Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 05-07-2008Approved Minutes City of Plymouth Planning Commission Meeting May 7, 2008 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair James Holmes, Commissioners Terry Jaffoni, Erik Aamoth, Frank Weir, Karl Neset, Scott Nelson and James Davis MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barbara Senness, Senior Planner Marie Darling, Planner Joshua Doty, City Engineer Bob Moberg and Office Support Specialist Laurie Lokken 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. 2. OATH OF OFFICE Planning Manager Senness administered the Oath of Office to Scott Nelson. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC FORUM 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Aamoth, to approve the May 7, 2008 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. 6. CONSENT AGENDA A. APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 16, 2008 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Davis, to approve the April 16, 2008 Planning Commission Minutes. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. B. CITY OF PLYMOUTH (2008016) MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Davis, to approve the request by the City of Plymouth for a site plan amendment to construct a pump house facility for property located at 12000 Old Rockford Road. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 7, 2008 Page 2 C. WOLD ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS (2008026) MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Davis, to approve the request by Wold Architects and Engineers for a site plan amendment to construct a 256 square foot two-story addition (roughly 16 feet by 16 feet) on the southwest side of the gymnasium complex at Armstrong High School for property located at 10635 36th Avenue North. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. 7. PUBLIC HEARING A. THE ROTTLUND COMPANY, INC. (2008003) Chair Holmes introduced the request by The Rottlund Company, Inc. for a planned unit development amendment and preliminary plat to create 20 single family lots and one outlot from one existing outlot for property located west of Cheshire Parkway and north of 55th Avenue North. Planner Doty gave an overview of the staff report. Planner Doty noted that one additional letter was received this evening and is added to the public record. Commissioner Neset asked about the side -yard setback. Planner Doty said that there would be a five-foot setback from each home to the lot line for a total of 10 feet between units. Chair Holmes introduced the applicant, Deb Ridgeway, representing Rottlund Homes. Ms. Ridgeway said that they were available for any questions. Chair Holmes said that the application calls for a rain garden in the middle of the proposed development and asked if the water will drain anywhere or if it will just collect in the rain garden. Ms. Ridgeway said that they had applied for a grading permit last fall to remove excess fill. She said that the site is slated to get another 10,000 yards taken off. She said that the water will collect in the rain garden and infiltrate into the ground and that there would be piping for the overflow that will go to the pond located south of the proposed development. Mr. Paul Cherney, representing Pioneer Engineering, said that a large regional pond was built as part of The Reserve project. He said that the rain garden would be for small rain events and that large rain events would flow to the pond. Commissioner Jaffoni asked how the maintenance for the proposed porous driveways would compare to the maintenance for the six rain gardens that were initially proposed and if the 30 percent impervious surface took into account the porous driveways. Mr. Cherney Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 7, 2008 Page 3 said that the 30 percent impervious surface did take the porous driveways into account and that the expense to the homeowner would depend on how the homeowner took care of the driveways. He said that the driveways would have less sand than what is found on City streets and that the driveways could be maintained by cleaning them periodically. He said that the driveways would need less maintenance than a rain garden. Chair Holmes continued the public hearing from the April 2, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting. Chair Holmes introduced Tom Lenzmeier, 14024 54th Avenue North, #3. Mr. Lenzmeier asked if there would be trees planted along Cheshire Parkway to obstruct views of the backs of the houses so that Cheshire Parkway would look like a parkway. Chair Holmes introduced David Benson, 5515 Fernbrook Lane North. Mr. Benson said that he is representing Glacier Vista Homeowners Association. Mr. Benson said that water runoff is a big concern. He asked what would happen with the water if the two rain gardens were not enough or who they would need to talk to if more rain gardens were needed. He said that it seemed aggressive to reduce the number of rain gardens in the proposed plans and that the piping for the overflow seems a long ways to go. Mr. Benson asked where the construction traffic would park if the only access is off of Fernbrook Lane. He asked who would take complaints for keeping the street clean. He asked if there would be any preliminary association guidelines established for sheds, boat storage, etc. Chair Holmes closed the public hearing. Planner Doty said that the proposed landscaping plan includes trees along Cheshire Parkway that would be a mix of deciduous and coniferous trees. He said there would also be trees around the back of the units and along the perimeter of the site, which would be consistent with a parkway character. Planning Manager Senness said that the landscaping plans reflect more than what is required by City ordinance. She said that low density residential is not required to provide screening and that the applicant is proposing to add trees where none are required. Mr. Lenzmeier asked what the elevation of the proposed development would be adjacent to Cheshire Parkway. City Engineer Moberg said that the applicant is proposing walkout units and there would be an eight -foot difference in elevation from the garage along the backside and would still end up sloping five to seven feet to Cheshire Parkway. He said that a trail would be put in as part of the development and that would be at the elevation of Cheshire Parkway and then slope up to the development. City Engineer Moberg said that the stormsewer system that the applicant is proposing adds two catchbasins at Fernbrook Lane that would be piped to the rain garden and then back to Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 7, 2008 Page 4 the pond located south of the development. He said that the rain garden along the south side of the development would drain underground to the storm sewer line that would run to the south pond. Planning Manager Senness said that staff worked with the applicant to reduce the number of rain gardens because staff felt that it would be too much for 20 homeowners to maintain six rain gardens. She said that staff concluded that one way to reduce the impervious surface would be to have pervious, paved driveways to take care of both the impervious and runoff issues. Chair Holmes asked how this design would work in the worst case rain event scenario. City Engineer Moberg said that typically with residential subdivisions like this, a rain event of two to three inches of rainfall in a 24-hour period would be accommodated in the proposed rain gardens and ponds. He said that for rain events larger than that, the water would exceed the capacity of the storm sewer and the streets would function as the drainage system. Planning Manager Senness said that the primary function of rain gardens is for water quality. City Engineer Moberg said that a rain garden would also be able to help reduce the volume of runoff by allowing the runoff to be in a rain garden for a short period of time. He said that the rain garden is designed to be dry within four to eight hours after a rain event. Chair Holmes asked why the construction traffic would not use Cheshire Parkway rather than Fernbrook Lane. City Engineer Moberg said that in the approving resolution, there is a condition requiring that the temporary access for construction traffic be from Cheshire Parkway prior to the extension of Cheshire Parkway to County Road 47. Planning Manager Senness said that as part of the construction project fees, the City requires streets to be kept clean and will charge for streets not being kept clean. She said that the City Engineer would be the contact for complaints on street cleaning. City Engineer Moberg said that the City requires that developers enter into a maintenance agreement for rain gardens but he is not sure if driveways are included in that agreement. He said the maintenance agreement would then be transferred to the Homeowners Association to make sure that the rain gardens continue to function as intended. Ms. Ridgeway said that this development would have a Homeowners Association that would be required to maintain the development. She said that each building would be on its own lot and surrounded by a common lot. She said that the Homeowners Association would maintain the mowing, rain garden and ground care. Ms. Ridgeway said that the Homeowners Association would not allow an addition to the building or allow outbuildings. Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 7, 2008 Page 5 Chair Holmes asked what the regulations would be for storage. Ms. Ridgeway said that there is no storage allowed. She said that there is no storage allowed on driveways for long term and homeowners would need to find alternative offsite storage solutions. Commissioner Nelson asked if the developer would be building as the units are sold or if the developer builds and stays a couple units ahead of demand. Ms. Ridgeway said that they would be built as demand dictates. Commissioner Nelson asked who would be responsible for the cost of maintaining the rain gardens if there were only a few residences completed. Ms. Ridgeway said that the City requires that the developer be responsible for maintenance for five years and it is not passed on to homeowners until that agreement is suspended. Planning Manager Senness said that maintenance would not be turned over until there is a certain percentage built on the site. Ms. Ridgeway said that 75 percent is required to be built on site before Rottlund turns over maintenance responsibilities to an association. Commissioner Davis asked if there is a covenant that homeowners could not convert back to impervious surface driveways. Ms. Ridgeway said that there is a clause that would not allow a homeowner to increase the impervious surface on their lot and the document would note the driveways. Commissioner Davis asked why there wasn't a sidewalk included in the proposed plans. Planner Doty said that subdivision requirements state that sidewalks are required unless specifically waived by the City Council and that each development is looked at to determine what is needed. He said that in this particular case, it is important for a trail connection to get to Cheshire Parkway because it connects to the regional trail system. He said that even though there is not an interior sidewalk, pedestrians would be able to get to Cheshire Parkway. Planning Manager Senness said that in this particular case with the small lots and the driveways occurring quite frequently, a sidewalk may not be safe or necessary and would increase the impervious surface. MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Neset, to approve the request by The Rottlund Company, Inc. for a planned unit development amendment and preliminary plat to create 20 single family lots and one outlot from one existing outlot for property located west of Cheshire Parkway and north of 55th Avenue North. Commissioner Aamoth said that he is empathetic to the residents, but it appears that staff has tried to do what is best for the project and for the City and that he will support this project. Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 7, 2008 Page 6 Commissioner Davis said that he had concerns about Fernbrook Lane and that after driving along it, he feels that it is still too narrow to support 20 additional residences. He said that he will not support this project. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. Commissioner Davis voted Nay. B. CITY OF PLYMOUTH (2008019) Chair Holmes introduced the request by the City of Plymouth for a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to Section 21155, Sign Regulations, to define and prohibit mobile signs. Senior Planner Darling gave an overview of the staff report. Commissioner Davis asked if this change would be similar to sign regulations in the 30 other communities mentioned in the staff report. He asked if any of those communities have been challenged in court and if any challenges have been upheld. Senior Planner Darling said that she had reviewed the zoning ordinances for 30 other communities and that all prohibit mobile signs, with the exception of one community. She said that to her knowledge, none of the communities have been challenged. Senior Planner Darling said that the zoning ordinance offers regulations for private property but does not include the public right-of-way. She said that mobile signs can be driven in traffic and can park in any right-of-way. She said that the City has the right to identify where vehicles and signs can be located on private property and require that they be stored in a screened area. Planning Manager Senness said that staff worked with the City Attorney to make sure that there would not be any legal issues. Commissioner Jaffoni asked about the exception for temporary signs for noncommercial announcements. Senior Planner Darling said that temporary signs are allowed on parked trailers if they are a public announcement for a free community -wide event. Commissioner Nelson asked if the City has received any complaints about mobile signs. Senior Planner Darling said that the City receives calls from time to time. She said that one business in the City employs mobile signs, so the volume of calls is low. She said that there have been a number of calls received from smaller businesses requesting the ability to park mobile signs on their property. Commissioner Aamoth asked what is defined as temporary. Senior Planner Darling said the ordinance allows temporary signs for community events for 14 working days. Commissioner Aamoth asked how long commercial businesses would like to be able to park mobile signs. Senior Planner Darling said that they would like to have mobile signs parked on a permanent basis. Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 7, 2008 Page 7 Chair Holmes opened and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the item. Commissioner Weir said that the Rotary Club uses mobile signs for the Ducks On Parade event. Commissioner Aamoth said that he is sensitive to the needs of businesses and asked if this request could be amended to allow commercial businesses to have temporary mobile signs for 14 days for any reason. Commissioner Nelson said that he would go along with that amendment because in today's economic climate, businesses are very frugal with their advertising dollars. Commissioner Davis said that he would not support altering the zoning ordinance text amendment request. He said that he has seen these signs around the community and that he doesn't like them. He said that he doesn't think that they are a good idea and that if the door is opened, these signs would be everywhere. Commissioner Jaffoni said that the concern would be that if even temporary mobile signs are granted to businesses, then there could be many different businesses with temporary signs at once and that would still be the same issue. She said that she also feels that mobile signs are an eyesore and that they would cheapen the visual attractiveness of the community if permitted, even on a temporary basis. She said that she would go with a permanent ban on mobile signs and would be opposed to businesses having temporary mobile signs. Chair Holmes asked if the City has a current permitting process for temporary signs that advertise sales. Senior Planner Darling said that temporary sign permits are currently issued by the City but that the temporary signs are limited by the total number per property per year and also limited by the amount of time the sign can be up. She said that temporary signs are limited to 32 square feet and that mobile signs can be as large as a semi trailer. Planning Manager Senness said that temporary signs that go on the building are relatively inexpensive and that the purpose of a mobile sign is only for advertising. Commissioner Aamoth asked that when businesses apply for a temporary sign permit, if it is most likely that they will be able to get a permit if they are within the sign ordinance requirements. Senior Planner Darling said that temporary sign permits are issued per business or per property and that they are not like a liquor license where there is a total maximum limit of licenses issued. Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 7, 2008 Page 8 Commissioner Neset said that Metro Transit uses signs on their buses. Planning Manager Senness said that there is advertising on buses, but that the buses are not parked and used as a mobile sign. Commissioner Aamoth said that in light of the new information, he would support this text amendment request. MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Jaffoni, to approve the request by the City of Plymouth for a Zoning Ordinance text amendment to Section 21155, Sign Regulations, to define and prohibit mobile signs. Roll Call Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. 8. NEW BUSINESS D] 13 role] 9001 DION MOTION by Chair Holmes, without objection, to adjourn the meeting at 8:10 p.m.