Loading...
PLM 06/18/2014 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF FRIDLEY June 18, 2014 Chairperson Kondrick called the Planning Commission Meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Leroy Oquist David Kondrick Brad Sielaff Tim Solberg Todd Olin MEMBERS ABSENT: Dean Saba OTHERS PRESENT: Scott Hickok, Community Development Director Stacy Stromberg, Planner Christopher Clos, A-ABCO Recycled Auto Parts Sheri King, Lawrence Sign Approval of Minutes: April 16, 2014 MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to approve the minutes as presented. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #14-03, by A-ABCO Recycled Auto Parts to expand the auto recycling center, which is zoned M-1, Light Industrial, generally located at 1175 - 73 1/2 Avenue NE. MOTION by Commissioner Solberg to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:03 P.M. Stacy Stromberg, Planner, stated the petitioner is seeking a special use permit to expand the auto recycling center use that currently exists at 1201-1231 73rd Avenue and 7360 Central Avenue to the property located at 1175 - 73 1/2. The subject property is zoned M-1, Light Industrial, as are the properties to the west, east and south. The property to the north is zoned C-3, General Shopping and is used as a parking lot for Friendly Chevrolet. The property was replatted and rezoned from C-3, General Shopping to M-1, Light Industrial in 1994. That same year, the existing office/warehouse building was constructed. In 1995, two special use permits were approved to allow retail services and a repair garage. Ms. Stromberg stated according to the petitioner, A-ABCO Auto Parts originally occupied the property Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 2 of 12 at 7360 Central Avenue as early as 1946. Overtime, three automobile recycling yards, A-ABCO, Central, and Sam’s Auto Parts located in this area. In 2006, the City started requiring each of the auto recycling centers to bring their properties into compliance with code requirements. As a result, several improvements were made to the site, including but not limited to, soil testing, the installation of storm ponds and landscaping. Sam’s Auto Parts is still in the process of achieving compliance with their special use permit. Ms. Stromberg stated in 2010, Central Auto Parts sold their property at 1201 - 73 ½ Avenue to A-ABCO Auto Parts. Therefore, A-ABCO now owns all the parcels along 73 ½ Avenue from the subject property at 1175 - 73 ½ Avenue to Central Avenue. rd Ms. Stromberg stated A-ABCO is currently leasing a warehouse at 1201 - 73 Avenue to store their inventory of parts and they would like to instead purchase the property at 1175 - 73 ½ Avenue to use for their business. They would move their warehouse inventory to their existing retail building at 7360 Central Avenue, so all the retail business with customers can take place in this building. They will then move the production part of their business that is currently in the retail building to the building at 1175 - 73 ½ Avenue. Moving the production part of their business to the building at 1175 - 73 ½ Avenue will reduce machinery traffic and move the daily operations away from the customer’s highly traveled areas to create a safer environment. A-ABCO plans to use the front parking spaces on the subject property for employee’s vehicles and to unload vehicles when they are towed in. The building itself will then be used to dismantle vehicles and the back of building will be used to get the vehicles in and out of the building. It is the petitioner’s hope to operate the subject property this way; however the building may be used for warehousing instead of production if the inside of the building isn’t suitable to production. If that is the case, the production and retail store will remain in the building on Central Avenue and the warehousing will take place in the building on the subject property. Ms. Stromberg stated the petitioner is also seeking a variance at this time to increase the height of a screening fence from 8 feet to 10 feet. Currently A-ABCO has a 10-foot fence along 73 ½ Avenue which screens the business activity from the public right-of-way and provides the security the business needs. They would like to continue the 10-foot screening fence across the front of the subject property along 73 ½ Avenue and then around the remainder of the property. The east side of the property will be open to allow access to and from A-ABCO existing property to the subject property. Ms. Stromberg stated City Code allows auto recycling centers with a special use permit, provided they meet requirements for drainage, pollution control, parking, screening, business licensing, facilities and scope. Ms. Stromberg stated overall the subject property as it currently exists today will not change from an outward appearance. All operations for the auto recycling center will take place within the existing building, either through production or warehousing and office. The front parking lot will be used for employee parking and the rear lot will be left open to maneuver vehicles in and out of the building if need be. The petitioner only expects that if they have any storage behind the building it will be for metal recycling bins. Ms. Stromberg stated there is a storm pond on site, which will be required to be repaired and retrofitted to current City standards. There are several large trees on the subject property that will likely be located on the outside of the new fence. City staff will require that the petitioner submit a landscape plan for the entire boulevard area on 73 ½ Avenue to create a consistent, aesthetically pleasing view of the boulevard Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 3 of 12 area. The parking that exists on site is adequate and will help with the businesses current parking needs. Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends approval of this special use permit with stipulations and timeline. An automobile recycling center is permitted as a special use in the M-1 Light Industrial zoning district subject to stipulations. Ms. Stromberg stated City Staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached: 1. The petitioner shall comply with all building and fire code requirements. 2. The petitioner shall apply for any necessary permits, including a fence permit, prior to construction or demolition taking place on site. 3. No towed vehicles shall be parked or stored in the front parking lot prior to installation of screening fence 4. New gates installed on the subject property shall remain closed except for when entering and exiting to provide proper screening. 5. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Rice Creek Watershed district. 6. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the City’s engineering staff for the existing storm pond. 7. The petitioner shall file a modified storm pond maintenance agreement for the existing pond if required by the City’s engineering staff. 8. The petitioner shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan for the boulevard area along 73 ½ Avenue to be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to installation of fence. 9. The petitioner shall remove the 5 feet of rock along the west edge of property and replace with sod and irrigation prior to fence installation. 10. The petitioner shall obtain any necessary approvals to operate an auto recycling center from the appropriate governmental authorities. 11. Any new signs installed on the property will require a sign permit. Chairperson Kondrick asked how many employees do they have? How many cars will be in front of there? They will want to have some cars stored there for a long or short time. Ms. Stromberg stated that is a good question for the petitioner. Commissioner Oquist stated he is a little confused as to what this property is going to be used for. Commissioner Olin asked staff to comment on the condition of the existing fence. The picture was not very clear on how the condition is generally. Ms. Stromberg replied she believed the fence shown in the photo was installed in 2010. It is in pretty good condition. Staff has been working really hard with the salvage yards to get them into compliance over the last 10 or so years. Commissioner Olin stated so the intent would be to have sort of a uniform look, extend it going down the street. Stacy Stromberg , Planner, stated, yes. Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 4 of 12 Scott Hickok, Community Development Director, stated to get that 10 feet of height that is being sought, that is really a structural element that needs to be considered as well as just increasing the height because a fence like this needs to stand up to over 80 mph wind loads. It is quite a structure that goes behind that fence. The petitioner has quite an investment in that fence and will want to maintain it very well also. They have done a nice job of maintaining both that fence and the one at the former Central Auto Parts location. Commissioner Sielaff stated he was kind of curious why they want to go to 10 feet. They do not have to go that high, only 8 feet according to ordinance. Ms. Stromberg stated the ordinance states 8 feet, but the petitioner would like to go to 10 because they feel it helps hide their operation more and also helps with security. Commissioner Olin asked regarding the renovating of the existing pond, is the potential scale of that renovation known? Or is that kind of an unknown until more information is collected? Ms. Stromberg stated, the City Engineer is actually taking a look at it right now and hopes to get back to the petitioner with his recommendation on what exactly he thinks needs to be done and whether they need to hire somebody to help analyze that. Commissioner Olin asked, in a worst-case scenario the City is pretty confident that whatever needs to be done will in fact be done? Ms. Stromberg replied, yes. Christopher Clos, A-ABCO Recycled Auto Parts, stated the front parking would not be used for employee parking and storing of towed cars. After hours if a car is dropped off they would like the tow truck driver to be able to open the gate, store inside the screened fence area, and then in the morning they would take it out of there. It would be mainly for after hour drop-offs or during business hours employee parking. At that location they are looking at about 20 employees. Chairperson Kondrick stated 20 employees, so they could have 20 cars there. Mr. Clos replied, yes, and they would be behind the screened fence. That is one of their big deals. They want it to be uniform with that current fence plus be able to screen for after hours. They do not want to give the tow truck drivers full access to the yard; therefore, they would actually end up with two gates. A gate they would come through and then a gate that kind of currently exists keeping the drivers from having access to the yard. Chairperson Kondrick asked Mr. Clos if he understood Commissioner Olin's concern about the retention pond? Mr. Clos replied, yes, they are his concerns, too. He has been working with Ms. Stromberg about it. It is not a deal breaker. He cannot imagine it being too drastic. That pond has been accepted once so he cannot imagine it has changed too much. Commissioner Oquist asked Mr. Close, they will be bringing vehicles into this building and taking them Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 5 of 12 apart? Mr. Clos replied, that is kind of all up in the air. They want to take the two buildings and either one is going to be warehouse and the other is going to be production or vice versa. It really stems off of the current building they own, the old Central Auto Parts building. It is in fairly rough shape, and they are trying to determine if it is cheaper just to wipe it out and rebuild a whole new building and, if that is the case, then they build it to suit. Commissioner Oquist asked, what do they do with the gate if their entrance is off of Old Central? Do they not bring the vehicles in there and then they take them apart in the lot? Mr. Clos replied, not in the lot. They do it inside. They do it inside their current building that is on the corner of 73 ½ and Central Avenue. They have five hoists in there. They want a larger building to do this in. Commissioner Oquist stated then he is saying instead of bringing them off of Central, they are going to be bringing them off of 73 ½, one of the two buildings. Mr. Clos replied, exactly. Currently they have three gates on 73 ½ that are not being utilized like they could. If their warehouse space and production were back there, they could bring cars back there. Take it kind of off Central and bring it back more into that industrial area. Mr. Clos stated as to wanting the fence to be 10 feet, there are two major reasons. Their racking is all 10 feet. If they have an 8-foot fence you will see all these body parts. Also, their equipment, their front-end loaders, those are 10-11 feet high; and their car crusher is taller than 10 feet. Chairperson Kondrick stated they talked about this last time and they gave authorization for that. He asked Mr. Clos if he had a chance to see the 11 stipulations? Mr. Clos stated for the most part he was okay with them. He has a couple of questions he feels they could definitely work out together. One of them is the rock bed. He asked whether they were talking about the rock bed inside the fence line? Ms. Stromberg replied, correct. Mr. Clos stated throughout the existing property they currently own, they do not have any irrigation inside the fence line. He was wondering what would be the use of the irrigation for that and it is inside their fence. Mr. Hickok stated in the City Code it does require front and side yard irrigation and vegetation that does requires runoff so you do not have any soil erosion happening. Being that this site really does not have a lot of vegetative area (soft area), pervious area, this would kind of bring it back to having some landscape in there. From talking to Mr. Clos the City's understanding is there would be an opening between 1175 and the property that is labeled, "1201" for example, in there. That is some landscape that goes away, and basically this would be impervious area that would be green. Granted it is inside a fence and one might say, who does it benefit? They are simply trying to be consistent with the Code that requires front, inside yard irrigation and coverage of land area so it does not soil erode. Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 6 of 12 Chairperson Kondrick stated he thinks Mr. Hickok can understand Mr. Clos' curiosity as to why. No one is going to see it except him and his employees or someone dropping off a car. Mr. Hickok stated this record would help later tell the story why. Commissioner Sielaff stated you can still have erosion on the inside just as well as on the outside. Mr. Hickok replied, that is true. They are trying to keep the storm sewers clean, and the pond itself. And maybe to touch on the pond a little bit, there seems to be a bit of a mystery as to what is being suggested there. He does not think it is much to be feared. Ponds over time can silt in. What the City's engineer wants to do is just take a look and make sure the pond is still meeting the capacity requirements of when it was built. That silting in does happen from soil erosion. Mr. Clos asked, is not rock suitable drainage, too? To stop erosion. Mr. Hickok replied, it is suitable drainage. It is not greenspace. It does allow the water to perk through. Whether in heavy rains it stabilizes the soil and holds it as well as seed or sod is a question up for debate. A cap of sod or well-grown seed that is tight knit is probably a better cover for erosion. Mr. Clos stated in the back building that will be used for recycling bins, that would be under the scenario that they would be dismantling there. If there was a warehouse they would probably more than likely want to put racks of parts there. Commissioner Oquist asked Mr. Clos, if they are going to do their production waste in this building, is there going to be containment of hazardous waste? Antifreeze, oil, transmission oil, battery acids? Mr. Clos replied, it does have a catch basin in that building. They would be checking all that out and would have to get the proper government out there. Mr. Hickok replied, that is inspected by the County hazardous waste folks as well on an ongoing basis. Those reports are provided to the City on an annual basis. MOTION by Commissioner Solberg to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:26 P.M. Commissioner Oquist stated he guessed he did not have a problem with this, just a problem with it overall. Recycling center in the middle of the City. That has always bothered him. It is there and they cannot do anything about it. He wants to make sure those hazardous wastes are under control. There are a lot of things that can be soaked into the ground and into the water supplies. Commissioner Olin stated he agrees with that. In his experience with the EQEC some of that goes to the issue of having some ground cover of living plants. There is no substitute for a healthy root system as far as soil erosion and acting as sort of a filter. Especially with things like phosphorous but anything with those particular phases we well. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff approving Special Use Permit, SP #14-03, by A-ABCO Recycled Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 7 of 12 Auto Parts to expand the auto recycling center, which is zoned M-1, Light Industrial, generally located at 1175 - 73 1/2 Avenue NE with the following stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall comply with all building and fire code requirements. 2. The petitioner shall apply for any necessary permits, including a fence permit, prior to construction or demolition taking place on site. 3. No towed vehicles shall be parked or stored in the front parking lot prior to installation of screening fence 4. New gates installed on the subject property shall remain closed except for when entering and exiting to provide proper screening. 5. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the Rice Creek Watershed district. 6. The petitioner shall comply with any requirements set forth by the City’s engineering staff for the existing storm pond. 7. The petitioner shall file a modified storm pond maintenance agreement for the existing pond if required by the City’s engineering staff. 8. The petitioner shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan for the boulevard area along 73 ½ Avenue to be reviewed and approved by City staff prior to installation of fence. 9. The petitioner shall remove the 5 feet of rock along the west edge of property and replace with sod and irrigation prior to fence installation. 10. The petitioner shall obtain any necessary approvals to operate an auto recycling center from the appropriate governmental authorities. 11. Any new signs installed on the property will require a sign permit. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Special Use Permit, SP #14-04, by Walker Sign Holdings, LLC, d/b/a Lawrence Sign, to allow an electronic changeable sign, generally located at 7451 East River Road. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:29 P.M. Stacy Stromberg, Planner, stated the petitioner, Ashley Solsrud-Beckman, of Lawrence Sign, who is representing the Super America at 7451 East River Road, is requesting a special use permit to allow the retrofit of the existing manual pricing sign, to an electronic pricing sign on the existing pylon sign. Ms. Stromberg stated an 80 square foot freestanding sign already exists on the subject property. The existing sign will remain as is, with the only change being to remove the existing manual pricing signs with new LED price signs. Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 8 of 12 Ms. Stromberg stated the subject property is located on the southeast corner of Osborne Road and East River Road. The property is zoned C-2, General Business. In 1965 a service station and store were constructed on the property. The pylon sign was originally constructed in 1966, but it has been modified several times over the years. The records indicate that a special use permit was issued in 1972 to allow a continued use of a service station. A special use permit was also issued in 1984, when Super America purchased the property for a gas station use, as the use was expanding. Ms. Stromberg stated electronic changeable signs are an approved special use in any zoning district, except residential, provided the message does not change more often than once every 45 seconds. The sign also needs to be in conformance with the sign requirements for the zoning district, in which the property is located. The subject property is zoned, C-2 General Business, which requires that free standing signage cannot exceed 80 square feet in size. The existing sign meets that size requirement as will the new sign. The total sign area of the sign with the retrofit to LED price sign is 80 square feet with the LED piece of the sign being 16 square feet. Ms. Stromberg stated City staff recommends approval of the special use permit as electronic changeable signs are an approved special use in the commercial zoning district, provided the sign complies with Code requirements, subject to stipulations. Ms. Stromberg stated City staff recommends that if the special use permit is granted, the following stipulations be attached: 1. The petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to installing any signage on site. 2. Message on L.E.D. sign shall not change more often than authorized under Section 214.07 of the Fridley City Code. 3. Message on L.E.D. sign shall never flash or have motion that may distract vehicular traffic in the area. 4. 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. Chairperson Kondrick stated they have had these petitions before. It is a very busy gasoline station. In the wintertime he sees the gals out there with their long stick trying to change the numbers, and he is sure it can be a real difficult job. He has no problems with this as long as the stipulations are adhered to. Commissioner Olin stated he is not entirely familiar with the existing sign but he is assuming it is fluorescent backlit at night and not lit during the day? Ms. Stromberg replied, she is assuming the lights are on at all times but is not sure. Commissioner Olin stated he assumes this would be lit all the time by LED light which he guessed on balance it would be more efficient. Ms. Stromberg replied, right. Chairperson Kondrick asked the petitioner if she or her company or Super America have any questions or disagreements as to the stipulations? Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 9 of 12 Sheri King , Walker Sign Holdings, LLC, replied, no. MOTION by Commissioner Solberg to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:35 P.M. Chairperson Kondrick stated they have had these before, and he has no problem with this. It is standard operating procedure. MOTION by Commissioner Solberg approving Special Use Permit, SP #14-04, by Walker Sign Holdings, LLC, d/b/a Lawrence Sign, to allow an electronic changeable sign, generally located at 7451 East River Road with the following stipulations: 1. The petitioner shall obtain sign permit and current sign erector license prior to installing any signage on site. 2. Message on L.E.D. sign shall not change more often than authorized under Section 214.07 of the Fridley City Code. 3. Message on L.E.D. sign shall never flash or have motion that may distract vehicular traffic in the area. 4. 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. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Receive the Minutes of the April 7, 2014, Parks & Recreation Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Sielaff. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. Receive the Minutes of the April 3, 2014, Housing & Redevelopment Authority Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Solberg. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. Receive the Minutes of the May 1, 2014, Housing & Redevelopment Authority Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 10 of 12 MOTION by Commissioner Oquist to receive the minutes. Seconded by Commissioner Solberg. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS: 1. Election of Chair and Vice Chair. MOTION by Commissioner Sielaff electing David Kondrick as Chairperson. Seconded by Commissioner Oquist. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION by Chairperson Kondrick electing Leroy Oquist as Vice Chairperson. Seconded by Commissioner Solberg. UPON A VOICE VOTE ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. Update on the TOD Grant Master Plan Project. Mr. Hickok stated staff wanted to let the Planning Commission know that near the end of 2012, the City applied for a grant to the Metropolitan Council. The City received that grant to do some master planning of its transit TIF district area near the train station. That was a very important thing for Fridley because the legislature gave it that. Fridley was the only city to have a transit district of this type. What staff felt they needed to do is use this planning money to help them master plan. Mr. Hickok stated staff has had a number of different things the Planning Commission, the HRA, and the City Council have been involved with that have led to staff saying, look, they have about 18 different studies it has done including Islands of Peace study about the housing in and around that area, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, current zoning, the transit plan development district of 2011 which was one of Planning Commission's products, Safe Routes to School grant, transit for livable communities, the federal Transit Enhancement grant to put a bridge over 694 so there could be a pathway in front of Home Depot, a bridge over 694 that is pedestrian and bike friendly, and then a path that continues south. It could even link up to the Hennepin County bike/pedestrian pathway. That, along with the East River Road corridor study, the transit TIF district, Fridley station market study, Northstar commuter rail, active transportation plan, and the John Allen project called "Riverside Corporate Center". Staff did put together an Islands of Peace concept plan. It was an interesting thing that has led to where they are at right now in this study. Mr. Hickok stated the Metropolitan Council received the City's grant application and awarded the City $100,000 to do this study and then shortly after said, hold on, they are going over the details of the City's application and you have a park in there and we do not allow park planning, especially this one is a regional park. The City was told it can plan everything but that. The City informed them that park is really important because future development of the transit-oriented district is going to depend on enhancing that park, not having it hidden behind some buildings. Instead the City thinks they need to open up its opportunities where they have them to the river. Also, enhance the parks so they are the best Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 11 of 12 value to the citizens. Mr. Hickok stated the City went back to the Metropolitan Council with a plan. It was very nice because the Anoka County park people were in the midst of doing a master planning for their parks, including Islands of Peace Park along with Riverfront Park just a little bit south of here. They used the land area for those two parks to give them enough land area to make this a regional park and, as a regional park then, they get federal funding which is very important to them. Anoka county park director and City planning staff sat down and said they need to illustrate and demonstrate to the Met Council they were not in any way trying to harm this park. They are not trying to take away any square feet. In fact, if they can make it work, they would like to add square feet to this park and enhance. It is a cornerstone to future development around there and, if that park performs like they would like it to, redeveloping next to it would be more promising. After doing this illustration they went along with it. They did go ahead and award the money. Mr. Hickok stated right now the City is working with its consultant for which they used a big piece of that money so they can take all these pieces and meld them together. Once a developer comes along, the City can help them by guiding them into a master plan. For example, they could say, on the East River Road corridor study they are talking about this parkway effect with certain types of lighting and landscaping. Imagine yourself as a developer needing to know the East River Road corridor plan and then needing to know the Comprehensive Plan and then needing know the active transportation plan, etc. Wouldn't it be nice if the City had a master plan that kind of tied all those things together and made it very simple for them and got the City a step closer to when redevelopment happens in this area and have it happen the way the City would envision. Mr. Hickok stated the good news is they are getting to a point where they have at least concepts now that they have taken to an early discussion with the HRA and City Council why this is so important also. Not only for that developer but, because the legislature was gracious and gave the City a transit TIF district here, the City is able to take the increment that happens through future development starting with the John Allen project which will probably be the first thing they see which will allow the City to take increment and put it back into infrastructure in that area that was highlighted and cross-hatched. The City wants to know how do you want that, where do you want those paths, where do you want that roadway, where do you want those infrastructure improvements that would qualify under this transit TIF money? Mr. Hickok stated, one of the things they may see in the future as a request is parking deck help on the John Allen project to do that corporate center right at the intersection of East River Road and 694 and, if that is the case, that would be a qualifying feature. Put other pathways and things to make it more able to be a pedestrian way or able to be a bikeway for people so they have alternatives for their transportation. Also, there might be other types of infrastructure that the City would like to have in that area. That is another important piece here. Mr. Hickok stated, before the City gets planning too far down the road like it always likes to do, they like to go public as always. Have a meeting that involves the public from that area and anyone else in the City who would like to attend. Also, have anyone from the Commission who is interested to attend as well. They are looking at a date of July 23 for that meeting. At that time they will have some concept plan that really helps meld together the pieces they have been talking about where they think intersections might be changing or slightly modified along East River Road to help enhance this, etc. Mr. Hickok stated the one thing they will be disappointed in hearing and has come out of their early Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2014 Page 12 of 12 discussion on this they have learned, and they have had engineers involved in this, they will recall the discussion about connecting 57th Avenue and extending it across East River Road. Phenomenal idea, it would have probably been an excellent thing for the community to have another east-west connection. What they learned is that the physical characteristic for the land here makes it so difficult but, it is not only the land, it is the kind of bridge they would need to build to traverse all of the width of the BNSF rail. They had a few meetings with them talking about, they would like to put this bridge over. The meeting went very well. BNSF smiled and nodded and said, yes, they do not have a problem with that although there is a certain minimum clearance they need. This would get them up higher than even a federal highway bridge because the Rail tends to stack their cars even a bit higher in some cases. Also, please do not put your legs down anywhere in their rail right-of-way. It would have been a free span bridge - a very expensive bridge. Also, the distance between East River Road and Main Street, in order to get the height for the rail, it increases too rapidly and comes down too rapidly to make it a comfortable commute. Mr. Hickok stated the complicated factor about a tunnel is there is a 96-inch metro sewer line that runs through there, and it is 20 feet down. The pipe requires a certain amount of cover over the top, and federal money again would be used for this. The City could not get federal clearance for funding. Kind of a top supported bridge, you have a pipe now that is moving over into the John Allen site further so that it would go deeper into the slope so it has cover, and that starts to mess with where John Allen can place buildings on his site. The tunnel gets to be as complicated as the overpass. Mr. Hickok stated the one thing they are going to do is try and preserve the opportunity. Things could change. East River Road could change in elevation so that it makes going up not quite as monumental of a task. Also redevelopment could occur around Main Street at some point in the future. Even if they were able to move the pipe right now, you would have retaining walls running along 57th in front of those businesses, and you would have no way of getting into those businesses, and they are not deep enough to put a frontage road in front of. ADJOURN: MOTION by Commissioner Solberg, seconded by Commissioner Sielaff, to adjourn. UPON A VOICE VOTE, ALL VOTING AYE, CHAIRPERSON KONDRICK DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AND THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:56 P.M. Respectfully submitted by, Denise M. Johnson Recording Secretary