asked if the opacity of the fence is this good enough to not seeing headlights and etc. Director McCabe said he is confident that the fence will take care of the lighting issues. He said the land is generally flat, the topography is closer to Markley Lake. Kallberg asked about the addition to the approval of May 8th, City Council action in this application. Director McCabe replied at an earlier meeting on May 8th approval formalized; he explained the earlier approval in April the Planning Commission Meeting. Kallberg said so this is the application to approve the construction of a second building (pole building) on the property, correct and asked if this application is for this building or another building. Director McCabe explained there are two requests; one for motor vehicles sales being brought into compliance with our code and the second is for the conditional use permit to allow a pole building on the site. Applicant No Comment. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4B AT 6:25 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Public Comment: Amber Pownall, (16761 Markey Lake Court SE). She questioned the notice requirements. Director McCabe explained the posting of both the newspaper and mailing of the notices. Pownall asked if this timeline is meant for both notices. Director McCabe explained the time line for each one of the notices. Tom Schutz, (16743 Markley Lake Ct SE). He stated concerns of the notice; information being last minute and vague and stated there should be more discussion. He said Google Earth in 2015 presented the site to look like a junk yard and applauded the applicant on doing a great job of cleaning it up. He said there are a lot of unanswered questions, such as the hours of operation. He stated complaints of noise after 10pm that can be heard across the lake and suggested to add restrictions to these hours of operation, give recommendations on lighting and commented on the car lights shining through the fence. Petersen asked Mr. Schutz when they received the notification. Schutz replied he got the notification at work last Tuesday. He commented on being in conversation with Planner Matzke with need for information and didn’t get any information until today on what the meeting would be about. Petersen asked when the notice was sent. Development Service Assistant Woods explained when the notice went out in the mail. Director McCabe said we are confident that it was sent out on time per State Statues. Jamie Hadland, (16591 Markley Lake Drive SE). She stated points of consideration being safety, path, storm water management, impervious surface, flooding, lighting, DNR controlled lake, keeping the lake clean, setbacks, keeping the trees, noise and the need to screen the views. She showed a picture from March of her view from her house to the business. She talked about the business being only internet based. Steve James, (16583 Markley Lake Drive SE). He talked of his lifelong dream of building a house with a lake view and now the current building is the view. He commented on knowing when the business is open, fence and building being an view issue, City Council just changing the I -1 industrial use, lack of notice, SD zoning, proper location of a retail car lot, not wanting a car dealership on th e lake, bike path around the lake that is currently underwater, impervious surface and flooding . 4 Rob Nelson, (16755 Markley Lake Court SE). He stated a couple concerns; notice issues and difference in pictures from the notice to the meeting. He questioned the triangular shape on the picture on the west end of the property and asked how does it relate to this permit. Director McCabe explained the area to be added in with the final plat approval is being sent to the City Council Meeting next week. The motor vehicle sales is the larger lot. He added the triangular shape in for clarification for the final plat. He explained it is a sketch that is not to scale. Nelson said he would like to reiterate that this is the first that anyone here has seen that triangular part of this property added to the property and asked if the plan was to remove all the trees; as it impacts the lighting, noise and erosion. He is hopeful that these items are taking Director McCabe explained the tree removal and replacement per our ordinance. He explained the erosion aspect and mentioned that our Project Engineer could talk more on this subject. Project Engineer Monserud explained the large stormwater pond that provides treatment for this area. Nelson asked for clarification on which pond. Project Engineer Monserud pointed out which pond. Nelson said this pond is flooded now and floods into Markley Lake and causes concerns to the owners on the west end of the lake. He said he is concerned with the erosion and/or water going into a pond that is already flooding. Dustin Cvancara, (16537 Markley Lake Drive SE). He said he is curious of the lighting height that is allowed in this zoning. Director McCabe said 15 feet height would be the maximum. Cvancara questioned if many of these lights in this region that will peek out above the trees. Director McCabe said we have not seen the lighting plan; maybe the applicant would have a better answer for you on that. Cvancara asked if there is a second opportunity for a public hearing after the lighting plan has been submitted. Director McCabe said no there would not be as this is the public hearing; however, if approved this agenda item could be appealed. He explained the code requirements would cover the lighting; however, the Planning Commission could set conditions tonight as well. Cvancara said that would be great. He commented on the applicant sales being internet based; and asked if that will be true going forward once this is done, they can change it to what ever he likes, correct? Director McCabe said as long as they comply with the conditions on the resolution, yes. Jamie Hadland presented her photos to the planning commissioners. MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD/KALLBERG TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 4A AT 6:44 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried. Commission Comments/Questions: Ringstad asked about the impervious surface; we are looking at a 7200-square foot additional building footprint. Director McCabe said correct and explained the site, paving and drainage, and stated staff is confident they are under their requirements. Ringstad said what we are looking at tonight is the conditional use permit approval and all the comments and concerns from the residents are dually noted and is hopeful that once the building permit process takes place that these concerns can be talked about. He stated one thing that we can do tonight is perhaps is recommend or require full cut off lights; He is in support of this tonight but that seems reasonable. He commented on the hours of operations go, stating hearing impact noise across the lake at 10pm, he wouldn’t want to be listening to that. He explained that the hours of operation in the I-1 district are the same for everybody including Universal Motors; however, maybe Universal Motors could be more sensitive to this noise. He said in short he will be approving both the resolutions before us tonight with the addition, and would be curious to listen to the concerns from the Coimmissioners on the full cut off lights to see if there is something that he has missed. 5 Petersen commented on the biggest concerns: people didn’t get the notices of felt they didn’t get the notices on time and they didn’t get enough information which concerns him. He also stated concerns of not addressing the lighting; however, it will be addressed by Staff which does a great job. He stated this time is a little different as it is industrial next to a lake and a residential area and this also concerns him. He mentioned flooding and said the staff does a terrific job to make sure the water is flowing where it is supposed to, but everything for him, leads to tabling this agenda item with the need for more information. Kallberg said he echoes the comments of Petersen and Ringstad. He stated there is a long list of conditions attached already by Staff. He commented on a photo from across the lake and said there should be additional screening; however, this is already part of the conditions. He commented on the building being visible but should be better in the summer with foliage; the facility is there and it is what it is. He said he does appreciate the comments and concerns from the neighbors and would like to table this agenda item to get more information. Tieman said he also echoes the comments of fellow commissioners; he said maybe with the Memorial Day weekend the mailing could have been delayed. He said there is a lot of conditions and concerns and tabling this to the next meeting would be a good idea to get more information and detail on these items. Petersen suggested to get as much information from the applicant and staff and questioned if the neighbors should then contact City Staff. Director McCabe said yes, Jeff or I. Petersen said obviously we cannot get a full investigation on the pond but some information would be good, so tabling to the next meeting would be great. Tieman asked Casey if that would work. Director McCabe said he wasn’t sure that would be enough time; mentioned the first meeting in July has been canceled MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY KALLBERG TO TABLE THE AGENDA ITEM TO THE JULY 17, 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 6:57 P.M. REGARDING ITEM 4B. VOTE: Ayes by Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried 5. Old Business: No Old Business. 6. New Business: No New Business. 7. Adjournment: MOTION BY PETERSEN, SECONDED BY RINGSTAD TO ADJORN THE MONDAY, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. VOTE: Ayes by Tieman, Petersen, Kallberg and Ringstad. The Motion carried Sandra Woods, Development Services Assistant