PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING April 19, Chairperson Kondrick called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

Transcription

1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Chairperson Kondrick called the to order at 7:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: OTHERS PRESENT: David Kondrick, Brad Sielaff, David Ostwald, Leroy Oquist, Mark Hansen, and Mark Heintz Stacy Stromberg, Planner Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Brad Dunham, Round Lake Commons II Ryan Doodnauth, Passion Church, 7651 Hwy 65 NE Approval of Minutes: March 15, 2017 MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to approve the minutes as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Rezoning, ZOA #17-01, by Round Lake Commons II, LLC DBA Topwash, to rezone from C-3, General Shopping to C-2, General Business to allow the subject property to be redeveloped. The proposed new development will be for an express car wash use, generally located at 7699 Highway 65. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Heintz. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:01 P.M. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #17-02, by Round lake Commons II, LLC DBA Topwash, to allow for a car wash use in a C-2, General Business zoning district, generally located at 7699 Highway 65. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Heintz. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS OPENED AT 7:01 P.M. Stacy Stromberg, Planner, stated the petitioner, Brad Dunham, with Round Lake Commons II, is requesting to rezone the property at 7699 Highway 65 from C-3, General Shopping to C-2, General Business. The rezoning will allow for the redevelopment of this site with a new express car wash use. Ms. Stromberg stated the C-2, General Business zoning district requires that motor vehicle wash establishments obtain a special use permit. As a result, the petitioner is also requesting that application.

2 Page 2 of 10 Ms. Stromberg stated the property at 7699 Hwy 65 is zoned C-3, General Shopping and is bordered by Osborne Road to the north, Hwy 65 to the west and the Hwy 65 Service Road (aka Viron Road) on the south and east. The property was originally developed as the FrosTop Drive-In in It was then used as a miniature golf course during the late 1960 s and 1970 s. In 1981, Dr. Wayne Dahl purchased the property and remodeled the building to accommodate a chiropractic office. The use of the property has remained the same since that time. Ms. Stromberg stated in 1986 the Viron Road loopback road was constructed, which moved the frontage road from the west side to the east side of the subject property. Constructing that loopback road in turn created what is called a turn-back parcel. There are several of these turn-back type parcels within the City, which are those lots along major corridors that have roadways all around them. Ms. Stromberg stated over the course of the last several years, staff in conjunction with the property owners of these turn-back parcels have worked on getting them rezoned to a C-2, General Business zoning district which will allow them to be redeveloped. Examples of these recent rezonings include SuperAmerica and Trav s Outfitters at 73 rd Avenue and Highway 65, and the old Citgo station site at University Avenue and 61 st Avenue. With the exception of the subject property, the last remaining C-3, General Shopping turn-back parcel is 7890 University Avenue, which is the Taste of Thailand. At which point that property is redeveloped, a rezoning will likely need to be considered. Therefore, a rezoning of this property is consistent with the trends already seen along the major corridors of Highway 65 and University Avenue within Fridley; and it is consistent with the City s comprehensive plan. Ms. Stromberg stated the small lot size of this parcel will fit better with the C-2, General Business standards because, though, the lot size is in compliance with the C-3, General Shopping regulations, the 80-foot building setback requirement on all sides of the lot would not be attainable due to the lot size. Ms. Stromberg stated the City s zoning ordinance and official zoning map are the mechanisms that help the City achieve the vision laid out in the Comprehensive Plan. The law gives the City the authority to rezone property from one designated use to another, so long as the zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan s 2030 future land use map designates this area as Redevelopment. This request will allow for the redevelopment of this property. Ms. Stromberg stated motor vehicle wash establishments are a permitted special use in the C-2 zoning district, provided they meet the necessary requirements, related to building and site requirements, subject to the stipulations suggested by staff. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner is proposing to construct a 3,840 square foot express car wash building that will be located along the southern portion of the lot. The proposed site plan shows (3) waiting lanes to pay and enter the car wash, going down to a single lane as you enter the car wash. Since the Planning Commission packet went out, City Planning and Engineering staff meet to review the proposed access points to the property. Staff has also meet with the petitioner and the access to the site has been modified. That modification includes removal of one of the accesses onto the east Service Road because it does create a vision issue for those people leaving the site when trying to look over there right shoulder when cars are coming around the corner. The City Engineer suggested just leaving the main driveway to the site as it is, and Mr. Dunham would like to consider using the access point off of Osborne Road to enter the site. Therefore, instead of two access points off the east side of the Frontage Road, they will just have one where you can enter and exit and then one off of Osborne Road which currently exists today. The southern access point will be removed. The City Engineer was okay with all those changes.

3 Page 3 of 10 Ms. Stromberg stated because this site is a turn-back parcel with roadways on all sides of it, meeting setback requirements on all sides is difficult; however, the petitioner has been able to achieve it. Ms. Stromberg stated the proposed site plan meets all performance standard requirements. Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends approval of the rezoning as the proposed rezoning meets the goals highlighted in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, which designates the site for redevelopment; and the proposed rezoning will allow the owner to economically utilize the site in a way that better suits its location, size and shape. Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends approval of the special use permit; with stipulations as motor vehicle wash establishments are a permitted special use in the C-2, General Business zoning district Ms. Stromberg stated staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached: 1. The petitioner shall obtain any required permits prior to the start of construction. 2. The petitioner shall meet all building, fire, and ADA code requirements. 3. City engineering staff to review and approve grading, drainage, and utility plan prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. The petitioner shall satisfy Rice Creek Watershed requirements prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. Landscape and Irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by City planning staff prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The proposed architecture and architectural detail on the south elevation of the building shall be reviewed and approved by City planning staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. Per Section 205 of the Fridley City Code, this Special Use Permit will become null and void one year after the City Council approval date if work has not commenced or if the Petitioner has not petitioned the City Council for an extension. Commissioner Sielaff stated are all the turn-back areas in the City that are proposed to be rezoned to General Business? How many has the City done so far? Ms. Stromberg replied, all of them are rezoned now to C-2, with the exception of the Taste of Thailand property. The big difference is the C-3 zoning district requires an 80-foot setback. It is for a shopping center. The C-2 requires a 35-foot setback which is more doable on a lot this small. Commissioner Oquist asked whether they need to add any stipulation regarding the signage, for both the road and for on the building? Ms. Stromberg replied, no, as the petitioner knows he needs to meet the Code requirements. Commissioner Oquist asked, also as to the existing chiropractic clinic, did that have a special use permit to be a on a C-3 property because that should have been zoned C-2 for them. Ms. Stromberg replied the site was developed in 1964 and just continued to be utilized as it is. The City isn t going to make a business go back and do a rezoning when they have been using the property as it is.

4 Page 4 of 10 Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated with the frontage road being around the Highway 65 side of the site, there was the potential that it could have been developed as a shopping center because it was not isolated as a parcel until, as Ms. Stromberg mentioned, in timeframe that frontage road came around the back of it. Then it severed it from the larger site. It made sense as a larger shopping center type zoning at the time. When it got severed off, the C-3 zoning no long makes sense. Commissioner Heintz asked whether the entrance off of Osborne is just an outbound or inbound? Ms. Stromberg replied, it s a right-in and a right-out onto Osborne. Commissioner Heintz stated it seems with the three waiting lanes to get into the car wash, existing the site onto Osborne Road could get to be real congested on the property. Mr. Hickok replied, there was talk with the City Engineer about actually tailoring the entrance so that you cannot go the wrong way out of there. Frankly it becomes just a better right-in movement. Because crossing the median at that point, it is an odd location, and typically stacking at that intersection is going to cause you to not do that anyway. You are going to want to come out the proper direction. Commissioner Heintz stated, he is talking about the petitioner s property with the three lanes. To him it seems there should not be traffic going out there because then they are going to have to go into those three lanes to have to get out again, plus they have an easier exit. However, he would say that should be an entrance only if anything on that lane. Ms. Stromberg replied she would say, for example, she sees that if the business is not that busy, then there might be an option for people to then take that right-out. Commissioner Heintz stated he sees enough of that traffic on 57 th and University with that entrance to SuperAmerica right there. There are a lot of near misses there with people turning right coming off of University or Central in this case. To him he does not see why they would even want people going out. They have a good turn out onto the frontage road. Chairperson Kondrick asked Commissioner Heintz whether his concern is people leaving? Commissioner Heintz replied, right, and besides they are going to have to go back into the wait lanes to go leave that way again. He does not know why they would need that to be an exit. Commissioner Hansen stated he shares Commissioner Heintz s concern but more so a concern just for potential of traffic stacking up on Osborne if it does become just so congested in the interior part of the site. With traffic waiting to get through or pay for their car wash could prevent inbound traffic and then stack up on Osborne which could create a dangerous situation. Chairperson Kondrick stated if you were going to get your car wash and you are going east on Osborne and you can go in there, and there are two or three cars there, your destination being the car wash, your logical thing to do is to keep on going around the corner and wrap around and go into the other main entrance if you will. Mr. Hickok replied, Chairperson Kondrick is right about that and practically speaking that is how they view that. He agrees with the comment made about SuperAmerica. They do have a minimum distance

5 Page 5 of 10 from the intersection, and this far would exceed the minimum distance from the intersection to allow you to go around the corner and get down Osborne a fair stretch. But for those sunny, midday Saturday s then it might actually stacked up in three queues, that will probably get used quite often. As an outbound opportunity though, there is not only a median that ends about that point; but there is a striped median that continues beyond that point that says, Right Only. Practically speaking it is going to be a right-in and a right-out. It is not designed with the taper that just lets it be an inward movement, but drivers should know and obey, when you are crossing a solid line, not to do that. There is a median and a painted separation which would mean you go out to the outbound, go out to an intersection that is meant to be an out. Commissioner Heintz stated he understands that and that is theory. However, in reality, they have to protect for that, too. There is no reason for somebody to drive back into the queue lanes to get out. Mr. Hickok replied, that he is not anticipating people doing that. Especially if it is stacked. Commissioner Heintz asked if they could put a sign there is No Exit as they get into the queue lanes - No Exit Onto Osborne Road. That way they would not think they could get out that way. Chairperson Kondrick stated for people who have their car washed, and they make a left and they are going to go all the way to the top and then make a right, Commissioner Heintz thinks they are going to do that as opposed to going out the normal way? He does not agree with him, but he can see his point. Brad Dunham, with Round Lake Commons II, stated they did not figure out about these exits until yesterday when the conversation came up as to what they are going to do. In conversations he thought that was going to be an entry only. This entry he thinks will actually help keep some of the congestion off the other exit because they will have people coming in and out of that location. Originally that is why they had two. The people who are trying to get out of the car wash a little quicker who are not waiting around and vacuuming. Mr. Dunham stated that second exit lane was a bad access and Public Works pointed that out so they eliminated that one, but the actual one at the top as an entry takes a little congestion off the other one. For the majority of the time that is not going to ever be an issue, but he is having a hard time anticipating they are going to use it as an exit ever. He thinks they talked about that in the meeting yesterday that they would not allow any turns out of it. It would not be an exit lane. He does not have any problem with a stipulation such as that. As an entrance he thinks it has a purpose because it does help get traffic off the intersection. They have a small tight road where they are turning onto the Service Road so he thinks having them both serves the property better. Commissioner Oquist asked Mr. Dunham if he heard him say they are going to put a No Exit sign? Mr. Dunham replied, yes, they talked about it. This entrance exists already. It was an in and out but, as far as usage, they had not had a chance to think this through entirely. They were pretty much in agreement and they had not known they had to think about it that much as far as exit, but he thinks an entrance only would work. They had not thought about it at all as an exit for all the obvious reasons they are all talking about. Chairperson Kondrick asked Mr. Dunham if he had any problems with the stipulations?

6 Page 6 of 10 Mr. Dunham replied, none whatsoever. Everything looks fine. They worked out the exit thing yesterday and how they were going to redo that. This way is fine for them. Commissioner Ostwald asked if this will be completely automated? Mr. Dunham replied it is a 120-foot express tunnel. They have one in Anoka on Round Lake Blvd. It is the same size tunnel and equipment. They offer washes from 6, 9, 12, 15, and $18. They generally move and process these people fairly quickly, and that is where the teller stations take care of it. The gate goes up and you go through. You can get in and out fast. That is kind of where the car washing industry is going, is a faster wash. Commissioner Heintz asked so he comes in and goes into the vacuum area first and then goes into the queue? Mr. Dunham replied, yes, he could, or he could wash first and go to the vacuums after. Mr. Hickok replied, the vacuum area is a two-way drive aisle though so they do not have to back out to get into the queue. They can drive out and it is designed to have the radius turn to get them back into the queue properly. They do not have to back out. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Ostwald. Chairperson Kondrick stated he is for this deal. This will be a good thing for that spot and they will get a lot of business there. Commissioner Oquist stated it seems it is pretty straightforward. Commissioner Heintz asked do they want to have a stipulation about the entrance only? Ms. Stromberg replied, it is up to the Commission. Chairperson Kondrick replied, that is okay. He does not want them going out that way anyway. Commissioner Heintz stated, right, make it an entrance only. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE HEARING WAS CLOSED AT 7:26 P.M. MOTION by Commissioner Hansen approving Rezoning, ZOA #17-01, by Round Lake Commons II, LLC DBA Topwash, to rezone from C-3, General Shopping to C-2, General Business to allow the subject property to be redeveloped. The proposed new development will be for an express car wash use, generally located at 7699 Highway 65. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

7 Page 7 of 10 MOTION by Commissioner Oquist approving Special Use Permit, SP #17-02, by Round lake Commons II, LLC DBA Topwash, to allow for a car wash use in a C-2, General Business zoning district, generally located at 7699 Highway 65 with the following stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall obtain any required permits prior to the start of construction. 2. The petitioner shall meet all building, fire, and ADA code requirements. 3. City engineering staff to review and approve grading, drainage, and utility plan prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. The petitioner shall satisfy Rice Creek Watershed requirements prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. Landscape and Irrigation plan to be reviewed and approved by City planning staff prior to issuance of building permit. 6. The proposed architecture and architectural detail on the south elevation of the building shall be reviewed and approved by City planning staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. Per Section 205 of the Fridley City Code, this Special Use Permit will become null and void one year after the City Council approval date if work has not commenced or if the Petitioner has not petitioned the City Council for an extension. 8. There shall be exiting of traffic from the site onto Osborne Road. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 7, 2017, ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND ENERGY COMMISSION MEETING. MOTION by Commissioner Heintz receiving the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 7, 2017, HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff receiving the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS: Mr. Hickok gave a presentation regarding the new Fridley civic center. The community meetings regarding the development said this cannot just be a development, it has to be grand. This new civic center will be a very nice development that will really represent the City well. Commissioner Heintz asked whether the glass on the city hall building would be bird safe?

8 Page 8 of 10 Mr. Hickok replied, bird safe is an alternate in the bidding process. This is a very nice building and is one they have tried very hard to keep within the budget that was given. Chairperson Kondrick asked whether a lot of attention was spent on energy saving/conservation or heat sources that are going to be efficient, etc.? Mr. Kondrick replied when the City was selecting its architects they said, although certification is a very expensive process, in this design they essentially want to lead in energy-conserving elements whether they went for certification or not. The architects have done that. There are a number of different degrees of efficiency you can buy as you can imagine in a building like this, and there is not one element in here that would be the standard. They have taken it at least one step further from the Code minimum in all areas. Mr. Hickok stated it will be an efficient building. Everything in it will be efficient lighting, efficient in terms of energy use. As to furnaces one of the interesting things they learned is sometimes the more efficient they are, the more flimsy or delicate they are; and the life expectancy is not as long. You have to weigh out the efficiency to the life expectancy as you are figuring it out. The City was involved in Xcel Energy s efficiency design program whereby they will probably get back somewhere in the neighborhood of $100,000 in rebates because of the efficiency and design. Mr. Hickok just to give them a little bit of an idea for the schedule on this, the staff did go through an environmental assessment worksheet. They actually went through the notification period and the public comment period twice because they might remember a while back they talked about more residential. They reduced the number of potential units almost in half for the private side of the development. Nonetheless things like traffic and density on the site are all things they want to consider and are things also considered in an EAW. There were no flags causing the City to go into an EAS that were identified through this process. Mr. Hickok stated the 30-day comment period ended on the 12 th. Staff received a few comments and answered the questions efficiently. There was a question about doing an archeological analysis. After further discussion with the State historical folks, they have now determined they do not need to do that. Mr. Hickok stated on April 24 the Council will consider the EAW completion and potentially pass a resolution of no further action. At which point then on May 8 the City would publish the EQB Monitor. The Commission is going to be involved very soon in the preliminary plat on their May 17 agenda. That would separate out the civic piece from the private development piece for a number of reasons. As for the land ownership reason, they are now entering into a partnership with a private developer so they want to set aside the civic piece. They want to turn it right around and get it to Council and their surveyors that work with the County to be able to turn it around in a final platform to the Council on May 24. Mr. Hickok stated they will be seeing a rezoning also, S-2 redevelopment, to accompany that private development that will happen on the south side of the pond. Remember that is predicated on a master plan, and they have to get to that point of having the master plan from the developer before they can have the Commission consider that. Mr. Hickok stated construction on the civic side will begin in May. Groundbreaking is on May 20. They will have a town hall meeting following for citizens to come in. The construction would take place from May to November 2018.

9 Page 9 of 10 Mr. Hickok stated as to the private side, staff did send out RFQ s in February soliciting proposals for potential partners for the private development south of the pond. On March 2 the HRA interviewed each of four RFQ respondents. On March 7 staff interviewed the top two teams to determine who they would recommend to the HRA. On March 9 the HRA selected a group called Flaherty & Collins out of Indiana and are in the midst right now of negotiation of a private and public partnership for that portion of the development. Mr. Hickok stated Flaherty & Collins are a very impressive group. They consider themselves a high amenity or amenity-rich development. They see this site as something very special. They are creating a place, not just buildings for a civic use and something for private use. This is something where people are going to come in and enjoy. Fridley is going to enjoy this as their town square. This is the group that did the 2700 on University. Himself, Ms. Stromberg, and Mr. Bolin went and visited Flaherty & Collins staff at the site; and he has to say it is very impressive. It is amenity rich. Chairperson Kondrick asked whether the Police Department is going to have a jail? Mr. Hickok replied, they will have what is called a sally port. They have one here also, but this one will be far more technologically advanced. All their squads will be down below city hall. Typically the City s holding is for a short stay before they go to the county facility. The police will bring somebody in and go down into the lower level of the garage. There is this sally port in a fenced area, so the police vehicle goes into the fenced in area, the fence closes, and the person comes out. Then persons are processed once they get through the doors down there. They have great evidence rooms and great processing rooms. Commissioner Sielaff asked whether there was a plan for disposing of the current city hall? Mr. Hickok replied, yes, it is for sale. They are anxious to get the property back on the tax rolls. It has great opportunity. Commissioner Sielaff asked whether the property is officially on the market now? Mr. Hickok replied, no, it is not. Commissioner Sielaff asked will there be a time it will be on the market? Mr. Hickok replied, they will time it so it is ready and there is a lot of due diligence they need to do first. There is a very interesting patchwork of a plat that is under the building. The HRA owns the land underneath the parking lot of the building next door. It owns the land out the front half of the parking lot on the University Avenue side. There will be an opportunity once it gets on the market to put this to good use for something other than a civic use. ADJOURN: MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to adjourn. Seconded by Commissioner Heintz. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:55 P.M.

10 Page 10 of 10 Respectfully submitted, Denise M. Johnson Recording Secretary