My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3. DRAFT PC MINUTES 12-22-2020
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Packets
>
2011-2020
>
2020
>
12-22-2020
>
3. DRAFT PC MINUTES 12-22-2020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/18/2020 12:44:38 PM
Creation date
12/18/2020 12:44:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
PCSR
date
12/22/2020
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission Page 3 <br /> November 24,2020 <br /> ----------------------------- <br /> 4.2 Elk River Municipal Utilities — 1643 Main St. NW <br /> ■ Conditional Use Permit to allow a duplex in the R-I a zoning district, Case <br /> No. IU 20-02 <br /> Mr. Leeseberg presented the staff report. <br /> Councilmember Ovall noted this proposal is a significant change to the initial site <br /> layout proposed and asked ERMU for the reason regarding this change. <br /> Mr. Kerzman explained the big change came after completing final cost analysis <br /> associated with civil work, soil removal, and the cost of the retaining wall. He stated <br /> the updated plan will not require a retaining wall and keep most of the soils on <br /> site. <br /> Councilmember Ovall stated he likes this concept even bette <br /> Chair Larson-Vito asked about outdoor storage location and what type of screening <br /> would be required. She asked if thetype of screening should be detailed in the <br /> conditions. <br /> Mr. Leeseberg explained storage would occur on the west side of the parcel and <br /> some type of screening would be required, stating the screening type is outlined in <br /> city ordinance but specific language of the type of screening could be included in the <br /> condition. He stated for instance,the condition could be 100% opaque screened <br /> fence and wall, using the same materials as the building itself. <br /> Commissioner Rydberg asked about Applicable Regulation #5 and what type of <br /> activities may generate complaints during normal business operations. <br /> Mr. Leeseberg explained staff anticipates traffic and vehicle noise in and out of the <br /> site, headlights, backup signals, all occurring during times when people are home. <br /> chair Larson-Vito opened the public hearing. <br /> Go on Bynum, 420 Rush Avenue,was curious about the traffic being anticipated <br /> and if it were on Main Street where the current traffic entered and exited. He asked if <br /> there was the thought of a further setback and screening to mitigate the traffic, noise, <br /> and lights from the neighboring homes. <br /> Chris Kerzman stated they are expecting employee traffic during normal work hours <br /> coming in on the two northern entrances, and truck traffic along the west side from <br /> Main Street, stating they are not anticipating more traffic or workload than what is <br /> already taking place. He stated there may be additional deliveries as they will have <br /> more storage space. <br /> Mr. Bynum asked if staff has heard from the residents living across the street on <br /> Main or off Tipton. <br /> 111`41AWRE <br /> . . .. . . . . . . <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.