Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-07-11CITY OF LAKEVILLE Planning Commission Meeting Minutes JULY 7, 2011 The July 7, 2011 Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Davis in the City Hall Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m. Flag pledge and roll call of members: Present: Chair Davis Vice Chair Lillehei Secretary Adler Commissioner Boerschel Commissioner Drotning Commissioner Grenz Commissioner Maguire Ex- officio Fitzhenry Absent None Staff Present Daryl Morey, Planning Director; Frank Dempsey, Associate Planner; and Penny Brevig, Recording Secretary. ITEM 3. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES: Commissioner Lillehei asked that the third bullet point on Page 5 of the June 16, 2011 Planning Commission meeting minutes be stricken due to it not being pertinent to the discussion. Commissioner Drotning indicated that Commissioner Grenz's name be removed from the Ayes vote under Motion 11 -35 of the June 16, 2011 Planning Commission meeting minutes as Commissioner Grenz voted Nay on that particular motion. The June 16, 2011 Planning Commission meeting minutes were approved as amended. ITEM 4. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mr. Morey stated that the following item was distributed to the Planning Commission at tonight's meeting: 1. Comfort Inn sign variance exhibit identifying the elevation of the site in relation to the elevation of the freeway. Mr. Morey commented that only four Commissioners are scheduled to be in attendance at the July 21, 2011 Planning Commission meeting ( Boerschel, Davis, Drotning, Lillehei). Four Commission members need to be in attendance in order to have a quorum. There is one public hearing scheduled for this meeting. Mr. Planning Commission Meeting July 7, 2011 Page 2 Morey asked that if any of these four Commissioners were unable to attend, to please contact either himself or the Recording Secretary as soon as possible prior to the meeting. ITEM 5. LIFETIME FITNESS Chair Davis opened the public hearing to consider the application of Life Time Fitness for an amendment to the Life Time Fitness Planned Unit Development to allow additional wall signs, located at 18425 Dodd Boulevard. The Recording Secretary attested that the legal notice had been duly published in accordance with State Statutes and City Code. Parham Javaheri from Life Time Fitness presented a brief overview of the project. He commented that Life Time Fitness is currently in a tennis branding process and they want to bring more awareness to their tennis facility and programs. He stated that Lakeville has the largest tennis facility within a Life Time Fitness and they want to differentiate the tennis business from their core business. The additional wall sign will help with branding their tennis facility. Planning Director Daryl Morey presented the planning report. Mr. Morey presented a short history of the development and zoning of the subject site. Mr. Morey reviewed the existing and proposed Life Time Fitness signage with the CC District sign requirements in place at the time the PUD was approved, the current OP District sign requirements, and the current C -3 District sign requirements allowed for large box retail uses. He stated that staff supports this PUD amendment request because Life Time Fitness has a multifaceted component to its use and is similar to and compatible with other large box retail users in Lakeville. Mr. Morey stated that should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Life Time Fitness PUD amendment, Planning Department staff recommends approval subject to the 2 stipulations listed in the June 29, 2011 planning report. Chair Davis opened the hearing to the public for comment. There were no comments from the audience. 11.36 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 6:12 p.m. Ayes: Boerschel, Maguire, Lillehei, Davis, Adler, Grenz, Drotning. Nays: 0 Planning Commission Meeting July 7, 2011 Page 3 Chair Davis asked for comments from the Pl annin g Commission. Discussion points were: • Commissioner Grenz wanted to confirm that he did not have to abstain from this vote due to him being a current member of Life Time Fitness. Mr. Morey indicated that if Commissioner Grenz would have no financial gain from the approval of this request he would not have to abstain from the vote. • Commissioner Lillehei wanted a clarification regarding signs being content neutral. Mr. Morey explained that this would be the third wall sign for the facility and by ordinance the wording for this sign does not have to identify the tennis facility. Staff is recommending the third wall sign be allowed consistent with the secondary wall sign allowance in the C -3 District. • The Planning Commission had a discussion regarding which side of the building the sign should be located. They agreed to the east or north walls of the tennis center only. The Planning Commission agreed to the following additional stipulation: 3. The sign shall be located on the east or north walls of the tennis center only. 11.37 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the Life Time Fitness Planned Unit Development amendment to allow additional wall signs, located at 18425 Dodd Boulevard, subject to the following 3 stipulations, as amended: 1. The PUD amendment shall pertain to the C -3 District requirements only for signage. 2. A sign permit is required prior to the installation of the proposed third wall sign. 3. The sign shall be located on the east or north walls of the tennis center only. Ayes: Maguire, Lillehei, Davis, Adler, Grenz, Drotning, Boerschel. Nays: 0 ITEM 6. ROFFE CONTAINER Chair Davis opened the public hearing to consider the application of Roffe Container for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a building height greater than 45 feet in the I -2, General Industrial District, located at 8415 - 220th Street. The Recording Secretary attested that the legal notice had been duly published in accordance with State Statutes and City Code. Planning Commission Meeting July 7, 2011 Page 4 Tom Janas, owner of Raffe Container, presented an overview of their project. He commented that rail access is a major component for their facility. He also indicated that they would like to amend Stipulation #2 in the June 30, 2011 planning report to read the silos shall not exceed 70 feet, rather than 67 feet in height. Associate Planner Frank Dempsey presented the planning report. Mr. Dempsey stated that the silos would be approximately 67 feet in height, but that could vary slightly so staff understands and supports the requested amendment to Stipulation #2 of the planning report. Mr. Dempsey stated that conditional use permits were granted in 1999 and 2004 for 70 foot tall storage silos for the now vacant industrial property to the east. He stated that in addition to the City approval, FAA and MAC approval is necessary to allow the proposed storage silos because a portion of the property lies within State Airport Safety Zone A. Mr. Dempsey stated that should the Planning Commission recommend approval of the CUP, Pl annin g Department staff recommends approval subject to the 6 stipulations listed in the June 30, 2011 planning report, as amended. Chair Davis opened the hearing to the public for comment. There were no comments from the audience. 11.38 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 6:24 p.m. Ayes: Lillehei, Davis, Adler, Grenz, Drotning, Boerschel, Maguire. Nays: 0 Chair Davis asked for comments from the Planning Commission. Discussion points were: • Commissioner Grenz commented on the requested 70 foot silos by the applicant. He indicated that as long as that height is consistent with the surrounding area and will not exceed 70 feet, he would be fine with amending Stipulation #2. The other Commissioners agreed. • Commissioner Lillehei asked why a greater height, rather than width, is needed to obtain the necessary volume for the proposed silos. Mr. Janas stated that it's easier to transport the silos from the manufacturing facility if they do not exceed the 12 foot diameter they are proposing. A wider diameter silo with a shorter height would add to the cost of the project. • Commissioner Grenz asked how the product from the silos are loaded and unloaded. Mr. Janas responded. Planning Commission Meeting July 7, 2011 Page 5 • Chair Davis thanked Mr. Janas for considering Lakeville for the expansion of his business. 11.39 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of the Roffe Container conditional use permit to allow a building height greater than 45 feet in the I -2, General Industrial District, located at 8415 - 220t Street, subject to the following 6 stipulations, as amended. 1. The silos shall be constructed in the location shown on the approved site plan. 2. The silos shall not exceed 70 feet in height. 3. Authorization from the FAA and MAC for the proposed silos is required prior to City Council consideration of the conditional use permit. 4. The crane used to install the silos shall not exceed the height authorized by the FAA and MAC. 5. The silos shall be painted to match a color that is compatible with the principal building. 6. Building permits are required prior to commencing any construction or remodeling work. Ayes: Davis, Adler, Grenz, Drotning, Boerschel, Maguire, Lillehei. Nays: 0 ITEM 7. COMFORT INN Chair Davis opened discussion for the application of Sunny Bhakta, owner of Comfort Inn, for a 60 day extension of the sign height variance approved in 2008, located at 10935 -176th Street. Sunny Bhakta, owner of Comfort Inn, presented an overview of her request. Ms. Bhakta explained that the economic hardship for two years in a row and not being able to afford to install the 50 foot tall freestanding sign approved by the variance is the reason that she has requested the extensions. She is in the process of getting quotes for the cost of installing a freestanding sign as allowed by the approved variance. Planning Director Daryl Morey presented the planning report. Mr. Morey provided a short history of this freestanding sign height variance. He indicated that the first extension was approved administratively as allowed by the Zoning Ordinance but any extensions after that must be reviewed by the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council. Planning Commission Meeting July 7, 2011 Page 6 Mr. Morey referred to the handout at tonight's meeting that includes the elevation of the site in relation to the elevation of the freeway. This exhibit was submitted by the applicant with the initial sign variance request in 2008. He indicated that if this variance approval lapsed, Ms. Bhakta would be able to install a sign approximately 44 feet in height given the elevation difference of the existing freestanding sign location and the adjacent freeway as shown on this exhibit as currently allowed by the Zoning Ordinance for a hotel use in the freeway corridor. The Zoning Ordinance was amended in 2010 to increase the freestanding sign height for certain uses within the freeway corridor that sit below the elevation of the freeway in order to increase the visibility of the sign to passing motorists. This ordinance amendment was due in large part to the discussion generated by the Comfort Inn variance request. Mr. Morey stated that Planning Department staff recommends approval of the 60 day extension for the Comfort Inn sign variance allowing a freestanding sign 50 feet in height to August 19, 2011, as presented. Chair Davis asked for comments from the Planning Commission. Discussion points were: • Commissioner Drotning was fine with this extension request but not any further extensions in order to bring closure to this variance application. • Chair Davis asked about the status of the southbound blue freeway information signs. Mr. Morey indicated that staff was recently informed by MNDOT that the southbound blue freeway information signs will be re- installed sometime this summer. Mr. Morey stated he was unsure of the impact that the State shutdown will have on this timeframe, if any. • Commissioner Maguire asked if this variance request expired on June 20, 2011. Mr. Morey stated that Ms. Bhakta submitted her extension request prior to the June 20th expiration date, but the 60 day extension, if approved, will be from June 20th bringing the new expiration date to August 19, 2011. • The Planning Commission agreed to the 60 day extension, but generally indicated an unwillingness to recommend any further extension requests. 11.40 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of a 60 day extension for the Comfort Inn Sign Variance, allowing a freestanding sign 50 feet in height, to August 19, 2011. Ayes: Adler, Grenz, Drotning, Boerschel, Maguire, Lillehei, Davis. Nays: 0 Planning Commission Meeting July 7, 2011 Page 7 ITEM 8. CITY OF LAKEVILLE Chair Davis opened the public hearing to consider an ordinance amending Title 11 (the Zoning Ordinance), Chapter 6 of the Lakeville City Code, concerning variances. The Recording Secretary attested that the legal notice had been duly published in accordance with State Statutes and City Code. Planning Director Daryl Morey presented the planning report. Mr. Morey stated that this Zoning Ordinance amendment formalizes the State Statute changes concerning variances that were signed into law on May 5, 2011. He indicated that City Attorney Roger Knutson was part of the group that wrote the new state legislation and he also drafted the redlined amendment to our Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Morey stated that Planning Department staff recommends approval of the amendment to Chapter 6 of the Zoning Ordinance as presented. Chair Davis opened the hearing to the public for comment. There were no comments from the audience. 11.41 Motion was made and seconded to close the public hearing at 6:42 p.m. Ayes: Grenz, Drotning, Boerschel, Maguire, Lillehei, Davis, Adler. Nays: 0 Chair Davis asked for comments from the Planning Commission. Discussion points were: • Commissioner Grenz stated that he still has a problem with Item C of the amended review criteria and cannot support this. - Mr. Morey stated that he talked to the City Attorney regarding the concerns with this particular review criteria expressed by Commissioner Grenz at the June 16, 2011 Planning Commission meeting in conjunction with the Schiller deck variance request. Mr. Knutson assured staff that Item C pertains to the current property owner at the time of the variance request, not a previous owner. The City Attorney did not recommend any changes to Item C. • Chair Davis and Commissioner Drotning indicated that there are a number of other requirements, besides Item C, that an applicant must also meet in order to qualify for a variance. • Commissioner Maguire was in agreement with Mr. Knutson and the amendment as presented. • Commissioner Lillehei has read Item C. He indicated that he does not have a complete understanding of what the plight of the landowner is intended to mean, but he has faith in the City Attorney and his recommendation. He Planning Commission Meeting July 7, 2011 Page 8 suggested that the plight of the landowner could be explained in more detail by the City Attorney, possibly at a future work session. • Commissioner Drotning stated that the City's ordinance must not be in conflict with state law. • Commissioner Grenz felt that the City could be more restrictive than state law. 11.42 Motion was made and seconded to recommend to City Council approval of an amendment to Chapter 6 of the Zoning Ordinance regarding variances, as presented. Ayes: Drotning, Boerschel, Maguire, Lillehei, Davis, Adler. Nays: Grenz. Commissioner Grenz interprets Item C of the Ordinance Amendment to allow property owners to profit from a situation that they created. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Penny BreA , Recording Secret 4y 7/21/11 ATTEST: Bart Davis,/Chair 7/21/11