Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/12/2020 P&Z Minutes APPROVED MINUTES CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Chair Tralle called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. on August 12, 2020. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Agenda was approved as presented. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Ms. Peacock made a MOTION to approve the July 8, 2020 Meeting Minutes. Motion was supported by Mr. Laden. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. Mr. Root made a MOTION to approve the July 15, 2020 Work Session Meeting Minutes. Motion was supported by Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. V. OPEN MIKE Chair Tralle declared Open Mike at 6:34 p.m. There was no one present for Open Mike. Mr. Laden made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:35 p.m. Motion was supported by Ms. Peacock. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. DATE : August 12, 2020 TIME STARTED : 6:32 P.M. TIME ENDED : 7:55 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Paul Tralle (Chair), Neil Evenson, Michael Root Perry Laden, Sue Peacock, Jeff Reinert, Nathan Vojtech STAFF PRESENT : Michael Grochala, Katie Larsen, Diane Hankee, Janele Waterman, Jessica Eller Planning & Zoning Board August 12, 2020 Page 2 APPROVED MINUTES VI. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING: Otter Crossing Preliminary Plat and Site Plan Review Ms. Larsen, City Planner, presented the staff report. The applicant, Tyme Properties, LLC, is creating a 1.43 acre parcel for the purpose of constructing a 7,800 sf commercial retail building. The name of the preliminary plat is Otter Crossing. Staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat and site plan review for Otter Crossing subject to conditions listed in the staff report. Ms. Larsen asked the board for input regarding the building’s location. Board Comments Mr. Reinert asked if we have data on how the positioning of the building will impact the success of the businesses. Tom Schuette, from Tyme Properties, said the tenants want to face the traffic on Main Street. He told the board he understands the concept of creating a village with the businesses facing the back street. However, he mentioned the back street will not likely have a main street feel since the street will eventually be right-in, right-out and the area to the north of the site is a wetland. Mr. Reinert stated an argument can be made for either design. He remarked if a decision is made for the positioning of one building, all of the buildings that will be developed on the road need to be positioned the same for consistency. He commented if the backside of the businesses face Main Street and if proper signage is displayed to ensure the businesses are noticed, then maybe there would be no loss of opportunity. He asked Mr. Evenson what his opinion was on the matter. Mr. Evenson said, from a retailer’s perspective, you would want the front of your business to face the busiest road. He liked how the developer positioned the building. Mr. Root remarked the new businesses will be a good addition to Lino Lakes. Regarding the position of the building, he explained he would prefer to have the front facing Main Street, but he acknowledged the alternative design could be done if the building was designed accordingly and the signage was prominent. Ms. Peacock suggested a sidewalk area be built around the shops to allow customers to be able to walk from business to business and to give the occupying businesses the opportunity to place additional seating outside. She questioned if the new trail would be a bike trail or a walking trail. Planning & Zoning Board August 12, 2020 Page 3 APPROVED MINUTES Ms. Larsen clarified the new trail would be a standard 8 ft. wide bituminous bike trail. Mr. Laden preferred to have the building pulled forward and have the front face Main Street. He recommended the back side of the building be addressed since the drive thru traffic will be driving through the back parking lot in view of the garbage, back doors, etc. He suggested incorporating shrubs and alternative screening options on the side of the building. Mr. Root questioned, with the future development of Outlots E and F, if a path would be installed between adjacent buildings to provide access for pedestrians. Mr. Vojtech speculated if there will be congestion issues when considering the traffic from the drive thru, the parking lot traffic, and the foot traffic of pedestrians. He wondered, if the building is moved to the south and there is no parking on the south, if the drive thru could be rerouted north of the parking lots thereby eliminating the possible issue of pedestrians walking across the drive thru lane and decreasing the amount of congestion between the drive thru and the parking lot. Mr. Reinert reiterated his desire to examine any existing data that would assist the board in making a decision on the placement of the building. He explained analyzing that data would then help the board determine what is better for the businesses that are occupying the space so the board could make a more informed decision. Chair Tralle explained the building should face Main Street so the occupying businesses are exposed to passersby. He also stated to position the back of the building facing Main Street would be a mistake as those passing by would be viewing the businesses’ dumpsters and heating and cooling units. He recommended the drive thru configuration be reviewed. Ed Farr, from Edward Farr Architects, appreciated the board’s observations about the project and agreed with Chair Tralle’s statement concerning the building’s orientation. He further expounded if the building was moved south towards Main Street, they would still want the building rear-loaded for delivery vehicles and have the driveway around the southernmost part of the building. The drive-thru would be placed in the southeast corner and congestion would likely occur with drive-thru vehicles and delivery trucks. He commented the current preliminary plat and site plan will look much better with the storefront facing Main Street. He stated this design is a superior solution and feedback received from tenants and leasing agents supports it. Mr. Farr explained it is their project’s intention to comply with all of the staff recommendations for the conditions of approval listed in the staff report. They will be addressing the roadway configuration items and pedestrian safety issues. They will also upgrade the landscape plan to comply with zoning regulations and to address comments made regarding landscape buffers and screening. He shared they will be providing another 5 ft. of property to the west in order to comply with the 10 Planning & Zoning Board August 12, 2020 Page 4 APPROVED MINUTES ft. side yard setback. The lighting plan will also be upgraded. He further commented the two ground signs in the public way will be accepted. Lastly, he appreciated the board’s support of the building being placed further to the north for best tenant visibility. Mr. Root asked if Mr. Farr to comment on his suggestion to incorporate a pedestrian access between buildings and between sites. Mr. Farr stated they are proponents of a strong pedestrian access as they believe it is good for business and the community. He explained, as the project develops, there will be a pedestrian connectivity plan and they look forward to developing it with the board. Mr. Root questioned Mr. Farr, if a space was reserved now for the future connection, how would he envision the development of the future connection. Mr. Farr remarked they have the space for it in their setback between the property line, which is the future street right-of-way for Street A and the parking curb. He clarified there is sufficient land for the pedestrian connectivity plan on either the public side of the right-of-way or the private side of the right-of-way. He informed the board, a trail will be provided from the single building to Main Street and a pedestrian crossing across Main Street. Chair Tralle declared the Public Hearing open at 7:11 p.m. There were no public comments. Mr. Evenson made a MOTION to close the Public Hearing at 7:12 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Reinert. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. Mr. Root made a MOTION to recommend approval of the preliminary plat and site plan review for Otter Crossing subject to conditions listed in the staff report. Motion was supported by Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. B. Lyngblomsten at Lino Lakes Addition PUD Final Plan/Final Plat Ms. Larsen, City Planner, presented the staff report. The applicant, Lyngblomsten at Lino Lakes, LLC has submitted a land use application for PUD Final Plan/Final Plat for development of Phase 1, the senior living community. Future PUD Final Plans/Final Plats will be required for development of the future commercial phases. Staff recommended approval of the PUD Final Plan/Final Plat for Lyngblomsten at Lino Lakes Addition subject to conditions listed in the staff report. Planning & Zoning Board August 12, 2020 Page 5 APPROVED MINUTES Brian Prunty, from Wold Architects and Engineers, presented the revised architectural plans. Board Comments Ms. Peacock inquired if the Lyngblomsten signage, on the exterior of the building, would stay illuminated throughout the night. She also questioned if the light will impact the residents in the units closest to the signage. Mr. Prunty remarked, since the signage is on a flat elevation to the windows, there should not be a lot of light infiltration for the nearby units. He acknowledged the timing about how long the lights will be on was not discussed with the owner. Mr. Root stated he is not completely satisfied with the HVAC chases and would have preferred to see them incorporated into the building. He expressed support for the land use and acknowledged his objections to the design are subordinate to the overall approval of the use; therefore, Mr. Root stated he would vote to approve the final plan/final plat, but reluctantly. Ms. Peacock agreed with Mr. Root. She communicated her dissatisfaction with the windows and expressed concern that the white siding on the building’s exterior may discolor over time. She said she would also vote to approve the final plan/final plat, but acknowledged the final plan is not exactly what she would love to see. Mr. Laden commented even though the board was not able to get everything they desired architecturally, the project as a whole is a good project. He asked when the future commercial development on the corner begins, if the restaurant will be sure to have the trash enclosures incorporated into the building. Ms. Larsen assured Mr. Laden the trash enclosures will be incorporated into the building unless there is a formal approval and change by the City Council. Mr. Reinert made a MOTION to recommend approval of the PUD Final Plan/Final Plat for Lyngblomsten at Lino Lakes Addition subject to conditions listed in the staff report. Motion was supported by Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. C. 6508 West Shadow Lake Drive Variance Ms. Larsen, City Planner, presented the staff report. Anoka County Highway Department, on behalf of Patrick and Patricia Barry, submitted a Land Use Application for building setback and fence height variances. This is related to the 2021 reconstruction project of Birch Street from Hokah Drive to Old Birch Street and necessary acquisition of road right-of-way. Planning & Zoning Board August 12, 2020 Page 6 APPROVED MINUTES Staff recommended approval of the variances for 6508 West Shadow Lake Drive listed in the staff report. There was no discussion from the board. Mr. Reinert made a MOTION to recommend approval of the variances for 6508 West Shadow Lake Drive listed in the staff report. Motion was supported by Ms. Peacock. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Project Updates Staff provided verbal updates to the Board on current City projects. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Evenson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Laden. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. Respectfully submitted, Janele Waterman, Administrative Assistant