Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Discussion on Briggs Proposal <br />IvIay 8, 2006 City COW1cil Worksession <br />Page 3 of 5 <br /> <br />could seek similar requests in the future based on affordability (e.g. daycare, hair salon, etc.) <br />so a key concerns should be \vhat retail/ senrice uses are compatible \vith an industrial park. <br /> <br />Second, from a policy standpoint a key consideration is \Vllether or not the City \vants to <br />con,rert industrial areas to more commercial uses due to the limited a,railability of industrial <br />land. In 2005 the eity experienced a great surge in the de,relopment of light industrial land; <br />SL"X different sites \vith a combined total of 45.78 acres \vere de\Teloped \vith a total of <br />273,000 square feet and creation of 184 ne\v jobs at minimum hourly \vages of $15. <br />Currently there exists 31 acres of Business Park property (including the specific lot in <br />request) that is a,railable for new industrial de,relopment in 2006. <br /> <br />Finally, specific to this request to locate in the Elk River Business Park, it should be noted <br />that allo\ving such use could affect the Redevelopment .i\greement bet:\veen dle City and <br />.L~ssociated In,restors of Elk Ri,rer, Inc., Fischer Sand & Aggregate, LLP and Elk Ri,rer <br />Business Park, LLC (the "Rede\reloper") dated July 21, 2000 \vhich outlines a Development <br />Schedule for the build out of specifically "light industrial building space". <br /> <br />Zoning Issues <br />From a zoning standpoint, the City already has a zone dlat allo\vs (\vith some qualifications) <br />commercial and industrial uses. Zoning Ordinance Section 30-1294 establishes a "BP <br />business park district" \vith the purpose of the district being industrial, office and <br />commercial. (Use sections attached. It should also be noted that the current zoning of tlle <br />City's Northstar Business Park is "BP." Commercial uses are only allo\ved in the "BP" zone <br />if the land use designation on the City's Comprellensive Plan is HigIl\vay Business. <br /> <br />TIlere are a number of issues associated with tlle current wording of the "BP" district: <br /> <br />1) Since no current "BP" zoned property exists along a high\vay, and in turn no <br />underlying high\vay business land use exists on these types of zoned properties, tile <br />City elected to remo,re from the district (summer of 2005) a \vhole series of retail <br />uses (including health athletic clubs ), both permitted and conditional. <br /> <br />2) i\lthough the retail uses \vere eliminated no amendments \vere made to tlle pUlpose <br />statement that still references commercial uses, albeit \vith tile proper underlying land <br />uses. <br /> <br />3) Again, \vith the idea of eliminating retail uses, no amendments \vere made to tile <br />accessory uses which still allo\v retail sales for a portion of any industrial space. <br />Under the accessory uses, there are t\vo separate pro\rl.sions for subordinated space, <br />one section for retail space (allO\VS for ten percent of the building) that is incidental <br />to the products being manufactured on site (Section 30-1294 (c) 4 f.) and a separate <br />section that allo\vs any type of retail activity based on the space not occupying more <br />than 150/0 of the gross floor area and capped at 5,000 sq ft. (Section 30-1294 (c) 4 b.). <br /> <br />4) Another inconsistency in the "BP" zoning district is that under the accessory use <br />section a complementary freestanding retail facility can be consttucted up to 20,000 <br />sq.ft. (Section 30-1294 (c.) 4 e.). Since the purpose section \vas not amended, \vh.ich <br />