Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-06-14 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes • fyy CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday,June 14,2018—Oak Park Heights City Hall Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance: Chair Freeman called the meeting to order @ 6:03 p.m. Present: Commissioners Giovinazzo, Kremer, VanDyke and White; City Administrator Johnson, City Planner Richards, and City Councilmember Dougherty. II. Approval of Agenda: Commissioner Kremer asked that New Business "Palmer Station"be moved directly following Visitors/Public Comments as mailing indicated that hearing would begin at 6:00 p.m. Commissioner Kremer, seconded by Commissioner VanDyke, moved to approve the Agenda as amended. 5-0. III. Approval of May 10, 2018 Meeting Minutes: Commissioner Kremer, seconded by Commissioner VanDyke, moved to approve the Minutes as presented. Carried 5- 0. IV. Department/Commission Liaison/Other Reports: Councilmember Dougherty noted that the City Council did approve the Holiday Inn Express with four stories. City Planner Richards will be prepared a proposal for the Council with regard to potentially changing the zoning ordinance in the area which would allow for four story structures. If the proposal is accepted the issue will be brought the Planning Commission for public hearing. Dougherty also noted that that the Council is reviewing potential changes to the accessory structure ordinance, which will also be brought to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation. City Administrator Johnson stated that he had an update of some concept maps for the Norell Ave./Hwy. 36 intersection, noted that as it does tie in to the proposed Ridgecrest Development, he would like to share this information later in the meeting. V. Visitors/Public Comment: None. Planning Commission Minutes June 14,2018 Page 2 of 9 VI. New Business: A. Palmer Station—5625 Oakgreen Ave.N.: Extension Request. City Administrator Johnson reviewed his June 7,2018 memo as to the project and its history or extensions and conditions applied to the current extension. Johnson discussed issues related to the roadway work bids in the developer's request for them to be re-bid,at their expense,which will result in a delay,essentially triggering another extension. As a result,the matter was brought forward to the City Council for direction on how to facilitate the timing issue.Council consensus was to notify the neighborhood in writing of the situation and to learn if there were any new issues or concerns since 2014 and then have those taken into consideration from both the Planning Commission and City Council. To this end,nothing has changed except for the time structure. Johnson noted that the developer maybe required to resubmit for a full new development application and that if so,it is likely to be a very similar if not identical design,if that process is required by Council,in that the underlying zoning and city comprehensive plan have not changed.Watershed and setback requirements have been met,there were no major variances to their application. City Council asked the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on the matter and receive comment and provide them with some direction after the hearing and thoughts they may have as to the fourth extension. Discussion ensued among the Commission and staff as to the status of approvals to the development and the original approvals having been granted in 2014 without anything having yet commenced. Chair Freeman noted that Commissioner Kremer was the only Commissioner that was on the Commission at the time of the approvals and felt that they current Commission really didn't have enough familiarity with the project. Commissioner Kremer provided some background as to the request and the general concern being water at the site,he noted that since the approvals the property is declining and is not regularly maintained. Commissioner Kremer does not feel that they have kept their agreement to date in general and stated that he felt they should be required to go through a new process. When asked if he thought anything would be different if it went through the process,Commissioner Kremer stated that he would like to see the promises made be backed up with financial commitment. Chair Freeman opened the public hearing and invited public comment. Steven Monzel—5507 Oakgreen Place N. Stated that it has been four years. Time has changed,conditions change and requirements have probably changed and as such Mr.Monzel expressed that he felt that the applicant should have to start over. He would like to see something happen with the property other than it presently is— a field with abandoned buildings,which is not a good situation. He noted his main concerns being first,storm water and would like to see the water from the site Planning Commission Minutes June 14,2018 Page 3 of 9 contained to the site. Presently the storm water runs to the lowest area in his neighborhood and accumulates in the back yards of a few homes. Secondly, sanitary sewer lines are of a concern—there have been sanitary sewer backups in his neighborhood also. He reiterated that he would like to see the applicant have to start over. Chair Freeman responded to the concerns of drainage in that when a development is planned,they typically take a look at what the drainage is; though if there is a problem with drainage today, they can be asked to correct the situation. Discussion ensued as to drainage regulations and the layers of review for water drainage. Mr. Monzel did note that the plan for this development involves the addition of piping into their existing drainage system, adding more water to an area that is already overloaded. City Administrator Johnson noted that the City is compelled to make a choice when it comes to public infrastructure such as water, sewer and storm sewer. He stated that the City can required the developer to build those public elements or the City can build them. In either case the developer is held responsible for paying for them and noted that hopefully the City Engineer will be allowed to review for flows and sizing. Johnson noted that beyond the storm water situation, there are going to be significant changes to that landscape and the City can only apply the regulations in place to guide what is permitted to do. The question remains is whether or not we will largely be in the same situation or should the City press the developer to make a new application. He asked if there was anything new over the past few years that the City has not been made aware of? If so,it would be really helpful to know about in thinking of about things. Johnson informed the Commission that the City did go out for bids for the public improvements(streets,water, sewer and storm)and the developer felt they were cost prohibitive and asked if they would re-bid. Re-bidding was agreed to be done, contingent upon whatever the Council decides at their June 26th meeting. The rebidding was done at the developer's expenses and those came in this week and they were actually a bit higher. Chair Freeman asked City Planner Richards and City Administrator Johnson if there have been any changes to the zoning ordinance since the time of their approval. City Richards indicated that no changes have been made that are relative to the development. City Administrator Johnson noted that they will be required to meet the new rules of Brown's Creek Watershed District at the time they prepare for construction. It was clarified that the water issue discussed is not new since 2014. Allen Gosselin—5554 O'Brien Ave.N. Stated that the water situation does not affect him. He stated that he did attend the meetings and at the time they proposed the development and came for public hearing,there was a berm proposed that appeared would drain quite a bit of water to the properties at the lower adjacent elevations at Oakgreen Place and there were comments from the neighborhood that they wanted that fixed. Planning Commission Minutes June 14,2018 Page 4 of 9 Commissioner Kremer stated that there has been a substantial amount of building, adding to the sewer line system and a neighbor had a system back up that dumped four feet of sewer in their basement. Steven Monzel—5507 Oakgreen Place N. also noted that he has not been affected by the water situation,but agrees that those properties at the lower elevation, at the corner, in the neighborhood have had water problems and a few of them have had to redo their basements because of storm water and there have been at least a couple that have been affected by sewage back up. Chair Freeman asked if there was anyone from the development in attendance. City Administrator noted that they did reach out to them and unfortunately the developer representative,Mark Gunther could not attend due to a family event. Greg Hartman—5479 Oakgreen Place N. wanted to know if there were any assurances that the development was actually going to occur. The property is becoming an eye sore. City Administrator Johnson stated that the developer's agreement is complete,their water, sewer and storm sewer connection and park dedication fees have been paid. They have made a significant fmancial investment at this point and they have been asked what their plan is for moving forward and remind them of their deadlines. Kevin Monzel—5507 Oakgreen Place N. introduced himself as speaking on behalf of his neighbor, adjacent to the property being developed, and noted their main concern being water and drainage. Mr. Monzel asked if the watershed approval was of public record and indicated that he would like to see a copy of that. He noted that the Palmer property has a couple of ponds on it. He doesn't feel that the property is properly maintained, doesn't feel that the watershed investigated enough prior to their approval,and that the developer didn't do enough to take into consideration the situations the existing residents are dealing with. Mr. Monzel expressed that because of these things and because many of the current planning commissioners weren't around when the approval was granted,he felt it would be in the best interest of the City that the developer be required to start a new process. Chair Freeman closed the public hearing at 6:39 p.m. and invited Commission discussion. Commissioner White inquired as to worst case scenario with potentially recommending the 60-day timeline extension. City Administrator Johnson stated that if the City Council granted a 60-day extension,they would have to pull the trigger on the development within that time period. Commissioner Kremer expressed that he felt the worst-case scenario in continuing it would be that the fears that people have would not have been addressed, adding that he felt that the engineer for the development has less than ideal ideas of what would be happening with the water. City Administrator Johnson noted that at the time the engineer of record for the development and the City Engineer did have some contention on issues and did work together to resolve those. Johnson noted that the developer did seek city Planning Commission Minutes June 14,2018 Page 5 of 9 financial contribution to the piping for the storm water piping work and the City Council did not agree to that and held the developer accountable for the costs associated with their infrastructure. It was noted that the City Council was seeking comment for the Planning Commission that they would review in making their decision as to the timeline extension request at their June 26,2018 meeting. Discussion ensued. It was clarified that extensions have to actively be sought or your permitted approvals will lapse and you will be required to restart. City Administrator Johnson did note that the Council can seek additional review or review of previous engineering related to water. It was noted that without any predicted starting time the granting an extension seemed arbitrary. Johnson explained that the extension came as a result of the public improvement being redone and pushing the timeline out in general. Time elements in general for public improvement and the private improvements to the site was discussed. Commissioner Kremer moved to recommend that the City Council consider requiring the developer to start the process anew. Motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner Giovinazzo, seconded by Commissioner White,moved to recommend that the City Council consider approval of a 60-day extension Commissioner Kremer commented that an extension approval doesn't address concerns expressed by the residents. Discussion ensued as to what may or may not have changed since the original approval and how to address concerns. Commissioner Giovinazzo, seconded by Commissioner White, amending the earlier motion,moved to recommend that the City Council consider approval of a 60-day extension with the condition that the City Engineer review their fmding relative to storm water and affirm their fmdings for the development and in addressing the concerns expressed by those at the June 14,2018 public hearing. Carried 5-0. VII. Public Hearings: A. Ridgecrest Oak Park Heights, LLC— 13523 60th St.N.: Consider request for Planned Unit Development: Concept&General Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Preliminary&Final Plat and Design Guidelines Review for proposed restaurant and retail development. City Planner Richard reviewed and discussed his June 7,2018 Planning Report related to the request to redevelop the former Eagle's site with a freestanding Panera Bread restaurant and a second retail building. Planning Commission Minutes June 14,2018 Page 6 of 9 Discussion was had as to the plat and setbacks,potential changes to the frontage road,access to the site, signage, glass transparency, having the City Council look at the allowing signs on all facades as long as they are within the allowed square feet of sign allowance. A materials board was presented for viewing. Chair Freeman opened the public hearing and invited public comment. Trent Mayberry of TOLD Development introduced himself and Architect Kathy Anderson and Engineer Bruce Carlson. He briefly discussed the access and entry proposals for the site and made himself available for questions. There being no other visitors to the public hearing,Chair Freeman closed the public hearing and invited further discussion from the Commission. Discussion ensued as to the potential intersection changes and how it applies to the development proposed. Commissioner Kremer, seconded by Commissioner Giovinazzo,moved to recommend City Council approval, subject to the conditions of the June 7, 2018 Planning Report, specifically that: The Planning Commission recommended the following subject to the conditions as follows: • Planned Unit Development,Concept and General Plan • Preliminary and Final Plat approval. • Conditional Use Permit for a Drive Through Restaurant. • Design Guidelines/Site Plan Review. 1. The preliminary and final plat shall be subject to review and approval of the City Attorney and City Engineer. A Final Plat shall be prepared for City Council approval. 2. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed building, driveway and parking setbacks. 3. The site plan shall be subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshal. 4. All grading,drainage, erosion control,utility plans, and access driveways are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Storm water plans are also subject to review and approval of the Brown's Creek Watershed District. 5. The Applicant shall agree to escrow sufficient funds, as specified by the City Engineer,to complete future sidewalk improvements adjacent to the property or agree that the City will complete the work and petition for the public improvement, waiving notice of public hearing and assessments, as required under Minnesota Statute 429. Planning Commission Minutes June 14, 2018 Page 7 of 9 6. Additional easements for sidewalk improvements on 60th Street North and Norell Avenue may be required subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 7. The Applicant shall provide a snow removal plan or indicate if the snow will be hauled off site. 8. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Arborist. All required landscape plan details shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the City Arborist. 9. All mechanical equipment on the roof or on the site shall be fully screened in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Panera Bread shall provide a site line study from Highway 36 and Norell Avenue demonstrating how the parapets will screen the mechanical units. 10. All light fixtures shall be full cut off, compliant with the height requirements, and be consistent with Section 401 . 15.B.7 of the Zoning Ordinance as it relates to lighting requirements. 11 . All signs shall be designed to comply with the Zoning Ordinance requirements for size, number, placement and internal illumination. The freestanding signs shall be limited to one per lot, unless designed as a monument sign. 12. The Planning Commission was favorable to the fourth wall sign on the Panera Building. 13. The Planning Commission was favorable to the building design and building materials. 14. The Planning Commission was favorable to the proposed transparency of the north and east elevations of both buildings. 15. A bike rack should be identified on the site plan and placed on site for each building. 16. The applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement. The development agreement shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney and City Council. Carried 5 — 0. City Administrator Johnson discussed a concept roadway alignment change that has been discussed over the past few months with the neighbors to the Ridgecrest site. He reviewed potential plans, the players involved to make it happen and the estimated costs and potential funding. He noted crash rate data for the intersection as it sits today and that it is higher than the State average. Planning Commission Minutes June 14,2018 Page 8 of 9 Additionally,Johnson noted a meeting with the Brown's Creek Watershed District, where discussion of water at the area was had and reviewed that conversation in how run off water is typically managed. Noting that an infiltration system cannot be placed within this zone,Johnson reviewed a couple of options that could be utilized to meet Brown's Creek Watershed rules,with the watershed partnering with the City to work toward rule compliant options.Ultimately,Johnson said that if everyone works together on roadway and water run off solutions in a regional matter,it will be a better solution for everyone. B. Temporary Accessory Structures.: Consider amendments to Zoning Ordinance 401.15.D.related to temporary accessory structures with regard to placement and duration. City Planner Richards reviewed his June 7,2018 Memorandum,noting that the City Council discussed amending this section to allow a mechanism for up to 24-month continuous temporary structure use in the R-1 and R-2 Residential districts at their May 22,2018 meeting and previous workshop and directed that the matter be sent onto the Planning Commission to weigh in. Brief discussion ensued as to the rationale for an extended temporary use and that it is"up to"24-months being proposed. Chair Freeman opened the public hearing. There being no visitors to the public hearing,it was closed. Brief discussion ensued as to the time element and process to extend beyond the 50 days currently allowed administratively. Commissioner VanDyke,seconded by Commissioner Giovinazzo,moved to recommend City Council approval as outlined in the June 7,2018 City Planner Memorandum. Carried 5-0. C. Continued: Oak Park Heights—Comprehensive Plan 2018: Reviewing his June 7,2018 Memorandum,City Planner Richards updated to the Commission as to the Comprehensive Sewer,Water System Master and Local Surface Water Management plans prepared by the City Engineer,which were provided to the Commission electronically due to their size and asked the Commission for comment and a recommendation to the City Council to authorize sending these documents onto Metropolitan Council. Brief discussion was had as to understanding the plans material. City Administrator Johnson suggested that the City Engineer could be invited to a Commission meeting to discuss the plan and answer Commission questions. Planning Commission Minutes June 14, 2018 Page 9 of 9 Chair Freeman closed the public hearing and invited a motion to the matter. Commissioner Giovinazzo, seconded by Commissioner White moved to move the documents onto the City Council to authorize sending them onto to Metropolitan Council for review and to invited the City Engineer to a Planning Commission meeting to review. Carried 5 — 0. VIII. Old Business: None. IX. Informational: A. Upcoming Meetings: All Meetings at City Hall — 6:00 p.m. Unless Noted Otherwise • Tuesday, June 26, 2018 City Council • Thursday, July 12, 2018 Planning Commission • Tuesday, July 24, 2018 City Council • Thursday, August 9, 2018 Planning Commission • Tuesday, August 28, 2018 City Council B. Council Representative • Tuesday, June 26, 2018 — Commissioner Freeman • Tuesday, July 24, 2018 — Commissioner White • Tuesday, August 28, 2018 — Commissioner VanDyke X. Adjourn. Commissioner Kremer, seconded by Commissioner Giovinazzo, moved to adjourn at 7:4 p.m. Carried 5 — 0. - : -ctfully submitted, Julie A itman Plani g & Code Enforcement Approved by the Planning Commission: 07-12-2018 (5-0)