Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, March 04, 2009 <br />Page 7 <br />day for office use. Ms. Simonsen further noted that Wellington was the current owners of <br />the commercial TCF Bank building and property; and had no intention of continuing down <br />the block with commercial development; and recognized appropriate concerns of <br />residents related to that potential. Ms. Simonson further addressed the applicant’s <br />willingness, at the direction of the Planning Commission, to hold an additional open <br />house, and noted staff’s cooperation in assisting with notifying applicable property <br />owners; and stressed that opinions of the residents were of value to Wellington. <br />Chair Bakeman closed the Public Hearing at approximately 8:43 p.m. <br />Mr. Paschke, for the record, verified that Mr. Vape had been on the mailing list for <br />notices, listed at a post office box, for both the open house and public hearing process <br />notices. <br />Discussion among Commissioners and staff included Chair Bakeman’s request prior to <br />tonight’s Public Hearing, for individual commissioners to review the Comprehensive Plan <br />for future development and redefining various business types, of which Neighborhood <br />Business designation was one of three; and types of businesses to be considered in that <br />land use designation, as defined. <br />Further discussion included height of the proposed building in relationship to surrounding <br />buildings, both commercial and/or residential; allowances of current zoning allowing <br />parking lots to occupy single-family residential lots as a permitted accessory use; and <br />potential mitigation to soften perceptions of the building to the adjacent residences, in <br />addition to screening or landscaping. <br />Commissioner Doherty opined that he was not bothered by the building’s height; and that <br />it was an attractive building, not to be mistaken for a warehouse; and further opined that <br />landscaping would mitigate screening issues from Sandhurst and adjoining properties. <br />Discussion included lack of sidewalk along Sandhurst, and no proposed addition of one <br />in the City’s overall sidewalk plan, due to it’s lack of connectivity with other sidewalks; <br />Commissioner Gottfried expressed concern related to berming or screening and <br />potentially reducing parking on site to accommodate those amenities. <br />Commissioner Wozniak noted existing trees in the proposed sidewalk location and <br />suggested that, if possible, they be preserved. <br />Mr. Paschke suggested that Commissioners provide specific conditions, as staff was not <br />suggesting a sidewalk; noting the need to balance landscape requirements with purposes <br />and benefit to the property and neighborhood as a whole, and based on managing and <br />enforcing winter maintenance of sidewalks. <br />Commissioner Martinson opined that, unless the sidewalk were carried over along the <br />entire street (Sandhurst), sidewalk only along this parcel would make it look even more <br />commercial and not in line with the remaining neighborhood. <br />MOTION <br />Member Boerigter moved, seconded by Member Doherty to RECOMMEND <br />APPROVAL of the REZONING of the parcels at 1126 Sandhurst Drive and 2167 <br /> <br />Lexington Avenue to PUD from R-1 and B-3, respectively; based on the comments <br />and findings of Sections 4 and 5 of the project report dated March 4, 2009. <br />Ayes: 7 <br />Nays: 0 <br />Motion carried. <br />MOTION <br />Member Boerigter moved, seconded by Member Doherty to RECOMMEND <br />APPROVAL of a GENERAL CONCEPT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) for <br />Wellington Management to allow the proposed redevelopment of 1126 Sandhurst <br />Drive and 2167 Lexington Avenue; based on the comments and findings of <br /> <br />