Loading...
PC Minutes 10-19-04 Lie ~' ('¡ "l -, -- '-._';,J Planning Commission Summary - October 19,2004 PUBLIC HEARING: ARBORETUM SHOPPING CENTER PUD AMENDMENT TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE USES (CENTURY PLAZA RET AIL CENTER), PLANNING CASE NO. 04-35. Public Present: Name Address Paul Andrescik Timothy Bohlman 710 Debbie Lane, Carver 7500 W. 78th Street, Edina Sharmeen Al-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Commissioner Tjornhom asked for clarification on the definition of exercise health club, and if that would include an establishment such as Curves. Chairman Sacchet asked staff to explain how they determine permitted uses in the Neighborhood Business district. The applicant, Timothy Bohlman, Senior Project Manager for Minstar Builders and Arboretum Exchange LLC explained he was seeking clarification of uses allowed for their project, Century Plaza Retail Center. The ordinance as it reads today is vague and confusing and requires frequent, almost a case by case request for individual approval from city staff every time they seek to execute a lease. The applicant is requesting to modify the PUD for this development to give a very specific, clear picture of what is and is not permitted for this shopping center. Commissioner Slagle asked the applicant to clarify the ownership of the property. Commissioner Claybaugh asked for clarification on what was being requested by the applicant and what was being recommended by staff. Commissioner Papke asked for clarification if the intent of the city was to keep off sale liquor stores within the downtown area. Chairman Sacchet opened the public hearing. No one spoke and the public hearing was closed. After commission discussion, the following motion was made. Papke moved, Tjornhom seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of Planned Unit Development Amendment #04-35 to include all lawn and garden centers, all off sale liquor stores, all radio and television studios, all appliance sales and services, however to include health and physical exercise clubs up to 5,000 square feet, based upon the following conditions: 1. The district has a reasonable selection of permitted uses. 2. The requested amendments will be in conflict with the comprehensive plan because the users are not inherently low scale and would be in competition with commercial development, particularly in the CBD, BG and BH Districts. All voted in favor, except Lillehaug who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. 6 Planning Commission Summary - October 19, 2004 Commissioner Lillehaug's reason for opposing the motion is that he supported staff's recommendation. Chairman Sacchet summarized the Planning Commission's issues as being, they struggled with the wording of the motion, but decided to include health and physical exercise clubs up to 5,000 square feet as an acceptable use but did not want to give further flexibility to the other 4 proposed uses. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Tjornhom noted the summary and verbatim Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated October 5,2004 as presented. Chairman Sacchet adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 9:00 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 7 0', ¡J c) c~ \ - _j J Planning Commission Meeting - October 19,2004 8. Submit an existing topographic survey signed by an RLS (registered land surveyor). The survey must show the following: a. Location of the retaining wall with top and bottom elevations. b. Driveway location and slope. c. Garage floor elevation. 9. The driveway must be hard surfaced and comply with City Code Sec. 20-1122 (attached). 10. No home occupation or business use will be permitted in the existing attached garage or proposed detached garage/storage building, as stated in City Code 20- 977: ".. .No garage or accessory buildings except accessory agriculture buildings existing on February 19, 1987 shall be used for any home occupation." 11. The applicant shall submit for staff approval and construct a French drainage system, along with gutters on the garage/storage building. All voted in favor, except Papke who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. PUBLIC HEARING: ARBORETUM SHOPPING CENTER PUD AMENDMENT TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD CONVENIENCE USES (CENTURY PLAZA RETAIL CENTER), PLANNING CASE NO. 04-35. Public Present: Name Address Paul Andrescik Timothy Bohlman 710 Debbie Lane, Carver 7500 W. 78th Street, Edina Sharmeen AI-Jaff presented the staff report on this item. Sacchet: Yes, this is questions. You can ask questions of staff, go ahead. Tjornhom: I have a question Sharmeen. When you say health and physical exercise clubs, do you also mean like Curves? Places like that. Would they be included in those? You know what I'm saying when I mention Curves? Al-Jaff: Yes. 25 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19,2004 Sacchet: What's Curves? Al-Jaff: It's a very good question. Tjornhom: Well wait, wait. Sacchet: Oh Curves. I get it. I know what Curves is. Yep. AI-Jaff: Okay. One of the things that we discussed in house is how do you differentiate between Curves and Lifetime. I mean both of those are health clubs. And under our current ordinances, current definitions there are no differences between them so yes. That would include Curves. Tjornhom: Okay. Claybaugh: But certainly wouldn't the 5,000 square feet, in terms of scale, help to balance that equation? AI-J aff: Yes it would. Claybaugh: That's one mitigating element. Sacchet: Any other questions of staff? Steve. Lillehaug: I have one question. What did the City Council do with the recent similar request we got from the southwest quadrant? AI-Jaff: I believe they turned it down. It was retail to be introduced into the building, yeah. Sacchet: Any other questions? I do have one question. Neighborhood business. I was trying to figure out how do we define neighborhood business, and you actually gave one clue. You said kind of daily use of the residents. So if you apply that, well we hope we don't need to buy an appliance every day. That certainly is very hopeful. We could say we do daily exercise, but we don't include that into neighborhood business. Because? I'm just trying to use a measuring stick. Trying to be consistent. You see what I'm doing? Al-Jaff: I believe, and I haven't done the research behind it but I believe it's different because our ordinance does not differentiate between, I used Lifetime as an example earlier. Between a Lifetime scale development, which will generate a lot of traffic. Sacchet: So it's a traffic concern to some extent? 26 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19,2004 AI-Jaff: That's one thing. And then you end up drawing from a much larger radius than you would from just one or two neighborhoods that are immediately next to this development. Sacchet: Then lawn and garden is probably not a daily use. We hope that liquor is not a daily use. The radio and the television studio, we probably don't use that every day either. Okay, there it applies pretty well. Use that as a yard stick. Okay, thanks. Are we ready to listen to the applicant? If the applicant wants to come forward. Maybe you can give us some insight of why specifically those items are of importance. Maybe give us a little framework. Tjornhom: I had one more. Sacchet: Oh Bethany had one more question. You can stay right there. Tjornhom: And this is probably nit picky I don't know but you have Exhibit A, page 2. Was there a page I? Were there more things? On page 1 that was listed. AI-Jaff: If you would just give me one moment. Tjornhom: Were they duplicates? Sacchet: Yeah, we have two page 2's and no page 1. So that's a good question Bethany. We have two page 2's so that would lead us to suspect there's a page 1 we don't see. AI-Jaff: I have the actual file with me so. I apologize. Sacchet: So there is a corresponding page 1, okay. If you can pass that around quickly to look at. While we look at that, if the applicant, you're there. If you want to state your name and address for the record and tell us what you want to add to this. Timothy Bohlman: Yes, thank you Mr. Chairman. Members of the board for letting me come and present my applicant this evening. My name is Timothy Bohlman. I am Senior Project Manager for Minstar Builders and Arboretum Exchange LLC. I guess the first thing I'd like to talk about is that while the staff report characterizes my application as seeking an expansion of the uses allowed at Century Plaza, I really don't see it as an expansion so much as a clarification. Some of the questions that members of the board had asked of Sharmeen here a couple of minutes ago sort of make that point is that the ordinance that is currently in place today, at best is vague and confusing and just requires frequent, almost case by case request for individual approval every time we would seek to execute a lease from the city staff. What we're really trying to do here is to modify the PUD for this development to give us a very specific, clear picture of what we can and cannot have in this shopping center. The reason that the list that you're passing around right now was submitted is, about 2 years ago now I was project manager on a similar site. A similar building in Cottage Grove on it's northeast frontier across town from it's major business districts. Very similar to what we're talking about here. This is sort of 27 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19,2004 the edge of Chanhassen and is removed and separated by the entirety of Chanhassen from it's main business districts. I guess the other thing I should clarify is that, along with that is exactly what uses we're trying to have here. The five uses that were just spoken about before I stepped up here were called out because of the fact that in staff's review over the list I had proposed, which was from the PUD in that Cottage Grove center, they said they were all fine except for these 5 and so that's kind of how they got called out. We don't today have anybody proposing to put a radio station studio in the center. We don't today have anybody wanting to put in a lawn and garden center. Those were just all things that the citizens, Planning Commission, staff and City Council of the city of Cottage Grove came up with as these are an all encompassing list of everything you might see and commonly want to have in a neighborhood convenience shopping center. They were so happy with it as a matter of fact that immediately after passing the PUD that we had written for the shops at Ellamar Village, they adopted that and codified it as an actual zoning ordinance and every other neighborhood convenience retail center since that time has followed that exact list. When the PUD for Century Plaza, or Arboretum Village was initially reviewed by this body and the council and staff and approved, many of the specific uses that are in my proposed list were not specifically discussed and that's just because we reasonably assumed that the permitted uses definition provided in the existing PUD code and the BN business district code would allow for the things you commonly see in a neighborhood convenience shopping center. Everything that isn't specifically listed, there's 14 different things listed in the BN district code as it exists today, and of the, aside from the maybe half a dozen of them that are fairly specific, like daycare center or veterinary clinics, most of the other ones are awfully vague. And I'm only saying that not to pick apart your code but simply to point out the fact that the reason we weren't having this conversation back then is that we reasonably assumed that say for instance an off sale liquor store in a specialty neighborhood, less than 5,000 square feet kind of sense, would fit within say number 12, specialty retail shops, and we had no idea that we would ever have a problem trying to put in such a use in a neighborhood convenient center. Going back to the Cottage Grove center for just one more second, I actually went out there today to visit with the proprietor of the off sale liquor store that I had leased and put into that center. Kind of catch up and refresh my memory of exactly what it looks like and what kind of a place it is. The build out is incredible. It's very much an upscale sort of a feel. He has everything in there from the more common sundry items like you know beer selections, table wines, to Dom Perignon and Louis the XIII cognac. Cigars. Gift items. Crystal wine glasses. Cigar cutters. Lighters, etc, etc. The floor is dyed and varnished concrete like you would see in you know Redstone or one of these kinds of restaurants. It's just a very nice, warm feeling shop. It's not MGM liquor warehouse. It's not Byerly's Wine and Spirits. It's not Gwill Liquors. It's completely not that. It does not compete with those businesses. Cottage Grove has those too in their main business districts. And the people who are in that part of town or who are going to stock up for whatever kind of a function they have, continue to go to those places. The people that frequent this particular shop are by and large those who live in the immediate area of that retail center or drive by it every day on their way home. In the 90 minutes that I spent there today, I only was able to speak with Steve for less than a third of that and that was because he had to keep excusing himself every few minutes to go and wait on the steady stream of customers that kept coming in the front door. It struck me that this is the 28 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19, 2004 middle of a Tuesday afternoon and he's got some pretty good business going here. People are stopping in to pick up some of these items on their way home for you know, for dinner this evening or maybe a celebration party if they had a good week picking football over the weekend or something like that. Whatever it was, but that seems to fit that daily needs definition. I mean this was the middle of a Tuesday afternoon and he was having such good business that I couldn't carryon a conversation with the fella, and that's the kind of thing I'm trying to get across to you of what we're trying to do here with that particular use. Out of the 5 uses that we're talking about, the other one that is fairly important to us and maybe the other ones aren't so important is the health and exercise club. In particular I didn't want to mention too many name brands but since you already did, the Curves is a good example. Most people know what that is. Again, that's a whole different animal than Lifetime Fitness. I know my wife and my sister in law and several of their friends wouldn't be caught dead at Lifetime. You know for various reasons that are their own and I don't want to go into with them, but they love Curves you know. It's I guess less intimidating is what my wife says. You know it's not the same deal. And so in a similar sense, I live in Lakeville. They're talking about building one of these new community centers with Lifetime or somebody built into it and yet 3 little neighborhood convenience retail centers in town, 3, have a Curves or a Fitness 19 or there's 3 different ones. Again they don't conflict, they don't compete. It's a different service. Just because you can go to both and lift weights doesn't mean that they're the same deal. And basically the point is that the BN, the underlying BN code that puts that overall restriction on that any of the uses that you have in there can't be more than 5,000 square feet is really the limiting factor. You know you can have anything else that you have in your main business district. You know Byerly's, grocery store. Huge right? Well, there's nothing to say that I couldn't have a Kenny's Market here, you know as long as there's not gas pumps I guess or actually part of our PUD was allowing gas pumps. But obviously nobody would make the point that Kenny's Market or Holiday Station competes and would put Byerly's under you know. So it's just part of the vagueness and the ambiguity that's in the code as it is, which is what we're here seeking to correct. To simply know that these are the uses that people expect in these kind of centers. One of the things that I also thought was particularly confusing is that in the code, in the BN business district, one of the specifically allowed uses is number 7, offices. And yet in the staff report, in the findings of fact section 4, subsection (a), the report says that, and I'm going to paraphrase. It says that office uses, I'm sorry, retail uses would be inconsistent with office and industrial type uses and so therefore they're not allowed. So the finding of fact in this staff report tells me anyway, maybe I'm reading it wrong, but it says an office use would not be allowed because it's inconsistent with retail, and yet the BN code specifically says offices are allowed. One other such sort of a conundrum would be that in the BN district, number 6 home furnishings is an allowed use in a neighborhood convenience retail center. Obviously as I said before, if there were to be such a store in our shop, it would be less than 5,000 square feet. It would be, you know home furniture would have absolutely nothing to worry about as far as competition being put under by such a store. My question is, how many people do you know would pull into a center like mine to pick up a gallon of milk and a sofa on their way home on a daily basis? I don't see that and so I think that actually wouldn't need to be in the list you know really. Along with probably the lawn and garden center. I don't 29 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19,2004 know that that's a particularly popular, critical type of use either, but there is a core set of uses no matter what your own personal needs are. If you just step back for a second and think of what you see in these centers and what you and your friends and your family members would normally want to have if you lived in the townhomes immediately adjacent to this center, you want to have a dry cleaner. You want to have a hair cut place. You want to have probably like a Subway sandwich shop. You want to have, maybe not you all personally but some of you may want to have an off sale liquor store there where you can stop in. Geez, friends are over. I'm a little bit low on Miller Lite. I'd better run over there and grab a 12 pack, or pick up a bottle of wine today for dinner. Whatever the case may be, it needs to be there for you if, for that convenience type purpose. One of the most important and probably, I guess about the last point I'll make because I don't want to take up your entire evening, is that going to what I heard said about the fact that the city has a total of 4 licenses. 3 are in use. There's 1 available. Do you need to have another one in the same 4 block radius that the other 3 stores are in right now? Or would it be better to have one somewhere else in this kind of a use to pick up that revenue and keep it in Chanhassen because, let me point this out to you. If we were not to have such a use in Century Plaza, the people who live out there in those townhomes and the people that work there in those, in the business park, are going to go to the next most convenient location to pick up those types of things on their way home, and if you define next most convenient by proximity, it's not Chanhassen central business district. If I can put this up on. Zoom it out a bit. Is that possible? Well you can't really see it on the screen there anyway. I guess it's better if I just hold it up and I'll pass it around to you up there. What I've put together is simply a proximity map that shows Century Plaza and picks out every off sale liquor, retail liquor store within a 3 mile radius of that location. The first closest one today is the Shorewood liquor stores at 41 and 7 in Excelsior. Fully half a mile closer than is Byerly's Wines and Spirits on 78th Street. The next closest is Pass By Liquors at Chestnut and Pioneer in Chaska. The next is Tonka Bay liquor store in Excelsior. Only then do you get to MGM Liquors and Cheers Wine and Spirits. So if we're looking to have convenience for the neighborhoods, which is I think the spirit of what we're trying to accomplish here. Obviously the Curves type of health club and this type of an off sale retail liquor store are two of the basic uses that that kind of center should have, and if they're not allowed, those uses will be sought out by those residents and those business daytime residents wherever is the next closest place to go. Most convenience place, and that isn't necessarily in downtown Chanhassen so if you like I'll pass this around so you can have a peek at it. Sacchet: Sure. Alright. Timothy Bohlman: I think that about covers it for me. I'll be glad to answer any questions you may have. Sacchet: Any questions for the applicant? Craig, you do? Claybaugh: Actually I have a question for staff. I guess I'll just throw it out there because now I'm a little bit confused. If we're looking not necessarily at excluding things and the applicant is looking for clarification. 30 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19, 2004 Sacchet: Do we want to see whether we have questions for the applicant maybe first before, can we hold this just for a second? Claybaugh: Sure. Sacchet: Let's finish with the applicant if you don't mind Craig. Slagle: I've got one, and I'm trying to go back to when we first saw this however many years ago, and the parcels to the south of you, which is the gas station and then we have the car wash and then to the east of that we have the new office. I'll make one comment and then I want to ask you. The comment I want to make is, I don't know if you were here for our discussion on the office. Al-Jaff: No, he wasn't. Slagle: Okay. There was some discussion afterwards if we did the right thing. About offices so your question centering on offices, as the question are they part of a neighborhood business district is right on target, because I think had some of us had another chance, our vote might have been different. I want to preface it by that. Here's my question. Has the ownership of this parcel changed because I remember a gentleman from Waconia coming before us with the Dunn Brothers Coffee Shop and the gas station. AI-Jaff: And you turned it down. Slagle: And we turned it down. Al-Jaff: You turned down the drive thru. Slagle: Correct. Turned down the drive thru and then where have you come into play, if I can ask. Your company. Timothy Bohlman: Well we are the original purchaser of that commercial outlot from the larger mixed use development. Arboretum Exchange LLC is simply the holding company for the shopping center. We bought the property. We hired, this was before I came on board with the company. The company hired a private consultant individual like myself to come in and gain the entitlement approvals at that time. And then subsequently the improvements were installed with the subdivision of the property. The c-store lot was sold off and the office building location was never a part of our deal. That was purchased separately from the original development, by that development. Slagle: Okay. Timothy Bohlman: So I don't know if I answered your question there but as far as I understand, Ron Clark Construction, which is the master company of Minstar Builders 31 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19,2004 and all these other entities. We are the original purchaser of the raw land from the bigger development. Slagle: Okay. And let me ask this question then. With your comment of trying to clarify as to what can be brought in or not brought in, which I certainly appreciate your desire. Are you having issues leasing space there? Timothy Bohlman: We are having some issues in getting the space leased out as fully and quickly as we would have expected. Some of that is just market factors and then some of that is the uncertainty as to what we can and cannot have in the center. Right now one of the our most interested, how do I put this? One of the uses that people are most interested in putting in there is the off sale liquor store. That's one of the two main reasons that I'm here this evening, and like I said. The other three uses there are probably not as important and were only submitted as part of that larger list. But the small scale health club and the off sale liquor store are two very important uses we feel, and right now we have 3 distinctly separate operators currently in business elsewhere in the immediate suburban area who want to put in another new location on this site for the specialty off sale liquor type of an establishment, so there again that speaks to the desirability of that type of a use in this kind of a scenario. Slagle: Okay. So last question then, center on the liquor, or the off sale. Is it your opinion that a liquor store would be defined as a value to that immediate neighborhood, and call the immediate neighborhood 2 miles in any direction? Timothy Bohlman: Absolutely it would. It would be an asset not only to the immediate neighborhood but also to the immediate business community meaning the center itself. Within any kind of a retail center where there is multiple users in a leased space environment, one of the factors that helps those individual businesses succeed and grow as well as supports the profitability and the viability of the building itself are the inter- dependencies. The synergies that those businesses have with each other. You want businesses that everybody stops by on their way home from work because if they stop there, they're also on the way back to their car going to run in there and grab that too, okay. So that's why you want to have a popular lunch time sandwich shop kind of a function because when people stop in there for lunch to have that sandwich, they're going to go oh yeah. I also need to stop over here and drop off my dry cleaning and vice versa, and they all work together to draw customers to themselves, that they also then share with everybody else in the building. And some of the strongest draws for that customer base are the 6 or 8 different uses that I rattled off here a few minutes ago. Slagle: Okay. Sacchet: Any other questions of this applicant? Not off hand, okay. Thank you very much. Timothy Bohlman: Thank you. 32 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19, 2004 Sacchet: Do we want to put questions to staff in there Craig? Before we go into the public hearing. Claybaugh: Yeah. For the applicant's use for clarification request, but what do we have in front of us? Let's see if I can go to the recommendation here. Al-Jaff: We don't have an issue with, I mean the applicant submitted approximately 80 different types of uses and as he stated, he had difficulty, he thought that the city ordinance was confusing so basically we took each of the requested uses and compared it against what our ordinance permitted, and out of the 80, approximately 80 uses, we found 5 that we strongly felt that they did not meet the intent of a neighborhood business district. One of the things that the applicant mentioned was he wanted to define those uses so he doesn't have to contact staff every time there is a space to be leased. We want to be contacted. That is essential for us. This is our only opportunity to insure that there is adequate parking. The use is actually permitted. And it's really, this is the first time we run into an issue like this. We have a couple other neighborhood business districts and again staff always welcomes phone calls. We welcome working with applicants and property owners so that's our job. That's what we're here for. Another thing the applicant mentioned was that this project, that he was able to manage in Cottage Grove permitted all of those uses. There are certain types of things that probably happen in the City of Chanhassen that might not work for the City of Cottage Grove, and vice versa. This is Chanhassen and you have our recommendation. Staff is recommending that. Claybaugh: Right. I guess what I was confused about is when the applicant came up initially it was, or I understood it, that it wasn't for a specific purpose. The more he got into the presentation, the more it took on a tone that there was a couple specific uses that they had in mind and it seemed like the request for clarification was broader than we have written in our summary of request, but if I understand you, it's just the 5 that didn't comply with the list that was submitted to you and that's what we're voting on? Nothing any broader and does that meet what the applicant is after? AI-J aff: That's correct. Claybaugh: But my question was, how that helps with the clarification of, it just seems like there was a broader question being asked, and I'm just trying to identify how we're going to address that, or if there is anything there to address. AI-Jaff: They gave us the list of uses that I sent out earlier. You were looking at and of that entire list there were a few uses that did not fit our definition of neighborhood business district. Slagle: But let me be clear on this too. We have in essence an applicant saying here's 80 things that I might want to do. Giving it to staff and staff determining that 75 are not conforming. I mean it's sort of, I'mjust letting you know, that sort of doesn't seem official. I mean other words, it seems like they should be coming to us with an 33 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19, 2004 application that's specific and we say yes or no. I guess what I'm trying to say is, if we vote and say no, you know these 5. Sacchet: We're endorsing 75 others. Slagle: Yeah, and I guess what I'm saying is if they came in and said this is the 5 uses we want and we say no, are they going to be back in 3 weeks from now with 5 more, or is your approval of the 75 all they need? AI-Jaff: Our approval of the 75 is all they need. I mean and please remember that we do this with development around the city all the time. Someone comes in and says Sharmeen, there's a dry cleaner that wants to go into that specific district. I open the ordinance and it says okay, specialty retail or daily service types of use, and I look at the use that they are proposing. Does it meet that definition? If I couldn't make that decision I will go to the Community Development Director. She the authority, you've given her the authority to make that interpretation. We also have an industrial classification book. That's another resource that's available to us. Every single imaginable use is within that book and it breaks it down as to what district these type of uses can go into so we have several resources and we make those decisions on a daily basis. Slagle: Okay. Just want to be clear. Papke: Also question for staff. On the liquor license. As a planning commission we quite often have to make trade off's between things being a viable business. Putting something where there isn't any competition versus clustering things together for aesthetic purposes or whatever. That's part of what we do. I want to make sure I understand the spirit of the comprehensive plan as it regards to off sale liquors. Is it the intent that we want to constrain, regardless of the viability of the business itself, the liquor stores, the off sale liquor stores to the downtown area. Is that what we're trying to get to? Al-Jaff: It's downtown, general business district as well as highway business district. And if you look at our zoning map, that is truly the area that surrounding downtown areas. Papke: So quite clearly this one, although as the applicant stated would be very viable due to the lack of competition in that area, that's directly in conflict to what we're trying to get to from our comprehensive plan? Al-Jaff: Right. That's very true. Papke: Okay, thank you. Slagle: I've got one more. Sacchet: Go ahead Rich. 34 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19, 2004 Slagle: Just touching upon Kurt's comment. Where does the highway district stop as you go westward on 5? Al-Jaff: West on 5, it stops at, north of West 79th Street. Slagle: But as you head west. Al-Jaff: Market Boulevard. Because anything beyond Market becomes general business district. Slagle: Okay. So I guess what I'm, maybe a different way to ask it is, based upon your definition of where, let's just say the city would be okay with an off sale liquor store. What is the furthest western most boundary? Al-Jaff: Target. Slagle: Target? Okay. So no further west than Powers? AI-Jaff: No. Slagle: Okay. Tjornhom: I have some questions. You said that the city has 4 liquor licenses available and 3 are in use. How does one go about to apply for a liquor license? What is the process of doing that? AI-Jaff: I would transfer you to Karen Engelhardt. Sacchet: It's City Council. It's not Planning Commission. Tjornhom: Right. Right. AI-Jaff: It's a City Council procedure. Tjornhom: I guess what I'm getting at is it because, you know if they wanted to put a Curves in, we don't have a certain amount of licenses for exercising do we. Al-Jaff: No, that's correct. Tjornhom: It's just for liquor that we have these. I just feel that if we would change our mind about this and allow this in the BN district, we have to open it up to everybody that's in that district all over the city then to make it fair, because everyone else has been complying with our ordinances and so now we're opening it up to something that I don't think we don't want to go there, do we? Necessarily. 35 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19,2004 AI-Jaff: I think you've got staff's recommendation. Tjornhom: Right. Al-Jaff: We believe that these types of uses belong in a neighborhood business district. Tjornhom: Right, and I think also when you do start opening up liquor stores, you do have a certain element of maybe worrying about more crime in that area. Or maybe not. I don't know. Okay, well. AI-Jaff: I don't know. I haven't investigated... Tjornhom: I don't have a problem with the whole Curves thing going in there because I don't think Curves really is a, would be competing with Lifetime Fitness or anything else. I think it's a 30 minute deal, you go in. You go out and you're done but I guess Ijust think that you know, because there's one license, it would not seem right to change the rules when everyone else has been complying with for a long time. Sacchet: Okay. Steve. We're still in questions actually. I want to remind you we haven't opened the public hearing yet so. We kind of got back into staff questions to staff here somewhere. Lillehaug: Well I've got just two quick ones. So we have our 14 definitions here that are permitted in the BN district. Specialty retail shops. So you're saying that is clearly defined on what applications actually fall into a specialty retail shop, and there's really no question about it? I mean it's defined pretty clearly? AI-Jaff: It's defined pretty clearly but here is the other thing. Liquor stores are spelled out in other districts and there's a reason why. I mean we look at the list of permitted uses throughout the city. And liquor stores are permitted in specific districts. And the neighborhood business is not one of them. Lillehaug: Okay. Sacchet: Alright. This is a public hearing so I'd like to invite anybody who wants to address this to come forward. And I see nobody getting up so I close the public hearing. So we did that. Discussion. Comments. Well we heard some positions here based on the questions to some extent. Do we need more discussions? I mean I think there are a couple of discussion points really the applicant touched on. But I'll hold back with that. See whether you guys have anything to add in terms of discussion or comments. Lillehaug: Well I think staff hit it right on. We're being vague to a point where we want to be vague. We want them to go to staff. We want them to look at the uses so I disagree with the applicant. He indicated that we're vague but I think it's clear and I think it's what we want. And I don't support any of these other uses. 36 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19, 2004 Sacchet: Okay. So, and the applicant made it relatively clear that there is no conflict except with off sale liquor store I think there seemed to be clearly an interest, but it looks like the other ones were just to clarify. And we already elaborate quite a bit about the liquor store reasoning in terms of our framework here for the city. In terms of the comprehensive plan. I don't know whether we need to touch on that more. Again you mentioned it Sharmeen whether it's allowed in other cities or not, is not irrelevant but then in the end it's not a deciding factor either. I mean we, and I agree with your comment Steve that you made it pretty clear Sharmeen that this is about as specific as we want to be because we want to see it in the context of the other aspects. Now what we're doing here is just a recommendation to City Council. This is going to go up to City Council either way so I want to point that out for the applicant. That we're not making a decision. We're making a recommendation to City Council. We are allowing appliances within the framework. Small scale. That we say here. The health and physical exercise club, at first I thought well. I mean if across the street is a huge health club, if somebody has the ambition that they can pull it off across the street with something that distinguishes itself, why not just allow it? I mean it's a daily use so I could make peace with a small scale health and fitness component in there. Because I would think the market forces would balance that properly and the size of what we have in there. Now did you see a conflict with that one in terms of neighborhood business concept? AI-Jaff: As long as, and again we had this discussion in house because our ordinance does not differentiate between a large scale Lifetime Fitness type of health club versus Curves. But stay consistent with what our ordinance says and again. Sacchet: Okay, you made that clear before. I'm clear about that. So possibly if we would make a distinction here for this particular case, they say small scale health. AI-Jaff: Not to exceed 5,000 square feet. Sacchet: I think I could make peace with that. Then florist is allowed but we don't allow a lawn and garden because we don't want to get into the request of people wanting to store, storing mulch or what have you in the back yard. And yeah, the television studios, that's hard to reconcile as a daily need of a neighborhood. Let's see. In terms of the inconsistencies, just for the applicant's benefit. I mean when we say offices are allowed on this list, and you found it kind of conflicting with the concept of, was it in the office industrial use. I think it's important to point out that office industrial use as a term in the zoning context. So it's really, it's how we define a particular grouping of what we address in our zoning. That's about my comments. Anybody else want to add anything to this? Somebody want to venture a motion? Papke: I'll give it a shot. I'd like to recommend a motion that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Planned Unit Development Amendment 04-35 to include health and physical exercise clubs and appliance sales and service that do not exceed 5,000 square feet based upon the two conditions listed in the staff report. 37 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19, 2004 Sacchet: Point of clarification from staff. Does that fulfill what we need to do here? I mean it's, if we don't mention the. Al-Jaff: The request in front of you today looks at permitting or denying the 5 uses. So may I rephrase what, okay. What you can say is, the Planning Commission recommends denial of PUD Amendment 04-35 to include health and physical exercise clubs that exceeds 5,000. Lawn and garden centers with no exterior storage and display, off sale liquor store, radio and television studios and appliance sales and service that exceed 5,000. Papke: Okay, got it. Would you like me to re-state? Sacchet: As stated. Papke: As stated. Sacchet: Alright. Do we have a second? Tjornhom: Second it. Sacchet: Now I have an issue though. Slagle: You can't say it and then. Sacchet: I'm making an amendment. Claybaugh: Right. The way this is worded, liquor store up to 5,000 square feet. Slagle: Would be allowed. Claybaugh: Would be allowed. Sacchet: And the lawn and garden center that has an exterior storage would be allowed because we only exclude the ones without. Slagle: Correct. Sacchet: That's an issue. Claybaugh: Correct. Al-Jaff: May I re-phrase again. Sacchet: Please. Claybaugh: Please do. 38 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19,2004 Papke: Or I can take a stab. Sacchet: Want to give it a stab Kurt? Papke: I recommend that the Planning Commission denies the Planning Unit Development Amendment 04-35 to include all, let's see. Denies approval of all health and physical exercise clubs that exceed 5,000 square feet, all lawn and garden centers, all off sale liquor stores, all radio and television studios and all appliance sales and services that exceed 5,000 square feet based upon the two conditions listed in the staff report. Lillehaug: Point of clarification. Number 11 of the permitted uses includes small appliance repair shops. Do we want to put a limit on that now by saying 5,000 square feet? AI-Jaff: The best... was any use that comes into that specific. Sacchet: So we don't need anything stated? I mean all of them, yes. Craig. Claybaugh: We still need to take another run at it. We need to lose the 5,000 square feet at the end. Just if we take, that the Planning Commission recommends denial and move the health and physical exercise clubs to the end, and just say recommends denial of 04- 35 to include all lawn and garden centers, all off sale liquor stores, all radio and television studios, all appliance sales, however to include health and physical exercise clubs up to 5,000 square feet. Sacchet: Now we also allow appliance sales and services. Claybaugh: Small appliances. It doesn't say small appliances. Sacchet: Okay,oh. Yeah. I see your point. Is that clear enough? Alright, we got a motion. Do we have a second? Tjornhom: I think I seconded it. Sacchet: You already did? Oh yeah, that was... Tjornhom: The old one. Sacchet: But we have a new one. Tjornhom: The new one. Sacchet: Alright, second the new one. 39 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19, 2004 Papke moved, Tjornhom seconded that the Planning Commission recommends denial of Planned Unit Development Amendment #04-35 to include all lawn and garden centers, all off sale liquor stores, all radio and television studios, all appliance sales and services, however to include health and physical exercise clubs up to 5,000 square feet, based upon the following conditions: 1. The district has a reasonable selection of permitted uses. 2. The requested amendments will be in conflict with the comprehensive plan because the users are not inherently low scale and would be in competition with commercial development, particularly in the CBD, BG and BH Districts. All voted in favor, except Lillehaug who opposed, and the motion carried with a vote of 5 to 1. Sacchet: Do you want to state why you're opposed? Lillehaug: I just support the recommendation as presented by staff. It's very clear to me there and I'm not sure if. Sacchet: Whether we made it clear or more muddy. Lillehaug: Yeah. I just support what was presented by staff. Sacchet: Okay. In summary for council, obviously we struggled with the wording of the motion. What I understand in plain English is that we already allow small appliance sales and services up to 5,000 square feet in the statement that as it is, so we want to leave that as is. We don't want to change that. We feel that if we specify for health and physical exercise club, if it's small, and we define small as less than 5,000 square feet which seems to apply to the neighborhood business district in general, that it would be a matter of market forces to determine whether something like that would be viable there. Basically across the street from a large scale health club. We do not want to give further flexibility in the other cases which is the lawn and garden center with or without outside storage. The off sale liquor stores goes into a whole other set of aspects with the comprehensive plan, with the number of liquor licenses we have with the intent of the city to keep that type of business in the central business district or highway business district. And then the radio and television studios we really didn't see any direct applicability to neighborhood business so that we also don't want to go in there, so is that a reasonable summary where we're at with this? So however that will be phrased in the end, I think we made our point reasonably clear. And that will go to City Council on the 8th of November? So that will be in what, 2 weeks. And they will make a decision based on staff recommendation, applicant's presentation and our input. Alright? Good luck with it. 40 Planning Commission Meeting - October 19,2004 APPROV AL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Tjornhom noted the summary and verbatim Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting dated October 5, 2004 as presented. Chairman Sacchet adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 9:00 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Nann Opheim 41