Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-17-06 CITY OF LAKEVILLE Planning Commission Meeting Minutes AucusT 17, 2006 The August 17, 2006 Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Swecker in the City Hall Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m. Flag Pledge. Present: Manikowski, Pattee, Swecker, Detjen, Grenz, Drotning, Ex-officio Gerl. Absent: Stolte. Staff Present: Daryl Morey, Planning Director; Allyn Kuennen, Associate Planner; Kris Jenson, Associate Planner; Jay Rubash, Assistant City Engineer; Andrea Poehler, Assistant City Attorney; and Penny Brevig, Recording Secretary. ITEM 3. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: .The August 3, 2006 Planning Commission meeting minutes were approved as presented. ITEM 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mr. Morey indicated the following items were distributed to the Planning Commission members and staff before tonight's meeting. 1. The August 16, 2006 Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Committee meeting motions for the TimberCrest at Lakeville Fourth Addition preliminary and final plat, the Shady Oak Grove Second Addition preliminary and final plat, the Kenyon Woods preliminary and final plat, the Chadwick Commercial preliminary and final plat, and the Chadwick Commercial 1St Addition final plat. 2. Parking lot designs. for Agenda Item 7, Kenyon,Woods. Chair Swecker congratulated Ex-officio member William Gerl on his promotion to Sergeant. Chair Swecker explained the Planning Commission public hearing process to the audience. ITEM 5. TIMBERCREST AT LAKEVILLE 4TH ADDITION Chair Swecker opened the public hearing to consider the application of The Avalon Group for the following, located north of 185th Street (CSAH 60) and east of Orchard Trail: Plann;ng Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 2 A. Preliminary and final plat of one lot and three outlots to be known as TimberCrest at Lakeville 4th Addition. B. Development and Final Stage Planned Unit Development. C. Vacation of Drainage and Utility Easements. Assistant City Attorney Poehler attested that the legal notice had been duly published in accordance with State Statutes and City Code. Kevin Brazner from The Avalon Group presented an overview of their request. Richard Wiebe from Westwood Professional Services reviewed the site plan and exterior building materials. Associate Planner Allyn Kuennen presented the planning report. Mr. Kuennen stated that The Avalon Group has submitted a preliminary and final .plat application and a final stage planned unit development for one lot and three outlots to be known as TimberCrest at Lakeville 4th Addition, along with the vacation of underlying drainage and utility easements. He indicated that the 4~ .addition includes Outlots F and G that were platted with the first addition of TimberCrest at Lakeville u12001. • Mr. Kuennen stated that the applicant is proposing to construct a 45,000 square foot Best Buy electronics store on Lot 1. He indicated that access to the development will be from a new private drive off of Orchard Trail. Mr. Kuennen stated that the City requested the developer to provide an overall site plan for the remaining undeveloped area .within the 4~ Addition plat surrounding the Best Buy site, which includes Outlots A and B. He explained that the overall site plan indicates the continuation of retail development with larger store footprints and a future addition onto the east side of the Best Buy building for an additional retailer. He stated that the proposed Best Buy building exterior materials and design is consistent with the existing buildings u1 the TimberCrest at Lakeville development. Outlot C includes the delineated wetland area and storm water basin that will be dedicated to the City with TimberCrest of Lakeville 4~ Addition. Mr. Kuennen described the proposed 375 square foot Best Buy wall sign and the 50 square foot Magnolia Home Theater wall sign above the entrance to the building and the 100 square foot sign being proposed below the existing Super Target pylon sign along Interstate 35. The proposed signage is consistent with the existing Super Target signage allowed under the TimberCrest at Lakeville PUD. • Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 3 Mr. Kuennen stated that should the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary and final plat, Development and Final Stage Planned Unit Development, and easement vacation, Planning Department staff recommends approval subject to the 13 stipulations listed in the August 10, 2006 planning report. Chair Swecker opened the hearing to the public for comment. Tl2ere were no comments from the audience. 06.99 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 6:15 p.m. Ayes: 7 Nays:O Motion passed. Commissioner Drotning stated that he was very glad to see the Best Buy project coming forward. He felt that the proposal is consistent with the TimberCrest. at Lakeville preliminary plat and PUD. Chair Swecker also commented that Best Buy was a very appropriate business to include in the TimberCrest at Lakeville development. • Commissioner Grenz asked why this application did not include a conditional use permit for shared parking. Staff indicated that the shared parking arrangement is allowed under the TimberCrest at Lakeville PUD. Mr. Brazner indicated that he was hoping construction would begin in the fall of 2006 for a summer of 2007 opening. 06.100 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the TimberCrest at Lakeville 4th Addition preliminary and final plat, Development and Final Stage Planned Unit Development, and easement vacation, located north of 185 Street (CSAH 60) and east of Orchard Trail, subject to the 13 stipulations listed in the August 10, 2006 planning report. Ayes: Manikowski, Pattee, Swecker, Detjen, Grenz, Drotning. Nays: 0 ITEM 6. SHADY OAK GROVE SECOND ADDITION Chair Swecker opened the public hearing to consider the application of Brent Crego for the following, located south of 185+ Street (CSAH 60) and west of Ipava Avenue • adjacent to Irvine Way: Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 4 • A. Preliminary and final plat of four lots and one outlot to be known as Shady Oak Grove Second Addition. B. Vacation of a drainage and utility easement. Assistant City Attorney Poehler .attested that the legal notice had been duly published in accordance with State Statutes and City Code. Steve Love from Jacobson Engineering was present representing the developer Brent Crego. Mr. Love presented an overview of the request. Associate Planner Allyn Kuennen presented the planning report. Mr. Kuennen stated that Brent Crego has submitted a preliminary and final plat application for the development of four single-family lots to be named Shady Oak Grove Second Addition. He indicated that a ghost plat for the area to the west of this proposed development has been submitted indicating future street extensions and how the adjacent property may develop in the future. He indicated that the plans propose Outlot A which will provide the area needed for the temporary cul-de-sac at the west end of Street A. Outlot A will be replatted in the future as a single family lot when Street A is extended and the temporary cul-de-sac removed. Mr. Kuennen . stated that .Shady Oak Grove Second Addition is consistent with the ghost plat for the subject property that was submitted with the first addition of the Shady Oak Grove development in 2002. Mr. Kuennen indicated that the applicant is also requesting the vacation of the drainage and utility easements that were platted within Outlot D, Shady Oak Grove (parent parcel). These easements will be replaced with the typical perimeter and drainage easements for each single family lot with the Shady Oak Grove Second Addition final plat. Mr. Kuennen stated that should the Planning Commission. recommend to the City Council approval of the Shady Oak Grove Second Addition preliminary and final plat and easement vacation, Planning Department staff recommends approval subject to the 6 stipulations listed in the August 10, 2006 planning report. Chair Swecker opened the hearing to the public for comment. Ken Kossak, 18667Irvine Way Mr. Kossak's concerns were: Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 5 • 1. What improvements are proposed within Outlot- A with the Second Addition. Will any trees within Outlot A be removed with the grading of the Second Addition plat 2. He wanted to confirm that the easement to be vacated would be rededicated around each individual lot within the Second Addition, and what can or cannot be built in those easements. 3. He wanted confirmation of the number of trees to be preserved. 4. There is a 28 inch oak .tree on the edge of his property to the north of Outlot A. He would like to see this tree preserved. 06.101 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 6:30 p.m. Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Motion. passed. Mr. Love. confirmed that the easements would be rededicated around each of the four lots in the final plat. Mr. Love identified the proposed tree preservation numbers and stated that the 28 inch oak tree in question will be saved. Mr. Rubash explained that private drain the will be installed within the perimeter drainage and utility easements to be established around each of the lots in the Second Addition • and that no permanent structure can be built in the drainage and utility easements. Mr. Love indicated that they are proposing to grade a building pad area within. Outlot A in conjunction with the grading of the other four lots so that extensive grading machinery would not be necessary when Outlot A is final platted as a single family lot in the future. Chair Swecker asked about the procedure for when a single family home would be constructed on Outlot A and the temporary cul-de-sac removed. Mr. Morey suggested that the preliminary plat be revised to include the fifth single family lot (Outlot A) as a lot and the final plat show it as an outlot to be final platted. as a single family lot at a later date. This is the typical procedure in these instances and no public hearing would be required. Mr. Morey recommended that the Planning Commission add this stipulation to their motion on the preliminary and final plat. The Planning Commission discussed whether to allow the developer. to grade Outlot A with the Second Addition plat or wait until it is final platted into a lot. It was agreed that it would be more efficient to grad this future single family lot in conjunction with the Second Addition improvements. 06.102 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the Shady Oak Grove Second Addition preliminary plat of five single family lots and Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 6 final .plat of four single family lots and one outlot and easement vacation, located south of 185 Street (CSAH 60) and west of Ipava Avenue adjacent to Irvine Way, subject to the 6 stipulations listed in the August 10, 2006 planning report. Ayes: Pattee, Swecker, Detjen, Grenz, Drotning, Manikowski. Nays: 0 ITEM 7. KENYON WOODS Chair Swecker opened the public hearing to consider the application of Stonebridge Development for the following, located north of 185+ Street (CSAH 60) and west of Interstate 35 adjacent to Kenyon Avenue: A. Preliminary plat and final plat of one lot fora 76 unit apartment building to be known as Kenyon Woods. B. Conditional Use Permit to allow building height greater than 35 feet in the RH-1 District. C. Variance to allow a parking lot setback less than 30 feet from the front property line in the RH-1 District. Assistant City Attorney Poehler attested that the legal notice had been duly published in accordance with State Statutes and City Code. Wallace Johnson, President of Stonebridge Companies, Gary Vogel with BKV Architects and Rick Osberg with James R. Hill Engineers were in attendance at .the meeting. Mr. Johnson stated that he is partners with Andy Chase of Chase Homes and David Anderson with Brandl Anderson Homes. He indicated that this is a very difficult site to develop because of the shape of the parcel, the extensive frontage along Kenyon Avenue, and the setback requirement adjacent to the wetland. Mr. Johnson reviewed the project and amenities and gave a brief company history, indicating the .current rental market and trends. He indicated the reason for the CUP is to allow for a gabled roof on the building, and the variance is to provide a better parking lot layout with improved on-site traffic flow and safety. Mr. Johnson indicated that he is constructing the apartments so they could easily be converted to condominiums in the future if the market changes to favor condominiums over apartments. He stressed that he is in this project for the long haul and will take good care of the building and grounds. • Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 7 Mr. Vogel presented an overview of the building layout and design, site accesses, parking layout, and the rain garden design. Lee Johnson representing the Lennar Corporation, the original developer of Prairie Lake, was in attendance at the meeting and indicated that he would be available to answer any questions. Associate Planner Allyn Kuennen presented the planning report. Mr. Kuennen stated that Stonebridge Development has submitted an application for .the preliminary and final plat of one lot and one outlot to be known as Kenyon Woods, along with a request for a conditional use permit to allow the building .height to exceed the 35 foot requirement in the RH-1 District by 8 feet, 10 inches and a variance to allow the southeast corner of the parking lot to encroach $ feet into the 30 foot front yard setback requirement for residential developments within the RH- 1 District. He indicated that the .proposal is for the construction. of a three-story apartment building with a total of 76 units. Mr. Kuennen .stated that the subject .property was platted as Outlot N, Prairie Lake 1St Addition in 2002. Two apartment buildings were shown conceptually on the • Prairie Lake preliminary plat and the future apartments were included in the EAW that was completed for the Prairie Lake development. He indicated that there is a large wetland area that borders the site to the west within a separate outlot owned by the City that will remain undisturbed by the Kenyon Woods development: Mr. Kuennen reviewed the applicable performance .standards included in the Zoning Ordinance for building height, which are listed in detail in the August 10, 2006 planning report. Mr. Kuennen also reviewed the variance request. He indicated that the developer had submitted a previous parking lot design that met the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. However, to improve internal traffic flow, eliminate compact car stalls, and provide more parking closer to the front door, staff recommended the developer revise the parking lot layout which necessitated the variance request. Mr. Kuennen indicated that the .developer hosted a neighborhood meeting on July 18, 2006 to present the project to the adjacent residents. The neighborhood meeting notes were included with the Planning Commission packets. Mr. Kuennen stated that should .the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary and final plat, building height conditional use permit, and parking lot setback variance, Planning Department staff recommends Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 8 approval, subject to the 11 stipulations listed in the August 10, 2006 planning report, and approval of the Findings of Facts dated August 17, 2006. Break at 7:27 p.m. Reconvened at 7:45 p.m. Chair Swecker opened the hearing to the public for comment. She reiterated the public hearing process to the audience. Approximately 50 residents were present at the meeting with the following 21 residents addressing the Planning Commission: George Strickland, 18376 Kerrville Trail William Stanton, 18324 Kerrville Trail Patrick Gaskell, 18380 Kerrville Trail Paul Bratulich, 12545 Greentree (18366 Kerrville Trail) Robert Robitaille, 18285 Kingsway Path Terri Janus, 18403 Lansford Path Patti Wetzel, 17609 Kettering Trail Sue Wadsworth, 18301 Lansford Path Robert Saleck, 11323 -178th Street Maurice Paul, 18246 Kerrville Trail Matthew Lunde, 18347 Kerrville Trail Tom Rerah, 18379 Lansford Path Jennie Strickland, 18376 Kerrville Trail Frank Jershe, 13001 Terrace Circle, Burnsville Jodi Shafer, 18138 Kingsway Path George Grosshandler, 18403 Lansford Path Terry Fitzpatrick, 17729 Kettering Trail Bill Myers, 18285 Kerrville Trail Duane Hoffman, 18312 Kingsway Path Mark Nippa, 17891 - ?79th Trail Scott Schilling, 17773 Ketchikan Ct. The following is a summary of their comments: ? The Chair's opening comments were rude. ? Concerned that not all the residents in Prairie Lake received notification of the public hearing. ? Felt this would have a serious negative social impact on the area. • ? Felt there would be a negative impact on surrounding property values. Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 9 ? Preferred condominiums (ownership) over apartments (rental) -can the property be rezoned for condominium use? ? .Felt that apartments should be grouped together in the City. ? Could the apartments be converted to Section 8 housing in the future? ? High rents dori t necessarily mean good citizens will be living there. ? Felt that there is a reason that apartments get a bad name. Felt that there is a big difference between owning and renting. ? Concerned about the impact of 76 families .moving into the area and absorbing those children into the school district. ? Felt that too many people will be living in the same apartment unit. ? Concerned about the safety of kids playing in the wetland (drowning) because there is no playground planned with the apartment project. ? Worried about increased crime as a result of the apartment project. ? Concerned about the safety of children in the existing Prairie Lake development. ? Thought there would be negative impacts to the wetland and trees. ? Concerned about the potential loss of wildlife. ? Concerned about their view if the apartment building is constructed. ? Concerned about the height of the building - it is not consistent with the other buildings in Prairie Lake. ? Where is the height of the building measured from? ? With underground parking proposed, why do they need so much surface parking? ? Felt that a compromise of a two story building with less parking should be considered. ? One resident was impressed with the layout of the apartment building. ? Concerned about increased traffic and noise. ? Concerned about traffic congestion -there is no way out of the area to the north unless you go through Queen Anne Manufactured Home Park. ? .Concerned about traffic safety -felt the curve on Kenyon Avenue was dangerous. ? What is the current traffic volume at the Kenyon Avenue/185 Street intersection and when will the Kenyon Avenue connection to County Road 5 be completed? ? Concerned about the lack of sidewalk/trail connections and expressed concerns about pedestrian safety. ? Concerned about the safety of kids riding their bikes to Super Target with incomplete trail connections. ? Has there been soil testing done on the site? ? How is the storm water run-off proposed to be handled? ? .Asked about rental and vacancy rates. Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 10 ? Wanted to know the track record of the apartment management company. ? When will construction begin? ? Felt that Lundgren Brothers mislead them by not telling them about the future apartment use on this property. ? Felt that the CUP and variance requests should be denied. ? Felt the Planning Commission s decision is already made -this is a "done deal." ? It seems like the City and Planning Commission make it easy for developers to build in Lakeville. ? Wanted to know if they .could attend the City Council meeting and express their concerns. The Planning Commission accepted a petition with 48 signatures against the Kenyon Woods proposal, which was presented to the Planning Commission at .the meeting. Chair Swecker thanked everyone for attending the meeting and for their comments. She then explained the procedure that the Planning Commission follows to address the concerns raised at the public hearing and to make a recommendation on the developer's applications. 06.103 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 9:06 p.m. Ayes: 5 Nays: 1(Pattee) Motion passed. Break at 9:10 p.m. Reconvened at 9:30 p.rn. Chair Swecker clarified that the social aspects of a project are not addressed by City Ordinance and cannot be used as a deciding factor to determine if the project meets City Ordinances. The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances are what the Planning Commission must follow in determining if the project meets City requirements. The Planning Commission s recommendation is based on the developer complying with these requirements. Chair Swecker requested staff explain the public notice process. Mr. Morey addressed the concern about the meeting notification to the residents. He explained that State Statute requires the City to notify all property owners within 350 feet of the subject property. He indicated that several years ago the City Council increased the City's notification requirement to 500 feet to increase public Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 11 awareness of development proposals. He stated that all public hearing notices are published in the ThisWeek Life & Times. newspaper, which is the.. official newspaper for Lakeville legal notices. The Planning Commission and City Council agendas are also posted on the City of Lakeville website, on Public Access Channel 16, and in the lobby at City Hall. Chair Swecker requested staff to address .storm water management and wetland impacts. Assistant City Engineer Jay Rubash commented on the wetlands, soils, and storm water run-off. He described the function of the proposed rain gardens and water quality pre-treatment prior to discharge into the wetland. Mr. Rubash stated that the developer has gone above and beyond the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance requirements for storm water run-off. Mr. Rubash stated that there are no wetlands on the site and the adjacent wetland area owned by the City will not be impacted with this development. The developer will install silt fence on site prior to commencing site grading, and rock rip rap will be added adjacent to storm water outlets to prevent erosion. • Commissioner Pattee asked about thermal sedimentar im acts to the wetland. Y P Mr. Rubash explained that it would be very minor with the type of storm water treatment the developer is proposing on-site. Commissioner Drotning addressed the question regarding tree preservation and removal by referring to the tree preservation section of the Subdivision Ordinance. He stated that the owner of the property could cut down every tree prior to developing the property, but .because aplat- has been submitted to the City,. the developer must comply with Subdivision Ordinance tree preservation requirements. This developer must follow the .same tree preservation process. as the Lennar Corporation did when Prairie Lake was initially developed. The Planning Commission discussed the view from the adjacent townhomes and noise concerns. Commissioner Drotning stated that ahis building could actually help buffer noise from I-35 due to the elevation of the freeway compared to the height of the proposed building. Mr. Rubash compared this site to the Gander Mountain site along I-35 to the -north and said the Gander Mountain building did reduce noise. from I-35 for the residents living to the west of the building. Chair Swecker explained that as much as we would like to have control over the view out our windows, we dori t unless we own the adjacent property. S Chair Swecker requested staff address the building height. Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 12 • City staff explained how the height of a building is determined and explained that the CUP request meets Zoning Ordinance conditions for approval. A flat roof would eliminate the need for the CUP, but the building could remain three stories because it would meet Zoning Ordinance requirements for height. The Planning Commission felt that a flat roof would .not fit architecturally with the surrounding developments and would not be consistent with the quality proposed for this apartment building as a gabled roof would. They reiterated that the building can still be three stories high in the RH-1 District without a conditional use permit and that the request meets the CUP criteria listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Chair Swecker requested staff address the current and future Kenyon Avenue improvements. Mr. Morey and Mr. Rubash discussed the interim and ultimate road improvements for the I-35/C.R. 50/5 interchange and indicated that it could be ten or more years before Kenyon/Keokuk Avenue is connected to County Road 5 to the north. He stated that road improvements will likely be completed as vacant. land along Keokuk Avenue develops. • Commissioner Grenz asked about putting turn lanes. on Kenyon Avenue. Mr. Rubash stated that the City's traffic consultant completed a traffic study for this portion of Kenyon Avenue and did not recommend the installation of turn lanes. In addition Mr. Rubash indicated that Kenyon Avenue is wide enough, but traffic volumes do not justify turn lanes. He stated that by-pass lanes would not work in this situation due to the curve in the road. Chair Swecker requested staff address proposed trails and future trail connections. Mr. Rubash addressed the trails and pedestrian safety. Mr. Rubash displayed the preliminary plat of Prairie Lake to indicate that trails constructed with Prairie Lake did not include the entire length of Kenyon Avenue. The section from Kerrville Trail to the Kenyon Woods site and the section south of the Kenyon Woods site to Kingsway Path is not planned for construction at this time. He stated the City would be responsible for completing these trail sections at some point in the future when deemed necessary and when funds are available. An 8 foot wide asphalt trail.. will be constructed adjacent to Kenyon Avenue for the length of the subject site by the Lennar Corporation as required by the Prairie Lake 1St Addition development contract. Mr. Morey clarified that the City has a five year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) which is updated annually. Construction of the missing trail sections are not in the Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 13 • current CIP, but could be included by the City Council with. a future CIP update. The trail could then. connect Kerrville Trail to 185 Street along Kenyon Avenue. Staff pointed out that sidewalks have been constructed internally within the Prairie Lake development that indirectly provide pedestrian connections to the trail on the north side of 185 Street. Mr. Morey indicated that .there is a public neighborhood park being built in the Prairie Lake development that is accessed by the internal .sidewalks and the trail along Kingsway Path. Lee Johnson pointed out the locations of the privately owned open space and the City park within the Prairie Lake development. Commissioner Drotning asked staff how Lakeville compares to other adjacent cities for land zoned for multiple family development. Mr. Morey stated that 1.22% of land in Lakeville is zoned RH-1, Multiple Family Residential District. This compares to Apple Valley at approximately 2.97% and Burnsville at approximately 4.7%. Chair Swecker requested the developer address the question regarding reducing the building height and parking area. Mr. Johnson indicated that he never considered constructing a two story building on this site. He stated that his purchase price was based on 76 units, which meets the Zoning Ordinance density requirement for the RH-1 District. He discussed the vacancy rate in his other buildings in the Twin Cities and felt 76 units was appropriate. He stated that his other properties have a 92-96% occupancy rate, and his age restricted apartments are 100% occupied. He indicated that Kenyon Woods is a high end product and he expects the occupancy rate to be similar to his other projects. Mr. Johnson commented that his management company is Stevens Scott Management Company. They will be on-site 24 hours a day and .they have an excellent reputation for maintaining high quality buildings and grounds. Commissioners Grenz and Pattee indicated that they drive by the Apple Valley apartments built by Mr. Johnson and stated that they look very nice and are well maintained. Mr. Morey reminded the audience that if Mr. Johnson sold these .units as condominiums, the building design would be the same but the condominium. owner could still rent them out. Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 14 • Mr. Johnson indicated that if approved, construction would probably start in October or November of 2006. Chair Swecker requested Officer Gerl explain the Police Department's enforcement efforts for the City's existing apartment projects. Commissioner Gerl stated that the Police Department takes a proactive approach. He explained the Conflict Resolution Team (CRT) program that the Police Department uses with residential. neighborhoods. He explained that the CRT program is used equally in single-family and multi-family developments when needed. Commissioner Gerl asked if there are any play areas planned within this development. Mr. Johnson indicated that not many families with young children move into his higher end apartment buildings. They will be marketed as executive housing and transitional housing for professionals moving into the area. But if .families with children do move into the project, there is space on the property to construct a play area at a future date. Sergeant Gerl excused himself from the meeting at 11:20 p.m. • Commissioner Grenz questioned if the developer would charge extra for .the underground parking, and if so, can. it be considered toward meeting the off-street parking requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Morey indicated that the Zoning Ordinance does not differentiate between free and rental off-street parking. The parking requirement is 21/2 spaces per unit, with the 1/2 space per unit considered guest parking. Chair Swecker requested staff further describe the two possible parking lot layouts. Mr. Kuennen explained the difference between the two parking plans and explained why the variance is being requested. He stated that the parking lot initially proposed by the.. developer includes a row of parallel parking stalls adjacent to the front of the building as well as a larger parking lot at the north. end of the site with compact stalls. This design meets the performance standards of the Zoning Ordinance but staff felt that a better design could be achieved to improve on-site traffic flow and safety, provide more parking close to the building, and eliminate the compact parking stalls. He indicated that the current parking lot layout achieves the objectives of staff by eliminating the parallel parking and the compact stalls and .provides more parking closer to the front door of the building. In addition, the current design provides for a longer "neck" at each access point off of Kenyon Avenue in an .effort to reduce the potential for traffic conflicts when. residents are backing out of parking spaces while other residents are entering the Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 15 site. Mr. Kuennen stated that a variance is required to allow a portion of the proposed parking lot to be constructed up to eight feet into the 30-foot front yard setback adjacent to Kenyon Avenue. He stated that the Emerald Professional Center office development located southwest of the subject property will have parking stalls setback 15 feet from the Kenyon Avenue right-of-way in compliance with Zoning ordinance requirements for an office use. Commissioner Pattee indicated that the newer parking plan has a better layout.. With the inclusion of the rain gardens and trees, he thought this area was well landscaped between the parking lot and Kenyon Avenue. Commissioner Grenz felt that the variance request was only for financial reasons. He indicated that if the building had fewer units, there would be plenty of parking without the need for a variance. Commissioner Drotning indicated that reducing the number of units would reduce the parking requirement but would not fix the problems with the parking lot layout due to the shallow depth of the site. He reiterated that the developer could go back to the previous design and not need the variance and the City would have a parking lot that does not function as well as it could. Chair Swecker requested the developer identify the location of the doors to access the building. Mr. Vogel indicated where the main entrance to the building is proposed and where the stairways are located. Commissioner Drotning asked the developer about snow storage. Mr. Johnson indicated that he has not yet thought about snow storage and. removal. Commissioner Drotning suggested that a stipulation be added addressing this issue. The Planning Commission added stipulation #12 to read: 12. Snow storage must be accommodated within the subject property or must be taken off site. Snow storage cannot utilize required parking spaces or be placed on public property. The Planning Commission and Mr. Johnson discussed condominiums versus rental units. Mr. Johnson stated that condominiums are not selling very well currently. The rental units will have. separate utilities so they could easily be converted into condominium units if the market changes in the future. Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 16 The Planning Commissioners discussed diversified housing and how the City has a responsibility to offer different types of housing as provided in the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Manikowski commented that she would .appreciate different housing options for the different stages in life. She felt this is a nice transition from the freeway to the adjacent townhomes and single family homes and the project follows the recommendations of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The Planning Commission concurred to break the Kenyon Woods proposal into three different motions, one for each planning action, and vote on them separately. 06.104 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the Kenyon Woods preliminary and final plat, subject to the 11 stipulations listed in the August 10, 2006 planning report, with the addition of Stipulation 12. Ayes: Swecker, Detjen, Grenz, Drotning, Manikowski, Pattee. Nays: 0 06.105 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the Kenyon Woods conditional use permit to allow a building height greater than 35 • feet in the RH-1 District, and approval of the Findings of Facts dated August 17, 2006. Ayes: Detjen, Grenz, Drotning, Manikowski, Pattee, Swecker. Nays: 0 06.106 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to .City Council. approval of the Kenyon Woods variance to allow parking lot setback less than 30 feet from the front property line in the RH-1 District, and approval of the Findings of Facts dated August 17, 2006. Ayes: Drotning, Manikowski, Pattee, Swecker, Detjen. Nays: Grenz. Commissioner Grenz felt there wasn't sufficient hardship to grant the variance. Break at 12:00 a.m. Reconvened at 12:10 a.m. ITEM H. CHADWICK COMMERCIAL Chair Swecker opened the public hearing to consider the application of Northfield Hospital for the following, located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of 215 Street (CSAH 70) and Jacquard Avenue: Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 17 A. Preliminary and final plat of three lots to be known as Chadwick Commercial. B. Conditional Use Permit to exceed 25 % impervious surface area for a commercial use in the Shoreland Overlay District for South Creek. C. Vacation of a drainage and utility easement. Assistant City Attorney Poehler attested that the legal notice had been duly published in accordance with State Statutes and City Code. David Oliver, Vice President of Northfield Hospital presented an overview of their request. Mr. Oliver stated that they would start with eight physicians and at build out they would have approximately 36 doctors. He indicated that they would start construction Spring of 2007 and hopefully be completed by December of 2007. He indicated that Steve Oliver from Mohagen Hansen Architectural Group was present to help answer any questions that the Planning Commission may have. Associate Planner Kris Jenson presented the planning report. Ms. Jenson stated that Northfield Hospital has .submitted an application for the .preliminary plat of two lots and one outlot and final plat of one lot and two outlots to be known as . Chadwick Commercial. She indicated that Northfield Clinic is proposed on Lot 1, Block 1 of the preliminary and final plat and Blue Chip Sports Academy is proposed on Lot 1, Block 2 of the preliminary plat. The Blue Chip Sports Academy lot is proposed as Outlot B on the final. A separate final plat (Chadwick Commercial 1St Addition) to create the Blue Chip Sports .Academy lot and conditional use permits is being processed simultaneously with the Chadwick Commercial preliminary and .final plat, conditional use permit, and easement vacation. In conjunction with the Chadwick Commercial preliminary and final plat, the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to exceed 25% impervious surface coverage within the Shoreland Overlay District and the vacation of a drainage and utility easement. _ Ms. Jenson stated that there are two outlots being final platted with this development. Outlot A includes a stormwatex basin and infiltration basin and will be deeded to the City with the final plat.: Blue Chip Sports. Academy is proposing to final plat Outlot B into a lot for their facility and the extension of 214th Street as Chadwick Commercial First Addition. Ms. Jenson indicated that a 10 foot perimeter easement was platted on Outlot D, • Chadwick Farm (the parent parcel). The applicant is requesting this easement be Planning Commission Meeting August 17,.2006 Page 18 vacated with new drainage and utility easements to be platted as shown on the Chadwick Commercial final plat. Ms. Jenson reviewed the applicable performance standards included in the Zoning Ordinance for total impervious surface area within the Shoreland Overlay District, which are listed in detail in the August 10, 2006 planning report. She stated that there will be 36% impervious surface coverage within the Shoreland Overlay District portion of the Northfield Clinic site. Ms. Jenson stated .that should the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Chadwick Commercial preliminary and final plat, conditional use permit, and easement vacation, Planning Department .staff recommends approval, subject to the 12 stipulations listed in the August 10, 2006 planning report, and approval of the Findings of Fact dated August 17, 2006. Chair Swecker opened the hearing to the public for comment. Marty Ruch, 21286 Isotope Trail • Mr. Ruch asked about the proposed landscaping on the north side of the plat. 06.107 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 12:20 a.m. Ayes: 7 Nays:0 Motion passed. Ms. Jenson displayed an overview of the entire Chadwick site, including Outlot A where the landscaping is proposed. Outlot A will be deeded to the City. She stated that no tree removal is proposed with this development. Commissioner Drotning asked the Assistant City Engineer to explain the drainage in this area. Mr. Rubash indicated that this area is the west branch of the South Creek. He explained that because this is a tributary to the South Creek, the drainage and infiltration must meet South Creek management requirements. Chair Swecker and Commissioner Drotning complimented the developer on the proposed landscaping and parking lot design. 06.108 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the Chadwick Commercial preliminary .and final plat, Conditional Use Permit to exceed 25% impervious surface area for a commercial use in the Shoreland Overlay District for South Creek, and easement vacation, subject to the 12 stipulations listed Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 19 in the August 10, 2006 planning report, and approval of the Findings of Fact dated August 17, 2006. Ayes: Detjen, Grenz, Drotning, Manikowski, Pattee, Swecker. Nays: 0 ITEM 9. CHADWICK COMMERCIAL FIRST ADDITION Chair Swecker opened the public hearing to consider the application of CAL, LLC (Blue Chip Sports Academy) for the following, located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of 215 Street (CSAH 70) and Jacquard Avenue: A. Conditional Use Permit to exceed 25 % impervious surface area for a commercial use in the Shoreland Overlay District for South Creek. B. Conditional Use Permit to allow indoor limited retail sales in the CC, Corporate Campus District. C. Conditional Use Permit to exceed. a building height of 35 feet. Consider the final plat of one lot to be known as Chadwick Commercial First Addition. Assistant City Attorney Poehler attested that the legal notice had been duly published in accordance with State Statutes and City Code. Jack Matasosky from APPRO Development. was in attendance representing the owner. Mr. Matasosky presented an overview of the request. He explained that Blue Chip Sports Academy offers instruction for a number of different sports. He indicated that the owner agrees with the stipulations listed in the planning report. Associate Planner Kris Jenson presented the planning report. Ms. Jenson stated that APPRO Development, on behalf of CAL, LLC, have submitted an application for the final plat of one lot to be known as Chadwick Commercial First Addition. She indicated that. the subject property is Outlot B, Chadwick Commercial and was shown as a separate lot on the Chadwick Commercial preliminary plat. In conjunction with the final plat, Ms. Jenson indicated that the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow indoor limited retail sales and service, to exceed the maximum building height of 35 feet, and to exceed 25% impervious surface coverage for a commercial use within the Shoreland Overlay District, all for the Blue Chip Sports Academy. Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 20 Ms. Jenson reviewed the applicable conditional. use performance standards included in the Zoning Ordinance for indoor limited retail sales and service, maximum building height, and total impervious surface area within the Shoreland Overlay District, which are listed in detail in the August 10, 2006 planning report. She stated that there will be 67% impervious surface coverage within the Shoreland Overlay District portion of the Blue Chip Sports Academy site. Ms. Jenson reviewed the parking requirement for the proposed use of this building. She indicated that staff has been working with the applicant and the City's planning consultant, Dan Licht of NAC, to determine the appropriate number of spaces for this type of use since it is not specifically listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Jenson reviewed Mr. Licht's calculations which are- listed in his memo attached to the August 10, 2006 planning report. Mr. Licht also addressed the parking requirement for a possible future re-use of the building for office/manufacturing/warehouse purposes. Planning staff recommends the following stipulation be added, which the applicant is aware of and agrees to: • 16. Thee landscape plan shall be revised to include a staggered row of nine evergreen trees. in a species that conforms to the Corridor and Gateway Design standards. These .trees should be planted in the southwest area of the ROW for 214 Street, in a location to be approved by staff.. This must be done prior to consideration of the final plat. Ms. Jenson stated that should the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council .approval of the Chadwick Commercial First Addition final. plat and conditional use permits, Planning Department staff. recommends approval, subject to the 15 stipulations listed in the August 10, 2006 planning report, along with the additional stipulation #161isted above, and approval of the Findings of Facts dated August 17, 2006. Chair Swecker opened the hearing to the public for comment. Marty Ruch, 21286 Isotope Trail Mr. Ruch asked about the proposed retail sales, the hours. of the facility, and headlight glare on 214+ Street. Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 21 • 06.109 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 12:40 a.m. Ayes: 7 Nays:O Motion passed. Mr. Matasosky responded to Mr. Ruch's questions. Regarding the retail sales, he indicated that there will be no exposure to the outside of the building. It will consist of pro shops, hockey equipment stores, etc,. accessed internally within the building. Mr. Matasosky stated that the facility's normal hours would be $:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., with ice use until 10:30 p.m. It would be open six days a week, closed Mondays. They may have hockey use seven days a week. City staff explained that the retail use .can have no separate exterior building entrance and there is no limitation on hours of use. Commissioner Pattee asked about the colors of the exterior of the building. Ms. Jenson displayed the exterior building materials. Commissioner Drotning confirmed that all roof top equipment is screened. He also requested that there be more screening at the northwest corner of the building due to the mass of the building. Chair Swecker asked how many student athletes would be in the building at one time. Mr. Matasosky responded that there would be approximately 175-210 students for 60-90 minutes at peak hours. He also.. stated that most kids are dropped off by their parents. Mr. Matasosky stated that there will be adult hockey one night a week at this facility and there will be leagues of all types. 06.110 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the Chadwick Commercial First Addition final plat, and Conditional Use Permit to exceed 25% impervious surface area for a commercial use in the Shoreland Overlay District for South Creek, to allow indoor limited retail sales in the CC, Corporate Campus District, and to exceed a building height of 35 feet,. subject to the 15 stipulations listed in the August 10, 2006 planning report, including the name. change to Chadwick Commercial Second Addition, along with the additional stipulation #16, and approval of the Findings of Fact dated August 17, 2006. Ayes: Grenz, Drotning, Manikowski, Pattee, Swecker, Detjen. Nays: 0 . There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1:03 a.m. Planning Commission Meeting August 17, 2006 Page 22 Respectfully submitted, Penny g, Recording Secre ry ATTEST: - Kerrm Swecker, Chair •