Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-04-07 CITY OF LAKEVILLE Planning Commission Meeting Minutes OCTOBER 4, 2007 The October. 4, 2007 Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair brotning in the City Hall Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m. Flag Pledge. Present: Davis, Stolte, Drotning, Grenz, Blee, Ex-officio Gerl. Absent: Pattee, Manikowski. Staff Present: Daryl Morey, Planning Director; Frank Dempsey, Associate Planner; Jay Rubash, Assistant City Engineer; Daniel Licht, Northwest Associated Consultants; Andrea Poehler, Assistant City Attorney; and Penny Brevig, Recording Secretary. ITEM 3. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: Chair Drotning suggested the following amendment on Page 12 in the September 20, 2007 Planning Commission meeting minutes: "Chair Drotning stated that the public hearing will stay open as long as #~ere the public is respectful of the process." The September 20, 2007 Planning Commission meeting minutes were approved as amended. ITEM 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mr. Morey indicated the following .items were distributed. to the Planning Commission members and staff before tonight's meeting. 1. Revised Kent 46 preliminary and final plat plans incorporating the Dakota County. Plat Commission's recommended right turn configuration at C. R. 46/Kent Trail 2. Dakota County Plat Commission letter dated October 4, 2007. 3. A letter from McDonald's regarding the hours of operation for their drive- thru window. 4. E-mail from a resident in support of the Kent 46 development. 5. Letter from a Kenwood Oaks resident regarding a potential conflict of interest with Chair Drotning and the Kent 46 development, along with a written response from the City Attorney. Assistanf City Attorney Andrea Poehler commented on the potential conflict of interest. She stated that there is no conflict of interest under State law. She stated that owning property near a potential .development is not sufficient to disqualify a Commissioner from the discussion and vote on a planning action. Planning Corrunission Meeting October 4, 2007 Page 2 ITEM 6. KENT 4b' (CONTINUED FROPVI THE SEPTEMBER 20, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) Chair Drotning continued the public hearing to consider the application of EFH Company and McDonald's Corporation for the following, located south of 1b2na Street (CSAH 46) and west of Kenyon Avenue: 1. Preliminary and final plat.of three commercial lots and two outlots to be known as Kent 46; 2. Conditional. Use Permits to allow: A.) A Planned Shoreland .Development within the Shoreland Overlay District of Lee Lake, B.) Impervious surface area greater than 25 % in the Shoreland Overlay District of Lee Lake, C.) A convenience food establishment (McDonald's) in the C-3, General Commercial District,-and D.) Permanent joint parking facilities; 3. Interim Use Permit to allow a special purpose. fence as a buffer along the south side of the subject property; and 4. Vacation of Orchard Lake Trail right-of-way. Gene Happe and Michael. Whalen from EHF Company, Jerry Roper from McDonald's Corporation, Tom Funk, VP of Operations for Brunswick, and Hal Sriver, Construction Project Manager for Brunswick were in attendance at tonight's meeting. . Planning Consultant Daniel Licht stated -that EFH Company was directed by the Planning Commission to submit revised plans and additional information to address issues that were identified at the September 20, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Licht proceeded to summarize the changes, which are .listed in detail in the September 28, 2007 planning report. He stated that the .revised plan submittal reduced the number of staff. recommended stipulations from 38 to 18, the majority of which are standard for commercial developments. Mr. Licht stated that the planning applications EFH Company is applying for are not unique to the subject site and proposed development. Regarding Kent Trail, Mr. Licht indicated that the extension of this street to intersect with CSAH 46 has been planned since the early 1990's. He stated that the design of the Kent Trail extension includes: a landscaped center median, restricted movements out of the site, parking restrictions on Kent Trail, and a neighborhood identification sign. The design elements were incorporated in response to concerns raised at the July 26~ neighborhood meeting and the September 20~ public hearing. Mr. Licht indicated that the revised plans and additional information provided by the developer address the issues that were identified by City staff and the Planning Commission at the September 20, 2007 public hearing. Mr. Licht stated that the development plans are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meet Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance requirements. Should the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of Kent 46 preliminary and final plat, CUP's, IUP, and right-of-way vacation, Planning Department staff recommends Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 2007 Page 3 approval subject to the 18 stipulations listed in the September 28, 2007 planning report. Chair Drotning explained that the public hearing is still .open, but the Planning Commission will have their discussion first. If the public has any new information, they may present that information following the .Planning Commissions initial. discussion. Commissioner Grenz felt that the Kent Trail extension is appropriate. He felt that the developer has gone above and beyond what a developer would normally. do to address neighborhood concerns. He reiterated his firm belief that the Kent Trail extension is needed for public safety reasons. Commissioner Davis complimented the developer on how hard they worked with City staff to address traffic concerns on Kent Trail. He also felt that. the developer .has gone above and beyond normal expectations with respect to site landscaping. Commissioner Stolte stated that there is obviously a lot of passion throughout the neighborhood regarding this project. He indicated that he drove through the neighborhood and felt there was a need for the Kent Trail extension for public safety and comprehensive planning reasons. He indicated that he liked the way the developer has tried to muiimize traffic through the neighborhood with the proposed design of Kent Trail. Commissioner Blee indicated that he felt that getting the developer's.. help on the extension of Kent Trail is the best option rather than delaying the extension and not getting a road design that the neighbors have had input in designing. Chair Drotning confirmed with the engineers that semi-trucks are able to enter and exit the McDonald's site sufficiently. The Planning Commission had a discussion regarding the intersection of Kent Trail and Kenora Way as to whether a two or four way stop should be required. .Assistant City Engineer Jay Rubash indicated that. he will contact Director of Operations Don Volk about stop control at this intersection. He stated there is no reason #o add this as a stipulation because this. is the City's responsibility to address, not the developer's. Commissioner Blee confirmed that Kenora Way will note be extended to the northeast. Mr. Licht stated that the temporary cul-de-sac for Kenora Way will be constructed as a permanent cul-de-sac by the Kent 46 developer. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 2007 Page 4 The Planning Commission had a discussion regarding the special purpose fence and landscaping along the fence. They concluded that City staff has done everything they can do and. the .developer has done more than they are required to do regarding the special purpose fence and the landscape buffer. Chair Drotning requested that the project manager communicate with City staff before they .start grading and tree removal on the site. ..Chair Drotning continued the .public hearing for comment. Mike Shoen, 11227 Kenworth Lane • Does not want Kent Trail extended. Felt that the additional access into the neighborhood for emergency vehicles was not necessary as the development has existed for 18 years without .the .additional .access Kent. Trail would provide. • The Brunswick Zone parcel does not provide parking at the City's 1:200 ratio for retail uses or the 1:191 ratio provided at the Blaine Brunswick Zone. • .Concerned about the joint parking arrangement if the office building does not get built at the same time as Brunswick Zone. • Does not feel. that McDonald's .needs. extended hours. • Does not think that the Lakeville Police or County .Sheriff have the staff to provide the amount of security that Brunswick Zone says they need. Mary Larson, 11135 Kenora Way. • Feels .that the crime, noise and light pollution they left behind when they lived in Minneapolis will be coming to her backyard in Lakeville because of this development. • Her bedroom and bathroom windows will face the development. She wants to be sure the wall is of sufficient height so the patrons cannot see in her 2na story windows. She is requesting a minimum eight foot tall wall and trees six .inches in diameter with a five year. written guarantee that if they die, they will be replaced. • Thinks the light poles should be not more than 20 feet in height. • Would like the developer to limit the Saturday hours of .operation for construction equipment from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. • Would like the private drive designated as no parking. Kathy Schmidt, 11065 Kenora Way • Admits that she never gave much thought to development in "her small forest." Planning Conunission Meeting October 4, 2007 Page 5 • Wants to know who is going to apologize when someone is maimed or killed because of this development. • Feels this is a "very .poorly contrived development." Julie Clark, 11260 Kenora Way • Her husband is Richard Clark (he spoke at the September 20~ public hearing) and is a Ramsey County Deputy Sheriff. According to her husband, off duty police officers are no longer used for security at the Brooklyn Park and Blaine Brunswick Zone. • Commented on the number of police calls at other Brunswick Zones throughout the United States. • She has worked at Apple Valley and Burnsville bowling alleys and knows. what happens in these places. She does not want that in her neighborhood. Greg Porten, 11050 Kenora Way Mr. Porten made several references to the current Comprehensive Plan. • Felt the commercial uses and parking areas will not. be compatible with the i residential neighborhood. • Questioned the land use .transition and the effectiveness of the proposed buffer areas. • Felt that the development is not living up to environmental standards. • Felt that it is the burden of the developer to operate with the existing neighborhood. • The kids in the neighborhood play in the street and we need to protect them. Christine Koch, 11036 Kenora Way • Was aware that the EFH property would be developed .some day. But she feels common sense says not to build .something like the Brunswick Zone. • Referred to Stipulation 32 in the September 14, 2007 planning report where it states that the developer shall work with the property owner at 11036 Kenora Way (which is her property) to reconstruct and resurface the portion of their driveway affected by the reconstruction of the Kenora Way cul-de-sac. .She indicated that the developer has not contacted her yet. • Feels this is not a bad development, just a bad location. Janet Arneson, 11120 Kenora Way • The thought of this development is "disgusting." • She feels betrayed. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 2007 Page 6 • Questioned if there was enough parking. She cited her own parking calculations that the Brunswick Zone should adhere to. • Thought that a stipulation. should be made that Brunswick Zone should have only one bowling league per night due to the parking demand that overlapped multiple leagues create. • Felt the office building parking spaces must be constructed at the same time as the Brunswick Zone due to the proposed shared parking arrangement. Break at 7:35 p.m. Reconvened at 7:53 p.m. -Chair Drotning stated that it was very clear to the Planning Commission that the neighborhood is against this project. He asked the neighbors to come. up and speak if they had something new that the Planning Commission has not heard yet. John Stronczer, 16366 Kent Trail • Questioned the location of the "no parking" signs on Kent Trail. • Commented that there should be at least two stop signs at the intersection of Kent Trail and Kenora Way. If Kent Trail does get extended, he feels afour- way stop sign would be more appropriate. Chris Drake,. 11242 Kenworth Lane • Tried to look at things from the customers' point of view. Asked if there will be crosswalks connecting. the shared parking lots. • Asked if the grade of the subject site could be lowered five feet using retaining walls along CSAH 46 in order to address visibility, noise and light impacts on the homes to the south of the site. • Now that the Freedom to Breathe law is in effect, where are the patrons going to smoke? • Feels that the shared office building parking lot is too far from the Brunswick Zone. • Will there be designated motorcycle parking? • Feels that Kent Trail should not be extended. He suggested constructing a sidewalk connecting to a public park instead. Dennis Magnuson, 16394 Kent Trail • Concerned about the safety of the neighborhood children. He displayed pictures showing the intersection of Kent Trail and Kenworth Lane where kids were waiting for the bus and playing in the streets. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 2007 Page 7 Brooks Lillehei, 11146 Kenora Way Mr. Lillehei appreciated Chair Drotning coming to ,heir neighborhood and talking with the residents. He complimented staff and the planning process. • Feels that. the office building should be constructed at the same time as the Brunswick Zone due to the office building being a good sound block for noise into the neighborhood. • Feels there should be a clear understanding of the: relationship. between the shared Brunswick Zone and office building parking. • Feels that signs in the street boulevards advertising liquor should not be permitted. • Feels that the monument sign for the neighborhood should be a large boulder, requiring no maintenance and to include an image of an oak tree - consistent with the existing Kenwood Oaks neighborhood identification signs. • Feels the decorative fence could be higher so patrons would not be able to see in the second floors. of the adjacent houses. James "Kent" Anderson, 11195 Kenora Way • Does not feel that Kent Trail has to be extended just because it's written on paper {in the comprehensive Plan}. That does .not mean that it makes any sense. • The neighbors do not have any traffic issues currently, so the Kent Trail extension would not be built for their neighborhood. • Felt that the neighborhood would be more secure. without the Kent Trail extension because it is not easy now for criminals to get out of their neighborhood.. • The proposed holding pond is directly behind his property. He feels that the existing hill is a good natural barrier. Does not understand why the developer needs to level the hill to construct the pond. • He appreciates the compromises that the developer has made. Shirley Groves, 11155 Kenora Way • Ms. Groves stated that this development has been more .stressful than her recent health issues. • Feels there is a lack of screening to prevent customers looking into the second story windows of the adjacent homes. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 2007 Page 8 Manley Wheeler, 11215 Kenora • Noted how all their yards slope toward the existing streets and he would like to keep traffic down in the neighborhood due to the fact that balls and such tend to bounce toward the streets and the kids are .always running to get what rolled down the hills. • Wanted Kent Trail kept as is because vehicles can drive over medians. Thomas Groves, 11155 Kenora Way • Suggested that if Kent Trail needs to be extended with this development, temporary concrete barricades should be installed at the entrance to their neighborhood to be removed in the future if thru traffic flow is needed. That way the Kent Trail extension would be built at the developer's expense. • Requested that the "no parking' signs not be put up on Kent Trail in front. of his house so that his friends and family can still park there when visiting. Ginny Lampert, 11062 Kenora Way • Asked the Planning Commission to not recommend approval of the CUP's for planned shoreland development and impervious surface area. • Wanted confirmation on how wide the. green area will be between the neighborhood and the special purpose fence. • Wanted to know why the retaining wall in the SE corner of the plat is allowed in the bluff impact zone. • .Felt that the developer needs two IUP's because a second special purpose fence is now proposed south of the office building parking lot. • Wanted to know why the parking lots do not meet the required 50 foot setback from C. R. 46. • Feels this development is too big for the property. • Feels this development does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan in terms of the commercial to residential transition and environmental impacts. Robert Sommerdorf,-11115 Kenora Way • Felt the proposed pond in Outlot A is in a bluff area which nullifies the project. • Felt that wetlands and ponds should not be included in the impervious surface area calculations. • .Questioned why the standard City parking ban signs for the winter months were needed if Kent Trail is to be signed "No Parking' year round. Plaruung Commission Meeting- October 4, 2007 Page 9 Attempted to call into question the expertise of the City's planning consultant but was warned by Chair Drotning that comments of this. nature were inappropriate and would not be tolerated. • Questioned whether the development will meet the new non-degradation rules.. • Cited numerous provisions contained in the Comprehensive Plan that he felt the.proposed development did not comply with. Mr. Morey stated that the Comprehensive Plan is a guide to the growth and development of the City. The Zoning and .Subdivision Ordinances are .the regulatory documents that include the performance standards that developments must comply with. 07.51 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 9:OO p,m. Ayes: S Nays: 0 Break at 9:00 p.m. Reconvened at 9:20 p.m. Mr. Roper requested that McDonald's be allowed the extended, hours of 5:00 a.m. to midnight Sunday through Thursday and 5:00. a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Friday and Saturday to-fall into line with the Brunswick Zone hours of operation. The Planning Commission discussed the proposed hours for McDonald's. Sgt. Gerl stated that loitering has been a problem at fast food restaurants in the City with extended hours of operation. Mr. Roper clarified that the request is for both the lobby and the drive-through. Chair Drotning and the. Planning Commission stated that the hours of operation for McDonald's should not be altered from the hours. requested by McDonald's at .the September 20, 2007 public hearing. He indicated that if .they are. good neighbors, they can always come back at a later date and request a CUP amendment to change the hours of operation. Mr. Morey confirmed that there would be a public hearing if McDonald's chose to come back for a CUP amendment at a future .date. He indicated. that the mailed public notice area for the current development proposal .was expanded from the normal required 500 feet to include additional properties south of Kent Trail to 166 Street (approx. 1500 feet) due to the interest in this project. He clarified to the neighbors that the City of Lakeville requires public hearing notification .of all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property along with a legal notice in • the .This Week. Life. and Times newspaper. Any future mailed public hearing notification of a CUP amendment for McDonald's will likely not extend beyond the required 500 feet. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 2007 Page 10 Mr. Happe stated that the entire site will be graded this fall. In the spring, all the buildings are expected to start construction at the .same time. He indicated that he will agree to the hours of construction from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday -Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and no construction on Sundays. and legal holidays. Mr. Rubash reviewed the cross sections submitted by the developer and indicated that they are drawn to scale. He pointed out what the patrons will be able to see from the parking lot toward .the residential area but the special purpose fence and landscaping should provide a good buffer screen. He indicated that anyone on the ,second floor of the office building will be able to look out and see the neighbors' backyards.' Mr. Rubash stated that lowering the site will not work due to the design requirements for the stormwater retention basins. The revised landscape plan. was discussed. Mr. Morey stated that all landscaping ..meets or exceeds the plant sizes required by the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission agreed that the revised landscape plan meets screening and buffering requirements. • Commissioner Blee asked if the contractor can warranty the landscaping for more than one year: Mr. Morey stated that the City requires a landscape security from the developer as part of the development contract. All landscaping must be guaranteed for one year and if plantings die after one year they must be replaced in order for the development to be in compliance with the approved landscape plan. Mr. Licht stated that signs for the shared parking will be posted at the entrance to the Brunswick Zone and office building parking -lots. A pedestrian. crosswalk between the two parking lots can be provided. The Planning Commission agreed with the -size and location of the entrance sign to the Kenwood Oaks neighborhood. Chair Drotning suggested a "no outlet sign' at the entrance to the .neighborhood also. Mr. Morey suggested a directional sign listing the three uses with a left turn arrow to direct patrons into the commercial site from Kent Trail. Commissioner Grenz again addressed public safety and emergency service vehicle access. He indicated that roads can become blocked by severe weather events for example and it is important to have addition accesses into a neighborhood. Commissioner Stolte agreed that multiple accesses are good. He stated that he appreciates the compromises that have been made by both the developer and the neighbors. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 2007 - Page 11 • Mr. Rubash explained that the. winter no parking signs and the odd even watering.... restriction signs are installed at the entrance to all neighborhoods for informational purposes. There was a discussion among the Planning Commission regarding Mr. Anderson s (11195 Kenora Way) rear property line and where the landscaping adjacent to the pond should be planted. They referred to the landscape plan which proposes nine evergreen trees and two overstory trees on the south side of the .pond. Mr. Anderson stated that he would like these trees planted on the high point along his rear property line. Chair Drotning indicated that the City cannot .require the developer to plant trees on private property outside of the development. Commissioner Grenz asked if the Brunswick. Zone. has a designated location for smokers outside. The developer indicated. that the Brunswick Zone is a smoke free facility and they do not provide an outside smoking area. Commissioner Stolte confirmed that one IUP will cover both special purpose fences. The second special purpose fence next to the office building parking lot was a request made by the neighbors at the September 20, 2007 public hearing. He also wanted to clarify to the public that the developer is not asking for any variances-for this project. Conditional use permits are more common than variances and the criteria for their approval is less restrictive. Commissioner Grenz asked about the lighting plan for the parking lot. Mr. Licht explained that the lights. will be shielded and the light will be cast to the north away from the neighborhood. He indicated- that if the light poles were shorter as requested by one of the neighbors, there would need to be more light poles to achieve the same lighting affect. Commissioner Davis appreciated the residents' involvement, comments, and compromises on this project. He also thanked City staff, Mr. Licht, and the developer for all their hard work. The following amendments and stipulations were made: 9. The conditional use permit for joint parking shall specify that .the office building parking lot shall be constructed simultaneously with the Brunswick Zone parking lot. 18. Earth moving. and utility construction activities shall be limited to 7:00 am to 8:00 pm, Monday -Friday, 8:00 am to 6:00 pm on Saturday and no work on SundaX and legal holiday with all .other site work regulated by Section 4-1-4-2 of the City Code. Planning Commission Meeting October 4, 2007 Page 12 07.52 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the application of EFH Company and McDonald's Corporation for the following, located south of 162nd Street (CSAH 46) and west of Kenyon Avenue: 1. Preliminary. and final plat of three .commercial lots and two outlots to be known as Kent 46; 2. Conditional Use .Permits to allow: A) A Planned Shoreland Development within the Shoreland Overlay District of Lee Lake, B) Impervious surface area greater than 25 in the Shoreland Overlay District of Lee Lake, C) A convenience food establishment (MeDonald's) in the C-3, General Commercial District, and D) Permanent joint parking facilities; 3. Interim Use Permit to allow a special purpose fence as a buffer along the south side of the subject property; and 4. Vacation of Orchard Lake Trail right-of-way, subject to the 18 stipulations listed in the September 28, 2007 planning report, as amended. Ayes: Davis, Stolte, Drotning, Blee. Nays: Grenz. Commissioner Grenz stated that he felt there was not sufficient parking on the site and that there was no way to fix it after the site is developed. Chair Drotning stated that the neighbors in the audience should applaud Bob Sommerdorf, Brooks Lillehei, and Janet and Doug Arneson for everything they have . done for the Kenwood Oaks neighborhood during this development process. Mr. Morey stated that the Kent 46 development will likely be on the November 5~ City Council agenda. He advised the neighbors to check with the City in advance of the meeting date to be certain. Mr. Morey stated that the. October 18, 2007 Planning Commission meeting will be cancelled due to a lack of agenda items. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:38 p.m. Respectfully. submitted, ATTES Penn B ig, Recording Secr tary Karl Drotning, Chair.