Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-06-02 MINUTESCity of Cottage Grove Planning Commission June 2, 2008 A meeting of the Planning Commission was held at Cottage Grove City Hall, 7516 — 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota on June 2, 2008, in the Council Chambers and telecast on local Government Cable Channel 16. Call to Order Chairperson Reese called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Roll Call Members Present: Obid Hofland, Steve Messick, Tracy Poncin, Chris Reese, Jim Rostad, Eddie Tharbes, David Thiede, Chris Willhite Members Absent: Tina Folch - Freiermuth Staff Present: Howard Blin, Community Development Director John McCool, Senior Planner Approval of Agenda Reese asked if there are any changes to the agenda. Being no changes were made, the agenda was approved as submitted. Open Forum Reese asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non - agenda item. No one addressed the Commission. Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Reese explained the purpose of the Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory ca- pacity to the City Council, and that the City Council makes all final decisions. In addition, he explained the process of conducting a public hearing and requested that any person wishing to speak should come to the microphone and state their full name and address for the public record. Public Hearings and Application Reviews 6.1 Comprehensive Plan 2030 — Case No. CP08 -020 Blin summarized the staff report. He noted that there are seven significant comments to the plan and explained that staff will go through the comments individually, the chair would open the public hearing, and the Planning Commission would vote on the recommendation. Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 2 of 12 Blin explained the proposal by the Smallidges to re -guide their property along Highway 61 from the proposed land use of rural residential to commercial as the property will be out of the agricultural preserve program in 2013. Staff is recommending that it remain rural resi- dential because it is surrounded by rural residential land and there some difficult access issues from Highway 61. Thiede asked why the property owner wanted to change the recommended land use in the draft comprehensive plan. Gene Smallidge, 10992 Point Douglas Drive, explained that this parcel is separated from the rest of their farmland by a road easement that serves two other properties so it is not convenient to include it as part of their farming operation. He has asked on numerous occasions in the past several years to have this re- guided to commercial during the next time the comprehensive plan was revised. He then summarized the informa- tion in his letter to the Planning Commission that was included in the packet. He stated they differ with the response that they are in an area where there is no other commercial and to deny their four -acre parcel to be considered for commercial would be discrimination in view of the fact that the city has taken such a firm stance in supporting other commercial opera- tions. Thiede asked why they want to change the designation now because they could apply to change it when a project is proposed for the property. Smallidge responded commercial is a logical use for the property due to its proximity to the highway with its frontage and visibil- ity. He stated that he has had inquiries from commercial users in recent years but currently there are no proposals. Reese opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Willhite asked if the parcel was surrounded by houses. Blin responded that it is surrounded by farm fields but is guided for rural residential development. He explained that if it was guided to be commercial, it would be an isolated commercial piece. There are other com- mercial uses in the area, but most of those cited are located at Highway 95 and Highway 61, which is guided and zoned for commercial. The golf course is a quasi - commercial develop- ment and is allowed in non - commercial zones. Reese asked what the property owner would need to do if the property was left as rural residential and a project was proposed in the fu- ture. Blin responded the property owner would need to apply for a comprehensive plan amendment and a zoning amendment. Messick asked if the city risked a court battle if the property was guided rural residential and a project was proposed. Blin responded that the city has the ability to guide and zone land, though landowners can challenge those decisions in court. He noted that the Transportation element shows future frontage roads and better traffic control and access along Highway 61, which would eliminate individual access points. Thiede stated that the property owners have the opportunity to apply to re -guide and rezone the property if a project is proposed. Thiede made a motion to not re -guide the property from rural residential to commer- cial. Rostad seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -O vote). Blin summarized the information on the proposed land use designation for Lower Grey Cloud Island. He stated that staff is recommending that the properties on the north side of the is- land remain guided Rural Residential. Reese noted that the public hearing is still open for comments. Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 3 of 12 Rod Hale, 11701 Grey Cloud Trail South, explained that the area recommended to remain rural residential comprises about eight property owners who own property ranging in size from 4 acres to 40 acres. He stated that the most of the Island has been mined since 1950 and the interior consists of mostly lakes where the mining occurred. The mining is projected to last at least 30 more years. He expressed concern about the proposed Urban Reserve designation for the rest of the Island as the term "urban" connotes to him high density devel- opment. He asked the Commission to honor the residents' request to maintain the rural resi- dential designation for the area north of Grey Cloud Trail and to give consideration to future development on the Island. Thiede noted that the Island is not being rezoned at its highest density levels. Blin explained the definition of "urban reserve" is for areas located outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) that are proposed for future urban development. Master plans will be com- pleted for each urban reserve area before they are open for development. Allowable uses in areas designated urban reserve include commercial, agriculture, and residential uses on lots of a minimum of 20 acres. There is a section in the comp plan that calls for further study of Grey Cloud Island to determine the appropriate mix of park and open space and develop- ment. This plan is not taking a position on the appropriate balance between those two uses; it is just saying at some point in the future when the mining is completed on the Island, the city in conjunction with the state, region, and county will determine how much open space and how much development. Hale expressed concern about extending utilities to the Island and would like to see the city designate some portion of the city for acreage lots. Thiede stated that guiding the rest of the Island urban reserve will protect it because a master plan would be required for the area prior to any development occurring. Thiede made a motion that the private parcels on the north side of the island remain guided Rural Residential and maintain the Urban Reserve designation for the other portion of the Island. Messick seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). Blin summarized the information on re- guiding five acres of land along Military Road from Low Density to Medium Density Residential and recommended approval. Willhite asked how many properties this area encompasses. Blin responded two properties, but the owners are marketing that property as one parcel. Reese noted that the public hearing is still open for comments. No one spoke. Messick made a motion to re -guide a five -acre parcel of land along Military Road from Low Density to Medium Density Residential. Hofland seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). Blin summarized the information on re- guiding an industrial parcel of land near the petroleum tank farm on 85th Street from Industrial to Urban Reserve. Reese noted that the public hearing is still open for comments. Brian McCool, Fredrikson & Byron, 200 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, stated he is the land use counsel for Minnesota Pipeline. He explained that Minnesota Pipeline owns a 28 -acre Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 4 of 12 parcel that they are looking to divest to a third party for industrial development. They are not intending to expand their tank farm. The recommendation before the Commission is to change the land use of property that is zoned 1 -1 to Urban Reserve. Minnesota Pipeline is asking the Planning Commission to leave the property designated as industrial as changing it would cause a decline in its property value. The company recognizes this is an area that has challenges with access and extending utilities, but any developer that comes in would have to deal with those issues. He stated if was re- guided to urban reserve, they could try to rezone it if an industrial user wanted to purchase the land, but they would also need to get a comprehensive plan amendment. He asked the Planning Commission to not change the designation of the 28 -acre parcel owned by Minnesota Pipeline from industrial to urban re- serve. He introduced Jennifer Sweeney from Minnesota Pipeline and stated that they would answer any questions. Reese asked if re- guiding to urban reserve would give the property owner more options when they sell the property. McCool responded that the only use that seems feasible to the market is industrial. Due to access issues, the property would not work for retail or commer- cial uses that need traffic. The property is not appropriate for residential, so that leaves an industrial use. Thiede asked what type of industrial user could locate there if it was left as in- dustrial. Blin responded the type of industrial user would be hard to determine because ac- cess is very poor and there is no sanitary sewer service available. Brittain stated that the access to this area is extremely poor and believes that re- guiding the property to urban re- serve would have less of a negative impact on the community and infrastructure in that area. Tharbes stated that it makes sense to leave it as industrial. Larger industrial users could af- ford the costs for upgrading infrastructure and that would provide more jobs. Thiede agreed with Brittain. McCool stated that there would be infrastructure issues for any type of devel- opment in that area. Tharbes made a motion to table discussion on re- guiding the industrial parcel near the petroleum tank farm on 85th Street. There was no second to the motion. Willhite made a motion to re -guide the industrial parcel near the petroleum tank farm on 85th Street from industrial to urban reserve. Rostad seconded. Jamie De La Cruz, 9049 Janie Avenue South, stated that he is employed by Marathon Pe- troleum Company as a Human Resources Manager, and asked that the discussion be tabled for further discussion. He also asked for clarification on why the proponents of the change are seeking to freeze industrial development on site and /or to allow residential use of that property. Blin responded that the purpose is to re -guide the property from industrial to urban reserve. The consequence of that would be to preclude any future expansion of industrial uses. De La Cruz welcomes the opportunity to discuss this matter further with the Council. Motion to approve the re- guiding of the property from industrial to urban reserve passed on a 6 -to -2 vote (Messick, Tharbes). Tharbes believes these entities are paying a fair amount of taxes to the city and they need to be heard. Messick stated that he cannot see any other use for the property than industrial and thinks the city should keep the status quo because that is what the property owners expected. Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 5 of 12 Blin summarized the information on re- guiding a 4.67 -acre parcel located at 7580 Harkness Avenue from Low Density to Medium Density Residential. He recommended that the Plan- ning Commission recommend that the City Council direct a small area study to look at the entire vicinity, including Oakwood Park. Japs supported the position recommended by staff. A comprehensive plan is a broad -based plan and this request is very specific, so he believes it is reasonable to address this request at a later time. Thiede made a motion to postpone consideration of a land use change of a 4.67 -acre parcel located at 7580 Harkness Avenue from Low Density to Medium Density Resi- dential until a small area study has been completed. Hofland seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8- to -0). Blin noted that there is another area requested for consideration of a land use change. An interested party submitted a letter requesting changing the proposed land use designation for the Langdon area, which is south of Highway 61 and east of Jamaica Avenue. He ex- plained that Langdon was platted back in the 1870s. The entire area east of Langdon is owned by 3M. In the previous plan, this area was guided for mixed -use development be- cause the proposed Red Rock commuter rail corridor runs along the Canadian Pacific tracks just south of Langdon, and part of the proposal was to create a commuter rail station in that area and develop around it with a mix of commercial and residential uses. The area has fairly good visibility and access to the regional highway system. That land use guidance is continued in the current plan, but the plan now creates growth staging areas. The site pro- posed for the land use change is in stage 3, which would follow development of the Cottage View area. There are currently no utilities in the Langdon area. A letter from a representative of a party who has an interest in the Majestic Ballroom site, which is currently a vacant piece, and wishes to develop it into a sports club facility, was sent to the Commission. Messick asked if the Majestic is now on well and septic. Blin responded yes. He explained that the Minnesota Department of Health tested the wells in the area and all tested positive for PFOAs. A fitness center would need to be connected to city utilities. He noted that the Public Works building, which is just north of the Majestic site, is connected to city utilities. Serving the Langdon area could require lift stations. Reese noted that the public hearing is still open for comments. Brian McCool, Fredrickson & Byron, land use counsel for Anxon, Inc., who is proposing to construct a Gold's Gym on this location. This project has also been proposed to the Eco- nomic Development Authority. He stated that the project is ready to proceed almost immedi- ately. He stated that they have three significant concerns regarding the comp plan update, including utility staging that could take five to ten years before this area can be served. He noted that utilities are stubbed less than 400 feet from where they would need the utilities to be and Anxon would work to get those extended. The utilities could be stubbed for use by other property owners in the area. The second concern they have is the language about needing a master plan of the entire Langdon area prior to development of this parcel. Their final concern is the wait and see approach that the comprehensive plan is setting for the Langdon area, which is an area that commercial developers have identified. as ready to be Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 6 of 12 developed. He requested that the Planning Commission recommend not putting this area into staging area 3 and giving this area more prominent utility staging. Paul Abdo, Anxon Inc., Minneapolis, explained that they have been working with the city for almost a year on this project. He stated that he has offered to pay to extend the utilities to the area. He displayed some preliminary development plans for a lifestyle center for the area that includes Gold's Gym, a transit station, big box retailer, junior box retailer, and other retail opportunities. Thiede asked what makes the Majestic site attractive for developers as there are currently no utilities and it is on a dead end road. Abdo responded exposure from the highway. There was a question as to how something in the Comp Plan 2030 is going to affect what they are wanting to do now. Abdo responded that if the comp plan stays the way it has been pro- posed, development would not occur for five to ten years due to the staging for the utilities. Hofland asked about the timing for the Red Rock corridor line. Blin responded that is not go- ing to happen for at least ten to twenty years. Willhite stated that what is there now is an eyesore and believes this project will be an asset to the community. Olsen commented about how rare it is to find a developer who is willing to financially support the extension of the utili- ties. He believes this is a good proposal. Kjellberg disagreed, noting that most of the city is based on planning and he believes this proposal is too premature for that area. He ex- pressed concern about access as there is only one way in and out of the site. Thiede asked how involved the EDA has been with this proposal. Blin stated that they reviewed the plans a few months ago and looked favorably on it. Thiede asked if the city can make exceptions to the staging listed in the comp plan if a proposal comes up. Blin responded yes. Thiede asked if the utilities would just serve the Gold's Gym or the whole area. Blin stated that is hard to determine, noting that existing homeowners in Langdon may want to hook up to city water. A motion was made and seconded to move the Majestic Ballroom property into staging area 1 and to designate the land use as commercial. Brittain asked about the location of the parcel and what impact this would have on a master plan for the Langdon area. Blin pointed out the parcel on the map and where the city water lines end. McCool summarized their request to move the property into staging area 1 and to strike the language requiring a master plan as it relates to that parcel. Reese asked how that parcel would be designated in the land use plan. Blin responded commercial. Thiede stated that he does not support re- guiding only the Majestic site and not the rest of the Langdon area. McCool responded that given the aspirations for this property with the rail line coming through in the future, bringing this development in ultimately is going to elevate the value of the homes t in that area. Messick stated that supports the proposal because it would rede- velop an area that is not generating much revenue for the city and would also create jobs. Thiede stated that he could support the project if the entire Langdon area was put into stag- ing area 1 so that the whole area could develop and neighboring property owners could have access to city water, but he does not want see an isolated parcel of land and building. Tharbes agreed with Thiede. He then asked how many jobs they anticipate the gym would created. Abdo responded 13 to 25 jobs could be created. Motion to change the land use designation for the Majestic property to commercial and to move that parcel into staging area 1 passed on a 7 -to -1 vote ( Thiede). Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 7 of 12 Thiede explained that he believes it is poor planning to isolate that parcel. He could support it if the whole Langdon area was taken out of staging area 3 and put it into staging area 1. Blin summarized the staff report regarding the term "Urban Reserve" land use designation. He stated that a suggestion was to substitute the generic term "Transitional Planning Area" for Urban Reserve. Another suggestion would be to call it Rural Reserve, as we are holding it as rural land in reserve for something else. He asked if the Commission and Committee had other suggestions. Brittain stated that he would have a concern calling it rural because people would assume that it would be low density. He does support Transitional Planning Area. Rostad also be- lieves using the term Transitional would make sense to him. Japs stated that it could be called anything and asked what the definition is. Blin explained that the basic concepts are no less than 20 -acre lot sizes, it signifies that someday this land will develop, and prior to development a master plan should be prepared for that area. Hofland made a motion to name those areas "Transitional Planning Areas" using the definition for Urban Reserve. Messick seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Reese asked if there was any further discussion on the overall plan. He stated that the public hearing was still open and asked if anyone wanted to address the Planning Commission. Being that there were no further comments from the public, Reese closed the public hearing. Messick asked if the Council could address the Langdon area to accelerate the master plan for the area. There was a motion and second to approve the comprehensive plan with an amend- ment to add language about accelerating the planning of the Langdon area. Thiede asked what this plan for the Langdon area would include. Brittain responded location of roadways, train station, commercial, and parking. Thiede suggesting moving the Langdon area to staging area 2 and develop it as the Cottage View area develops. He asked why the Langdon area could not be moved from staging area 3 to staging area 2. Blin stated that it would be more efficient to plan the whole area. The argument for keeping the rest of Langdon in staging area 3 is to preserve the future station site. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). 6.2 Fireworks Sales at 80th Street Village Green — Planning Case No. ICUP08 -015 Hometown Fireworks has applied for an interim conditional use permit to allow tempo- rary sales of fireworks in the parking lot at 80th Street Village Green Retail Center, 7155 — 80th Street. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the report. He indicated that the prohibition of the use of a generator would be added as a condition. Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 8 of 12 Thiede questioned the location of the tent in relation to overflow parking that occurs from Dairy Queen. Willhite shared Thiede's concerns. McCool responded that the parking lot is not on Dairy Queen's property. Willhite asked if there was room between the fence and the parking area to locate the tent. Thiede suggested several tent relocation possibilities. McCool identified the different tent lo- cations on an air photograph of the site. Sight lines for the private drive were discussed by the Commission. The applicant from Hometown Fireworks indicated that he felt the proposed tent location was the best location. Turning the tent would take the same amount or more parking, and moving it closer to the building would block parking for the building's tenant. Reese opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Reese closed the public hearing. Motion to approve the interim conditional use permit for one year passed on a 7 -to -1 vote. Thiede stated that he voted against the application because he thought the tent should be turned 90 degrees. 6.3 Tradehome Shoes Building Expansion — Case No. V08 -016 Tradehome Shoes, 8300 — 97th Street South, has applied for variances to the minimum off- street parking requirements and to the maximum building coverage requirement to allow for a 3,000 square foot building expansion. McCool summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the report. Poncin asked about the parcel of land east of the property. McCool responded that the city owns that land and a stormwater basin is located there. Rostad asked if the addition would cause the loss of parking. McCool that no parking would be removed. Reese opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Reese closed the public hearing. Tharbes made a motion to approve the variances to minimum off - street parking re- quirements and maximum building coverage requirements based on the findings of and subject to the conditions listed below. Hofland seconded. Findings of Fact A. If the City determines that additional parking is necessary to serve the site, parking spaces can be added in the area shown as demonstrated parking on the site plan. B. The property abuts land owned by the City of Cottage Grove that is used for drain- age and storage of stormwater. These areas provide green space and open space around the existing and proposed building addition. Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 9 of 12 Conditions of Approval 1. The additional parking spaces are not required to be constructed at this time. The City will determine if additional on -site parking is needed if unauthorized parking is occurring on neighboring properties or the City receives complaints about off -site parking. The City will monitor parking on the property and notify the property owner of potential parking problems that must be resolved. If additional parking is required, the property owner must apply for a building permit to construct the ad- ditional parking spaces and provide the City with a construction schedule to com- plete this work. 2. A building permit must be issued by the City before any construction can begin. 3. The exterior materials for the proposed addition are similar in design and color of the existing office building. 4. Any landscaping materials that are removed or damaged during construction must be replaced someplace else on the site. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). 6.4 G -Will Center Parking Lot — Case No. V08 -17 United Properties has applied for a variance to parking standards at G -Will Center, 8118 Hadley Avenue South. Burbank summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the report. Willhite asked why a sidewalk is not constructed within the green space along 80th Street, between Hadley Avenue and the west access drive into the G -Will retail center. She com- mented that it would be better to have pedestrians crossing at the Hadley Avenue /80th Street intersection. Brandon Champeau, representing the G -Will Retail Center, explained that they purchased the Center approximately a year and a half ago and have always intended to improve the building's fagade, parking layout, and provide more landscaping improvements. He agreed with the pedestrian crossing issue and stated that they will evaluate the possibility incorpo- rating a sidewalk along the south side of their parking lot, noting that the amount of green space between 80th Street and the parking lot would have to be reduced, the monument sign might have to be repositioned, and the proposed water feature at the southeast corner of their parking lot would have to be subdued. The locations of sidewalks within the proposed Norris Square project south of 80th Street and their connections with the G -Will project were described. The Planning Commission ex- pressed their support for the overall renovation plans. Reese opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Reese closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 10 of 12 Thiede moved to approve a variance for 193 parking spaces versus the 246 parking spaces required by City Ordinance, decreasing the parking stall size from 9 feet by 20 feet to 9 feet by 18 feet, and reducing the parking setback requirements based on the following findings of fact: 1. Variance from Title 11 -3 -9F of the code to allow for 193 parking stalls versus the re- quire amount of 246. Findings: a. The existing site conditions b. The proposed site plan would provide for an increase to 193 parking stalls. c. Several of these new stalls will be located closer to the Anchor tenant en- trance thus reducing vehicle pedestrian conflict. d. Historical data identifies that the site has functioned sufficiently with the reduced parking ratio, and has been adequate even during times of 100 percent tenant occupancy. 2. Variance from Title 11 -3 -9E of the code for a decrease in the face to face stall sizes on site from 9 feet by 20 feet to 9 feet by 18 feet. Findings: a. The existing site conditions b. The current dimensions are 9 feet by 20 feet. c. The proposed site plan would provide for an increase in parking stall size to 9 feet by 18 feet. d. Historical data identifies that the site has functioned sufficiently with the re- duced stall depth, and has been adequate even during times of 100 percent tenant occupancy. 3. Variance from Title 11 -3 -9D of the code for a reduction in setbacks as proposed on the site plan sheet C3.0 dated 512212008. Findings: a. The existing site conditions. b. The parking around the entire perimeter of the site currently does not meet the ordinance criteria. c. The proposed site plan actually increases the setback along the southern property line. d. Historical data identifies that the site has functioned sufficiently with the re- duced setbacks. e. The site landscaping is increased of due to the setback deviations. Messick seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (8 -0 vote). 6.5 Renewal by Andersen Code Amendment — Case Nos. TA08 -018 and SP08 -019 Andersen Windows, Inc. has applied for a zoning text amendment to allow outdoor prod- uct testing as an accessory use in the 1 -1, Limited Industry, and 1 -2, General Industrial, zoning districts, and for a site plan review of an outdoor testing facility at 9900 Jamaica Avenue South. Blin summarized the staff report and recommended approval of the zoning text amendment and the site plan review with two changes including moving the test house to another loca- tion and some minor modifications to the landscape plan, subject to the conditions stipulated Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 11 of 12 in the staff report. He stated that staff has discussed this proposal with the neighboring prop- erty owners and none had any objections to it. Rostad asked if the test house would block the view of the windows out in the open. Blin re- sponded yes. Greg Brooklyn, Andersen Corporation, 9495 Mendell Road, Stillwater, asked if there were any questions. Rostad stated that he would, rather look at the test house than the windows out in the open. Brooklyn stated that the house would be a tastefully done facility. Reese opened the public hearing. No one spoke. Reese closed the public hearing. A motion and second were made to approve the zoning text amendment and site plan review with changes to re- locate the test house and minor modifications to the land- scaping plans, subject to the conditions listed below. 1. All site and landscape improvements must conform to the plans submitted with ap- plication SP08 -019. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). Discussion Items None. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of April 28, 2008. Being that there were no corrections to the April 28, 2008 minutes, they were accepted as distributed. Reports 9.1 Recap of City Council Meetings Blin reviewed the items discussed by the City Council at their meetings on May 7 and 21, 2008. 9.2 Response to Planning Commission Inquiries None. 9.3 Planning Commission Requests Willhite asked for an update on the Culver's project. Blin stated that the closing was sched- uled for June 4 and they will be ready to start construction immediately after. Blin reported that there is no business for the June 23 meeting, so staff is suggesting that that meeting be canceled. The Commission concurred. Blin then stated that Folch has provided a publication on walkable communities for the Commission's information. Planning Commission Minutes June 2, 2008 Page 12 of 12 Adjournment Messick made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Hofland seconded. Motion passed unanimously (8 -to -0 vote). The meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m.