pm_071205 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, December 05, 2007 Page 8 to benefiting properties, and their use of the public system, provide for HarMar Mall to share in 25% of any future intersection costs for improvements at Skillman and Snelling Avenues (i.e., signals). Ms. Bloom noted that HarMar was the only benefiting property on the east side, and any improvements would provide better and safer access to HarMar, as per an agreement to be negotiated between the City and the applicant. Discussion included pro-rating HarMar’s contributions to the intersection; proposed MnDOT improvements scheduled for 2008 bidding; proposed storm water management at HarMar Mall and continuing improvements on site run-off; pending staff approval of Site Plan provisions by the applicant; and staff’s review of the flexibilities allowed for PUD parameters and their consistency, rather than specific footprints. Commissioner Boerigter spoke in support of a 25% cost participation for the 2008 project; however, expressed his concern with including provisions on any future improvements; and also expressed concern in not having a specific development proposal to consider, rather than no additional review for specifics. Applicant, Mr. Jamie Swanson, representing Emmes th Tammera Diehm, 225 South 6 Street, #3500, Attorney for the applicant Mr. Swanson advised that the applicant was currently negotiating with several operators, and would submit plans to Planning staff for sit-down restaurants, not fast food facilities. Ms. Diehm provided the applicant’s rationale and lack of approval of staff’s recommendation for future 25% cost-sharing, based on principal and not feeling that the PUD was the proper place for such a provision. Ms. Diehm indicated the applicant’s willingness to share in proposed improvements; however, asked that such measures be included in future MN Statute, Chapter 429 provisions, and assessment processes; rather than attempting by such a condition to take away the rights of a property owner. Ms. Diehm advised that such a condition bound the applicant and any future property owners, and caused a burden on the property, rather than providing a clear assessment process for the City to use, with right of appeal by the property owner. Public Comment Roy Rich, 2009 Asbury Street (west side of street near – 500’ from restaurant) Mr. Rich noted that there was currently lots of empty space at HarMar Mall, and encouraged the applicant to communicate, via their website, on happenings in response to community interest, and as a way to get more people involved and excited about future improvements. Mr. Rich spoke of an important concern to him and residents, specifically pedestrian access to HarMar Mall at Asbury Street; and asked that, whatever building goes in on this site, that it not create a traffic pattern that would add danger to pedestrians. Mr. Rich used the Cub site with similar problems for pedestrian traffic, and asked that this safety due to improvements on this site not become another unintended consequence. Mr. Rich asked that the note in the staff report providing that the City Engineer would review pedestrian/bicycle access, remain as an important consideration. Mr. Rich further asked that the access (sidewalk) be handicap accessible, as a notable lifestyle issue. Mr. Rich asked that consideration be given by staff to additional fencing materials; and location and aesthetics of signage related to residential properties and visual impacts. Mr. Paschke advised that he had received approximately five (5) phone calls, with a super majority of those calls in support of replacement for the Backyard Grill with a new restaurant; and one caller seeking answers to numerous questions before the staff report was available. nd Jeff Agnes, Architect for Project, 4517 – 82 Avenue N Mr. Agnes spoke favorably of the ongoing discussion between the applicant’s representatives and staff related to changing traffic patterns based on staff comments; proposed building location; alignment of intersections; past issues with traffic conflicts; and better functioning of the site due to those discussions. Mr. Agnes advised that the applicant was supportive of staff’s conditions of approval related to traffic circulation.