Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/09/2003 P&Z MinutesAPPROVED MINUTES CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONI NG BOARD MINUTES I.CALL TO ORDE R AND ROLL CALL Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., April 9, 2003. II.APPROVAL OF AGENDA III.APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 12, 2003 Mr. Corson made a MOTION approve the March 12, 2003 Minutes and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 5-0-1 (Mr. Lyden abstained). IV.OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared Open Mike open at 6:32 p.m. There was no one present for Open Mike Mr. Lyden made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:32 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 5-0. V.ACTION ITEMS A. ELECT CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR FOR 2003 Mr. Hyden made a MOTION to elect Chair Schaps as Chair for 2003 and was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 5-0. DATE: April 9, 2003 TIME STARTED: 6:30 P.M. TIME ENDED: 9:36 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Corson, Hyde n, Lyden, Rafferty, Schaps and Tralle. MEMBERS ABSENT: Lane. STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Smyser; Mi chael Grochala; Bob Kirmis (NAC) Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 2003 Page 2 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Corson made a MOTION to elect Mr. Rafferty as Vice Chair for 2003 and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 5-0. B.CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING, Bruggeman Properties, SE corner of Birch Street Chair Schaps reopened the public hearing at 6:37 p.m. Staff stated applicant had requested prelim inary plat approval to allow a three lot commercial subdivision on prope rty located south of Birch Street and east of Hodgson Road. Staff requested the Board review the acceptability of the proposed land uses. Notice of specific concern was th e motor fuel station component. Mr. Lyden stated when they looked at this ar ea and the zoning districts the City had, there was a good reason why they had a general bus iness area. He noted this area had residences and therefore, needed to be neighborhood business and not general business. Mr. Grochala agreed. Mr. Lyden stated he wanted to see neighborhood business in this area. He noted he had nothing personal against a gas station, but by putting a gas st ation there, it precluded them from putting other businesses that they needed in this area. Mr. Rafferty stated he also wa nted to see neighborhood busine ss located in that area. He noted there was nothing unique with this proposa l. He suggested a first class restaurant or other upper scale development be proposed. He noted a gas station in that area was not appropriate. Mr. Grochala noted market realities would di ctate as to what went there. He stated neighborhood business was drawing from a much smaller area, which would preclude a restaurant facility from wanting that loca tion. He indicated a gas station/convenience store was a good anchor for a small neighbor hood business. He stated this was a challenge. He noted this was pass-by traffic, not destination traffic. Mr. Rafferty pointed out that Kozlak’s Restaura nt was located in a residential area and it worked well in that area. Mr. Grochala stat ed it was not impossible for a business to be successful in this type of an area, but it was difficult. Mr. Rafferty stated in some cases if it was built, the residents would come. Chair Schaps asked what was the Board’s spec ific objection to the gas station. He noted a restaurant would have an increased tr affic pattern and he did not believe the neighborhood wanted more traffic. Mr. Rafferty stated he would not agree to any type of a development there until the traffic was addressed. Chair Schaps noted the last thing they wa nted on the property was a building that was empty and they needed to build what the market was demanding. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 2003 Page 3 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Rafferty indicated he wa nted a “classy” development on that land. He stated he understood the economics of the situation, but he believed the residents would come to a business if it there is a nice, class y, upscale development on that property. Mr. Lyden stated he did not want this de velopment to look like County Road J. He suggested various businesses for the development. Mr. Grochala noted all of the businesses Mr. Lyden had suggested required a drive-thru and a drive-thru was not allowed in a neighbor hood business district. Mr. Hyden asked if this project would not go ing to go through if they did not allow a gas station. Mr. Grochala replied from the devel oper’s standpoint, this was a possibility. He noted the market realities were that it was po ssible that two gas sta tions were not possible in this area. Mr. Hyden noted the reality was that a gas st ation on each corner of the road would both be used. He noted the market woul d dictate what went on that site. Mr. Corson stated when it came to gas stati ons, he thought of noise, light, and pollution issues. He noted those issues would need to addressed. Mr. Grochala stated a gas station had th e most extensive performance requirements placed on it than any other businesses and wa s held to a higher standard than other businesses in the City. Mr. Rafferty stated he would like to see some creativity in this area. Mr. Tralle expressed concern about the traffic patterns to access this proposed development. Mr. Grochala noted this was a concern of staff also and they were working with the developer on this issue. He indi cated they were looking at the possibility of moving the road. Mr. Tralle asked if the exit of the car wash would be on the front side of the convenience store. He noted if this were the case, it woul d create an icy area in the winter months. He noted this exit should be redesigned. Mr. Grochala replied sta ff would be addressing those concerns with the developer. Chair Schaps stated he wanted to see a ne ighborhood business in the area. He noted this would not fit a general busin ess area. He stated a neighborhood business would give them the ability to consider other things. He agreed the market was going to control this area. He stated the developer had to be awar e that this business was in a residential area and that landscaping was very important, as well as lighting and hours of operation. Mr. Hyden agreed limited busin ess would fit in that area. Mr. Lyden asked if the Board agreed the gas station was accep table on the site. Chair Schaps replied he was not opposed to it. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 2003 Page 4 APPROVED MINUTES Mr. Lyden stated he was not for limited business. Mr. Grochala stated both developers had escrowed the money for a feasibility study to determine the extent of the improvements for traffic. He indicated staff was working with the developers regard ing the traffic concerns. Perry Ladem, 6425 Hodgson Road, read part of the Comprehensive Plan that he believed was applicable to this site. He stated he did not see a neighborhood focal point for this development as required by the Comprehensiv e Plan. He challenged the developer to come up with a neighborhood focal point. He asked how many sites in the City were available for neighborhood business. He noted a neighborhood busin ess was appropriate for this site. Mr. Hyden asked what did Mr. Ladem belie ved a focal point would be. Mr. Ladem replied a business was not necessary for a focal point. He suggested a park or a place where neighbors could gather, or a plaza area . He stated this area was not pedestrian friendly. Bryan Olson, 511 Hawthorn Road, asked if there was any chance to re zone the area to a R-1 area, or single-family residential area. He noted it appeared that a development of this sort would go in before any traffic ch anges were made and this area was difficult right now. He asked if the City addressed traffic i ssues before the developments went in. He noted if there were no other choices, he was in favor of a rezoning somewhat like a neighborhood business. He indicated he did not have any idea of what he would like to see on that land, but he did not want to s ee another gas station and he believed the residents in that area agreed with this. He expressed concern about th e increase in traffic, and environmental issues with a gas station. He indicated there wa s a safety issue with the school down the road. Mr. Grochala repl ied to rezone the area, it would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan whic h would have snowball effects to another part of the City to meet the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. He noted this was also not a good location for singl e-family homes. He noted unfortunately, the traffic would not be addressed until the development went in because the developers were putting in the traffic controls. Mr. Lyden noted the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan was to have this area be neighborhood business, but if a neighborhood bus iness could not survive in this area, then the right thing in his mind was to go back and look at this area again. Mr. Corson noted he liked the idea of a focal point in the neighborhood. Greg Schlink, representative of developer, believed they we re a lot closer on the issues than appeared. He noted the three issues were meeting the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, making the retail marketable, and ma king it a viable development for them. Peter Hilger, Portfolio Design Services, Arch itect, noted he has never done a convenience store that was not a conditiona l use permit. He indicated th at was not a concern for them. He stated the business suggested by Mr. Lyden and Rafferty were possi ble, but did not fit Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 2003 Page 5 APPROVED MINUTES with the zoning ordinances of the City. He stated they were comfortable with the limited business, including the convenience store. He summarized the development. He noted there were other areas of the City where ga s stations were acro ss the street from each other and survived. He indicated the ga s station was proposed to be neighborhood, mom and pop convenience stores. He stated the ki nd of business they w ould expect to see in this type of a center would be a coff ee shop, a video store, hair salon, eating establishment (i.e. Subway, Chinese food restau rant, etc.). He noted, however, that many of these types of restaurants they could have on that site only if a drive thru would be allowed. He stated they could create a desi gn that would be attrac tive, with sufficient landscaping. Greg Schlink noted they wanted to create architecture that was compatible with the residential area and they were willing to work with the Board and staff regarding this. He summarized the residential portion of the development for the Board. Mr. Lyden asked where the children would pl ay in the development. Greg Schlink replied they were not opposed to a tot lot in the area. Mr. Tralle requested the developer mix up th e colors in the proposed development. He stated he did not want to see the same co lor homes in the development. He requested they look at the architectural appeal of the development. Mr. Lyden stated this development was not unique. Mr. Rafferty stated he agreed with Mr. Tralle’s suggestion. Mr. Tralle made a MOTION to continue th e public hearing. The motion was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 5-0. Chair Schaps REOPENED the Open Mike at 8:29 p.m. Chad Wagner, owner of Millers on Main, stated they had done some research and a lot of work for possibly opening up a restaurant less than one mile from the previous development and it was not feasible. He stat ed his issue was with Millers On Main and possibility relocating it. He noted the ro ad was eventually going to get widened. He stated he would like to screen in the patio to make it more usable. He noted the problem was that his building was not 40 feet off the road for a setback and he was informed he could not make any improvements to it because of this. He asked the Board’s opinion on screening in the existing patio. Mr. Smyser noted this was a non-conforming structure that was being requested to be being made even more non-conforming. He noted Mr. Wagner had a problematic site. Mr. Lyden stated he had no problem with this idea. Chair Schaps asked if screening in the ex isting patio would be a violation of the Ordinance. Mr. Smyser replied screeni ng was considered enclosing, which was in violation of the Ordinance. Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 2003 Page 6 APPROVED MINUTES Chair Schaps asked if the screening was not a permanent structure, but was put up seasonally, wasn’t this a permit issue. Mr. Sm yser replied he did not know if this was a building code issue and it would be up to the building code o fficials to answer this. He noted he had not gotten into this in that leve l of detail. He noted there might be other options. Chair Schaps indicated the Board wanted to help Mr. Miller with his situation, but they had to follow the Zoning Ordinances and suggested he bring this up with the City Council. Mr. Wagner noted there would be no heating of the porch with this proposal. He stated he would like to leave th e structure up all year. Mr. Tralle asked if there was some way they could grandfather this business in because of its long-standing history with the City. He stated it did not make sense for Millers On Main not to be able to do make some impr ovements to their facility. Mr. Smyser noted they would look into possibilities with the building officials. Mr. Lyden indicated mosquitoes were a public safety issue and for the safety of the patrons, he agreed with the screening in of the patio. Chair Schaps RECLOSED Open Mike at 8:45 p.m. Chair Schaps adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:54 p.m. Mr. Lyden was not present for the remainder of the meeting. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. 35E CORRIDOR, TRI-CITY COALITION Staff explained the coalition of communities was requesting each community to bring a list of issues to be consid ered when the group establishe s a work plan for their next meeting. Staff requested that the Board draf t a list of questions for Council discussion. Mr. Hyden noted he wanted a connection of 35W and 35E. Mr. Corson replied they needed more trails and recreation outside of the parks. Chair Schaps indicated anythi ng that happened commercially for Centerville, Lino Lakes or Columbus was dependent upon 20 th Avenue. Mr. Rafferty questioned if they wanted an 80 th Street connection to the freeway. B. RAVENS HOLLOW, K-G DEVELOPM ENT/ROCKEY GOERTZ, EAST OF HODGSON ROAD AND WEST OF WARE ROAD, SOUTH OF THE FOX TRACE SUBDIVISION Planning & Zoning Board April 9, 2003 Page 7 APPROVED MINUTES Staff stated Ravens Hollow was a projec t proposed for land between Hodgson and Ware Roads, immediately south of Fox Trace developmen t. Staff noted the main issue is if the comprehensive plan needed to be amended if the project did not comply with the density of the current plan. Staff also noted anothe r issue was the City’s requirements regarding the annual number of units and amount of MUSA allocation to be approved. Chair Schaps asked if they were in a particular mode to go through a Comprehensive Plan Amendment right now. He stated he did not believe they were. Mr. Smyser replied he agreed they were probably not at the po int to amend the Comprehensive Plan at this time. Rockey Goertz summarized the difficulties they had with this development. He indicated this development would not go through until next year. He stated it was tough to get the density up. Mr. Smyser suggested a plan to make some of the lots smaller with a planned development or single-family townhomes. Mr. Goertz stated this development was in an odd place. He noted the residents would not agree to townhomes – they wanted single-family homes. Chair Schaps noted a Comprehensive Plan amendment was not a good proposal at this time. Mr. Smyser agreed that a Comprehensive Plan amendment was not a good idea at this time. Chair Schaps suggested going w ith a Planned Development. Mr. Rafferty noted he was against 80-foot lots. He stated he wanted 100-foot lots, but he understood Mr. Goertz’ difficultie s with this development. VII.ADJOURNMENT Mr. Corson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 9:36 p.m. and was supported by Mr. Rafferty. Motion carried 4-0. Respectfully submitted, Kathy Altman, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc .