Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 09-03-2002 . . . MINIJTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday - September 3,2002 7:00 P.M. Members Present: Dick Frie, Robbie Smith, Richard Carlson, Rod Dragsten and Council Liaison Clint Herbst Lloyd Hilgart Jeff O'Neill. Fred Patch, John Glomski and Steve Grittman Absent: Staff: 1 . Call to order. Chair fric called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and declared a quorum. 2. Approval or the minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting held August 6. 2002. A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARD CARLSON TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 6, 2002. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. j. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. None 4. Citizens comments. None 5. Public Hearin!! - Consideration ora reauest for variance allowing are-subdivision of Lot 1. Block 3 and Outlot A Groveland 2nd Addition to create two buildable parcels. Applicant: Ocello. LLC Steve Grittman, City Planner. provided the report noting the request for a replat which would result in 2 buildable lots. Grittman advised that the City and Planning Commission would need to find a hardship that interferes with reasonable use of this property. He added that the lots could be combined, but that at this point in time it would not make sense to realign the entire plat. A concern in addition to the hardship is that when the lot width is narrowed, it narrows the building pad. and the depth, with the power line casement in the back, would make for a very small buildable area on the property. inconsistent with the R-l standards. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Shawn Weinand, Ocello, LLC. provided a history of Outlot A which originally was dedicated as a trail easement and somewhere along the way was eliminated. Unrortunately this was not taken off the plat and was only discovered just recently. Weinand advised that they did try to buy back Lot 33 and Lot 1, but were only able to purchase one. lie added that they could give the lots to the two property owners on each side but that would add little value to their lots, and they would prefer to combine them and build. -1- Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 . Chair Frie then closed the public hearing. There was discussion regarding the other lot widths, if there were homes already on the remaining lots, and also how the situation was created. It was noted that the Outlot was actually missed by both the City and the Developer's engineer, advising that MFRA stated when the park trail was eliminated, the Outlot was overlooked on the plat. Jeff O'Neill stated the park trail was initially placed on the power line corridor but was later moved to a sidewalk, stating the City was involved in that decision. They also discussed total building area and Weinand stated they would build to lneet standards. Dick Frie asked why the applicant was asking to vary from the new standards, which he added had taken them a great amount of time creating. Weinand did not feel that was the case. frie also asked why this was not re-platted and Weinand stated they did not become aware of this until just recently. He also added they have outlots Iix trails, storm sewer, and ponding, and until they stmied processing deeds for the outlots, it was not discovered that the park trail had been moved. frie asked Weinand what would be his hardship and Weinand stated it would be a financial hardship if the lot is not a buildable lot. A MOTION WAS MADE BY RaBBlE SMITH TO RECOMMEND DENIAL Of THE REPLAT AND VARIANCES, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE ORDINANCE TEST FOR PIIYSICAL HARDSHIP IS NOT MET. DICK fRIE SECONDED TI IE MOTION. . There was further discussion regarding finding of hardship and Dragsten felt the error was on both the City's and the Developer's part, and felt that they could approve with a condition such as the need to meet the R-IA standards. O'Neill stated that it would actually be R-I standards that apply, not R-IA. Weinand stated it would be diiTicult to meet the R-IA standards as they are already size restricted. Clint Herbst added that possibly Dragsten was referring to the R-2A standards, and Grittman then advised of those standards. Dragsten clarified that he was talking about the 80 n widths. It was stated by Weinand that the home would be approximately 1,050 sq. n. Smith again asked about standards and Grittman advised of the newly installed standards, stating a minimum of 70 ft widths and 10,000 sq ft of area. Smith felt that Weinand would be close to the average if combining the whole area. Carlson added that the lot is only 123 feet short and it may be better to compromise with the developer and have him move forward. Robbie Smith stated that based on the idea of the lot widths being an average he would rescind his motion, as did Chair Frie. . A MOTION WAS MADE HY ROD DRAGSTEN TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REPLAT AND VARIANCES TO 'n-IE LOT WIDTH AND AREA, BASED ON A FINDING THAT ON AVERAGE FOR TillS PI lASE OF TilE DEVELOPMENT THE LOT DOES FOLLOW THE NEW STANDARDS, THE 60 fEET LEFT OVER WOULD BE UNREASONAl3LE TO REQUIRE FOR REASONAl3LE USE, AND WITH TIlE UNDERSTANDING THAT NO VARIANCES WILL l3E CONSIDERED FOR SETHACKS TO ACCOMMODATE TIlE REDUCED BUILDABLE AREA, WITII THE CONDITION THAT THE HOUSE FOLLOW REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW STANDARDS. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. -2- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 6. Public Hearing - Consideration of an amendment to a Planned Unit Development allowing expansion of auto sales and displav area on an intcrim basis. Applicant: Dave Petcrson Ford Steve Grittman, City Planner, provided the report advising of the applicant's original request. He noted that the request for paving of the area on the original map was due to visibility. Urittman also stated that the applicant submitted a revised plan after reviewing the staff report and has withdrawn his request for the use of the areas on the north and east boundaries. lie is proposing to extend his storage area north with the addition of 2 rows, and he is proposing crushed concrete versus paving for storage of vehicles. The applicant has estimated 2 to 5 ycars before a ncw dealership would possibly be in place, therefore the request for thc interim use. Grittman stated the City is reluctant to get into a temporary use as it becomes an enforccment issue. A second issue was the new standard regarding the sales lot size requirement of 1 Y% building area ratio. Grittman summarized the conditions listed in Exhibit Z stating that the use would be on the southern portion only, grading the remainder of the lot and seeding, and await future development. Item 2 of the conditions would not be relevant, as well as item 3. Item 4 would statc a distance of approximately 170 feet and Grittman was unsure of item 6 stating that lighting may be the only issuc in this condition. The rcmainder of the conditions would be effective. .lefT C)"Neill added that the original proposal was changed after staff comments, and that is why it is being looked at by the Planning Commission, stating it would be the Planning Commission's decision whether they wanted to look at the first proposal as well. Chair Frie opened the public hearing. Milton Olson, Olson & Son's Eleetric, stated that they are conccrned with the storm scwer and how it would drain as they do get runoff with hcavy rains. Hc did statc that there have becn no problems so far but they are concerned once it is leveled off that there would be a drainage problem. It was statcd that there eurrently is a holding pond between Weinand's property and Olson's property. Olson felt there would be a potential problem coming across Marvin R..oad. Grittman stated that any grading of the site would have to be approved by the City Enginecr and he felt that the Engineer was familiar with this and would he working with thc applicant to addrcss any conccrns. Chair Fric then closed the public hearing. There was discussion regarding the rcason for withdrawing the original rcquest and the applicant stated it was due to the rcquest f()r paving. He came up with an alternative plan aftcr receiving the staff report listing comments and conditions. O'Neill adviscd that it was not staff's position to state if the applieant's original request would or would not be approve. Peterson felt that whatevcr staff stated in the report the Planning Commission would follow, to which staff and Planning Commission disagrecd. Peterson addcd a correction on what his future intent was for the property. He stated ifhe was not successful in getting a new franchisc in 3 years, he would find another use for that propeliy. Frie asked Peterson ifhe had the list of conditions and could hc work with them, eliminating itcms 2, 3, and 6, and changing item 4 to read "120 feet to 140 feet". Petcrson clarified that -3- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 he was actually asking for 200 feet. Also in regard to lighting, he would put additional lights on the back of the existing light poles. There was no fUliher discussion. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DICK FRIE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THI.: PUD AMENDMEN]" AND INTERIM USE PERMIT FOR DAVE PETERSON TO ACCOMMODATE TEMPORARY AUTOMOBILE DISPLAY AND STORAGE CONSISTENT WITH THE SURVEY DArED APRIL 27, 2000, AND CONSISTENT WITH TilE RECOMMENDATIONS Of THIS REPORT AS SUMMARIZED IN EXHIBIT Z, WITH CORRECTIONS AND CHANGES MADE. RICHARD CARLSON SECONDED THE MOTION. There was further discussion by Fred Patch, Building Official, as Exhibit Z related to the entire PUD, stating a landscaping plan had not been supplied and thcre had been previous issues with landscaping on thc Dunlo site. Patch stated that although no building pcrmit was required, a grading permit would be and noted that some grading had already taken place on the newly created storage arca and that the City Engineer had been active in looking into this. Patch suggestcd that prior to this item going to City Council, a landscaping plan be submitted for the entire area, as well as assurity of installation and maintcnance. It was clarified by both O'Neill and Peterson that this mattcr was taken care of and Peterson is in the process of landscaping the Dunlo site, stating hc just purchased the site earlicr that day. Patch also added that there was no curbing requircd in the list of conditions and felt it should be as in the case of any other development in the City. Also, thc use of the display area should be subject to a grading permit supplied to the City Engineer. O'Neill asked Grittman about limitations of access to and from that site and Grittman stated that it is presumed that access would be hom the existing lot, and not very accessible from other areas. Frie asked Patch if he was involved in previous discussions regarding the list of conditions in the exhibit provided to the Planning Commission and he stated he was not. Frie asked that conditions/exhibits be provided to all statT prior to agenda packcts. Carlson added in regard to item 1 of the conditions that this would be temporary, and he envisioned that at that time this could be combined to one site. At that time curbing would be required, hc also agreed to landscaping but again noted this is a temporary use of the site. Dragsten questioned the landscaping requiremcnt on the Dunlo property and O'Neill adviscd that this was relatively minor, some finished screening, and that this could be work cd out between stafr, City Planncr and Mr. Peterson. There was no furthcr discussion. THE MOTION CARRrED UNANIMOUSL Y. 7. Public Hearing. - Consideration of a request for a zoning map amendment re-zonin!2: a parcel from 1-2, heavy industrial to one or a comhination of the following districts: 8-4, 8-3, 13-2, and I-I A. Applicant: Planning CommissiorL City of Monticello .Jeff O'Neill, Deputy City Administrator, provided the report advising that this site is currently zoned 1-2, which extends to an area surrounded by B-3 and I-I A, and that the uses in the 1-2 arc not compatiblc with the surrounding uses. O'Neill also advised that the -4- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 property owner, Mr. Lundsten, had presentcd a lettcr in favor of the re-zoning. He also stated that staH recommends re-zoning to 13-4 as it is evident that Monticello is becoming more attractive to large scale commercial development. The proposed rezoning will support this trend and thus cncourage economic development and expansion of tax base. In the event that the commercial development does come to fruition, or if this site becomes attractive to a desirable industrial prospect then the site could be rezoned accordingly. Chair Frie opcned the public hearing. Hearing no comments, the public hcaring was thcn closed. John Lundstcn, property owner, confirmed that he was in support of the re-zoning. Dragsten did not feel that 13-4 would be most appropriate, but felt 1-1 A would allow more flexibility, stating B-4 seemed more highway commercial. Grittman advised that 8-4 is a general business district, rather than highway business. Carlson questioned if 8-4 relied on Highway frontage and it was stated no. Smith questioned if the IDC had looked at this and O'Neill stated they have not gotten any input from them, but there may be interest. Smith also asked if therc were any thoughts on this in regard to the IDe's request for morc industrial land. Frie stated this re-zoning follows the comp plan and also that it allows flexibi I ity. A MOTION WAS MADE BY RIO-lARD CARLSON TO RECOMMEND APPROV AL OF TilE REQUEST TO RE-lONE FROM 1-2 '1'0 13-4, BASED ON THE FINDING THAT THE AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, COMPATIBLE WITH THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA AND CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA, WILL NOT RESULT IN THE DEPRECIATION OF ADJOINING LAND V ALLJES, AND THE NEED FOR THE USE IS SUfFICIENTLY DEMONSTRATED. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDED TilE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. Update regarding consideration of a request to rezone land from R-3, Multiple Family Residential to pun, Planned Unit Developmcnt to accommodate a recreation center and commercial development. Steve Grittman advised that the concerns of the neighbors at the public hearing had been addressed and noted again that staff fclt this type of development would have less of an impact than an R~3, multi-L1l11ily development. They did look at tratTic issues more closely, stating that multi-f~lmily dcvelopment would generate approximately 2,400 daily trips. It was noted that an arcna has different traffic generations with less than 200 trips on an averagc day. On gamc days there could be an additional 450 to 600 trips, which is still about 1/3 of what a rcsidential projcct would generate. Chair Frie clarified that this was not a continued public hearing, but rather a tabled item. He askcd if other sites had bcen pursued and O'Neill advised that The Pointe Group was in attendance and would provide an update on that. Frie then clarified with staff and Planning Commission that if rezoning to pun, they would not nccessarily have to state what would be going into that PUD. Grittman concurred. Frie stated that the rcason he states this on record is that they do support a hockey and soccer arena, but not necessarily on this site. Smith stated that one ofthe concerns of the residents at thc previous meeting was if this was rezoncd and the arena did not go in on that site, could the developers put something else on -5- Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 . that site. and hie stated that was not the intent. Herbst stated that the City has control of the property and has control over what is allowed on that site. Dragsten asked if the Planning Commission would ultimately have to state what would be approved for the PUD site. (i-rittman stated they would and that would occur at a public hearing. Al Gagnon, The Pointe Group, Minnetonka. introduced himself and the rest of thcir team working on this project. Gagnon stated it is the only site that will work for the entire project team which includes The Pointe Group, Silver Creek Real Estate Development. the Hockey Association and the Soccer Association. Carlson asked Gagnon to address the concerns of the residents that were stated at the public hearing, as well as go over site selections and dialogue regarding surrounding facilities. Herbst also added that the main concern was if this was the only site that would work for all patiies involved, and that has been answered by Gagnon. Bill Whittlock of RSP Architects, Gregg Engle, Hockey Association President, Kcnt Johnson, Monticello Soccer Association President. and Pat Cruikshank, Silver Creek Real Estate were present to answer questions as well. . Gagnon advised how they had selected this particular site, stating that initially they looked at several communities and sites that potentially would work, such as Becker and Big Lake, as well as Monticello. lIe advised that they found staff in Monticello were more receptive and also the greater use by thc Monticello Hockey Association. Gagnon stated the Th Street site supported 2 shects of ice as wcll as an area fi.)r a soccer dome. The High School site did not have that potential. Monticello Community Center site west of the center had issues with parking and relocating current facilities, as well as acquiring additional land. The small piece of land on Cedar and Dundas did not support the acreage. Highway 25 site had the acrcage. but the issues were that it did not support the commercial site that would be important to them financially, and also it did not give the City ability to maximize the use of that land. Frie asked Gagnon if there were other communities that had arenas in residential arcas, and Gagnon listed many. Frie then asked which came first, the residential or the hockey. and Gagnon stated he could not say for sure, but that it is typical to find arena's in residential areas. Gagnon then addressed the concerns from the residents at the previous public hearing. . Traffic - Gagnon noted that Grittman had addressed that with statistics, and also they believe this is a great use of the site and would potentially Ininimize traffic compared to other potential projects. . Parking spaces/seats - Gagnon stated there would be ample (m-site parking, again stating that 7111 Street would he pushing through regardless of this project and that the traffic would predominantly be the residents coming to and from the arena. . Noise/hours of operation - Gagnon stated this could be addressed in an operating agreement. Frie asked Engle about possible timcs of operation and he stated between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., adding that the younger players are not scheduled after 9 p.m. Frie also asked if they could work within the operating hours ofpossihly 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. and Engle stated it was possible. It was clarified that this would not include . -6- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 game nights. Gagnon added that he did not agree with 9 p.m., but that they would abide by hours of operation mutually agreed upon. Carlson added that the intent is to help promote selling of ice time which Gagnon agreed and stated that there are times when there are later hours. O'Neill asked Mr. Johnson about soccer hours and he stated the soccer dome is a relatively new idea and they would have to work with that. Frie staled that the Planning Commission fully supports making use of the hours that would make the arena work. . Gagnon then asked Whittlock to address concerns with I ighting and advise the layout of the site. The remainder of the development is for future parking ifnecded, as well as future development and ponding. The building faces Th Street and he supplied a drawing showing what it could look like. He also provided potential elevations, stating the site drops from 1-94 where the structure would begin. This would act as a visual block as well as a sound barrier, to a certain degree. Gagnon also advised of berming and landscaping that could address lighting issues as well. Green area along 7th Street could be landscaped addressing issues of traffic as well. Access points are limited and landscaped parking could also be developed. They stated they are putting this parcel to its highest and best use. . Frie confirmed with Patch items 6 & 7 of the concerns addressed in The Pointe Group's information regarding lighting and headlights. Perimeter mounted lighting would be in compliance, as well as perimeter bermed landscaping. Perimeter lighting that casts toward the center of the lot would be appropriate and a photometric plan would be required. . Gagnon addressed items 8 and 9 regarding parking on streets stating they would have ample parking onsite. . Lastly, there were concerns that games for both hockey and soccer would be going on at the same time. It was noted that scheduling would be coordinated and also that youth hockey does not generate a large number of people. Engle added that he felt there would be non-board members managing the facility, including scheduling. Johnson also stated that there would not be bleachers for seating in the dome and therefore this significantly limits the number of people that would be in attendance as it would be standing room only. Herbst again pointed out any concerns regarding tranic on Th Street are a moot point in that the strcet will be pushed through regardless ofthis project. They also questioned if a traffic light would be installed at Th Street and Co. Rd. 39. It was advised that this would be a County issue and would be monitored. Herbst added that Chelsea Road being pushed through may help with traffic as well. Smith asked Cruikshank about the commercial site and what might possibly be placcd there. He stated that they preferred to have something family oriented, something that played off of the sports complex themc where people could go to eat after dropping off children for practice, as an cxample. He also stated this could change, perhaps a particular business such -7- Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 . as an Applebees may not want to go in that particular spot. Smith asked if it would be restaurant or retail and Cruickshank stated gas/convenience type facilities had not been discussed, but could not state for certain. Frie asked Grittman again if the City Council had discretion as to what uses would be allowed in this PUD and (i-rittman stated that was true. They again discussed the Highway 25 site which O'Neill stated there were larger developments looking at that site which would be more suitable. There was also a concern with traffic on 71h Street by Cub Foods area and amount of congestion with people trying to get to this site via that route. O'Neill advised that the City Engineer has been looking at this and it would need to be addressed with or without the arena at this site. Smith then stated a concern regarding speed on Co. Rd. 39 and Grittman advised that the Sheriffs Department would take direction from City Council and that it is an enforcement issue. Grittman also stated that with additional traffic, it may actually help with reduction of speed as there is a tendency to slow down when there is more traffie. Signals were also discussed again. A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARD CARLSON TO RECOMMEND APPROV AL OF THE CONCEPT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT RE-ZONING. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED TilE MOTION. . There was further discussion regarding that possibly this report should be made public to the residents in attendance at the previous public hearing. O'Neill advised that this could be summarized and provided to them. It was also noted the importance for them to realize the amount of time spent addressing the issues raised by the residents at the previous meeting. Smith stated that he was still concerned about the issues of the neighbors in that area. Herbst added that the last time this property came before the Planning Commission and City Council, approximately 7 years ago, regarding a possible multi-family project, the residents were against that as well. Herbst felt it would be hard to say what the neighbors would be in favor of or against. Gagnon added that the current R-3 zoning does allow fi.H this type offacility by CUP. By going to a PUD they are really looking llw a win/win project. He stated that the majority of the questions were pertaining to the arena, not the potential commercial development, again stating the arena would be allowed by CUP in the current zoning. There was no further discussion. MOTION INCLUDED DIRECTING STAFF TO SIJMMARIZE CONCERNS ADDRESSED AT TilE MEETJNG AND PROVIDE TO THE RESIDENTS IN TIIA T NEIGHBORHOOD VIA MAILING. MOTION CARRIED 3 TO 1 WITH ROBBIE SMITI I VOTING IN OPPOSITION. . -8- . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 9. Review ncw owncr's plan fi.)l' consistency with ori!!inal approved PUD. Former Montissippi Trail Townhomes, now Timber Ridge. .Jeff O'Ncill provided the report rcgarding the prcvious development that was approved by the Planning Commission and the proposal by the new devcloper. Since the initial approval, the previous developcr, Harstad, is no longcr involved and the dcvelopment has been taken over by Mike Schneidcr of Homestead Development. Schneider is proposing thc samc plat design and landscaping, and has suppl ied staff with what hc felt the homes would sell for, which is slightly under what was initially proposed and approved. O'Neill adviscd that if this is approved by the Planning Commission at this timc, stalJwill forward to the City Council on Scptembcr 9 for their approval, the projcct would thcn move forward to final stage PliO which includes cxecution of the development agrecment and placement of signatures on the final plat and initiation of public storm sewer improvement necessary to support thc project. If the Planning COImnission decidcs to bring it back in the form of a public hcaring, staff will proceed that route. Fric asked Grittman about the building style and base price which varies from the original plan, questioning if that would be cause for a ncw public hearing. Grittman stated it is thc discretion of the Planning Commission. Frie added that initially they had a lengthy public hcaring on this project and questioned if the ncighbors needcd to have input again, but again Grittman stated that is the discrction of the Planning Commission. It was statcd that the primary changc is building style, thc valucs are not exactly the same, and it appears it is morc architectural. O'Neill added that thc previous developer, Harstad, had stated at the public hearing that these homes would bc valucd around $150,000 and latcr changed that numbcr, but that the rcsidents heard $150,000. Mike Schneider, applicant, addressed the Planning Commission stating that at the time he talkcd to staff he did not have the homes priced. What he provided was infi.)[mation on homcs that they had complcted in another community that were similar. Hc also stated thcy may be closer to $160,000. Thcy designed thcm as closely to thc previoLls developmcnt as possible and thcir square footage may be somewhat larger. Schncider's marketing reprcsentative addcd that they fOLlnd the avcrage sclling price in Monticcllo to bc $150,000. Frie asked Schneider for his time frame on this project and Schneidcr stated that hc would like to procecd immcdiately. Dragsten asked about square footage of the main levcls and it was stated 1,275 to 1,300, all with 2 car garages, similar stone fronts, slab on grade ramblers with walkouts or lookouts. It was confirmed that Schneidcr had agreements with propcrties to the wcst of this parcel, as did thc previous dcvelopcr. A MOTTON WAS MADE BY ROD DRAGSTEN TO RECOMMEND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLANS AS CONSISTENT WITH THE ORIGINAL APPROVED PUD. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDLJ) THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSL Y. -9- 10. . . . Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 Consideration of callinl! for a public hearing on temporary sign regulations as they pertain to multi-tenant commercial developments. John Glomski, Planning Technician, provided the report noting that the reason for this item was to start discussions and call for a public hearing. The current ordinance was not designed to handle strip mall developments where there are multiple users on one lot. Glomski provided examples for these developments such as limiting permits to I 0 per year, or per lot basis rather than per each business, or limit and not have them at all. He asked for direction from the Planning Commission. O'Neill advised that they also have a provision that allows for 10 days for special occasions, along with the 10 days per year. As of now they are assigning permits to the parcel and allowing for 40 days. O'Neill noted that keeping track of the way it is regulated now is cumbersome and they would prefer to simplify the process. They would still be allowed the 10 days for speeial events. It was notcd that they have had a problem with not being able to direct businesscs at this time. It could be easier to have each individual business to have a specific number of days. They discussed the Towne Centre site but Carlson felt that it being an upscale hleility, wound not have a multitude of signs. Frie added that in keeping up with progress of the community we should have this available for staff and City Council to work with. He felt that this should be discussed further as well. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DICK FRIF TO CALL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO DISCUSS TEMPORARY SIGN REGULATIONS AS II lEY PERTAIN TO MUL 1'1- TENANT COMMI':RCIAL DEVELOPMENTS. ROD DRAGSTEN SECONDED TIlE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. Review sketch plan for quad homc development at current site of the West Side Market. Jeff O'Neill provided the report stating that Tom Holthaus, owner of the West Side Market property, had provided a sketch plan showing three quad home structures on the property on which the West Side Market is currently located. The plan shows three access points at CSAI [ 75 and one access point at Otter Creek Road. In order for this development to occur, the property will need to be rezoned from R-l to R-2 zoning designation and Holthaus will need to get Planned Unit Development approval as well. The purpose of the sketeh plan review is to introduce the concept of development of a medium density development at this R-l location. The site is contained within the R-1 district. Single family homes are adjacent on two sides with CSAH 75 and Otter Creek Road forming the south and west boundary. The limits of the R-2 district to the east extends to within a few hundred feet of the site and the school property directly across CSAH 75 is zoned R-2. A major reason fi.Jf the request is as follows: The current use (convenience store) is a lawful non-conforming use that can not expand. Given the debt against the store, it is not financially feasible to convert the site to a single family development. In other words, -10- Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 . development of the site with 12 units (3 quads) is feasible on a financial basis whereas development of the site under the current zoning (R-1) is not feasible. As the Planning Comll1ission knows, financial feasibility of a development is not a basis for land use decision making. Planning Commission will want to analpe the request for rezoning in terms of the standards for changing the code, such as determining if the rezoning is consistent with character and/or geography of the area, would rezoning result in depreciation of adjoining land values, is there a demonstrated need for this type of use, and is the rezoning proposal consistent with the comprehensive plan. According to Holthaus, the proposed development meets the minimum standards for density in an R-2 development which is no more than one unit per 5,000. This will need to be verified at concept PUD if the proposal advances that hlr. If the discussion is generally positive, Holthaus will he completing the detail on a Planned Unit Development application and will he applying for the rezoning. If the feedback is negative, Holthaus will likely operate the convenience store as is. . Tom Holthaus, applicant, stated this was initiated this year as a result of the County's decision to close off access on the west side of his property. Holthaus stated that the decision to close off this access, along with a number of other issues, has made it increasingly harder to operate his business at that location. lie stated ifhe were to lower the density he would need some kind of financial assistance which he felt the City would not be interested in giving him. Several of the members felt that the convenience store was a good use for the neighborhood. Frie asked about the layout and the 3 proposed entrances, and whether this would be allowed by the County. Holthaus was not sure at this time but he felt that with the current zoning this actually reduces the number of driveways allowed and that may be more desirable to the County. Grittman advised that the County would most likely look at it as starting from zero in regard to the number allowed. Herbst added that there was a problem with a turn lane going into Otter Crcek as well as into the convenience store. Holthaus stated that the City was in proccss of obtaining some property at the corner of this property to straighten out Otter Creek Road. . Holthaus advised the square footage of the homes would be approximately 1,170 sq. 1'1., with a 7 course crawl space, selling for approximately $160,000. He stated there arc still details to be workcd out on the development side regarding demolition of existing building. lie added that they have built these same homes in Fergus Falls. I,'rie asked if there werc any setbacks/variances issues or was he just asking for re-zoning. Ilolthaus was not sure at this time and O'Neill stated they have not looked at this in detail yet as they wanted direction from the Planning Commission first regarding density before proceeding further. Ilolthaus advised that there would be an association for the homes but that each one would be owncd individually. O'Neill noted that previously the applicant had come he fore the City Council to expand his site but that was voted down by thc Councilor that may have been another option for him. He also noted that the neighborhood was not really in favor of the convenience store in the first place and they are trying to work to make something more - ] 1- Planning Commission Minutes - 09/03/02 . desirable in the neighborhood. There was further discussion regarding eliminating entranec/exit to the store, then increasing driveways for honles. Holthaus added that although there would be more driveways there would be less traffic entering/exiting them. The Planning Commission was in favor of working with the applicant and advised Holthaus to get approval from the County Jirst and then come back to the Planning Commission for a request for re-zoning. It was noted that Holthaus' request previously to expand his current site was denied due to concerns in the neighborhood 01' intensifying that site. It was also noted by Herbst that another reason was due to the need to straighten out Otter Creek Road due to safety issues. It was advised that the City has received complaints regarding the automatic gas pumps which are lit and run 24 hours a day. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to support the applicant's intent. 12. Adiourn A MOTION WAS MADE BY ROD DRAGSTEN TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 10:0 P.M. ROBBIE SMITH SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED. . . -12-