2011-06-01_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, June 1, 2011 Page 7 PLANNING FILE 11-015 299 b. OR 11-014 Request by Affinity Plus Federal Credit Union for approval of a drive-through 300 facility as a CONDITIOANL USE associated with their proposal to construct a 301 financial institution at 2750 Snelling Avenue 302 303 Chair Boerigter opened the Public Hearing at 7:45 p.m. 304 Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed the request of Affinity Plus Federal Credit Union 305 for construction of a two-story office and financial institutional building on the former 306 Stuart Anderson’s Cattle Company site, with the building including a drive-through for the 307 financial/banking portion of the use. In order to allow the proposed improvements, 308 however, Mr. Lloyd noted that the focus of discussion was the drive-through portion 309 requiring formal approval as a CONDITIONAL USE. Mr. Lloyd noted that surrounding 310 properties were all commercial, with the exception of an apartment complex to the north; 311 and that that project site was currently vacant and formerly a nuisance property 312 addressed by the City Council and requiring threatened abatement and demolition of the 313 restaurant building. 314 Discussion among Commissioners and staff included the most practical ingress/egress of 315 vehicles parked in the rear of the site to the south of the building given its proximity to 316 County Road C and Snelling Avenue accesses; no prohibition of vehicles exiting on the 317 north portion of the site; preference for access onto the frontage road rather than onto 318 busier streets; available of the proposal for stacking space for the drive through lanes 319 separated from general parking due to the long island for routing vehicles; speaker 320 volume addressed through the City’s existing noise ordinance restrictions; consistency of 321 drive through canopies and lanes consistent with other elevation designs; and the buffer 322 area of at least ten feet (10’) on the north side of the drive through lanes and north 323 property boundary. 324 Staff recommended approval of the proposed drive-through as a CONDITIONAL USE at 325 2750 Snelling Avenue; based on the comments and findings of Sections 5 and 6; and the 326 conditions of Section of the Request for Planning Commission Action dated June 1, 2011. 327 Mr. Lloyd advised that, other than the e-mail from City Councilmember McGehee 328 included as part of the record, they had fielded no calls or e-mails related to the proposed 329 use. 330 Related to the issues raised by Councilmember McGehee in her e-mail dated Tuesday, 331 May 31, 2011, attached hereto and made a part hereof, Mr. Lloyd advised that the 332 reality is that the building footprint location is not the focus of this planning case that was 333 specifically a Conditional use request related to the drive through; and that the building 334 location was based on Zoning Code requirements. For context, Mr. Lloyd advised that the 335 previous Zoning C ode would have required a thirty foot (30’) setback, which was close to 336 where the proposed building was to be located under current Zoning Code requirements. 337 Member Boguszewski concurred with staff that it was not germane to tonight’s review 338 and discussion; and that this concern was inaccurately portrayed. Member Boguszewski 339 questioned if the applicant would even be allowed to move the building back for visibility 340 lines with adjacent buildings; and further questioned the types of businesses to the north 341 and south of the subject property. With concurrence by Mr. Lloyd, Member Boguszewski 342 opined that, germane or not to review of the Conditional Use for a drive through, site line 343 visibility concerns off Snelling Avenue may not even be founded. 344 Mr. Lloyd confirmed that the applicant would not be allowed to do so without applying for 345 a variance; and advised that the building to the north was a multi-tenant office building; 346 and to the south was a former Fuddruckers Restaurant, currently vacant and subject to 347 potential re-use in the future. Mr. Lloyd advised that the next property immediately to the 348 south was the applicant’s current facility, and the next property south was another 349 restaurant. 350 Member Wozniak noted City Planner Paschke’s response to Councilmember McGehee’s 351 e-mail, opining that he did an excellent job in outlining the points.