Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/25/2013 P&Z Minutes 08-13 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION CASE NO. PZ-08-13 Hearing Date: July 25, 2013 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 730 & 740 E. Rand Road PETITIONER : Menard, Inc.- Michael Simonds PUBLICATION DATE: July 10, 2013 PIN NUMBER: 03-35-300-031-0000, 03-35-300-033-0000, 03-35-300-034- 0000, 03-35-300-036-0000, 03-35-300-038-0000, 03-35- 300-032-0000 REQUEST(S): Amend Ord. #6025 which granted a Conditional Use to amend the Planned Unit Development to allow the expansion of the garden center, warehouse, and outdoor yard & Variations (Parking & Lighting Requirements) MEMBERS PRESENT: Joseph Donnelly, Chair Tom Fitzgerald William Beattie Jacqueline Hinaber Leo Floros Sharon Otteman MEMBERS ABSENT: Keith Youngquist STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian Simmons, Deputy Director of Community Development INTERESTED PARTIES : Menard, Inc.-Michael Simonds Chairman Donnelly called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Commissioner Beattie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Hinaber to approve the minutes of the June 27, 2013 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting; the minutes were approved 6-0. After hearing four (5) previous cases Chairman Donnelly introduced Case PZ-08-13 730 & 740 E. Rand Road and explained the case is Village Board final. Mr. Simmons explained the property at 730 & 740 E. Rand Road came before the Planning and Zoning Commission last year to amend the PUD to propose an expansion of the property. As the Petitioner has started the permit process they have discovered additional Variations are needed continue the project. Mr. Simmons stated the existing site conditions consist of the existing Menards property, the Lube Pros site, and the former Aldi building which has recently been demolished. Mr. Simmons explained that the 2012 plan included an expansion of the outdoor garden center and reconfiguration of the lumber yard which are on the south and north sides of the property. He also stated the property received a parking variation to reduce their required onsite parking to 339 spaces. Mr. Simmons stated the Petitioner has realized additional storm water detention is required on the site; therefore, the Petitioner has revised their plan to include more onsite detention. Mr. Simmons explained the Petitioner is requesting to construct two retention ponds on the north side of the property along Harvest Lane and Business Center Drive which will provide adequate storm water detention for the project and the impervious surface as proposed. As part of the revised plan additional parking spaces will need to be eliminated from the site. He stated the parking spaces will decrease to 293 parking spaces from 339 spaces. Mr. Simmons stated the Petitioner provided a parking study stating that similar sized local stores demanded about 200 parking spaces; therefore, Staff believes 293 parking spaces would still be adequate for the proposed location. Mr. Simmons explained the Petitioner also developed a photometric plan in order to light the property. As required by code adequate parking lot lighting and building lighting is required. As proposed the Petitioner is requesting variations to the lighting regulations including increasing the maximum lot line illumination levels along the Rand Road and Harvest Lane frontages, and also the south property line which abuts the Brunswick Zone and adjacent banquet facility. Mr. Simmons stated the Petitioner is also requesting variations to the primary parking lot area regarding the average parking lot lighting for the entire lot and the proposed uniformity levels. He showed the table below comparing the code requirements versus Petitioner’s request: Requirement Proposal Parking Spaces 339 293 Lighting .7 foot-candles (north lot line) At Property Lines Max. .5 foot-candles1.2 foot-candles (west lot line) 2.4 foot-candles (south lot line) Parking LotMin. average .2 foot-candles.3 foot-candles Max. average 2.4 foot-candles2.9 foot-candles Parking Lot Max. 3:1 (avg./min.)9.7:1 (avg./min.) Uniformity LevelsMax. 12:1 (max./min.) 37.7:1 (max./min.) OverallMax. 5 foot-candles2.3 foot-candles Mr. Simmons stated the code provides standards of how Conditional Uses can be supported he summarized the findings as: The Conditional Use will not have a detrimental impact on the public health, safety, morals, comfort or general welfare; The Conditional Use will not be injurious to the use, enjoyment, or value of other properties in the vicinity or impede the orderly development of those properties; There is adequate provision for utilities, drainage, and design of access and egress to minimize congestion on Village streets; and The request is in compliance of the Conditional Use with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, and other Village Ordinances. Mr. Simmons stated Staff finds the request to Amend Ord. #6025, which granted a Conditional Use to amend the Planned Unit Development to allow the expansion of the garden center, warehouse, and outdoor yard satisfies the standards for a Conditional Use. Besides the reduction in parking to accommodate the storm water detention, there have been no changes to the project since the project received the zoning approvals in 2012. The expansion would be in compliance with the provisions of the Village’s Comprehensive Plan. The Village’s Comprehensive Plan calls for the subject property to be utilized for Community Commercial land uses which encourages “large-scale big box and mixed use type developments.” The proposed Menards retail building is compatible with this land use designation. The expansion project was designed in a manner to contain its operations on the Subject Property and not impede the orderly development of adjacent properties. Access to the storage area will be limited to traffic already on the property and will not provide additional access points from Harvest Lane or Rand Road. Parking lot cross connections are also provided to the parcels containing Lube Pros, Brunswick, and the Frankie’s restaurant to provide for sufficient access and egress from the property. Mr. Simmons stated based off Staff’s review the proposed project meets the intent of the Conditional Use Standards and therefore recommends support of the proposed amendment. Mr. Simmons addressed the lighting variations next. He stated the Variation Standards found in the code are summarized as followed: A hardship due to the physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of a specific property not generally applicable to other properties in the same zoning district and not created by any person presently having an interest in the property; Lack of desire to increase financial gain; and Protection of the public welfare, other property, and neighborhood character. Mr. Simmons also stated the Petitioner requires relief from the parking regulations. He stated that Staff asked the Petitioner to provide a site plan that would show how the site could be parked in the future if the outdoor storage area and garden center were eliminated and it was strictly a retail use. He commented that parking spaces could be added back into the property that would meet the code requirements. Therefore, Staff is in support of the parking variation. Mr. Simmons stated the lighting requirements could be modified to meet code. He stated other commercial properties within the Village have been able to meet the Village’s lighting requirements; therefore, the Variation requests do not meet the standards for a Variation. There are no unique circumstances at the Subject Property that would not be applicable to other commercial properties. The Staff recommends denial of this request. Mr. Simmons stated that the Village Board decision is final for this case. Chairman Donnelly inquired if staff had looked at underground water detention options as oppose to detention ponds. There was a general discussion. Commissioner Beattie questioned if the size of the stores in the parking survey conducted was comparable to the Mount Prospect store. Mr. Simmons stated that the size of the stores were comparable, if not larger than the Subject Property. There was general discussion regarding the parking requirements. Commissioner Hinaber asked if Menards has had complaints of not enough parking spaces. Mr. Simmons stated that the Petitioner could give more detail; however, the existing site shared parking with the former Aldi building and now Menards would be the sole retailer in that site. Commissioner Hinaber asked if the Village Mount Prospect has conducted a parking study similar to the one provided by the Petitioner. Mr. Simmons stated that the parking survey is required by the petitioner to act as justification for the request and that the Village doesn’t conduct their own survey. Chairman Donnelly called the Petitioner to the stand. He swore in Michael Simonds 5101 Menard Drive, Au Claire Wisconsin. Mr. Simonds stated that the parking study compared the proposed expansion to two other stores similar in size and sales volume. He addressed the staff’s comment regarding the underground detention as oppose to the above ground detention. He explained currently all of the detention is underground, and that the cost difference between the two is significant. He also stated that Menards is changing its philosophy and gearing towards above ground water detention ponds. Mr. Simonds addressed the comment regarding the number of parking stalls needed for the employees and customers. He assured the board that 200 parking stalls is more than enough to accommodate roughly 40-50 employee cars and the customers. He explained the cost benefit for keeping the water detention above ground and losing some parking stalls outweighed the cost of putting in underground water detention. Mr. Simonds stated that if the site were to be sold to another developer for another use other than a home improvement store the lumber storage would be eliminated which would add to the already existing parking stalls. There was general discussion regarding the parking stalls versus more inventory in the store. Chairman Donnelly asked if they would temporarily take additional parking stall away for seasonal sales. Mr. Simonds stated Menards seasonal sales are done internally in the store. Chairman Donnelly asked if there were any further questions regarding the parking request. Hearing none he asked Mr. Simonds to address the lighting aspect of the proposal. Mr. Simonds stated that he feels the proposed photometric plan creates a safe site that is viewable by traffic. He stated the brightest points are located at the highest traffic areas on the site. He stated they consist of code compliant fixtures. There was general discussion regarding the lighting fixtures being used in the project. Mr. Simonds explained the hot spots are located off of Harvest Lane, Rand Road, and the south entrance by the lumber yard. This helps the overall safety of the site. He further explained that the hot spot located in the back south corner are contained by a roof enclosure and a fence which is also heavily landscaped to help prevent light trespass onto adjacent properties. Chairman Donnelly asked if the fixtures could be changed if residents were to complain. Mr. Simonds stated the light would be parallel the ground and be able to be adjusted if needed. Chairman Donnelly asked if there were any other questions for the Petitioner or staff, hearing none he opened the public portion of the meeting. Chairman Donnelly swore in Richard Benson 2020 Autumn Lane. Mr. Benson stated his home is immediately behind the existing wall and is the president of the Harvest Lane Homeowners Association. Mr. Benson stated it is not appropriate to have the wall bordering a residential area. He is concerned about the construction of the additional wall along Harvest Lane. Mr. Besnon inquired about the sidewalk that is along the north side of the property that the majority of the residents use. He stated the proposal suggests to modifying the sidewalk to put in a retention pond. He is concerned that this will eliminate the sidewalk. Mr. Benson stated there are issues with the existing storm water retention system that is built to hold storm water along the property lines along the fence of the property owners. He stated the underground detention system gets clogged from landscaping debris and floods when it rains heavily. Mr. Benson explained the landscaping behind the wall is not maintained and a lot of debris and dying trees remain on the property. He is concerned if the addition of the wall is approved there will be more debris and the issue will be even more out of control. He also discussed the issue of semi-trucks dropping off shipments during the middle of the night is a constant annoyance for the homeowners on Harvest Lane. Chairman Donnelly called the Petitioner to the stand to address the issues. Mr. Simonds stated the sidewalk would remain intact and that he will have a discussion with the store manager in regards to keeping the landscaping clean and maintained. He also mentioned he will talk with the engineer regarding the water detention issue. Mr. Simonds stated he doesn’t have control over the semi-trucks waiting in the parking lot. They use third party drivers and have no control as to when a shipment is received. There was general discussion regarding the overflow of storm water and the area located between the wall structure and the neighboring residential area. Mr. Simonds indicated he would need to review the specifics of the storm water system with their project engineer. Commissioner Fitzgerald stated that the Petitioner should have the topics he was going to discuss with his engineer before he goes to the Village Board Meeting. Chairman Donnelly closed the public hearing portion of the meeting and brought it back to the board. Comissioner Beattie made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald: “To adopt Staff’s findings in the staff report as the findings of the Planning and Zoning Commission and approval recommend of: A.An amendment to Ord. #6025 which granted a Conditional Use to amend the Planned Unit Development to allow the expansion of the garden center, warehouse, and outdoor yard; and B.A Variation to reduce the required off-street parking to 293 parking spaces, subject to the following conditions: 1.Development of the site in general conformance with the site plan prepared by Menards dated June 20, 2012, revised July 15, 2013. 2.Installation of a safety barrier surrounding the proposed detention basins as required by code. The safety barrier shall match in style and color the fence materials proposed for the west side of the Garden Center area. 3.Installation of landscape materials along the perimeter of each retention pond to effectively screen the ponds all year long and native vegetation tolerable of wet conditions within each pond to assist with water filtration. 4.Submittal of a detailed landscape plan that complies with Article XXII of the Zoning Ordinance which provides landscaping in areas which will be modified as part of the project and replaces any damaged or missing plantings along the east bufferyard area. 5.Submittal of final civil engineering drawings for review and approval by the Village. The engineering drawings shall include all site work including utilities, storm water detention, and associated improvements; and 6.Development of the site in accordance with all applicable Village Codes and requirements, including, but not limited to, detention requirements, Fire Prevention Code regulations, landscaping regulations, Sign Code regulations; and Building regulations. 7.Seasonal sales will not be conducted within the parking lot. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Fitzgerald, Beattie, Hinaber, Floros, Otteman, Donnelly NAYS: None The motion was approved 6-0. Commissioner Hinaber made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fitzgerald to approve the following variation requests: A.A Variation to increase the illumination levels at the property lines from .5 foot-candles up to .7 foot-candles at the north property line, up to 1.2 foot-candles at the west property line, and up to 2.4 foot-candles at the south property line. B.A Variation to increase the parking lot uniformity levels from 3:1 (ave./min.) and 12:1 (max./min.) to 9.7:1 (ave./min.) and 37.7:1 (max./min.). C.A Variation request to increase the parking lot maximum average illumination level from 2.4 foot-candles to 2.9 foot-candles. UPON ROLL CALL: AYES: Fitzgerald, Beattie, Hinaber, Floros, Otteman, Donnelly NAYS: NONE The motion was approved 6-0. This case is Village Board Final. After hearing six (6) cases Commissioner Beattie made a motion seconded by Commissioner Otteman to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 p.m. The motion was approved by a voice vote and the meeting was adjourned. _______________________________ Jenna Moder, Community Development Administrative Assistant