Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-12-05 P & ZCITY OF CENTERVILLE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 5, 2006 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the Planning and Zoning Commission held their regularly scheduled meeting on December 5, 2006, at 6:30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson Brian Hanson Commissioner Jennefer Klennert Hunt (arrived at 6:40 p.m.) Commissioner Bob Wright Commissioner Mark Pangell Commissioner D. Love ABSENT: Commissioner Tom Wood COUNCIL: Mayor Mary Capra STAFF: Dallas Larson I. CALL TO ORDER 1.Roll Call The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. II. APPEARANCES 1. Ms. Norma Essex – 7333 Old Mill Road (Fence Ordinance) Ms. Essex stated that she would like the fencing ordinance to be reviewed, not only for her benefit but for the benefit of others. She stated that the current fence ordinance states that fencing needs to have a two-foot setback, which means you, would lose two feet of your yard. She stated that, in her case, this would mean her underground sprinkler system would be on the opposite side of the fence. She stated that she would like to install a split rail fence directly on the property line, without permission from the neighbor due to re-occurring difficulties with that same neighbor. Ms. Essex stated that she does not understand the need for the two foot setback because there is no ordinance for setback distances on trees or brush plants. She stated that if she cannot install a fence on her property line, she would like to put in a hedge. Chair Hanson stated that the reason for the two foot setback is to allow for maintenance on both sides of the fence and still remain on your own property. He stated that there are allowable reasons for a zero lot line in some cases; however, a property survey will need Page 1 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 to be completed and the neighbor will need to approve the location of the fence so the other side can be maintained. Ms. Essex stated that she does not feel her neighbor would cooperate and asked about the location of a hedge. City Administrator Larson stated that the hedge cannot be put on the boulevard and adequate sight lines will need to be maintained at the end of her driveway. Commissioner Klennert-Hunt arrived at 6:40 p.m. Mayor Capra asked Mr. Larson to provide Ms. Essex with information on mediation services available through the County. III. PUBLIC HEARING(S) 1. Sedona Homes – Preliminary Site Plan & Conditional Use Permit Request Chair Hanson opened the public hearing at 6:41 p.m. City Administrator Larson stated that this public hearing needs to be repeated because proper notices about the hearing were not published last month. He stated that the City Attorney had submitted a memo to the Commission regarding items that he would like Sedona Homes to address. Mr. Paul Keleher, Chief Manager for the project, explained the plans for the site. Mr. Keleher stated that they plan for a 30,000 sq. ft. office building for a single tenant, located near the Public Works building. He presented a landscape plan that will screen the properties on the west with 6 to 7 foot spruce trees in a staggered row. He stated that at the south end, the property will be screened also with 6 to 7 foot spruce trees in a triple staggered row. He stated that the project meets all C-1 codes, but they are asking for a variance to the building height. He introduced Architect Mr. Mike Thomas and Civil Engineer Mr. Brian Bourassa. Chair Hanson reviewed items from the City Attorney’s letter that he felt needed to be addressed: A. Issue regarding blending of styles of buildings, and use of buildings as a buffer Mr. Thomas stated that to keep the roof height down, they have planned a flat roof line and due to the size of the building, they could not use a wood structure and plan to use precast concrete. He stated that they have tried to tie the buildings together with colors, using earth tones and also using cultured stone on the front of the new building, similar to the existing townhome buildings. He stated that the canopy and columns on the new building will be white to match the existing canopies. Page 2 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 Commissioner Pangell asked if the windows would be similar between the buildings. Mr. Thomas stated that the townhome buildings have a vinyl, residential-type window that cannot be utilized on Commercial buildings per the building code. He stated that they are planning to use aluminum windows. Commissioner Klennert Hunt asked if the landscaping plans would be for the entire property. Mr. Keleher, Project Manager, stated that they will be using the same installer for the new building and also using the same planters, for instance, to tie the buildings together. He stated that they are planning on a uniform landscaping look for the entire property. Mr. Thomas suggested, since they were unable to bring accurate samples of the building materials, that the Commission approve the plans contingent upon approval of the building color and materials to be used. Commissioner Wright asked if some of the existing townhome buildings are vacant. Mr. Keleher stated that some are vacant. He stated that their offices are located in the first building, the second building does not yet have a finished interior, and the third building has one side occupied. Commissioner Wright expressed concern that the new building may intimidate potential tenants. Mr. Keleher stated that he feels it will not be intimidating to incoming tenants, but a draw because of the influx of people that may use their services. He stated that he felt the building will have 65 to 70 people who will utilize other retail services within the community. He stated that he feels this building will be a focal point for other businesses and good for the industrial park across the street. Mr. Thomas stated that at the previous meeting there was concern expressed regarding the mechanical equipment and whether screening would be necessary. He presented a study completed regarding sight-lines for both the trash enclosure and the mechanical equipment. He stated that the enclosure for trash receptacles would be constructed out of material that exactly matches the building. He reviewed the sight-lines for the mechanical equipment and stated that they do not feel screening will be needed. Mr. Keleher stated that they also received information from the manufacturer regarding the sound levels of the equipment. He stated that the equipment is at 70 decibels near the unit and drops down to 55 decibels at the property line, which is well within the accepted range. Mr. Larson asked for a review of the lighting plans. Page 3 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 Mr. Keleher stated that they are proposing a shoe-box style light that is 20-25 feet tall. He stated that the lighting will be directed downward and remain on site. Commissioner Love asked if the lighting throughout the entire development would be the same. Mr. Keleher stated that the existing buildings do not have lighting in the parking areas, just on the buildings. Chair Hanson asked about the buffer between the surrounding properties. Mr. Keleher reviewed the landscaping plans and noted that he feels the office park will blend in with the surrounding areas. Commissioner Pangell stated that he was not on the Planning Commission when the original proposal was submitted but it has been made clear that this proposal is completely different than the original. Mr. Keleher stated that a market study was completed before they began the first phase of the project. He stated that they were then chosen over two other sites by Eagle Brook Church for their office building. He reiterated that he feels the addition of this building will be good for both the community and the office park. Ms. Linda Broussard, 6756 Centerville Road, asked what the developer would call the architectural style of the townhomes. Mr. Thomas stated that he does not feel they really have a style but, if pressed, would say it has a two-story, ranch feel. Ms. Broussard asked if there was a way to create a three-story ranch feel out of the existing building. She stated that although the new building is beautiful as designed, she does not feel the look fits in with the current buildings. She would like the new building to look more like what is there. Mr. Thomas stated that he has struggled with this issue from the beginning, but noted that there are building code issues, budget issues, and also a client asking for a certain type of building that hinders this process. He stated that because he cannot make the buildings look exactly alike, he has tried to tie them together with the use of colors, the cultured stone and the canopy area. Ms. Broussard suggested wrapping the canopy around the corner of the building to make it look more “porch like”. Commissioner Love asked what the distance is between the current buildings and the new buildings. Page 4 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 Chair Hanson stated that at the last meeting it was said to be 65 feet. Mr. Thomas stated that the building was moved so that the parking stalls wrapped around the building and did not present a “Wal-Mart” type feel with a “sea of parking stalls” as you enter the development. He stated that he tried to make it appear more pedestrian. Chair Hanson asked if the new tenant would be renting or owning and if they were renting, whether designing the building specifically for this tenant made sense for possible leasing later. Mr. Keleher stated that they are still negotiating this, but feels the structure would be an attractive office space. He stated that the interior is office like and has a very functional design. He stated that he is confident that the future road improvements in the area will make this space very attractive. Mayor Capra stated that she feels this building would be great in the new downtown redevelopment area or on Eagle Brook’s own 92-acre campus to the north, but struggles with how we can meld this with the existing townhomes. She stated that she is disappointed that the developer did not have material and color samples and that the drawings do not include the newly added white canopies and columns. She stated that she wants to see all this information before a decision is made. Mr. Thomas passed around pictures that included the white canopies and columns. B. Issue regarding City concessions and Code deficiencies of initial development. 1. Reducing the required number of parking spaces per office unit from 22 to 14. Mr. Keleher stated that he asked for the reduction to 14 because he felt that is adequate for each building, based on studies of other office townhome complexes. He stated that the new structure will comply with the City code for the number of parking stalls. 2. Delaying construction of a trail and dedication of easements. Mr. Keleher stated that he does not remember how the trail easement issue was originally discussed. He stated that the dedication of easements has been recorded with the plat. Mr. Keleher indicated that they did talk about a trail along the road but decided not to do it because it would only be torn up when the road is improved. Mayor Capra stated that the City needs to make sure it has a dedicated trail easement along the front of this project because this did not end up on the plat. She noted that they want this in addition to the easement given to the County. Page 5 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 3. Waiving or reducing park dedication fees. Mr. Keleher again stated that he was unsure what this means because he thought there was a plan to pay as they went. He stated that he is willing to sit down and figure out what their fair share of dedication fees will be. 4. Waiving requirements related to screening and drainage. Mr. Keleher stated that he would research what was originally agreed upon for screening and drainage. Mayor Capra stated that she thinks the drainage was corrected near the Public Works site and noted that perhaps some of these issues are contractual issues for the Council to take a closer look at. Chair Hanson agreed that most of the items in the memo from the City Attorney were issues that the Council needed to consider. C. Issue regarding Development Contract, Jackson Commercial LLC – Centerville Town Office Park, Phase I (Lots 1-10) Mr. Keleher stated that once again, he was unsure what this issue was about. Commissioner Klennert Hunt suggested that Mr. Keleher discuss these issues with the City Attorney prior to the Council meeting so he can be prepared with the correct information to answer their questions. Motion by Commissioner Klennert Hunt, seconded by Commissioner Love, to close the public hearing on Sedona Homes – Preliminary Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit at 7:36 p.m. All present in favor, motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Klennert Hunt stated that she is concerned about some of the issues with the previous development agreement and feels that the Commission may be “beating up” Mr. Keleher for mistakes that may have been made by the City. She stated that the City just wants to make sure it is done right this time. She stated that she feels most issues raised at the last meeting have been addressed, with the exception of the building colors, which is a subjective issue. She asked if the City Engineer has reviewed the plans. Mr. Larson stated that comments have been given to Mr. Keleher by the City Engineer. Commissioner Wright stated that at the last meeting, this project had conditional approval from the Rice Creek Watershed District and asked if they had received final approval. Mr. Keleher stated that they are still working through a few minor issues, but are very close to approval. Page 6 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 Chair Hanson questioned whether the Fire Department had reviewed the plans. Mr. Larson stated that they have seen the site plan and are reasonably comfortable with it. Mr. Thomas stated that he met with the Building Official and noted that this will be a fully sprinklered building, so there are usually no issues. Commissioner Klennert Hunt suggested adding item K. to the CUP including the platting of the trail easement. Commissioner Love asked whether something should be included regarding the engineering information given on the sight lines for the mechanical equipment. Mayor Capra suggested that the City Engineer review the developer’s study of the sight lines. Commissioner Pangell stated that he is not personally bothered by the style of this building. Commissioner Klennert Hunt stated that she is not sure if it is the Commission’s place to decide on colors because they meet all codes and rules. She stated that color choice is always subjective anyway, and she feels this is more of a Council decision. Commissioner Love stated that his biggest concern is that this building does not look low-cost because it will be the focal point and start development in this area. Motion by Commissioner Klennert Hunt, seconded by Commissioner Pangell, to recommend approval for the Sedona Homes Preliminary Plat. All present in favor, motion carried unanimously. Motion by Commissioner Klennert Hunt, seconded by Love, to recommend approval for the Sedona Homes Conditional Use Permit, subject to City Engineer reviewing the site line study to determine if additional screening is necessary for the rooftop equipment (item G) and add item K: that the Developer will plat the trail easement for the property. All present in favor, motion carried unanimously. Chair Hanson stated that this topic will be on the December 13, 2006 City Council agenda. V. NEW BUSINESS 1. Proposed Hanzal Addition – 7381 Old Mill Road – Rezone, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Variance Request, and Preliminary Plat Mr. Jeff Hanzal appeared before the Commission and stated that he would like to subdivide the entire parcel and create four lots on the north side of the present house and Page 7 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 one lot to the south. He stated that a portion of this land is zoned P-1 and a small corner is zoned R-5. He stated that he would like the entire property to be zoned R-2 which would require updating in the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the variance he is asking for is due to the proximity of the creek, which requires a 100-foot setback. He stated that he would like to be able to move the house a little closer to the road. Commissioner Klennert Hunt asked why the City had a front setback requirement. Mr. Larson stated that the front yard setback is to provide uniformity among houses, so someone is not standing on their front porch looking at the back of another resident’s home. Mr. Hanzal stated that he feels this situation is unusual and the location of the home, as proposed, will not impede the line of sight in the area. Ms. Broussard stated that she remembers the City allowing a variance in this area because of the creek setback issues and this situation appears to be similar. Mayor Capra asked what setback he was asking for. Mr. Hanzal stated that he would like a 20-foot setback rather than the 35 feet currently required by City Code. Mr. Larson asked if there would be a retaining wall in the rear of the house and if so, how high it would be. Mr. Hanzal stated that he is planning a 10-foot high retaining wall to separate the yard from the wetland area. Chair Hanson asked if this area is DNR wetland. Mr. Hanzal stated that it is under the jurisdiction of the Rice Creek Watershed District and some mitigation is planned. Commissioner Klennert Hunt confirmed that the existing house will remain. Mr. Larson noted that all the proposed lots meet the 100-foot width guidelines. Mr. Hanzal stated that the existing driveway will be moved and one of the sheds on the property has already been removed. He stated that there is a second shed in the wetland area and he is unsure whether it will need to be removed. He stated that he would like to have water and sewer connections to the lots Chair Hanson asked if this should be a PUD rather than an R-2 rezoning. Mr. Larson stated that it would be possible for it to be a PUD. Mr. Hanzal stated that there is currently a storm water drain that dumps directly into the creek. He stated that he is willing to move this pipe and redirect the water into a catch basin between Lots 1 and 2, which will drain to the ponding area at the back of Lot 1. He stated that he feels this is a positive change for the environment. Commissioner Klennert Hunt stated that she thought City sewer and water hookups were required in R-2 zoning. Page 8 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 Mr. Larson confirmed that City sewer and water hook ups are required in R2 zoning and approval of this plat is predicated on having sewer and water available. He stated that the Parks and Recreation Commission are looking to gain park access to the lake and that perhaps there would be a trail connection to Old Mill Road. He suggested that this is something that the Commission should think about for the long term and try to figure out where it could go on the plat now. He stated that if the Commission is comfortable with this proposal, the public hearing could be scheduled. Motion by Chair Hanson, seconded by Commissioner Wright, that a public hearing be scheduled regarding the Proposed Hanzal Addition – 7381 Old Mill Road – Rezone, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Variance Request and Preliminary Plat. All present in favor, motion carried unanimously. IV. OLD BUSINESS th 2. Six Month Review – Special Use Permit (Launderville’s Auto Repair, 7139 - 20 Avenue) Mr. Larson noted that there have not been any calls to the City regarding this business. He stated that the Commission could just leave it alone or opt to review this again in a year and judge whether further review is necessary. Motion by Commissioner Klennert Hunt, seconded by Commissioner Pangell, to recommend extending approval of the Special Use Permit for Launderville’s Auto th Repair, 7139 - 20 Avenue with a review in one year. All present in favor, motion carried unanimously. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS Mr. Larson stated that the Council has scheduled interviews with the three candidates who applied for the vacant Planning Commissioner position. Commissioner Pangell asked how appointment of the candidate made it onto the agenda at the last Planning and Zoning meeting. Mayor Capra stated that past practice has been to send applicants to the various commissions for their review and recommendation to the Council. She stated that this time, Council Member Lakso did not agree with the Planning Commission recommendation. She stated that this prompted her to have Mr. Larson review the ordinance requirements for filling these positions and found that the City is not following its ordinance. She stated that she also wanted to apologize to Commissioner Love and any others she may have offended with a comment she made at the last Council meeting. She stated that she values the Planning Commissioners very much and did not mean to devalue their contributions. Page 9 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 Commissioner Pangell stated that in the past, appointment has been done many different ways and he agreed it made sense to develop a process and adhere to it. Mayor Capra stated that she hopes the new commissioner will be in place by the January meeting. She stated she learned that the City of Lino Lakes sends their Planning Commissioners to the League of Minnesota Cities Newly Elected Officials training session and suggested that Centerville consider the same. Commissioner Klennert Hunt stated that she attended this session and found it helpful to have the legal responsibilities of being a Planning Commissioner explained. Mayor Capra stated that she is hoping to have an all Commission/Committee meeting scheduled by February, 2007. She stated that the City Attorney will give a presentation about the open meeting law and e-mail correspondence. IV. OLD BUSINESS – continued…. 1. Comprehensive Plan Review The Commission discussed possible language changes in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Larson suggested that the Planning Commission continue reviewing the Comprehensive Plan through page 48 for the January meeting. VII. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES 1. November 14, 2006 Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes Commissioner Klennert Hunt noted that on page 6, the word “compliment” should be changed to “complement.” Motion by Commissioner Pangell, seconded by Commissioner Klennert Hunt to approve the Minutes of November 14, 2006, with the change on page 6, as indicated above. All present in favor. Motion carried unanimously. VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS – continued… Mr. Larson distributed Conflict of Interest statements and Code of Ethics policies and asked Commissioners to sign and return them to him within the month. Mr. Larson asked that the Commission state whether they intend to continue serving on the Planning and Zoning Commission. The following Commissioners expressed their desire to continue serving on the Commission: Commissioner Love, Chair Hanson, Commissioner Klennert Hunt, Commissioner Wright, and Commissioner Pangell. Page 10 of 11 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 2006 VIII. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Klennert Hunt, seconded by Commissioner Pangell to adjourn the December 5, 2006 Planning Commission meeting at 9:44 p.m. All present in favor. Motion carried unanimously. Transcribed by: Kayla Atkins Rokosz, Recording Secretary TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Page 11 of 11