2011-06-15_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, June 15, 2011 Page 7 corridor lay in final form, and whether it needed to be 60’ wide, as currently prescribed. 309 Mr. Paschke noted that this would be doubling over the existing Metropolitan Council’s 310 sewer easement of that width. Mr. Paschke advised that parking could go over the 311 easement, but not a structure; and staff had been questioned if that didn’t take away uses 312 for that area, and whether there could be more flexibility with the build-to lines as the 313 building fronted that easement. Mr. Paschke opined that consideration could certainly be 314 given for the approach to be softened to fit more of a variety of uses. Mr. Paschke 315 advised that, with this corridor mandated over that existing easement, it created an 316 undevelopable, landlocked parcel, and should be addressed. If the corridor remained as 317 is, Mr. Paschke noted that it took that portion of the parcel out of the equation, and 318 needed further thought for additional flexibility. 319 Member Wozniak noted that the landlocked parcel did not have freeway frontage 320 designation. 321 Mr. Paschke concurred, however, noted that it was narrow, with no parking; and 322 warranted further consideration. 323 Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd noted site entrances with build-to areas at the corner and 324 the corridor off Iona that limited access to the site, with access indicated between Twin 325 Lakes Parkway and Iona east of the build-to line where the roundabout was located going 326 east along Twin Lakes Parkway. Mr. Lloyd opined that the question was whether further 327 consideration could be given, while remaining sensitive to what was already there; again 328 adhering to a Plan predicated to the City’s vision, but recognizing market realities; and 329 that may indicate access connecting to Iona. 330 Member Boguszewski questioned how that parcel-specific flexibility would be 331 documented. 332 Mr. Paschke advised that it would not be listed as specific exceptions, but addressed 333 through flexibility within the public connection circle (e.g. to the park) addressed in the 334 350-400’ radius. 335 Mr. Lamb concurred, noting the public dedicated corridor connecting to the park. 336 Member Boguszewski recognized that the Regulating Map was a different approach than 337 zoning, and was a work in progress at this point. However, he questioned if the concept 338 was that the Regulating Map would be eternally work in progress; and questioned if that 339 was the concept, how would any action taken by the Commission at tonight’s meeting to 340 recommend approval make any difference or fit into the overall process that would allow 341 for ongoing additional adjustments; or whether approval needed to be conditioned on 342 future amendment(s). 343 Mr. Paschke advised that, since tonight’s meeting was not being televised or recorded for 344 delayed viewing, he would suggest that the Public Hearing be continued to the 345 Commission’s July 6, 2011 meeting, to allow recording for public documentation. Given 346 the fact that staff was still referring to the Regulating Map and Plan as a “working 347 document.” Given that staff had indicated to the Commission those ongoing discussions 348 and considerations based on public and property owner comment, some yet to be 349 articulated to the point they would be beneficial for the Commission or public to consider 350 at this point, he reiterated that staff would recommendation continuation of tonight’s 351 Hearing to allow for a more formal recommendation to be formulated. 352 Related to whether this document would be in flux all the time, Mr. Paschke advised that 353 it would not be in flux once approved; however, he did note that if a project came forward 354 in the future, no matter whether a residential or commercial use, and if modifications to 355 the Map and Plan were indicated, there would be an option to amend the Plan and Map 356 similar to amendments to other City Code and Ordinances. 357 Member Boguszewski recognized the timing constraints in getting this Plan and Map 358 approved; however, he requested that, if the Hearing was to be continued, those 359