Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 22, 2005 16200 Eagle Creek Avenue S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372-1714 REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 2005 Fire Station - City Council Chambers 6:30 p.m. 1. Call Meeting to Order: 2. Roll Call: 3. Approval of Minutes: 4. Consent Agenda: 5. Public Hearings: A. EP05-183 Roy Erickson and Cal Chadwick are requesting a Variance to the minimum lot area in order to subdivide a parcel for conveyance to the adjacent parcel. This property is located north of CSAH 42, on the east side of Crest Avenue. B. EP05-184 Busse Student Transport is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage within the I-I zoning District legally described as Lot 2, Block 2, Deerfield Industrial Park 2nd Addition. C. EP050-180 Brad Hanson of Pro Finishers is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow motor vehicle sales in the C4 zoning District. This property is located at 16117 Main Avenue SE, Unit #5. 6. Old Business: 7. New Business: 8. Announcements and Correspondence: 9. Adjournment: L:I05 FILESI05 PLAN COMMISSIONl05 AGENDASIAG082205.DOC . f . I k www.CItyopnorae.com Phone 952.447.4230 / Fax 952.447.4245 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 2005 1. Call to Order: Chairman Stamson called the August 22,2005, Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Those present were Commissioners Billington, Perez, Ringstad and Stamson, Planning Director Jane Kansier, Planning Coordinator Danette Moore and Recording Secretary Connie Carlson. 2. Roll Call: Billington Lemke Perez Ringstad Stamson Present Absent Present Present Present 3. Approval of Minutes: The Minutes from the July 25, 2005, Planning Commission meeting were approved as presented. 4. Consent: None 5. Public Hearings: Commissioner Stamson read the Public Hearing Statement and opened the meeting. A. EP05-183 Roy Erickson and Cal Chadwick are requesting a Variance to the minimum lot area in order to subdivide a parcel for conveyance to the adjacent parcel. This property is located north of CSAH 42, on the east side of Crest Avenue. Planning Director Jane Kansier stated the applicants were present however, they have requested to continue the matter to the next planning commission meeting on September 12,2005. Comments from the Commissioners: MOTION BY BILLINGTON, SECOND BY PEREZ, TO TABLE THE MATTER TO THE SEPTEMBER 12,2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. L:\05 FILES\05 PLAN cOMMISSION\05 MINUTES\MN082205.doc 1 Planning Commission Meeting August 22, 2005 B. EP05-184 Busse Student Transport is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage within the 1-1 zoning District legally described as Lot 2, Block 2, Deerfield Industrial Park 2nd Addition. Planning Coordinator Danette Moore presented the Planning Report dated August 22, 2005, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Busse Student Transportation has applied for a conditional use permit to allow outdoor storage on a site located south of Adelmann Street and west of Revere Way, within the Deerfield Industrial Park. Currently the site is vacant. The site plan shows a structure and an outdoor storage area for the parking of buses. The 7,200 square foot structure is proposed to contain office space, restrooms, and service bays. The four service bays will allow for minor maintenance and washing of buses. The property is zoned 1-1 (General Industrial). Outdoor Storage is permitted with a Conditional Use Permit in the 1-1 district, subject to conditions. Overall, staff believes the outdoor storage is consistent with the intent of the 1-1 use district provided conditions of approval are met. Based upon the Findings set forth in this report, staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit. In order to meet the above-listed criteria, the Planning staff recommended the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall record the Conditional Use Permit at Scott County no later than 60 days after City Council approval. 2. A plan must be provided that details the materials used for the construction of the gates to the fenced enclosure areas. 3. A zoning permit shall be issued prior to the installation of the fence. 4. All vehicles within the outdoor storage area must be operable, licensed, and registered. 5. A sign permit application must be submitted to the City prior to the installation of any signage on the site. 6. Revise the lighting plan to show light spill not exceeding 1.0 at the property line. 7. Prior to site plan approval, the applicant shall submit revised plans reflecting plan changes and conditions as indicated. 8. All conditions listed in Section 1102.1503(8) ofthe Zoning Ordinance shall be met. 9. All conditions listed in the August 17,2005 Engineering Department memo. 10. The plans must be revised to show the access road as Granite Court. Stamson questioned the outside bus storage parking requirement for a Conditional Use Permit last year. Kansier responded the applicant added more parking than the code required as well as this applicant. Comments from the Public: Applicant Jim Busse said the staff report was accurate. L:\05 FILES\05 PLAN cOMMISSION\05 MINUTES\MN082205.doc 2 Planning Commission Meeting August 22, 2005 Alex Wilson, 17444 Deerfield Drive, said he did not like the idea of 100 buses in his back yard. At the neighborhood meeting, the number of buses was at 50, now it is 100. He did not receive any notification. Wilson wanted to know how the City was going to tame this down. He stated he did not want to see or hear buses starting up every morning, and does not feel a 6 foot fence is adequate for screening. He does not like the idea and this project should be reworked by the Commissioners. Wilson said he thought there was going to be a wetland in his back yard, not a bus parking lot. Commissioner Perez asked Mr. Wilson what he would like to see reworked. Wilson responded he did not want to see 100 buses running in his backyard. He did not see how anyone could give the applicant a conditional use for a building. Wilson said he bought the townhome in good faith and wanted to see a wetland. Kansier pointed out the neighborhood and wetland. Moore mentioned the distance is anywhere from 250 feet and over 300 feet from the property line with the wetland in between. None of the wetland will be disturbed. Stamson noted the parking lot is quite a bit in from the property line. Jerry Hanson, 17436 Deerfield Drive, didn't feel 350 feet was adequate for notification. Staff pointed out the 350 foot map on the overhead met all the requirements. He felt at least 50 people can see the parking lot. Hanson thanked Jim Busse for his neighborhood information meeting. Hanson stated originally there would be 50 buses now there would be 111. Moore explained there were 94 parking spaces including employee parking. His other concern was the zoning map - did not feel it was up to date. Moore explained the immediate property is 1-1 and pointed out the township property. Hanson said he did not understand the zoning. He felt, in his opinion, this was not an appropriate zoning next to R2. Hanson questioned the lighting as well as the conditions. Moore responded to Hanson's concerns and explained the requirements. He did not agree with staff's conditions and interpretations. Hanson stated he would like to see a berm or a higher fence. He felt the applicant should move across County Road 21. Moore pointed out the berm is on the adjacent property, not the Busse property. Keith Dahnert, 17440 Deerfield, said the elevation oftheir property is higher and overlooks the bus parking lot. It's like looking down a barrel of a gun. He understands Busse's problem, but sitting out on his deck he already hears cars and motorcycles. Now he is going to hear additional cars and buses. This will impact the quietness of the neighborhood. Dahnert also stated his concern for the impact on the wetlands with 100 buses. He also felt a 10 foot fence would not block the view or noise. Dahnert understands the applicant needs to do business, but not this area. He felt he was misled by the developer on the types of businesses going into the industrial park. Judith Hanson, 17436 Deerfield Drive, said she was surprised she was only one of three neighbors who received a notice of the neighborhood meeting or the public notice. She was also concerned for the sound of 100 buses starting up in the morning. Not only does L:\05 FILES\05 PLAN cOMMISSION\05 MINUTES\MN082205.doc 3 Planning Commission Meeting August 22, 2005 there need to be a visual boundary but a sound barrier. Hanson told the Commissioners to think about having Mr. Busse moving to another location across the road. The public hearing was closed at 7:03 p.m. Comments from the Commissioners: Ringstad: . Questioned staff on the runoff fluids - oil, antifreeze, salt, etc. Moore explained the NURP plan was engineered specifically before runoff into the wetlands. . Agree and disagree with some ofthe comments. . I believe there will be some impact regarding Item #5 of the conditions. . However, the bus parking is an appropriate use for the zoning. . A 6 foot fence is not adequate for sound or screening in my estimation. Would like to throw out the idea ofberming visual and sound. . This has been a well thought-out project. . The size of the berm may not be that great in length but worth talking about. Billington: . This appears to be a reasonable project. . The lighting plan would be a caveat for the conditions to be approved. . It seems to meet the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. . The berming is an open discussion. . Support. Perez: . Questioned notification. Kansier explained the notification process. Staff errors on the side of caution. If the line just touches a property, the resident is notified. However, the City follows the State Statutes. . Kansier pointed out the Comprehensive Plan Amendment notification is 500 feet. This area was rezoned in 2003 and all parties are notified within that area. . Moore also added the applicant supplies the information certified by an abstract company based on County records. . Agreed with Ringstad on condition #5 for adverse impacts to neighborhoods. . In favor ofberming to mitigate the noise. . No issues on the other Findings. Stamson: . This area was changed to Industrial and outside storage. Stamson explained to the attendees the Planning Commission and City Council's reasoning for the change of zoning. . One of the other CUP's for a bus parking lot was not next to a neighborhood. This project seems like an adverse impact on the neighborhood. A berm or trees will not block the noise or view. A bus parking lot is different from a car lot. It would be a sea of orange. How do you block that? They are diesel buses and will L:\05 FILES\05 PLAN cOMMISSION\05 MINUTES\MN082205.doc 4 Planning Commission Meeting August 22, 2005 have to be started up and idle 15 minutes next to a residential neighborhood. It is a huge impact. . Will not support based that it does not meet condition #5. Move it further away in the I District and I would be okay with it. Perez asked Jim Busse to speak on the normal operation of the buses. Jim Busse explained the normal operation (School Year - Monday through Friday) - drivers start arriving at 6:20 am and stagger with 3 starting times. There would be 30 staggered buses 6:30 to 8:00 am. He realizes there is a visual impact and will put in 18 foot tall trees. He has never had a problem with the existing neighbors on a gravel road who were only 150 feet away. The neighbors are supportive ofthe operation as they did not feel the operation was a problem. The Busse family has been in the busing business for over 40 years without any problems. All buses are back by 4:30 pm. The buses are not in and out throughout the day. It is pretty quiet around the yard after that. Busse is aware the east end of the lot would be a visual impact to the neighbors therefore, he was planning on the larger taller trees. Busse also explained the lighting for safety. The bus companies have been working with the Minnesota School Bus Association. The lighting is very important - he will make sure the lighting stays in the lot and will not affect the neighbors. Busse also landscapes and is knowledgeable on vegetation and plans on screening the property beyond the City's requirements. Billington questioned what type of trees Busse was planning on planting. Busse responded - evergreen, ash, armor maple clumps, Colorado blues, Black Hills spruce, various maples and crab trees. All are 15 feet or higher. Ringstad: . Agreed with Stamson on the berm. He does not feel the berm is going to solve the problem. Did not feel a conclusion will be determined tonight. . Will not support at this time. Leaving it open. . Would like another neighborhood meeting as the last one was not well attended. . Would like to see some sort of satisfaction between the applicant, neighbors and staff. Stamson: . Would be willing to see if someone has a better idea or have it landscaped differently. Little pessimistic with orange buses - it will be hard to do an adequate job of blocking the view. It is a difficult piece of property to mitigate. . Questioned if this could be continued. Kansier responded the Commissioners would have to give the applicant clear directions to what they are looking for. Stamson said they don't know what they are looking for. L:\05 FILES\05 PLAN cOMMISSION\05 MINUTES\MN082205.doc 5 Planning Commission Meeting August 22, 2005 Kansier responded the applicant has to know what the Commissioners want. If the Commissioners are leaning toward denying it, there has to be Findings of Fact and staff would then bring back a Resolution to the next meeting. Moore eXplained the applicant's landscape plan for the Commissioners and attendees. Stamson: . The applicant did a tremendous job of trying to mitigate the property the best he could. It is just a difficult site. The question is - What is the impact on the neighborhood? . I would love to find a spot in town for him. This piece of residential land sitting a little higher makes it hard to berm. Quite frankly, big orange busses are an eye- sore. It is a tough thing to look out your back yard and see them all the time. Billington: . Inclined to support - would like to see additional fine-tuning of the landscaping. The applicant was done a supreme effort on this project. It is tough. MOTION BY BILLINGTON, SECOND BY RINGSTAD, TO CONTINUE THE MATTER TO THE NEXT MEETING - SEPTEMBER 12, 2005 AND DIRECT THE APPLICANT TO SUPPLY ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPE INFORMATION. Vote taken indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. C. EP050-180 Brad Hanson of Pro Finishers is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow motor vehicle sales in the C4 zoning District. This property is located at 16117 Main Avenue SE, Unit #5. Planning Director Jane Kansier presented the Planning Report dated August 22, 2005, on file in the office of the City Planning Department. Brad Hanson, owner of Pro Finishers Auto Body, has applied for a conditional use permit to allow motor vehicle sales within the General Business Zoning District. The site is located at 16117 Main Avenue SE (west of Highway 13, south and east of Lakefront Park, and north of Dakota Street). The property is zoned C-4 (General Business) and is guided C-TC (Town Center) on the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. The C-4 Zoning District allows motor vehicle sales by conditional use permit. The auto body repair business was established in its present location in 1992. The applicant purchased the business in 1996. The auto body shop predates the Code and the use was "grandfathered in" at the time the Code was revised to address requirements for this use. L:\05 FILES\05 PLAN cOMMISSION\05 MINUTES\MN082205.doc 6 Planning Commission Meeting August 22, 2005 Recently the applicant was informed a retail dealer's license plate is necessary for the legal transport of vehicles to the repair shop site. In order to obtain the retail dealers license plate, the applicant must have City approval designating the use as a permitted use. For that reason, the applicant has requested a conditional use permit to allow motor vehicle sales. The function and volume ofthe business will remain unchanged from its current use. As stated as a condition of the conditional use permit, no vehicle sales advertising or retail vehicle sales will be allowed at the site. Section 1102.1203(2) of the Zoning Code allows motor vehicle sales as a conditional use in the C-4 district. The site will not function as a retail car lot. Approval ofthe conditional use permit, with the conditions detailed in the staff report, will allow the business to continue as it currently exists. Any future expansion of the business will require that the use come into full conformance with all conditions of the Code. Motor vehicle sales are allowed in the C-4 district with approval of a conditional use permit. In order to meet the above-listed criteria, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall record the conditional use permit at Scott County no later than 60 days after Planning Commission approval. 2. No on-site advertising of car sales or retail car sales may take place on the subject property. 3. All vehicles must be parked on a paved surface within the interior of the property boundaries. Stamson questioned the "condition" on the Conditional Use. Moore and Kansier explained the State classification and process. Nothing will change from what the applicant is currently doing. If the applicant wants to change from what he is currently doing, he would be required to come in and revise the CUP. Kansier went on to explain the "condition". The applicant simply does not have the parking, screening or the landscaping. Staff looked at a way that would allow what the applicant is currently doing and be properly licensed by the State without making the use more intensive. Comments from the Public: Applicant Brad Hanson was present for questions. The meeting closed at 7:37 p.m. Comments from the Commissioners: Billington: . Understands what the applicant is requesting. Support. L:\05 FILES\05 PLAN cOMMISSION\05 MINUTES\MN082205.doc 7 Planning Commission Meeting August 22, 2005 Perez: · Agreed with Billington and it serves the purpose without negative impact to the City. Ringstad: · Read it twice. Understands - no problem. Support. Stamson: Agreed there is no negative impact to the City. Support. MOTION BY PEREZ, SECOND BY BILLINGTON, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 05-12PC APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW MOTOR VEHICLE SALES WITHIN THE C-4 ZONING DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO STAFF'S LISTED CONDITIONS IN THE PLANNING REPORT. Vote indicated ayes by all. MOTION CARRIED. 6. Old Business: None 7. New Business: None 8. Announcements and Correspondence: Kansier gave a brief overview of the City Hall disbursement of departments to the Fire Station and Maintenance building. 9. Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 7:41 p.m. Connie Carlson Recording Secretary L:\05 FILES\05 PLAN cOMMISSION\05 MINUTES\MN082205.doc 8 PUBLIC HEARING Conducted ~ Planning Commission I: ( ;1--)-, OlJOS-' The Planning Commission welcomes your comments in this matter. In fairness to all who choose to speak, we ask that, after speaking once you allow everyone to speak before you address the Commission again and limit your comments to new information. Please be aware this is the principal opportunity to provide input on this matter. Once the public hearing is closed, further testimony or comment will not be possible except under rare occasions. The City Council will not hear additional testimony when it considers this matter. Thank you. ATTENDANCE - PLEASE PRINT L:\DEPTWORK\BLANKFRM\PHSIGNUP .doc