HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 06-05-2019Approved Minutes 1 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
Approved Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
June 5, 2019
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Marc Anderson, Commissioners Bryan Oakley, Donovan Saba,
Julie Witt, and David Witte
MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners Justin Markell and Jaspreet (Jesse) Narr
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barbara Thomson, Community Development Director
Steve Juetten and Senior Planner Shawn Drill
OTHERS PRESENT: Councilmember Ned Carroll
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. PUBLIC FORUM
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION by Commissioner Oakley, seconded by Commissioner Witte to approve the June 5,
2019 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved.
5. CONSENT AGENDA
A. APPROVAL OF THE MAY 15, 2019 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
MINUTES
B. BRENDAN COONEY (2019038)
Approve a variance to the side yard setback for property located at 1470 41st Avenue.
MOTION by Commissioner Witte, seconded by Commissioner Oakley, to approve the consent
agenda. Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. DOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT (2019026)
Approved Minutes 2 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
Chair Anderson introduced the request by Dominium Development for a pre-application sketch
review for redevelopment of the Four Seasons Mall site with apartments, park and ride and retail
uses for property located at 4200 Lancaster Lane. Chair Anderson indicated that Commissioner
Markell was not present this evening as his firm advises Dominium on all development projects,
including the Four Seasons Mall redevelopment, noting that he would have to recuse himself and
leave the chambers during the discussion of the sketch plan.
Senior Planner Drill gave an overview of the staff report.
Commissioner Oakley stated that parking is a concern and asked for additional details on the
number of required stalls and whether the parking would be combined together.
Senior Planner Drill provided information on the required parking for the two different uses and
also provided information on the parking areas.
Commissioner Oakley asked how the parking requirement for the previous Agora development
compared to what was approved for that development.
Senior Planner Drill explained that would not be an apples to apples comparison because of the
different proposed uses. He noted that the parking provided on the previous application was
lower than the city standard.
Commissioner Oakley stated that the staff report included a detailed evaluation of actual parking
use at different apartment complexes in the city and asked for details on those ranges.
Senior Planner Drill reviewed the range of parking observed at different apartment complexes in
Plymouth.
Commissioner Saba referenced the wetland to the south and asked for details on the required
buffer.
Senior Planner Drill stated that the watershed regulations are stricter than the city regulations and
therefore the applicant would have to meet the watershed regulations. He said he was unsure
that the building locations would be impacted, but noted that changes may be required for the
trails. He provided additional information on the path that water would take around the site.
Commissioner Witte asked if there has been discussion related to signage for the commercial
uses and residential uses.
Senior Planner Drill replied that if this proposal continues to move forward, signage would be
added to the discussion.
Commissioner Oakley stated that it appears there is a lot of impervious surface and asked how
this proposal compares to what would typically be seen from this type of development.
Approved Minutes 3 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
Senior Planner Drill identified the existing greenspace on the site, noting that of the 17.3 acres,
31 percent of the site is currently greenspace. He stated that under the proposed development
there would be about 40 percent greenspace, which is fairly typical.
Commissioner Oakley noted that the panhandle would not have buildings and parking and asked
if there was a driving force behind that decision.
Senior Planner Drill noted that the developer can address that question.
Chair Anderson acknowledged that this is the sketch plan phase, and if this proposal moves
forward, more detail would be provided. He noted there are a number of factors that need to be
addressed that may relate to density. He asked if the city would have sufficient detail to make a
recommendation on density with the unknown elements.
Senior Planner Drill stated that the proposal would be within the allowed density range, although
it is on the higher end of the range. He noted that the applicant would propose a planned unit
development if this moves forward, which would provide the city with additional control. He
further noted if the commission has comments related to density, those could be posed to the
applicant to determine how those unknown elements would be addressed.
Commissioner Oakley referenced the traffic study, noting that that the staff report states that this
proposal would have fewer daily trips than the previous development request. He asked how this
proposal would compare to the Four Seasons Mall.
Senior Planner Drill replied that when the Four Seasons Mall was fully occupied, it generated
5,000 to 6,000 average daily trips and noted that this proposal would have a similar traffic
generation.
Chair Anderson introduced Willy Boulay, representing the applicant, who provided background
information on Dominium Development. He stated that they are excited to be present tonight
and believe that this is a great opportunity to lead the redevelopment of this key corner in
Plymouth. He stated they would like to take this vacant parcel and bring a mixed-use
development of commercial and residential development, as well as providing the transit
connection. He stated they are early in the design process and thanked the city staff that have
worked with them thus far. He stated they are eager to receive feedback from the commission to
help guide them through this process.
Chair Anderson introduced Dan Regan, Launch Properties, partnering with the applicant, who
stated that the approach with the sketch plan review is to gain additional input because of the key
location and to use that feedback to work further along in the process. He stated that his
company would take the excess land, following the apartment developments, to create
commercial developments that would have a more local, neighborhood draw. He stated they
have not yet identified users for the commercial portions, as they would like feedback prior to
selecting tenants. He stated that in his opinion the Four Seasons Mall became obsolete because
of the orientation and size of the building, and therefore he prefers to use smaller buildings with
four-sided architecture that would provide flexibility to create outdoor spaces that can be a part
of the buildings and restaurants. He said he believed that the market would support a mix of
Approved Minutes 4 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
restaurant, service, retail and healthcare uses. He stated there were some drive-thru options
shown on the site, but he has heard the comment that there is not a desire for traditional mass
retailer drive-thru establishments. He stated their architecture is meant to be very vanilla at this
point, but noted once they receive input, they will provide additional details prior to submitting a
formal application.
Chair Anderson introduced Michael Krych, BKV Group, representing the applicant, who stated
that this is a community of mixed but separate uses. He identified the various access points to
the site along Lancaster Lane. He stated that the site will be connected through pedestrian
pathways. He noted that the commercial and park and ride portions of the site would be the most
north and visible from Rockford Road, while the housing area would be to the south, closer to
adjacent residential development. He described how traffic would flow through the site from the
different access points. He reviewed some of the proposed amenities for the residential
developments. He noted that the taller buildings would be further away from Lancaster Lane,
with the lower elevation buildings closer to Lancaster Lane. He stated there are some
groundwater issues that will need to be dealt with. He provided additional details on the
proposed building materials and aesthetics.
Commissioner Saba asked for details on the analysis that was done to determine the mix of
residential between senior and family apartments.
Mr. Boulay replied that they wanted to keep the taller building closer to Highway 169 and away
from Lancaster Lane. He stated that a mix of senior and family housing has worked well for
them in the past. He stated they would like to keep family apartments smaller, with four stories
or less, while they like a larger, more centralized building for seniors.
Commissioner Oakley asked how many units Dominium Development owns in Plymouth, the
names of the developments and the number of years they have been in operation.
Mr. Boulay stated that Dominium has two developments in Plymouth – Willowwood
Townhomes and Stone Creek Apartments, providing details on each development.
Chair Anderson referenced the pool and playground and asked if those are interchangeable
recreation opportunities.
Mr. Boulay stated that the playground would be available to any visitor, but the family
communities would be operated as one and therefore the amenities would be shared by residents
of both buildings.
Commissioner Oakley asked for details on why the panhandle area is proposed to remain green.
Mr. Regan stated that the decision is related to functionality and flexibility. He stated that one of
the problems with real estate is making sure you can build things that do not become prematurely
obsolete. He stated that access is a main factor, specifically related to the distance between the
parking and front door. He stated that due to the utility easements and setbacks, the dimensions
left over for the panhandle area would not adequately support a building, parking and traffic flow
and therefore they would rather use that area as a landscaped enhancement for the development.
Approved Minutes 5 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
Commissioner Oakley referenced the use of the term “vanilla architecture” and stated that the
city has previously used the term “gateway” for this area. He asked how those terms would
interchange.
Mr. Regan stated that he has different architects for the commercial portion of the project and
noted that the representative from BKV Group was representing the residential portion. He
explained that they are committed to striving for a higher architectural design in the formal
application, but simply wanted to present a vanilla concept to receive feedback that can be used
to assist in more detailed design of the development.
Chair Anderson referenced the parking and stated it appears that some of the parking for the
apartments and senior building would be north of the parking ramp and asked if that is correct.
Mr. Boulay stated that the residential projects would be separate projects and provided details on
each of the required parking elements. He stated they are still attempting to work out the final
details related to parking. He stated there would not be any parking north of the ramp included
in the totals for the residential buildings.
Chair Anderson stated there are a number of aspects that will come forward during a formal
application that can relate to density (snow storage, wetland buffers, etc.) and have not yet been
addressed.
Mr. Boulay stated that in terms of the design, they want to create opportunities for the residents
to recreate around the buildings. He stated they also need the density to make the project
feasible, given the challenging site conditions and the desire to include affordable units.
Mr. Regan stated there are a lot of different ways to gauge density. He stated that related to
parking and traffic, overall there would be enough capacity to accommodate all the proposed
uses on the site. He noted these uses would also blend well in terms of when the parking would
be used by different uses.
Commissioner Witt stated that she lives in the area and is excited to see this proposed
development. She noted that she has received a multitude of phone calls that range from
excitement to concern related to density. She stated this is a really good plan, but five stories is
very high. She commented that Dominium has a great reputation and has done great things in
their communities. She asked that the developer listen to the concern and lower the density a
little. She noted that residents want this area developed, but challenged the developer to go back
and figure out how this could work with lower density.
Mr. Boulay welcomed the feedback. He noted that density is a push and pull of what a project
needs to be financially feasible. He welcomed any of the commissioners or council members to
tour Dominium projects, noting that they build for the long-term as they manage and own
properties for the long-term. He noted that they plan to deliver a high-quality project.
Chair Anderson introduced Thomas Klick, 4655 Forestview Lane, who stated that he has been a
resident of northeast Plymouth for 37 years and raised his children in the community and now his
Approved Minutes 6 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
grandchildren. He stated he retired last year, and, in his career, he saw a lot of projects. He
stated that everyone is unhappy with the structure on top of the swamp, but 40 years ago
everyone loved that development. He stated that along the roughly 1.25 mile stretch of
Lancaster Lane, there are about 1,300 apartment units among the different buildings. He stated
there have been comments in the past that this corridor is very dense and now this development
would increase that density by 30 to 40 percent. He stated he feels that the density is too high
and perhaps 200 or 250 units would be more appropriate. He stated that there is only one arterial
road because of the proximity of Medicine Lake. He acknowledged that the site has challenges,
but stated that perhaps a compromise could be developed for the site. He stated that people
moving to the east side of Plymouth expect that their children would go to a local school. He
said that because the Robbinsdale School District has some financial challenges, it is likely that
some of those new residents could go to schools in New Hope or Golden Valley. He asked that
more time be taken to address these issues.
Chair Anderson introduced Glory Lueck, 4050 Nathan Lane, who stated that she has lived in her
home since 1973 and has watched all of this development. She agreed that this is a horrible
parcel of property, and there are traffic concerns. She noted there is a huge number of apartment
buildings further down the street and this would add another mass of apartments with unknown
retail. She stated that perhaps small retail and restaurants could be integrated into the
development. She stated people will see the large four- and five-story buildings with large
parking lots. She noted it does not appear to have 40 percent greenspace because of the layout
and design. She stated the proposal does not appear to be neighborhood friendly. She indicated
that in the past the council promised the neighborhood that development on this parcel would not
exceed three stories. She stated that the neighbors desperately want something on this property,
but this just has large buildings that are not cohesive. She stated the water problems will be
major, because there is so much density on the parcel. She stated she would like to have more
information on the retail as it appears that this proposal will just add more apartment buildings.
She asked the city to go slow and reconsider all of this, including the layout of the site.
Chair Anderson introduced Greg Pratt, 10615 48th Avenue, who stated that he submitted
comments through the city website, which were noted earlier by Senior Planner Drill. He
provided documentation that provides background information on Dominium Development and
negative feedback on their lack of follow through after project completion. He stated his
neighborhood is surrounded by apartment complexes, and he did not believe that adding another
apartment building would be beneficial for this area. He stated that the traffic is already a mess
at the intersection near Cub Foods, and this would only amplify the problem. He noted there are
a multitude of fast food restaurants on the north side of County Road 9 in New Hope and adding
additional fast food would only create a fast food corridor. He noted there are also vacant retail
spaces in this area. He stated there is a shortage of full service, sit-down restaurants in Plymouth
and believed that would be a good fit for the entrance of this parcel. He asked if there are any
plans to install a noise buffer along Highway 169 that would support more residential
development and whether that highway will be expanded.
Chair Anderson introduced David Burke, 4220 Nathan Lane, who stated that the neighborhood
met with the developer on April 13th, and he asked how the low-income housing works. He
stated that the developer assured him that it was not the old method in which subsidies were
given to the residents, but rather the developer receives assistance with the financing, which in
Approved Minutes 7 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
return provides lower rents for certain residents. He noted that he was told there were
requirements that the residents would be working to pay their rents. He stated he was then
confused by Commissioner Witt’s comments that there would be subsidized renters. He said he
hoped that he was just misunderstanding the comments tonight.
Chair Anderson introduced Diane Brower Johnson, 10825 39th Avenue, who stated she would
prefer a smaller hotel and retail rather than apartment buildings. She stated the residents would
like to support and be present at the businesses in that development. She stated it would be nice
to understand the parking requirements for the different residential developments. She asked that
lighting be reviewed, specifically how it would impact the residents across the street. She
referenced the split amenities between the family apartments and was concerned with children
crossing the street to access the playground and pool.
Chair Anderson introduced Ken Isaacson, 4005-4085 Lancaster Lane, who stated that he is
supportive of housing for the site as the current site is terrible and does not work for anyone. He
said he has concerns with density and parking. He noted that he would encourage Dominium to
look for a housing product that requires less than two stalls per unit. He noted that the density
and parking is what is causing issues with the setbacks. He encouraged Dominium and BKV
Group to look at the Cottage Grove site. He noted that Dominium can do great work, but needs
to be nudged in the right direction. He stated that the Cottage Grove site has a building that was
not done well. He said he hoped they could develop a project that would work for everyone.
Chair Anderson introduced Nancy Frank, 5570 Nathan Lane, who stated that she has questions
regarding the layout and is concerned that this would put too many people onto the property. She
referenced the boulevard that goes between the family buildings to access the large senior
building and asked the type of parking that is allowed. She said she believed that would lead to
safety concerns. She stated she is aging and someday would move into a senior building. She
noted that she would not move into a senior building of this nature, where you need to drive
through two family buildings with children and noise. She asked where the other mixed-use
properties Dominium has developed are located as she would like to visit those locations.
Chair Anderson introduced Mike Hestick, 10405 45th Avenue, who stated he would like
clarification on parking. He asked if the calculations include visitor parking as well. He asked
where overflow parking would occur and how that would be managed. He referenced the rent
ranges and asked if there would be a fixed rate once seniors move in, as those residents often rely
on a fixed income.
Senior Planner Drill reviewed the parking count proposed and the requirement of the city.
Planning Manager Thomson stated there was concern with the proposed four- and five-story
building heights, noting that the other apartments in that area are three stories. She asked the
developer for input on their need to have a higher number of stories.
Mr. Boulay stated that the overall market study shows that the vacancy for apartments in this
area is historically low. He stated they do not want to put too many or too few units into a
building, but noted that the demand is there for apartment units that are not at the top of the
market rate. He stated there is a great need for this type of product in this area. He explained
Approved Minutes 8 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
that generally these projects would participate in the low-income housing tax credit program,
noting that the residents do not receive a direct subsidy and are instead qualified by their income
and pay a rent equal to 30 percent of that income. He stated there are voucher holders that
receive a direct subsidy credit, and they would have to accept qualified individuals, even those
that use vouchers. He estimated that the voucher users would be 10 percent of their residents.
He stated the vast majority of residents and visitors would be driving, and therefore they provide
good vehicle circulation. He stated they would study the circulation and how residents access
the amenities. He stated they would attempt to drive the pedestrian traffic in that area to certain
crossing points to assist in safety. He stated in regard to the senior building, they would limit the
rents and incomes for people making 60 percent of the area median income. He noted that lease
terms would be for a minimum of 12 months. He also noted that rent increases would be applied
on an annual basis in conjunction with federal government requirements.
Planning Manager Thomson indicated that the city would require a traffic study as part of a
formal application, noting that the applicant would pay for the study, and the city would direct it.
Commissioner Saba asked the percentage of residents in the family and senior buildings that
would take advantage of the voucher program.
Mr. Boulay estimated that about 10 percent of residents in the family building and 10 percent in
the senior building would utilize the voucher program.
Planning Manager Thomson noted that there were a lot of comments addressing a sit-down
restaurant in this part of the city and asked if that would be considered.
Mr. Regan stated that currently there are not specific users or uses identified. He stated they
would like to design something that is flexible for many different uses and could include quick
service restaurants, neighborhood restaurants, or two units could be combined to create a sit-
down restaurant. He noted that typically developers do not build new buildings for that type of
use, as it continues to become obsolete, using the example of the Ruby Tuesdays. He indicated
that typically a developer cannot build a new building with a rent that a traditional restaurant can
afford, rather those businesses typically go into second generation buildings.
Planning Manager Thomson stated there are no expansion plans for Highway 169. She said she
did not believe that a sound buffer is included in the plans. She stated that the city is very
conscious about making sure lighting does not impact surrounding sites. She also noted that the
city also has regulations for signage.
Mr. Boulay stated that Dominium also takes lighting seriously to ensure that safety is provided,
but that the adjacent neighborhoods and residents of the development would not be negatively
impacted. He noted that the residential signage would be minimal and provided details.
Mr. Regan noted that the commercial development would also meet the city requirements and
indicated that a lighting plan would be crafted that would meet the needs of the community. He
stated that it would make sense to have a master sign program for the commercial development,
noting that it would make sense to have a low profile monument near the roadway with another
sign on the back of the buildings toward Highway 169. He stated that small, but easily visible
Approved Minutes 9 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
wayfinding signs throughout the commercial portion of the site would also be important to help
people find their way to the right business in the development. He stated they would work with
staff and take in the feedback from the public and elected officials for signage, noting that they
do not have any desire for loud, large signs.
Mr. Boulay stated that the market value of this development would exceed the current value of
the property. He stated they have submitted a request for city subsidy for the affordable housing
element, which would include the use of tax increment financing. He noted that the general
occupancy buildings are geared toward housing because of the need for stable housing for
families. He stated they have an understanding of the number of children and ages of those
children for their average residents. He stated they have done a high-level analysis for the
schools, but would get into further detail throughout this process. He stated that Dominium has a
good understanding of the amount of parking that is used by their residents. He stated there are
times when there could be additional visitors and noted that the parking ramp could possibly be
used for those times.
Commissioner Witte asked the experience that Dominium has for people that may desire outside
assistance, specifically for the senior buildings.
Mr. Boulay stated that the senior building is proposed for independent living, and therefore a
very light level of service is provided, such as transportation to the grocery store or space for
fitness classes or other service providers that would not require major parking commitments. He
stated that the development will be sized to provide 1.1 stalls for the senior building and 1.5
stalls per unit for the family buildings. He stated there are other mixed-use developments run by
Dominium, providing the example of their development in St. Michael.
Commissioner Witt stated that she found the clarifying answers helpful. She stated that this
proposal seems to have too much density for the lot and asked the developer to see what they can
do to be creative.
Commissioner Oakley stated there was a housing study completed in Plymouth that states the
city needs senior housing and affordable housing, therefore this project addresses those needs.
He stated he also believes that the Four Seasons Mall needs to be torn down, and this proposal
would address that. He stated there were comments against affordable housing, but asked if not
here, where. He explained it is important to provide housing for all residents of the community.
He said he recognized that this is a high-density project, but noted that this is a large site. He
stated that perhaps the apartments could be three stories rather than four stories, which would
match the other uses in the neighborhood. He said he felt that the senior building could be taller
as it is set back further from the road. He stated he does not have a problem with higher density,
but if the buildings are lowered to three stories that could resolve the setback issue. He noted
that when looking at the plan, he sees a massive parking area, which is what currently exists. He
said he wished that the greenspace reserved on the panhandle was more centered to the site to
help breakup that hardcover. He stated he believes there is an elegant combined use with the
park and ride and senior building. He indicated that there is another senior development in the
area that does not have adequate parking for Sunday visitors and noted that the accessibility of
the park and ride structure would provide an opportunity for that overflow visitor traffic. He
Approved Minutes 10 of 10 Meeting of June 5, 2019
stated he believes that the city requirement exceeds the demand for mixed-use developments, but
didn’t know what the right answer is.
Commissioner Witte said he recognized that this is a challenging site and appreciates anyone that
is willing to take on that challenge. He stated he likes the segregation of uses between the
residential and commercial components. He noted that from a land use perspective, it makes
sense and the parking ramp provides a transition that could service both uses. He stated the
density drives the economics of the project, but also drives the shortage of parking, lack of
greenspace, and pedestrian traffic.
Commissioner Saba stated that Commissioners Witte and Oakley summarized the comments that
he received from residents on this topic. He noted that the residents he spoke with were not
concerned with the height of the senior building, but the height of the family buildings. He noted
that people also prefer a traditional restaurant over a quick service restaurant. He stated that
parking will continue to be an issue. He noted that of the 17 apartment buildings in that area,
there is only one that has a demand of over 1.5 stalls per unit, based on actual usage. He said he
also believed that the use of the parking ramp for weekend visitors to the senior building would
be a good shared use. He said he believed that the greenspace in the panhandle would be an
attractive entrance to the site.
Chair Anderson stated that having a bank or health use in the retail portion could be a good fit.
He stated he would be concerned with two drive-thrus that would potentially contribute to this
area being a fast food area. He stated the city would need some level of control over the retail
tenants. He referenced the setbacks on the north and noted that he would support those reduced
setbacks. He stated he would be concerned to have four-story buildings that close to Lancaster
Lane, which also speaks to density. He stated that when he sees the issues related to wetland
buffers, under parking, proximity to Lancaster Lane, and snow storage, he automatically goes to
density. He stated he believes that the proposed parking is low. He stated he shared the concern
that people accessing the senior building would need to drive through the two family buildings,
with people crossing the street to access shared amenities. He stated that the site appears to be
too dense.
CONSENSUS to forward the informal comments to the City Council on the request by
Dominium Development for a pre-application sketch review for redevelopment of the Four
Seasons Mall site with apartments, park and ride and retail uses for property located at 4200
Lancaster Lane.
8. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Chair Anderson, with no objection, to adjourn the meeting at 9:32 P.M.