Loading...
Planning Commission Minutes 09-02-2008• MINUTES MONTICELLO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, September 2nd, 2008 6:00 PM Commissioners: Rod Dragsten, Charlotte Gabler, Lloyd Hilgart, William Spartz, and Barry Voight Council Liaison: Susie Wojchouski Staff: Angela Schumann, Gary Anderson, Steve Grittman - NAC 1. Call to order. Chairman Dragsten called the meeting to order and declared a full quorum of the Commission present. • 2. Consideration to approve the minutes of August 5th 2008 It was clarified that Commissioner Voight made a motion to approve the minutes of June 3rd and July 1St, 2008. Commissioner Spartz seconded those minutes. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILGART TO APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF AUGUST Sth, 2008. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 3. Consideration of adding items to the a eg nda NONE. 4. Citizen comments. NONE. C7 5. Public Hearing -Consideration of a request for Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development for an expansion of services for a Senior Housing Project in a Performance Zone Mixed (PZM) District Applicant• Presbyterian Homes/Mississippi Shores Planner Grittman reviewed the staff report, stating that the proposed addition is located on the east side of the building. The purpose of the addition is for a wellness center for the current residents. It is not increasing the unit count or activity capacity. In terms of meeting ordinance requirements, the proposed addition meets setback requirements and no additional parking demand is created by the addition. It meets all • other zoning standards. Grittman noted that the expansion is being developed with materials similar to the existing building. Staff is recommending approval with no conditions. Spartz inquired how the parking demand would not be impacted, even though the building was becoming larger. Grittman responded that the ordinance regulates parking based on use. For Mississippi Shores parking demand is based on the residential unit capacity, therefore parking demand is not increased for the wellness center activity alone. Gabler inquired if the applicant is making any changes to lighting or landscaping. Grittman indicated that they were not. Dragsten referred to need to amendment to CUP. Grittman confirmed that any change beyond the original scope, including that for square footage, required an amendment to PUD. Chairman Dragsten opened the public hearing. Dan Lemm, 113 Cameron Avenue NE, asked if the land on which MIssisippi Shores is located is owned by the hospital district. He commented that if the hospital owns the property, then they should be the applicant for this permit. Dustin Sayre, representing Presbyterian Homes, addressed the Commission. Sayre confirmed that there was a property agreement, and Presbyterian Homes now owns the property. He explained that Presbyterian Homes owns properties all across the Twin Cities area. Sayre indicated that the wellness center will primarily be used as a fitness and exercise area. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED ADDITION IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL ZONING REGULATIONS OF THE APPLICABLE B-3 AND PZM DISTRICTS. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. Spartz recommended that prior to this item being presented to the Council, Presbyterian Homes should provide verification that they own the property. 6. Public Hearing -Consideration of a request for Conditional Use Permit for a Drive Through Facility, Joint Parking and Joint Access and a reauest for Final Plat for Riverview Square Second Addition. Applicant: Broadway Market Investors LLC Planner Grittman provided a review of the staff report for the request. Grittman stated that the conditional use permits will formalize the cross easement agreement needed between the two properties and allow for a drive through facility for the bank. Grittman stated that a review of the plat and site plan has indicated that setbacks and plat requirements are complaint. Grittman noted that the access points have been reviewed 2 • and found to be acceptable and that the sign plan is complaint and consistent with ordinance requirements. Screening and landscaping also meet code requirements, as does the lighting plan, with a few tweaks at perimeter. Grittman illustrated the building elevations for the Commission. He noted that staff had met with the applicant regarding the conditions in Exhibit Z. The applicant stated that they would have no problem with meeting those conditions. With those comments, Grittman stated that staff are recommending approval of the request. Dragsten asked about minimum width for parking spaces. Grittman noted that the 8' space has a van accessible space adjacent to it for handicap accessibility. Dragsten confirmed that the free-standing sign will be a monument sign. Grittman confirmed. Dragsten noted irrigation was recommended, but was not a condition. Grittman noted that irrigation is not required by the ordinance, but it is always a recommendation. Wojchouski asked if there is signage on the southwest elevation. Grittman confirmed that there is sign identification on the tower, but there is none on the wall itself. However, the monument sign will also be visible on that side. • Chairman Dragsten opened the public hearing Dan Lemm again addressed the Commission. He inquired whether there would be a will push button door for handicap accessibility. Dragsten stated that the building code would dictate that element. Lemm stated that it may not be code for the state, but he would ask the Commission to consider it. Sean Lathrop, KKE Architects, addressed the Planning Commission, representing the applicant. He noted that while there is no code that requires push door operators, but the doors are constructed to be handicap accessible. Dragsten asked if there are cash machines. Lathrop confirmed that there will be a drive up ATM on the outside lane. Dragsten asked Lathrop to confirm that the materials on the outside will be what appears on the building. Lathrop confirmed that they would be. Voight asked Lathrop to address the elevation for the longest wall. Lathrop referred to mansard at 23' in height, while the top of drive thru is at 15 feet. He noted that the mansard base is Kasota stone, as are all the piers. These variations will provide visual appeal and creak-up. Grittman noted that there is a small retaining wall on the site, which is just to hold the elevation of the site; it is just a couple of feet high. It is not a screening wall. • Dragsten asked if they would be irrigating. Lathrop stated that he would assume so, but he will bring it to the attention of the client. Spartz inquired if the applicant is aware of the conditions. Lathrop confirmed and stated that there are no issues with meeting the conditions. Chairman Dragsten closed the ublic hearin no other comments. p g, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HILGART TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS AND FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE DRIVE THROUGH LANE AND PROPOSED USE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE PZ-M DISTRICT AND UNDERLYING B-3 DISTRICT, AS WELL AS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE BROADWAY MARKET APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT Z AS FOLLOWS: 1. The applicants execute across-parking and access agreement with the Broadway Market property owners to ensure proper access and shared parking. 2. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations of the City Engineer. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 7. Public Hearing -Consideration of a request for Preliminary and Final Plat for Monticello Commerce Center Eighth Addition and a Request for Rezoning from I IA (Light Industrial and B-2 (Limited Business) to B-4 (Regional Business) Ap~licant• I & S Grouy Inc Planner Grittman reviewed the staff report, stating that the applicant is requesting an approval for preliminary and final plat for Monticello Business Center 8a` Addition. Grittman clarified that the original version of the final plat document is actually incorrect. The only platting that is occurring is for the subject parcel itself, there are no outlots. A revised plat illustrating that condition has been provided in the packet, as well. Grittman stated that when reviewing plat, the City needs to make sure that any plat is consistent with the subdivision ordinance. Development on that site must be consistent with the zoning ordinance. Grittman noted that this is not a CUP or PUD. In those circumstances, the Planning Commission is used to reviewing architecture. In this case, the rezoning and plat review do not offer the opportunity to incorporate design comments. As such, staff has held comments to zoning compliance only. Grittman indicated that the plat is a single lot at7.6 acres, which is proposed to be rezoned to B-4, the City's standard retail commercial district. The site is currently split by two zoning districts. The land to the east is zoned B-2, and the land to the west is I-lA. The single lot is proposed as B-4, which would accommodate the use proposed as permitted. The applicant's plan is for a single building retail structure. The site itself has about 390+ parking spaces, based on staff report. Grittman stated that by ordinance, 420 spaces are required, based on the 93,325 square foot retail building proposed. That size includes a mezzanine and dock space. Parking standards apply to usable square footage • of the building. The applicant is also proposing a proof of parking arrangement to meet the 420 required spaces. It is staff's assumption that 392 spaces is probably more than needed and staff is recommending the parking arrangement as shown. 4 • Grittman explained that the applicants have not shown signage information, which will be shown at a future time and a separate application will be made. If it is consistent with the code, it may not come before Planning Commission. Grittman indicated that staff did make some notes on landscaping requirement, as per code they need another 33 overstory trees. These will also help to accomplish additional screening of the dock area. Staff did meet with applicant and they are agreeable to revising this item. Grittman noted that the loading docks are on the Chelsea Road side. This is acceptable under the code, providing that docks do not face the street. In this case, they will need an 8' screening wall, and will have recessed docks. The combination of those items with the landscaping additions will meet screening requirements. Grittman stated that the lighting plan does bleed in excess of code requirements, but the applicants indicated that they will modify to meet requirements. He explained that the engineer's comments will not require any redesign of the site, and the applicants will be required to meet the requirements. Staff had one comment related to access, which is a provision for access to adjoining commercial properties. Grittman stated that every development will have access, but to the extent that street access will be allowed, the engineers will work with development to limit them wherever possible. There is an understanding that we don't know what developments might be, but the applicant has indicated that they would be willing to work with the City as the adjoining lands develop. Hilgart asked about B-4 zoning, stating that extending B-4 zoning all the way along the north side might make sense. Grittman noted that the comp plan guides this area as commercial, but that question might be answered by the property owner. Spartz inquired if this area would be impacted by the proposed Fallon Avenue overpass. Grittman stated it would be running west of this site. Gabler asked if the Commission could address the plainness of the building. Chairman Dragsten opened the public hearing. Bob Doren, addressed the Commission. Doren stated that he is the site building manager from the corporate office of Kohl's. Bruns also introduced Lynn Bruns of I & S Engineering. Doren addressed the landscaping around dock, stating that Kohl's will make those enhancements in the green space along the boulevard due to tight spacing near the building and dock. Dragsten asked if something can be done to enhance the wall planes of the building. The internal architect for Kohl's stated that this is a pre-cast structure, which is a new prototype for Kohl's. Right now, they are generating new ways of looking at these buildings, and part of that is a way to break up the building. Since this is pre-cast, the architect stated that they will use paint changes to give it more visual interest and depth. Future elevations will show that. West elevation use a parapet feature. Dragsten noted that there is significant elevation exposure along I-94, and visual appearance is important for the City. 5 • Dragsten asked if they can comply with Exhibit Z. Doren stated that other than the landscaping change noted, they would comply. Dragsten asked if their free-standing sign would be on two metal posts. Doren stated that they do not have a sign package ready, but that it is basically one pole. Bruns stated that they may negotiate anoff-premise sign. Dragsten commented that the Commission is working on changing the sign ordinance. As part of that, they are working on getting signs to be similar to building style. Doren stated that right now the concept is a single pole. There is potential for a monument sign with a panel for Kohl's and others. Dragsten asked about timeframe. Doren stated that plans are for March 2010 opening, but they maybe asked to look at an October 2009 opening. Dragsten inquired about rezoning along Chelsea. Charlie Pfeffer, representing the land owner, indicated that the reason for rezoning portions at a time has to do with real estate taxes and the tax classification of the property. At this time, they would support only the rezoning of this portion. Hearing no further comments, Chairman Dragsten closed the public hearing. Voight stated that concern about landscaping adjacent to screening wall is reasonable. Dragsten stated that if they improve the wall plane, the City can adjust the screening. • MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REZONING TO B-4, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED REZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL, BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED PLAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE B-4, REGIONAL BUSINESS, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT Z AS FOLLOWS. Internal cross access easements to future development surrounding the Kohl's site must be provided. The provision of these accesses maybe made as a part of the development agreement. 2. Signage is not a part of preliminary plat approval. The applicant must submit a signage plan as part of a separate review and approval. 3. Submitted landscape plan must be revised to include an additional thirty (33) overstory trees or equivalent understory plantings. These trees must be not less than 25% deciduous and 25% coniferous. 4. The area adjacent to the loading dock must be landscaped with a layered vegetated screen to run the length, including overstory trees, shrubs and perennials. 6 • 5. The retainin wall must be a minim g um eight (8) feet above finished grade. 6. The developer must provide financial security that guarantees live growth of the plant materials for a two (2) year period from the date of installation. 7. The applicant shall provide a separate trail easement document to encompass the existing trail along the north side of Chelsea Road. 8. The final plat is subject to the review and comment of Mn/DOT. 9. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations of the City Engineering staff. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GABLER. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. 8. Sign Ordinance Amendment Update Grittman referred to a timeline presented to the Planning Commission for the process of amending the sign ordinance. Dragsten stated that it his goal to have it done and in place in February to accommodate spring commercial development. • 9. Adjourn. MOTION TO ADJOURN BY COMMISSIONER SPARTZ. MOTION SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VOIGHT. MOTION CARRIED, 5-0. . ~~ ~-- Record • 7