Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/08/1998 P&Z MinutesPlanning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 1 • CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Chair Schaps called the Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., April 8, 1998, and welcomed the newest members. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MARCH 11, 1998 Mr. Johnson questioned an item from page 4 and it was verified that "new technology" referred to the new recording system. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to approve the minutes of the March 11, 1998 meeting of the Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board, as submitted, and was supported by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried, 6 -0 -1, with Mr. Robinson abstaining. III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Item V, section F, Site Plan Review, Laborer's Training Facility, 2350 Main Street, was removed from the Agenda at the applicant's request. A. Election of Officers Chair Schaps explained to the new members that they have the election of officers after appointments are made. • Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 2 Chair Schaps opened the floor for the nomination and election of the Chair and Vice Chair of the Planning And Zoning Board. Mr. Johnson made a MOTION to elect James Schaps to the office of Planning and Zoning Board Chair and was supported by Mr. Schilling Motion carried, 6 -0 -1 with Schaps abstaining. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to elect William Johnson to the office of Planning and Zoning Board Vice Chair and was supported by Mr. Schilling. Motion carried, 6- 0 -lwith Johnson abstaining. IV. OPEN MIKE Chair Schaps declared the Open Mike portion of the meeting open at 6:35 p.m. There were no comments. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the Open Mike portion of the meeting at 6:36 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Trehus. Motion carried 7 -0. V. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING, Molin Concrete, 415 Lilac MUSA Expansion to allow connection to city utilities Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 6:37 p.m. Ms. Wyland explained that Molin Concrete is requesting MUSA designation to allow their facility to be connected to the City sewer which will soon be installed in front of the facility on Lilac Street ( the project has been ordered by the City Council). The Planning and Zoning Board recently approved an amended conditional use permit and site plan review for Molin Concrete to allow expansion of the use. Ms. Wyland proceeded to present the staff report. Ms. Wyland stated that it appears it would be in the the best interest of both the applicant and the City to have this facility connected to city utilities. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Chair Schaps verified with Ms. Wyland that the Met Council had no objection to this and they would not be taking this from the City's Interim MUSA Reserve. Ms. Wyland responded by stating that the City has approximately 100 acres in their reserve that has been earmarked for use in the southern part of the city. Mr. Robinson asked about the planting of the berm in the rear. Ms. Wyland explained that the site plan for the Molin expansion was included in their packet for informational • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 3 purposes only. Mr. Robinson asked when they intended to do the berming and Ms. Wyland explained that it would be done in 1 to 1 1/2 years, prior to the placing of any exterior storage. Mr. Robinson stated that the reason he questioned that is because when they rezoned six months ago neighbors were concerned about the noise and the berm would help. Ms. Wyland said a representative from Molin Concrete is present this evening if the Board had any questions for him. Mr. Johnson asked if there had been any problems with the current onsite disposal system. Ms. Wyland stated she was not sure but they would have to expand it for their new facility, as they are planning an office building as part of their phasing. Randy Molin, Facility Manager of Molin Concrete, explained that they are planning to implement the berm after the new addition, which is their next focus, and are looking at the plantings and wetland relocation at this time. Chair Schaps verified that the plan was to have the berm and plantings in before the storage goes in. Mr. Schilling asked what the schedule was for Phase 1. Mr. Molin responded explaining that the drawing they had was not very accurate and the berm was not included in Phase 1, which is currently under construction. They are just starting to look at Phase 2, the office facility. He stated that the anticipated time of completition is July. Mr. Corson asked if there were any issues of sewer line capacity that needed to be looked at. Mr. Molin said no, stating that everything was sized for this facility. Chair Schaps asked if Mr. Ahrens, City Engineer, had looked at this and Ms. Wyland indicated that he had. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 6:45 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried, 7 -0. Mr. Johnson made a MOTION to approve the MUSA expansion to allow connection to City utilities, and was supported by Mr. Schilling. Motion carried 7 -0. B. PUBLIC HEARING, Tracy Douglas, 540 Lilac Street, MUSA Expansion to allow connection to City utilities Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 6:45 p.m. II Ms. Wyland explained that Mr. and Mrs. Douglas own approximately 7 acres on the north side of Lilac Street just west of the proposed Apollo Drive extension. Their current Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 4 septic system is failing and City sewer is in front of their property at Lilac and Apollo Drive. The Douglas' would like to connect their existing home to City sewer. Their property is currently zoned Rural and outside the MUSA boundary. The site is indicated as single family residential on the City's current land use plan. The proposed land use plan for the area indicates this site as general commercial and light industrial. Ms. Wyland advised that staff has reviewed this request and recommends the addition of this area to the MUSA to facilitate the connetion of the existing single family home. Staff has discussed the amendment with the Metropolitan Council and have been encouraged to proceed with the amendment on an emergency basis. This amendment would serve only the existing homestead. Mr. Robinson asked if they were sure they had the correct address of property, stating that the north side of the road is odd numbers. Ms. Wyland stated that to the best of her knowledge it was the correct address. Mr. Johnson asked if this residential connection will ultimately service whatever is built here or will new service be required. Ms. Wyland believed that a new connection would be needed because they have seven acres and it may end up being a cul -de -sac or having street extensions. Therefore, at this time, it will just be residential. Mr. Corson commented that he would like to be sure if it is included in the MUSA boundary, they are not required to take it out of the MUSA reserve. Mr. Corson felt they should make that one of the conditions for approval. Mr. Dunn stated that he supported that condition, but if the homeowner had no other option and was distressed, they had no choice but to approve even if it did come out of the MUSA reserve. Ms. Wyland believed that they would look at this as one residential connection, even though it was the full seven acres. Mr. Dunn said he felt that should be the goal and objective of staff, but he does not want to restrain the land from hooking up if the property owner is faced with the installation of a new septic system. Chair Schaps said that he believed a similar situation had occured before and it was not taken out of the MUSA reserve. Ms. Wyland agreed and added that this was not in an area that they originally approved the reserve to be used, so it should not be an issue. Mr. Trehus asked if the entire parcel had to be in the MUSA. Ms. Wyland stated that she believed the Met Council would allow MUSA based on the number of connections, which is one. She also believes that because this is designated as commercial on the Comprehensive Plan, the whole area will be in MUSA by next year. Mr. Brixius stated that when looking at seven acres it was in their best interest to bring the entire area into the MUSA, because they want to keep it as industrial - commercial. • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 5 From the standpoint of using their reserve, the seven acre size does not concern him. Mr. Brixius said because they did have a distressed property owner and this will ultimatly fulfill their objectives, they should approve. Mr. Trehus stated he agreed with Mr. Dunn, and they should remove the MUSA bank criteria and follow the staff recommendation. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 6:53 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Trehus. Motion carried 7 -0. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to approve the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Add MUSA to 540 Lilac, and was supported by Mr. Schilling. Motion carried 7 -0. C. PUBLIC HEARING, Lake Business Park, Preliminary Plat, approximately 7300 Lake Drive, Planning Report Mr. Corson removed himself from the discussion due to conflict of interest. Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 6:54 p.m. Mr. Brixius explained that in March of 1998, Glenn Rehbien Companies submitted a concept plan for a subdivision entitled Lake Business Park. The concept plan overlaid 35 acres of land located south of I -35W and west of Lake Drive. The subject site is zoned LI, Light Industrial. After receiving comments from the Planning and Zoning Board Glenn Rehbien Companies is now requesting consideration of a preliminarty plat for the same property along with variances for cul -de -sac length, block length, and street right - of-way width. Mr. Brixius stated that Staff recommended approval, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Planning Commission and City Council find that the site configuration and existing site constraints present unique physical hardship that warrants variance from the following City subdivision requirements: a. Block length b. Cul -de -sac length c. Street right -of -way width for the western cul -de -sac 2. The street pavement width shall be a minimum of 32 feet. The cul -de -sac will have a paved turnaround radius of 50 feet to accommodate semi truck turning. 3. The western cul -de -sac will be posted "no parking" on street. 4. The half street extending north must be shifted west platting 60 feet of the future street right -of -way within the Lake Business Park plat. Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 6 5. The outlots will require future preliminary and final plat approval prior to issuance of a building permit for these outlots. 6. Appropriate drainage and utility easements are established with the final plat. The size and location of the needed easements should be subject to approval of the City Engineer. 7. The drainage, grading and utility plans should be subject to the review and approval of the CityEngineer and Rice Creek Watershed District. 8. Applicant dedicate a 20 foot trail easement through the plat connecting the middle school and Village Center. 9. The City Architectural Guidelines be applied to the future industrial development within the plat. Chair Schaps asked if the length of the cul -de -sac was about the same as it was one month ago when this was discussed. Mr. Brixius verified that it was and explained the rational behind their review. He stated that they looked at the potential of extending it to 4th Avenue, but that right -of -way no longer exists. Additionally, taking more traffic down to Elm Street is a very unpopular option. He stated they had looked at a southern lane extension through the wetlands and felt with that disruption they were not gaining anything. The extension to the north to the Village Parkway area will provide a second entrance and a signaled entrance into this subdivision. It may also add some opportunity in the future for redevelopment of some of these under - utilized sites. Mr. Brixius continued stating that they do believe the cul -de -sac length will work with the conditions that they have outlined. He believes they have addressed this to the best of their ability if they leave the street open and available for circulation. Chair Schaps then asked if the 50' foot cul -de -sac was a minimum necessary or if that was more than enough. Mr. Brixius explained that the standard for a right -of -way cul -de- sac is 45' turning radius. By increasing it 5', they are allowing for the semi - trucks, although most trucks can make the turn in 40'. The City Engineer felt that 50' should be the minimum. Chair Schaps asked if possibly that should be increased. Mr. Brixius believed the 50' minimum was satisfactory. Mr. Trehus then asked for clarification as the whether the 50' was radius or diameter. Mr. Brixius stated it was radius, with the paved diameter being 100', leaving the right -of- way radius at 60'. Mr. Trehus asked about the safety aspect with the narrowness of the roads. Mr. Brixius stated that with a standard street width of 32', and no parking on both sides, there is adequate manuvering space. They had considered parking on one side, but had decided that they needed to accomodate all the traffic and be able to handle an emergency situation. Mr. Brixius noted that they had no concern about the parking. • • Mr. Robinson asked if there had been any discussion with the County as far as access to • Lake Drive, and how far north of Elm Street the access would be. Mr. Brixius explained • • Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 7 that the access would be about half way between Elm Street and Village Parkway. He referred to a map and said that they wanted to be sure that any future acess in the large undeveloped R2 area would provide a full intersection at Lake Drive, which they had accomplished. Mr. Robinson then verified that the access would be north of the Methodist Church and south of Palico. Mr. Dunn asked if there were any plans in the Wetland Deliniation Plan to trade out some land or if they are going to allow the wetlands to stay as is. Mr. Brixius stated that there are big changes in the grading and wetland configuration to create buildable area on Lot 4. They are trying to hold to the original configuration but also expand the building pad to give it some additional depth.Additionally, as the wetland moves to the north side of the street some mitigation will be required. Mr. Dunn asked if they were being compliant with the traffic engineer's reccommendation in which Mr. Brixius verified that they were. Mr. Johnson asked what the zoning designation was for the area south of Lake Drive to which Mr. Brixius answered it was Light- Industrial. Mr. Johnson wondered if this plat could incorporate the excluded sites just to the south. Mr. Brixius stated that those would have to be developed separatley. Mr. Trehus mentioned that his copy of the map was very poor and wanted verification of the two sites.Mr. Brixius then referred to a map and explained the exact location. He did note there are two houses on that location. Mr. Trehus asked what the advantage of shifting the right -of -way was. Mr. Brixius explained that the additional depth would provide them with a larger building pad and better circulation. Additionally, if they shift it over they take some of the burden off those lots which need the area for future use. Mr. Trehus asked how far the proposed right -of -way extended onto the smaller lots property. Mr. Brixius explained he was proposing a 60/40 arrangement, so the plat would be dedicating an additional 20' of right -of -way. Mr. Trehus asked if there was currently a right -of -way there and verified that the property owners would be losing another 20' of their property when the road goes in at some point in the future, subject to another plat and approval process. Mr. Brixius stated that there was no current right -of -way there and concurred with his last statement. Mr. Dunn asked if the Fire Department or Chief of Police had any comments regarding the streets in regards to safety. Ms. Wyland stated that they had no concerns with the plat. Mr. Kirk Corson, representing Glen Rehbien Excavating, addressed the issue regarding the wetlands on this site. He referred to a map detailing the current wetland area and showed the area they are excavating to expand the wetland. He stated that they are digging out more wetland than they are filling so they will be able to bank 3/10 of an acre to use elsewhere. He continued saying that they are extending one pond but also Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 8 creating two additional storm ponds. He stated that the requirements that Mr. Brixius mentioned are acceptable, however, they would prefer the right -of -way be split 50/50. Mr. Robinson asked for verification on proposed access over Ditch 10, if it turned to the right and came back out by the Fina. Mr. Corson concurred with that and explained that they wanted it to line up with the Village property. Mr. Robinson asked who owned the property at the end of the cul -de -sac. Mr. Corson stated it was all separate property owners. He explained how it lined up across the street showing the large parcel and boundary which is zoned for multi - family. Mr. Robinson stated that it was the north boundary of the church. Mr. Corson reviewed the map again showing the boundary lines. Mr. Robinson expressed concern about the crossing over Ditch 10 and stated that it will be quite a project as it is very deep. Mr. Trehus asked for verification on the blue and green bordered wetland area. Mr. Corson said that the green would become wetland and the blue was what they were digging out to become storm water. Mr. Dunn asked what the expected schedule was and Mr. Corson explained that they would like to start this sometime this summer, noting that he had prepared the colored map for them to get the idea of the concept and to show where the roads and buildings would be. Mr. Brixius asked if they had pursued a County Access Permit. Mr. Corson stated that they had not yet received an official response from the County. Mr. Brixius suggested that they make the permit a condition of plat approval. Mr. Robinson asked if he thought the County would require a light there, noting that they did require one at Elm Street. He explained that the City's Comprehensive Plan stated that Elm Street and Village Drive would be two signaled areas, leaving the access in the middle without a light. Mr. Trehus asked if any of the current right -of -way for the temporary cul -de -sac would be outside of Rehbein's property. Mr. Corson explained that they would not, as the cul- de -sac comes up to the property and the proposed right -of -way dedication is entirely on his property. Mr. Ken Skogland, 4170 Lake Drive, came forward and stated he did like the plan, except for the proposed road crossing the ditch. He explained that a road was also proposed in 1981 and it was turned down by the DNR, although he did not know why. He questioned why the school would want a black topped area going to the Village Hall area, as they are in two different school districts. • • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 9 Chair Schaps indicated that he thought the idea was to have the trail from the middle school, through the project, then into the Village. Ms. Wyland explained that it was just a park trail. Mr. Skogland said that he misunderstood, as he believed it was to get the kids to school. He continued asking why they could not follow the property lines more closely when they cross the ditch, because otherwise it will cut his property into six peices, leaving the area behind his garage triangular, approximatly 50' by 10'. Another area across the ditch will be 50'; and another 50' by 250'. He noted that Mr. Rehbien would also have property cut up into irregular shaped pieces. He wondered why they did not go down the easement area for sewer and water. Mr. Skogland then showed a detailed map indicating his property and where his property would be segmented, questioning again why the street did not stay on the sewer and water right -of -way instead of turning. He stated that there would be about 50' by 200 -250' of right -of -way that is useless. Mr. Brixius explained that in reviewing the site plan, Staff had the same concerns as this property owner. He believed that future right -of -way alignment needs to follow the property lines so they are not severing property and leaving sites that are unuseable. He said that it should be endorsed by the Planning and Zoning Board that future acquisition of right -of -way north of the ditch follow the property lines. Mr. Skogland stated that they could work together and possibly trade their property so they did not have property on opposite sides. Mr. Brixius again said that this was a concern of Staff and they would like to see this matter resolved in a way that works for both property owners. Chair Schaps then asked Mr. Skogland if he could recall why the DNR refused the proposed ditch years ago. Mr. Skogland stated that he could not remember the details, but did recall the proposal was totally shut down. Mr. Robinson said that he could not recall the reason either, but did know that it was in 1981 and the Corp. of Engineers had some reservations also. Mr. Carl Bukholtz came forward and expressed his concerns about the cul -de -sac that comes behind his property and the idea of taking more of his property for the future road. Because his is a smaller lot, he believed that if they took any more of it the value of his property goes down substantially. He asked if it would be possible to place it back farther, as opposed to backing up to his property. He explained that the lights and noise from the semitrucks would basically make his property worthless, noting that it is zoned Residential and Light Industrial. Chair Schaps asked Mr. Bukholtz if he had any discussion with Mr. Rehbein or Mr. Corson regarding his concerns. Mr. Bukholtz stated he had never met Mr. Rehbein, but had spoken briefly with Mr. Corson. He then stated he would like to see the road stay Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 10 farther to the west, and asked if he could still use Lake Drive to get out. Chair Schaps said that he could still use Lake Drive. Chair Schaps asked if the temporary cul -de -sac road could be moved to the southwest. Mr. Corson indicated that would not be a problem as long as they still had access to the lot. He stated they had not discussed this and he was not sure how the City would feel about that. Mr. Brixius said shifting the temporary cul -de -sac southwest to accomodate this property owner is a very reasonable request. Mr. Bukholtz then asked when they planned on extending the street. Mr. Brixius stated there was no schedule for it, the driving force would be the development north of the creek when they would need the crossing. Mr. Bukholtz said that he agreed with Mr. Skogland and he was not in favor of the way the development split up the properties. Mr. Corson then summarized the changes the property owners had asked for, moving the cul -de -sac back to the southwest and the right -of -way staying the same. Chair Schaps verified that. Ms. Wyland clarified the zoning of Mr. Bukholtz property, stating that it was zoned Light Industrial, although he did have a residence there. Mr. Robison stated that there was no Residential zoning there all the way to the Fina, although there are existing residents but they are nonconforming with the zoning. Mr. Bukholtz then stated that when he bought the property he believed it to be zoned Residential /Light Industrial, aware that it did have a split zone. He said that when he bought the house in 1984 that is what he was told it was zoned as. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 7:43 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Johnson . Motion carried, 7 -0. Mr. Trehus suggested requiring some sort of berm where the trucks are turning around in the temporary cul -de -sac and also between the school property. Mr. Corson responded by stating that there were several mature pine trees along the south side by the school and on the north end, they could add some pine trees. Chair Schaps then added the following conditions to the executive summary: 10. Application approval of access off Lake Drive from Anoka County. • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 11 • 11. Move temporary cul -de -sac back within 50' -75' of the west property line. 12. Add a buffer in the form of trees on the north end. 13. Change condition #8 from 20' to 15'. Chair Schaps then asked if the variances should be done individually and Mr. Brixius stated that they could be grouped, but separate from the plat approval. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to approve preliminary plat for Glen Rehbien Companies, pursuant to the conditions as revised, and was supported by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 6 -0, with Mr. Corson abstaining. Mr. Johnson made a MOTION to approve variances for cul -de -sac length, block length, and street right -of -way, for Glen Rehbien Companies and was supported by Mr. Robinson. Motion carried 6 -0, with Mr. Corson abstaining. D. PUBLIC HEARING, Village Plat II, Preliminary Plat, south /east corner of I- 35W and Lake Drive Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 7:47 p.m. Ms. Wyland explained that the City is requesting review and approval of the Village No. 2. This plat consists of a replat of a portion of the Village No. 1 with the addition of the recently acquired County parcel intended to house the City Complex, future community center (YMCA) and village green. To facilitate construction of the City Complex, a platting of the parcel is required. The plat will consist of one lot, Lott, Block 1 which is 9.64 acres in size, and one outlot, Outlot A which is 18.4 acres in size. As future development occurs the outlot will be replatted. The lot dimensions and area meet the requirement of the PSP Zoning District. Ms. Wyland stated that the City's Engineering Consultant, OSM, has reviewed the plat to insure the proposed extension of Town Center Parkway will fit within the design of the current roadway. The current roadway configuration is 80' to accommodate a landscaped median, the extension will not contain a median and is therefore proposed at 60' in width. Drainage plans have been developed for the site and permit approval from the Rice Creek Watershed District is expected on Wednesday April 8. Easements will be provided over all wetlands as is required by our ordinances. Staff recommended approval of this preliminary plat, with the following conditions: 1. Easements are provided as per the City Subdivision Ordinance along lot lines and • wetlands /drainage ways. Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 12 2. Town Center Parking terminus contain a temporary cul -de -sac to allow adequate space for turning maneuvers. Mr. Robinson asked for verification on what part was aquired from the County, and which part was the City's. Ms. Wyland explained it was everything east of the dotted line and south of the northern dotted line, referring to a map. She said that they had purchased the balance of the site. Mr. Robinson asked if they had title to the property. Ms. Wyland stated she believed that would take place on April 10, 1998, prior to the Council meeting. Mr. Robinson stated that the Planing and Zoning Board could not act on an item before they have title, and they should have had title before it even reached the Planning and Zoning Board. Ms. Wyland excused herself to get Mr. Wessel, Economic Development Director, who was in another meeting. Mr. Brixius explained that frequently a subdivision is processed on the basis of a purchase agreement or a development contract with the owner. The transfer from the City to the County has been in the works for over a year. Mr. Robinson stated that he did not believe the deal is going to be finalized, sayng that he spoke with the land owner yesterday and it had not yet been resolved. Mr. Wessel explained that they there were in the final stages of the project, which has taken four years. Last week the Town Center Committe signed off on it in terms of the architectural direction, on Monday a check was issued to the property owner in the amount of $170,000 for the 100 acres of land. The commissioners detrmined this to be a fair amount for the property. He continued stating that once the check was accepted the City did own the land. They are in the process of setting up a closing with the County so they will receive clear title to the 14.72 acres that they will be building the Civic Complex and YMCA Community Center on. The closing is tentatively scheduled for next Wednesday, April 15, 1998. On Monday, April 13, 1998, he will be going to the City Council for Site Plan Review Approval. He stated that the total financial package is being discussed by the City Council and Rice Creek Watershed is issuing a permit this evening for the City Civic Campus Project. The first bid pack for that project will be issued next Tuesday, April 14, 1998, with the intent of breaking ground on May 12. The middle building has to be open by Novermber per their lease agreement with the Centennial School District, which is a ten year lease contingent on being open by that date. He finished by saying that plat approval is just another step in the final process that should be completed within the following week. Mr. Robinson again stated that he had spoken with the property owner who indicated the deal would not go through. Mr. Wessel explained that the City did in fact own the land. He explained that the owner could appeal the decision, but the issue would be what the City paid him, not the ownership of the land itself. Mr. Robinson stated that if the deal goes through that process, it could end up costing the City a lot more money. Mr. Wessel • • • 4. Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 13 • agreed. Mr. Robinson then asked if the owner had to cash the check to make it final. Mr. Wessel explained that according to the attorney, he just has to accept it, which he did. • • Mr. Robinson stated that the Planning and Zoning Board cannot proceed with anything until the City owns the property, explaining that they have held up a lot of other applications for this same reason. He asked what the Town Center is going to cost the people of Lino Lakes, stating there were a lot of questions in regard to that and no numbers. Mr. Wessel said that the land development portion would pay for itself, and the City Council is addressing that issue right now, so he could not answer that. The estimation for the Civic Complex is $6 million. Mr. Robinsion asked where that funding would come from. Mr. Wessel again stated that the City Council was presently discussing that issue, and that he would like to see this approved. He noted that everyone was very cooperative in this effort and they are down to the final stages, which is very exciting as they are creating a legacy for Lino Lakes. Ms. Bernadine Skogland, 7481 Lake Drive, directly across from the Town Center Parkway, asked if the land south of the new road is completed or if there will be additional work done. Ms. Wyland indicated that landscaping would be done in that area. Ms. Skogland then distributed pictures of the area to the Board for their information showing a large hole (old foundation filled with debris). Ms. Wyland said that she would speak with the Public Works Department to resolve the safety aspect immediatly. Mr. Trehus stated that the configuration where the extension of Town Center Parkway comes off appears to be very sharp. Ms. Wyland explained that the road was platted that way originally, but the future replat will smooth out the lines so it will not be that way. Mr. Robinson made it clear that he believed you must determine how you will finance something before you can do it. Chair Schaps indicated that even if it is approved, the financial plan must be approved also to move forward. Mr. Robinson agreed, stating that he thought it should go to a referendum. Mr. Corson stated that he was concerned about a penalty being imposed if the Learning Center is not completed by November and asked what the penalty was. Chair Schaps believed the penalty would be a per day, per completion, penalty and the district would charge the City daily. However, he hoped the City had put the penalty in the contract with the builder, so the builder would have to reimburse the City if it was not completed on time. Mr. Johnson then said that he was concerned about the City having to pay the penalty whether it was completed or not. Mr. Dunn stated that it was not their issue, it either conforms to the ordinances or it does not. Chair Schaps agreed. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:07 p.m., and was Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 14 supported by Mr. Dunn. Motion carried, 7 -0. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to approve the preliminary plat for The Village No. 2, with the conditions presented, and was supported by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 6 -1, with Mr. Robinson voting nay. E. PUBLIC HEARING, Universal Outdoor Inc., Interim Use Permit to allow nine (9) advertising signs on I -35 E between Main Street and 80th Street Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 8:11 p.m. Mr. Brixius explained that Universal Outdoor Inc. is requesting approval of nine interim use permits for off premise advertising signs (billboards) along I -35E. The area in question is zoned R -BR, Rural Business Reserve which allows advertising signs by interim use permit. He also stated that advertising signs are allowed interim uses within the R -BR Zoning District and Universal Outdoor Inc. has substantially complied with the City regulations governing advertising signage. Staff recommended approval of the interim use permits for off premise advertising signs, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant identify the homes nearest to the proposed sign sites and demonstrate compliance with the 750 foot setback. 2. Applicant demonstrated that Sign No. 1 meets the 1,200 foot setback requirements from the adjoining GB District. 3. A separate interim use permit for each affected property. Their permit outlined that the signs shall be removed if the site is rezoned or redeveloped to add another principal use. Sign removal shall be the responsibility of the property owner and the applicant. Both the property owner and the applicant shall sign the approved interim use permit. 4. In light of the anticipated land use planning along I -35E, we would ask the applicant to reconsider the location and construction of Signs 1 and 2. 5. Sign construction plans be subject to review and approval of the City Building Inspector. 6. Applicant provide the City with copies of approved off - premise advertising device permits from MnDOT. • • • • Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 15 Mr. Robinson asked why there is a 1,200' setback from another zoning district. Mr. Brixius explained that he was not involved with the development of the Sign Code, so he was unsure. The only amendment that occured in 1997 was to give the RBR District the same rights as a Rural District. He guessed that possibly because it was reasonable to have them set back that distance from a district that does not allow the signs. Chair Schaps asked if they had seven different property owners involved and Mr. Brixius stated that there were five involved. Mr. Dunn asked for clarification on the type of the sign, asking if it was variable up to 80' 6 ", which he believed to be a very high sign. Mr. Brixius stated that they are required to stay within 40' and have indicated that they will. He said that the nine different applications had not been included in the packet, which stated those requirements. Lino Lakes does not allow signage going beyond the 40' requirement, although other communitites do. Mr. Dunn then asked if there were any other benefits beyond the building permits and fees, and Mr. Brixius stated there were not. Mr. Micheal Cronan, a representative from Universal Outdoor Inc., 8809 West Bush Lake Road, Bloominton, stated that he is joined tonight by Tom McCarver, the Real Estate representative, and Chris McCarver, the Director of Real Estate for Universal Outdoor Inc. He stated that they were available to answer any questions from the Board and ask for approval of nine interim use permits. He explained that they had used an air photo of the area and there is no housing within 750,' but are willing to do a survey if required. In regard to Condition #4, he explained that they are very aware of the fact that the signage placed would be for a very short time, but would still like to use that location and will remove it when they are requested to do so. Mr. Corson asked how long it would take for sign removal once they were requested to do so. Mr. Cronan asked for a 30 day or 60 day notice. Mr. Brixius suggested that they include it as a condition of approval. Mr. Cronan said that they would prefer the 60 day notice. Mr. Robinson said that they should add a 60 day removal clause to Condition #3 to which Mr. Cronan agreed. Chair Schaps asked how much one of the signs cost to put up and Mr. Cronan said approximately $35,000 - $40,000. Mr. Dunn stated that on the map they appeared to be very close and wondered if that was atypical of other communities. Mr. Cronan said that State law requires 500' betweeen signs, but most cities use the 1,000' requirement. He continued saying that the Lino Lakes Ordinance is a very cautious one at 1,200'. It looked like they were close together but they would not get the "picket fence" appearance. The real constraint is the 750' radial, where you can not place them across from each other. He preferrred they had Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 16 them at 500' for business purposes, but believed Lino Lakes had a good balance with the sign ordinance as is. Mr. Brixius suggested two changes to the recommendation which included the applicant demonstrate and meet the 1,200' setback from adjoining GB and R districts and also a 60 day removal after notice. He then asked if they saw any problem obtaining the MnDot permit and Mr. Cronan explained that MnDot is reviewing the ordinance presently, and they beleived it would be resolved. He noted that the interum use permit is a dual permit that goes along with the MnDot permit, they can not use one without the other. Chair Schaps asked about maintenance and the color of the pole and frame, stating the often seen rust color. Mr. Cronan said that they use dark brown steel poles, which they keep up with the maintenance, and the signs would be brand new. Chair Schaps then asked if they had any guidelines in their interum use code that regulates a maintenance schedule. Ms. Wyland noted there was a condition in the Sign Ordinance that requires all signs to be maintained in good condition, resurfaced every two years, if necessary as determined by the zoning official, and the surrounding area must be cleaned after sign removal. Mr. Corson again asked if their was any benefit to the City by allowing these signs. Mr. Cronan stated that the relationship between the sign company and the City is basically a business one. There is some benefit for the advertising of a new business in their area and they will also do some public service advertising for the City. There are some exceptions to this, such as a leasing situation, but that would not apply here. He also mentioned the issue of defraying the cost of holding property until development reaches it. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:40 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Schilling. Motion carried, 7 -0. Mr. Trehus asked who does the inspections of these signs and determines if they are being propertly maintained. Ms. Wyland said that the Zoning Official is either the building official or the planning coordinator depending on the issue. Mr. Schilling made a MOTION to approve the nine interim use permits for advertising signs along I -35E, pursuant to the conditions presented, and was supported by Mr. Dunn. Motion carried 7 -0. G. Site Plan Review, Rice Lake Covenant Church, 125 Ash Street Ms. Wyland explained that Rice Creek Covenant Church is located at 125 Ash Street (C. Rd. J) just west of Woodridge Drive. The Church has purchased a garage from the old Arsenal Site in Arden Hills and would like to move it onto their property for storage • or • • Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 17 purposes. The garage would be located just north of the existing building as shown on the site plan within the setback requirements of the District. Ms. Wyland noted that the Church proeprty is zoned R -1X Single Family Executive and churches are allowed by conditional use permit. According to the Zoning Ordinance, the proposed garage would be considered a permitted accessory use "incidental and customary to the uses permitted..." and the moving in of a building would require this site plan review. The subject property is indicated as Single Family Resiential on the current and proposed land use map. Ms. Wyland reported that she and the Building Official have inspected the garage to be relocated and found it to be structurally sound and in good repair. The building is a 20 x 20 two -door garage with side windows and eight inch masonite siding. They intend to paint the building to match the existing church. Staff recommended approval with the following conditions: 1. Proper building permits are obtained and the structure is located according to UBC Standards. 2. The building be painted to match the existing church structure. 3. The building be secured as recommended by the CPTED Officer. 4. The general drainage plan for the site be maintained and subject to the review of the City Engineer. Mr. Corson commented on the need to be sure the building did not have any asbestos siding. Mr. Schilling asked if it would need a structural inspection after the move and Ms. Wyland said that they did need a building permit so their would be final inspections. Mr. Johnson asked if they planned on putting electricity into the building and it was stated that they would not. Mr. Dunn made a MOTION to approve the site plan review, pursuant to the conditions presented, and was supported by Mr. Robinson. Motion carried 7 -0. H. PUBLIC HEARING, Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Chair Schaps declared the public hearing open at 8:48 p.m. • Mr. Brixius reviewed the draft Zoning Ordinance amendment which establishes drive - through facilities accessory to banks and financial institutions as "permitted" rather than Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 18 "conditionally permitted" uses within the City's various comercial districts. The following were the two questions to be considered in this amendment: 1. Whether operational or physical differenced exist between land uses which warrant CUP processing of only certain uses with accessory drive - through facilities (i.e., drive -in restaurants). 2. The need to address drive- through facilities associated with uses other than banks and drive - through restaurants (i.e., drug stores). The recommendation by staff is to allow bank drive - throughs as "permitted" and approve the Text Amendment. Mr. Dunn stated that their function was to maintain the integrity of traffic flow. Mr. Brixius explained that in regard to the drive - through windows, the traffic flow was the main concern. Other concerns are outdoor audio equipment and stacking space. Mr. Dunn asked his opinion of the change, in relationship to the ability of the City to still maintain the intergity of the situation. Mr. Brixius said that banks differ from fast food facilities because they are enclosed with canopies, they are multi -lanes so the stacking is not so intrusive, and the turnover is much quicker. In that respect, he believed they should consider this. They still have review authority and that is taken very seriously. Mr. Robinson asked how many banks they could possibly have, which could not be answered, so he wondered why they should change it. Mr. Johnson stated that the similarities are more important than the differences, noting that multi -lanes indicated more traffic. He is concerned about drive - throughs being put in residential areas and stated they intend to pay very close attention to where they are located. Therefore, he felt the conditional use permit allowed them the best opportunity to control this. He did not feel that there was any advantage to approving this. Ms. Wyland stated that they did approve a site plan review for a bank contingent on this review, and wondered what would happen to that approval. Chair Schaps said that they intended to make it retroactive. Mr. Robinson noted that it needed to be handled on an individual basis. Mr. Brixius said that they did not have approval for the drive - through based on this discussion. Ms. Wyland stated that they could come back for approval. Mr. Robinson then agreed with Mr. Johnson and asked if the existing bank had a CUP. Ms. Wyland said they did not since they were in a district that did not require one. • • • .r a • • Planning & Zoning Board April 8, 1998 Page 19 Chair Schaps then asked if the new bank for The Village had a CUP and Ms. Wyland explained that they did not need one because of the zoning. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 8:58 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Trehus. Motion carried 7 -0. Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to deny the Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to establish drive - through facilities accessory to banks and financial institutions as "permitted" uses within the City's various commercial zoning districts, and was supported by Mr. Dunn. Motion carried 7 -0. Chair Schaps asked Ms. Wyland to inform the Nations Bank that they would need to apply for a Conditional Use Permit. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS Mr. Trehus stated that the Environmental Board is setting up a Steering Committee and is looking for one member from the Planning and Zoning Board, which would be both enjoyable and educational. The focus will be making the land more valuable for the owners. Chair Schaps asked if Mr. Trehus was interested and he said he needed to evaluate the time factor, saying that their schedule would possibly include monthly meetings. Chair Schaps nominated Mr. Trehus and the Board agreed, stating that if the time factor became a problem to let them know. Ms. Wyland then reminded them that there is a Comprehensive meeting at City Hall, on Thursday, April 9, 1998, at 6:00 p.m. VII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Robinson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 9:02 p.m., and was supported by Mr. Trehus. Motion carried 7 -0. Respectfully Submitted, Kim Points, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.