Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-12-02 PACKET 04.A.I.f2EQl1EST (7F CITI� COUNCIL R,C°fION COUIVCIL ,4GENDA r�EE o�Enn # DRTE i2f2/88 �. j . PREPAF2ED �Y Community Development Kim L.indquist ORIGINATING DEPAFtTMEfVT STAFF AtJTHOR «..�����akA4.ffi�4��kmm..�.a« <44gA�.���a.a�x.,... • , � ' � ` E2�ceive and place on file the approved minutes for the Planning Commission's meeting of October 26, 1998. � �. � . , � � . • •�, *- � � •' )• �1 • • ; � . � . � ' % •' � "' "' t ' ' • � ' ■ • � � � •- � ..r• �• ■ � � �� ■ REVIEWED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ . .� . . * APPROVED � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DENIED ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • � s s-� . _ � �, � , • • � � • � • • - • •�- . ..� y� w•. ��n �'.. .. .� -_�m� _� / t / Ci4y,Qdministratc�r Date ������a����,�«����a.�a.�«.���.�«� « ��.�������*t�« �au�c�L �� - r����: ❑ ����aov�� � ������ ❑ ��ra��� a�:��tavrs�rt.tvat�dc�as9s�c;rrrc;ou,�c�a rc r.�;nut�.ac� City of Cottage Grove Planning Commission October 26, 1998 Pursuant to due cail and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the Pianning Commission was duly heid at City Hall, 7516 - 80th Street South, Cottage Grove, Minnesota on the 26th day of October, 1998, in the Council Chamber. Call to Order Chairperson Auge called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ��.1 Members Present: Jon Auge, Ken Boyden, Gien Brown, Phil Foster, Herb Japs, Glen Kieven, Jeff Podoli, Pat Rice, Richard Sawyer Staff Present: Kim Lindquist, Community Development Director John McCool, Senior Planner John Burbank, Associate Pianner Approvai of Agenda Auge stated that Case CUP98-28, Roger's Auto Parts and Cecil Martin, has been with- drawn by the appiicant. A{etter regarding the withdrawal was circulated to the P{anning Commission members. Boyden moved to approve fhe agenda with the change. Japs seconded. Mofion carried unanimously. Open Forum Chairperson Auge asked if anyone wished to address the Planning Commission on any non-agenda item. No one spoke. Chair's Explanation of the Public Hearing Process Chairperson Auge explained the purpose of ths Planning Commission, which serves in an advisory capacity to the City Council, and the City Council makes ail 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 recard. • ' , •, 6.1 CASE CUP98-28 — Withdrawn by appticant Minutes of October 26, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 2 of 11 6.2 CASE CUP98-39 The South Washington County Schooi District has applied far a conditional use permit to construct an addition to Crestview Elementary School, 7830 — SOth Street South. Burbank summarized the staff report and recommended approval subject to the conditions losted in the staff report. The applicant stated that they had no further information to share with the Commission. Auge opened fhe public hearing. No one spoke. The public hearing was c/osed. Boyden moved to approve fhe app/icafion subject to the conditions /isted below. Rice seconded. 1. A building permif and commercial plan review packet shal! be completed, sub- mitfed, and approved by the City prior to the commencement of any consf�uction activities. 2. Silt fencing sha!/ be installed around the entire perimefer of the building at the consfrucfion limits. 3. Addifional engineering details thaf minimize sformwater drainage across all sidewa/ks near the building addition shall be completed, submitted, and approved by the City prior to fhe commencement of any construcfion acfivities. 4. Tree planting andprotection acfivities shall be in accordance with the insfruc- tions detai/ed on the submitted preliminary site plan (sheet L-2). 5. A revised landscaping plan detailing the addition of four deciduous over story frees 4 six foot coniferous trees plus 24 buiiding perimeter shru6s and associated mulch or rock to fhe existing landscaping on fhe fiont of the sife. ln addition, the juniper shrubs that were removed in front of the building sha!/ be replaced, as �hey a�fed as parking lot perimeter screening iov ti�e �eo�iP loP. The revised land- scaping plan sha// be submitted to the City and approved prior to the re%ase of a building permit. 6. The applicant shalt submit a bona fide cost estimate of the landscaping improve- ments and relocafions. A/etter of credit in the amount of 150 percent of such es- timafe shal/ be submitted fo and approved by the City. Upon completio» of the landscaping improvements, the applicant shall submii an as built survey of all planting locafions and inform the City in wrifing that said improvements have been completed. The City shall refain the financial guarantee for a period of one yea� from the date of notice to insuse the survival of tJ�e plantings. 7. A!l new raof top mechanical equipment on the site shal! be screened prior fo the cerfificate of occupancy for the addition. Minutes of October 26, 1998, Pianning Commission Meeting Page 3 of 17 8. A trash enclosure fhat meets the criteria esfab/ished in section 28-39 shall be provided for all exterior trash and recyclable containers. Construction of said enclosure shall be comp/eted prior to fhe re/ease of a certificate of occupancy. Podoll asked about the traffic studies that were done for the 80th Street project regarding parents picking up and dropping off children. He wants the City Councii to be aware of the traffic problems and asked that consideration be given to switching the drop off area ta Hinton rather than 80th Street. Japs stated that he has the same concerns about the tra�c and wondered if the Pubiic Safety Commission had looked at these concerns. Burbank stated that the staff report was submitted to the department head for review and dissemi- nation to the commission and that no comment was received from them on this application. Podoli stated that the police department is aware of the problem as they have had a patrol car parked on Hinton to direct some of the traffic for the children crossing Hinton to get to the school. He reiterated his concern about the traffic back ups on 80th Street from parents dropping off and picking up students. Auge clarified that staff should inciude this issue in their report to the City Council but not as a condition of approval for this application. Ntike Vogel, Support Services Director for the South Washington County School District, stated that safety was a bigger concern prior to the addition of the new parking lot to the northwest of the buiiding. The purpose of the parking lot was to segregate bus traffic from citizen traffic. The rear parking lot is used for bus traffic and the front exclusively for drop- ofF/pick-up and staff parking. Moving the tra�c onto Hinton would create the same prob- lems as before with both buses and cars utilizing the same parking lot. He further stated that the turn lanes are beneficial, as the line of cars does not back up into the main lanes of traffic. Podoll stated that he would like to see the traffic pattems reversed — the buses using the 80th Street entrance and vehicie traffic using the rear parking lot. Podoli asked if the addi- tion would add more students to the school, thereby increasing the traffic problems. Vogel stated that the expansion at Crestview is not to add more students but to allow for class size reduction. Boyden asked if the addition wouid affect the parking area in the rear. Vogel answered that it would not. Mofion passed unanimously. 6.3 CASE CUP98-41 Sunbelt Sales and Leasing, Inc. has applied for a conditionai use permit to remove an existing structure and to construct a 35.5-foot by 51-foot commercial building at 7510 and 7528 East Point Douglas Road. lindquist summarized the stafF report and recommended approval subject to the conditions stipulated in the staff report. Japs asked what the zoning classification is on the southeast end af the property. McCool responded that the commercial site itself is zoned B-2 and the vacant lot to the southeast is aiso zoned B-2. Minutes of October 26, 1998, Pianning Commission Meeting Page 4 of 11 Judd Beattie, Sunbelt Sales and leasing, 7510 East Point Dougias Road, stated that he is improving an existing business but not significantly changing anything. He stated that he is willing to work out the detaiis with staff regarding the landscaping requirements. The ex- isting property is already irrigated. He stated that he wanted to discuss a few minor issues regarding the conditions. Condition #3 is a compromise from prior approvals to not use the cars for advertising. He stated that the vehicles are the inventory and that he sometimes needs to be able to paint advertising on a windshield. He stated that every other car deal- ership in the state is allowed to do so and he wouid like more leeway on this condition. Beattie stated that he is concerned about combining the lots. His perspective is that the second conditional use permit after he purchased the Pineridge property was to deal with that property, which was two parcels at the time. As a compromise during that discussion, it was agreed that the two lots at 7528 East Point Dougias Road should be combined. He stated that his attorney advised him that it is in the business's best interest to keep the two properties (7510 and 7528 East Point Dougias Road) separate. Beattie mentioned that he already closed two curb cuts voluntarily and he intends to keep at least o�e of the remaining curb cuts. They always keep the one onto Hefner Gosed with cars; it is used to unload cars from semis and for snowplowing. They aiso intend to keep the farthest one done by the empty lot closed with cars and to have that one also availabie for snowplowing. if the lots are not combined, he believes that two curb cuts per lot are reasonable. Beattie then addressed the sign issue. He would like to keep both signs. Beattie stated that he had no problem with striping the parking lot for customer and handi- capped parking but doesn't want to stripe for the inventory as they park the cars in all sorts of different directions. Beattie stated that he has talked to the five adjacent neighbors and they have ali signed a petition in support of the project and consider it a reasonable use of the property. He stated that one concern of the neighbors was deflecting the light better and he has agreed to do so. He reiterated his belief that this upgrade is a significant improvement and that what he is asking for is reasonable. He believes he has broad-based support. Japs asked �eattie what the business reasons were for not combining the two praperties. Beattie responded that it would affect personal and corporate taxes, there is a lease agreement between the two properties, there are some savings by not doing that, and there are some liabilities. Japs then asked if Beattie owned the properfies. Beattie responded that he owns both pieces of the property but one is leased to the corporation and the other is personally owned. Podoll stated that in Resolution 94-245, condition #10 states that "the applicant shail combine the two lots of record into one taxing parcel and that a certified copy from the Washington County Assessor Treasurers Office shali be provided to the Planning Division before December 31, 1994." He further stated that this provision was part of the resolution four years ago. Beattie stated that he thought the bank had been done this during the title search but it hadn't. His understanding was that the two Pots referred to the two on the Pineridge property, which he personaliy combined aYthe County. He stated that Lots 12 and 13 were the Pineridge lots and have been combined, and Lot 11 is Sunbelt. He stated that the CUP he applied for in 1994 was for the Pineridge property. McCool stated that the in!ent was for the Pineridge and Sunbelt properties to be one parcel. As a part of the ap- Minutes of October 26, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 5 of 11 plication in 1994, there was a text amendment to ailow automobile dealerships in the B-2 zoning districts. As a concession, the description said that they had to have a service bay in arder to have that business. The service bay is on the Sunbelt property and if he is going to display on both parceis, it had to be combined into one business. Beattie stated that he thought that compromise was to combine the two Pineridge properties. Auge clari- fied that back when the application was reviewed, there were three taxing parcels and now there are two and the recommendation called for a combination of two taxing parcels but there were actually three. Boyden asked staff why they want one parcel. Kleven answered that without combining the two parcels into one, he will vote for deniai because it is a non-conforming use. The Sun- belt site does not have the service bay it is required to have. Also, if the two parcels are not combined, there wiil be a green space setback running down the property line because there is nothing in the ordinance to allow the city to do anything different. He was on the Commission in 1994 when the Pineridge Floral parcel was purchased and the businesses were combined, and the clear intent was to have one parcel for the business. He stated that he would have to regrettably vote no on the application if the parceis are not combined. Beattie asked if the indoor garage that he is adding would meet the criteria. Podoil stated that according to the staff report, the indoor garage was for storing inoperable vehicles. Beattie stated that it is used to clean and service vehicles. Podoll asked Beattie if he was planning to abolish the garage on the old part of Sunbelt. Beattie responded that ne� year he would like to upgrade it externally to match the new building. He further stated that they are removing the canopy in front. Podoll then asked if Beattie was planning to remove that service bay. Beattie stated that they would not as they need it for servicing and cleaning cars. Boyden asked about the curb cuts. He is concerned about public safety vehicles getting onto the property. He stated that those curb cuts should remain so they can be used for snow removal. He stated that he did not think that the City should tell businesses how to paint their driveways for parking. Japs asked about condition #3, regarding pinwheeis, pennants, streamers, and other atten- tian-getting devices. He asked Beattie what condition #3 wouid prevent him from doing that he would like to do. Beattie responded that he wants to write certain information on the cars. Japs asked if writing on the vehicles is prohibited under condition #3. Lindquist responded that it is. Kieven remarked that the first four conditions were from the previous conditional use per� mit. He further stated that he has no problem with allowing a tastefui ramp and allowing Beattie to do standard markings on the windows, but he does not want to aliow propped open hoods and signs. Podoli stated that the curb cuts should be left as they are because the curbs in that area have been recentiy replaced and it makes no sense to tear them out. Auge opened !he publ)c hearing. Richard Fearing, Village Transmission, 7470 East Point Douglas Road, stated that on the Hefner side, which is the road that spiits the two businesses, there is a continual problem with on-street parking and congestion that continuaily blocks one of the entrances to his Minutes of October 26, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 6 of 11 property. He asked how many spaces the city will require Beattie to have for customer parking. He stated that the curb cut on Hefner is usuaily blocked off, and customers park on the street and walk up to the building. He stated that the plan would be a site improve- ment but his biggest concern is the parking issue. Lindquist responded that the ordinance would have a requirement for customer parking based on the square footage of the build- ing. Staff didn't do a calculation because the applicant has not presented a parking plan yet, but a firm aliocation would be made that meets the ordinance criteria in a designated area. Sawyer asked how this would be enforced once the project is done. Lindquist stated that the city couid check on that periodicaily. Boyden stated that unless it is posted on the street, peopie will park wherever they want whether there are spaces designated on the property or not. Podoll asked Fearing how many curb cuts he has for his building. Fearing stated that he has three — two on East Point Douglas and one on Hefner. Auge closed the public hearing. Lindquist stated that staff has some long-term concerns about the curb cuts. If the property turns over, the new property owner is entitled to those four curb cuts. The opportunity to remove curb cuts when combining lots are slim, and if the City doesn't take this opportunity, future users have that entitlement and there probably won't be the same commitment to block the cuts from a different type of user. Boyden stated that owner would be able to sell off one parcel if the property was kept as two parcels, but if they were combined, he wouid have to sell the entire parcei. Lindquist answered that he could do a lot sp(it or it could be sold in its entirety. Auge clarified that condition #3 should keep the language that pinwheels, pennants, streamers, and other attention attracting devices are prohibited. Antenna pennants would be allowed and that the language that wouid not ailow writing on the windows of the vehi- cles shouid be removed. The Commission agreed that this would be acceptable. Auge brought up condition #7 regarding the number of curb cuts. Staff recommendation is to ciose two; some Commissioners have suggested leaving them ali open. Foster stated that he thinks the four curb cuts snould remain. Brown believes that the four curb cuts are needed. Kleven wondered why three entrances ofF Easf Point Douglas Road were neces- sary for a business. Auge stated that if ramping were aliowed with the landscaping, the net effect wouid likely be to ciose the center curb cut. Lindquist stated that the installation of a concrete ramp would biock half the access to the most western curb cut on East Point Douglas Road. Beattie stated that he planned to modify the ramp by buiiding one sideways. He also pointed out that it should have been centered better on the plan. He further stated that snow plowing is more difficult at a car dealership because the vehicles for sale need to be moved. Brown suggested that a compromise be reached to have three curb cuts rather than two or four. Sawyer asked what the downside is to having four curb cuts as it gives more flexibility for the current business and more flexibility in the future when it is sold. Sawyer stated that �3eattie is biocking tv✓✓o cuts with c�rs �n display. He wondered what the problem was with having the curb cut there. Lindquist stated that the number of curb cuts is related to a traffic safety concern, which would allow too many vehicles to merge onto a higher volume road (ike East Point Douglas in too a short distance. The current user may not be a high traffic generator, but future users may generate more traffic. Typically, con- Minutes of October 26, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 7 of 11 sistent with the comprehensive plan, you find communities trying to limit the number of direct access points onto major and minor arterial streets and collector roads due to traffic safety interests. Sawyer asked why all those cuts were put in originally. Lindquist re- sponded that they were two separate parce�s. Kleven suggested that it be required that only two curb cuts be allowed to be open at any one time and the other two must be closed during business hours. Lindquist stated that unless you require some other approval in the future if this business ceases to exist, you are not going to have that opportunity. Lindquist further stated that there has been a Gear direction previousiy for landscaping and with that many curb cuts, the opportunities are dramaticaliy reduced. Kleven stated that right now there is the opportunity for landscaping in the middle of the parcel because there are two parcels. Podoll stated that especiaily on Beattie's property, the old Pineridge parcel, is that it is right where East Point Douglas goes from two lanes to four lanes, which would have an impact. That is where traffic widens out. He further stated that he doesn't have a problem with it, but he hates seeing tearing into curb, gutter, and asphalt that has been replaced within the iast four years to close something off because there may be problems in the future. He has fewer problems with it as long as it becomes one parcel (condition #5}. If it becomes one parcei and a lot split comes up in the future, then the curb cuts could be addressed at that point. Japs asked whe� this wouid be going to the City Council. Lindquist responded at the November 4 meeting. Japs stated that if there was more time, that portion could possibiy be sent past the Public Safety Commission and see what they want to recommend. lindquist stated that the Pubiic Safety Commission has not seen the application because Mr. Beattie did not get it in on time. Auge then brought up the issue of landscaping. He referred the Commission to Exhibits l and M, which are staff conceptual landscaping alternatives. He asked to what extent does the Commission want to provide direction on the scope of landscaping for the discussions between Mr. Beattie and the staff. Boyden asked if that means the city wants 10 more feet of parking space added to the existing landscaping. Lindquist stated that aii the green space for the property is currentiy located on the city right-of-way and what staff is pro- posing is that a portion of the property be allocated to landscaping. Beattie stated that about five of that is theirs and that they have irrigated alI the way out to the curb. Auge stated that the rear green space is not on the city's right-of-way. Boyden asked if because the landscaping is currentiy on the easement, staff wants it moved onto Mr. Beattie's prop- erty. Lindquist responded that the approvai in 1994 clearly stated that the city was looking for significant improvements to the landscaping when the conditional use permit came about. Boyden asked what the differences are between 1994 and now, and stated that it is much better than it ever was. Lindquist stated that amount of green space allocated is the same as was required in 1994. Boyden then asked if staff is recommending adding another 10 feet of green space from the existing curb where they are parking cars now. Lindquist stated that staff is looking at increasing the green space at the front of the prap- erty. Boyden wondered if that would leave enough room for parking vehicles and for emergency vehicles to get between the inventory and the building. Auge asked what the distance was between the property line and the new buiiding. Lindquist answered that it wouid be 39 feet for the new building, which leaves 29 feet. Beattie stated that this would impact the flow pattern if cars ere angle parked at the curb and customers puli up behind a car they want to see. There is currently room for two cars behind those cars, and if that were cut back 10 feet, there would not be room. Minutes of October 26, 1998, Pianning Commission Meeting Page 8 of 11 Fearing asked if staff wants Beattie to add 10 feet from the curbing on Point Douglas, be- cause he just recurbed his property iast year and that was required of him in order to get his building permit. He asked what the totai setback would be. Lindquist responded 20 feet from street curb to parking lot. Japs asked Fearing if the landscaping shouid be con- sistent with his. Fearing stated that it should be. Japs stated that if this was required in the past, it should be required now for consistency. Kleven stated that the parcei should be consistent with the area based on the ordinance unless there are variance requests. Auge asked if the staff recommendations in Exhibits L and M meet the ordinance criteria. Lindquist stated that it does not. McCooi stated that the ordinance requires a 20-foot set- back for parking areas from the property line, not the curb of the street. Fearing stated that he had to be consistent with all the other businesses in the area. Kleven asked about the details of the Village Transmission project. McCool stated that he was not familiar with Village Transmission. Burbank stated that that project had been worked on by Mr. Beane. Auge clarified that the purpose of the discussion is to provide direction for the staif and Mr. Beattie regarding landscape planning. Kleven stated if the ordinance criteria were looked at, it would be found that the city has already compromised greatly. Kleven further stated that historicaily when the Commission looked at trying to adjust the landscape ordinance in regard to commercial properties, the Councii was hesitant and that is the reason it took so long to develop the ordinance. He stated that if this is a give and take proposition, he wanted to point out that the landscape requirements being put in piace now is aiready a gift. Boyden asked how much space is between the building and the parked cars due to the island that juts into the property by the curb cut on Hefner from the conceptual landscape alternative. Lindquist reiterated that the conceptual plans (Exhibits L and M) were inciuded with the stafE report to give some ideas on landscaping, but staff will not design Mr. Beattie's landscape plan. The intent was to present some options to the Commission so they couid give direction to staff. She stated that the Commission does not have to pick one of the options. Lindquist further stated that in reading the documentation from 1994, emphasis was placed on significant landscape improvements, and the staff understands that to mean significant and not minor, which she considers the proposal presented. She fhen sfated that if staff and Bea4tie cannot come 4o agreemen4, sfafiF wili bring fhe plan back to the Planning Commission. Kieven asked if there was a difference between what was proposed by the Planning Commission in 1994 and what the Council finally adopted. He stated that the city needs to be reasonabie about the use of the property but the land- scaped area needs to be increased. Landscaping shoufd be consistent in the commercial area from Super America down to the Sunbeit site. Auge stated that he supports Boyden's suggestion and thought that improvements should be made on the portion by the vacant lot, on the area where property connects with the residential area, and in the front so it would be consistent with the rest of the commercial area. Kleven moved fo approve the application subject to the 14 conditions listed below wifh the following modifications to those condffions: • Condition #3 — De%te the word "wfndows" and leave the remainder of fhe condition lntacf. • Condition #5— Remains as /Isted. Minutes of October 26, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 9 of 11 • Condition #7— Add language to require that only two curb cuts be open for pubtic access during business hours and the applicant can use reasonable means to c/ose the other two. • Condition #8 — The resolution should be worded to ensure fhat the landscap- ing improvements for this property would be similar or equal to the business area surrounding it, from SuperAmerica to the Sunbelf property. Japs seconded the motion. 1) Ail vehicles dispiayed or parked oufside shall be in good running condition. Wrecked or inoperable vehicles shall not be stored on the site, unless they are inside the building. 2) F�rterior /ighting for security purposes sha// deflect light away f�om adjoining residential properties and the public sfreet. 3) Windows, roof, hood, efc. of vehicles shall nof be used for displaying advertising media. This shall not be consfrued to prohibit informatioNwarranty/p�ice lisf on a window of the vehicie. Pinwheels, pennants, streamers and other attenfion- aftracting devices are prohibited. Antenna pen�ants would be allowed. 4) The applicanf shall maintain a solid fence a! the rear property line. 5) The applicanf shall combine fhree /ofs of record into one ta�ring parcel fo bring the site into conformance with ordinance standards. The three /ofs to be com- bined are PlN 17-027-21-13-0093, PlN 17-02T-29-13-0094 and PIN 17-027-21-13- 0095. A cerfified copy of fhe lot combination from the Washington County Assessor?reasurers office sha!! be provided fo the Planning Division prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new office building. 6) Aillandscaping and irrigation on fhe public right-of-wayis at the owner's risk. The City is not liable for any damage to these improvements and fhey must be re/ocated at the owner's cost if the city must do work within the right-of-way. 7) The applicant shall c%se at /easf fwo curb cuts on the site so fhat !he site has a tofaf of oniy two curb cuts. This condition does not preclude moving or realigning the curb cuts so long as fhe slte fofa/ does not exceed two and lhaf the relocated access complies with applicable ordinance criteria subjecf to staff review and approval. 8) The applicanf revise the site /andscape plan to increase the amount of open space similar in intenf to that depicted on exhibits L and M. The landscape plan shall include overstory trees, ornamental tre2s, and shrubbery and will include piantings a/ong !he back of the lot fo aid in butfering the site from the adjoining residenfial uses. A final plan must be submitted and approved by the planning diviseon prior to fssuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new office building. 9) lnsfaliation of landscaping wouid occur in the spring of 1999 consistent with the approved p/an. A letter of credit in the amount of 150 percenf of fhe landscape Minutes of October 26, 1998, Pianning Commission Meeting Page 10 of 11 esfimate should be submitted fo the city prior to issuance of a certificate of accupancy for the new office bui/ding. 10) The applicanf will repave fhe exisfing parking lot and stripe it to provide direction regarding site circulation, customer parking, and designated display a�eas. Paving may occur up to one year after approval by the Council. The applicant shall submit a /etfer of credif in the amounf of 150 percent of the paving and striping estimafe to fhe city prior fo issuance of a certificate of occupancy for fhe new otfice building. 11) Up to two ramps or e/evated display areas are permifted on site so long as they are incorporated into the final /andscape plan, 12) The applicant conduct some minor grading wifhin fhe green space in !he north to depress that area stightiy, to provide some minor d�ainage retention. 13) The applicant remove the black fop area in the east which overtaps fhe property line. Further, blacktop will be removed to permit on-site landscaping in the easf. 14) The applicant remove one of the freestanding signs prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy for the new o�ce building. Boyden asked if the motion included maintaining striping the parking lot (condition #10). Kfeven stated that the parking lot needs to be striped for customer parking. Sawyer stated that he does not see handicapped spots mentioned in the proposal and asked if there is handicapped parking available now, Beattie stated that it is in one of the site plans. Kleven stated that law requires handicapped spots. Brown asked if only one freestanding sign is ailowed, couid it be larger than what is there now. Lindquist stated that it must meet the sign ordinance ailocation. Auge reviewed the motion, which is for approval with the deletion of "windows" from condi- tion #3, keeping the remainder of the text; language requiring the ciosure of two curb cuts would be deleted from condition #7 and language that only two curbs be opened to public access during business hours be inserted; would have language that stating that land- scaping improvements should be similar to the surrounding commercial areas wouid be added to condition #8; and that under condition #10, the Commission is not requiring the entire parcel to be striped but to provide directionai fiow and customer parking. The motion passed on an 8 to 1 vofe (Boyden). This appiication wil� go before the City Council on November 4, 1998. Applicatians and Requests None. Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of September 28, 1998 Pedol! moved ta approve the minutes. Rice seconded. Mofion passed unanimously. Minutes of October 26, 1998, Planning Commission Meeting Page 11 of 11 .�� 9.1 Recap of October City Councii Meetings Lindquist updated the P(anning Commission on the actions taken at the October 7 and October 21, 1998, City Council meetings. At the October 7 meeting, the Council approved the Waidelich conditional use permit application, approved the extension for the compre- hensive plan update, received the draft of the fiscal impact analysis, and discussed the sur- vey results for financial guarantees. On October 21, the Council approved the variance for the Lamberty garage; approved the GAMAS mining permit; and discussed expending funds for a fiscal impact study for Grey Cloud Island, which wili also be funded by Metropolitan Council, Washington, and Department of Natural Resources. Lindquist stated that the next Planning Commission workshop is scheduled for November 9, 1998, and wiil aiso include a public hearing on a variance request to the maximum height requirement for a tower addition by Up North Piastics. Kleven asked if the Planning Com- mission was setting a precedent by hearing legai business at a workshop meeting. �indquist stated that it has been done before. Kleven stated that he believes the schedule shouid be followed for requests to the Planning Commission. Lindquist suggested the possibility of holding two pubiic hearings a month during the fall to accommodate those ap- plicants who need to get projects started prior to the onset of winter. Kieven stated that this fopic could be considered at the Cammission's annual meeting in February. 9.2 Committee Reports .I� •t7ii� 9.3 Planning Gommission Requests .� •CTiT� . , . _ .. _. , . . , , � .., . None. Karen Britton, 113th Sfreet, had questions regarding the Roger's Auto Parts application. She asked if, from a legai standpoint, they couid go fonaard without coming back to the Planning Commission. Lindquist responded that they wouid be applying for a buiiding per- mit, which will most likely be rejected by staff due to the non-conformance to current zoning regulations. They couid then appeal to the Pla�ning Commission. She further stated that, while this would not be a public hearing, neignboring properties wouid be notified of the date of the appeal. Staff will consult with our legal representatives on this issue. Adjournment Podalf r»oved to adjourn the meeting. �oster seconded. The mofion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned.