HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 06-06-2007Approved Minutes
City of Plymouth
Planning Commission Meeting
June 6, 2007
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair James Holmes, Commissioners Frank Weir, Karl Neset,
John Cooney, Terry Jaffoni (arrived at 7:10 p.m.) and Erik Aamoth
MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners James Davis
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barbara Senness, Planner Joshua Doty and Office
Support Specialist Laurie Lokken
1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. PUBLIC FORUM
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chair Holmes stated that New Business item 7A has been withdrawn from the agenda.
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Aamoth, to approve the
amended June 6, 2007 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION
approved.
5. CONSENT AGENDA
A. APPROVAL OF THE MAY 16, 2007 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Neset, to approve the May
16, 2007 Planning Commission Minutes. Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION approved with
Commissioner Weir abstaining from vote.
B. CRAIG SPENCER (2007046)
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Neset, to approve the
request by Craig Spencer for a variance to allow a nine -foot yard setback for the
construction of a third stall garage addition for property located at 4810 Trenton Lane
North. Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved.
C. OPUS NORTHWEST, LLC. (2007047)
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
June 6, 2007
Page 2
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Neset, to approve the
request by Opus Northwest, LLC. for a site plan amendment to add a 98 -stall parking lot to
the north side of the AGA Medical Corporation building for property located at 5050
Nathan Lane North. Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved.
D. GALLAGHER CONSTRUCTION, INC. (2007052)
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Neset, to approve the
request by Gallagher Construction, Inc. for a variance to allow a side yard setback of 12
feet to allow construction of an addition at the southeast corner of the home for property
located at 5630 Sycamore Lane North. Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. POPE ASSOCIATES, INC. (2007037)
Chair Holmes introduced the request by Pope Associates, Inc. for a planned unit
development amendment to combine two buildings into one with a 20,381 square foot
building addition for Productivity, Inc. for properties located at 15150 and 15200 25th
Avenue North.
Planner Doty gave an overview of the May 29, 2007 staff report.
Commissioner Weir asked if both properties are owned by the same owner. Planner Doty
said that question will be deferred to the applicant.
Commissioner Weir asked why it is necessary to get approval from Hennepin County in
order to combine the two lots into one. Planner Doty said that the City would not be able
to issue any building permits for the building addition if the lot line is not removed. Chair
Holmes said that the issue is that the County controls how the lots are divided or separated.
Planning Manager Senness said that consolidation of the two lots is not something the City
is involved in as it is under the County's jurisdiction. She said that the need to remove the
lot line is a building code issue.
Chair Holmes introduced the applicant, Kevin Timm, representing Productivity, Inc. Mr.
Timm said that they are working with the current owner and the partner who owns the east
building and consolidation should take place shortly.
Mr. Timm said that they need the outdoor storage. He said that in 1994, they were able to
get a conditional use permit for outdoor storage because of their business needs. He said
that they have large equipment products shipped in and some of the products need to be
uncrated and then repacked and sent out. He said they need temporary storage and they
have taken care of issues related to previous complaints on the property. He said they
recently hired a new staff member to keep the area cleaned up more diligently. He said that
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
June 6, 2007
Page 3
the walking path has also been an issue in the past and the plants will take care of that
issue.
Chair Holmes introduced the applicant, Paul Holmes, representing architect Pope
Associates, Inc. Mr. Holmes said that on the materials and the exterior of the building, the
two buildings that are being linked have red brick and dark windows but they are different
in very significant ways. He said that they had looked at dark brick and dark windows but
were unable to find a solution to match one or the other. He said they abandoned the
approach and designed a link that is in contrast to the existing buildings on either side. He
said they created a quilt of three design ideas, side by side, rather than trying to unify the
ideas into one. He said that the green glass, the champagne colored window frames and the
buff colored masonry are important pieces to this design approach. He said they request
that the project be approved as designed rather than to incorporate red brick and dark glass.
Mr. Holmes said that on the landscape plan, the existing site has 102 trees. He said that if
they were building a new building of that size, they would be required to plant 83 trees. He
said they will be removing 42 trees in order to build the addition, leaving 60. He said the
tree replacement policy from the City requires that they replace the 42 trees that they are
eliminating and are required to plant 1 new tree for each 1,000 square foot of new building
area. He said that would be 63 new trees and an onsite total when done of 123 trees. He
said that there is not room to do it all well. He said they request to either conform to the
tree replacement policy and have 102 trees after construction or treat it as a bare site and be
required to provide 83 trees total.
Chair Holmes asked if they are proposing a change to their application. Mr. Holmes said
that they are requesting that it be passed on to City Council without the conditions that the
materials change and with a landscape requirement that would require one or the other of
the tree replacement or treating it as a bare site. He said that the landscape plan they
submitted was in response to staff requirements and they are appealing to the Planning
Commission and City Council because they don't think it is a good plan.
Planning Manager Senness said that as far as the issue of the trees, staff concurs they can
reduce the number. She said there is an issue with the need for screening on the north side
but staff feels comfortable that they can come up with something to go to City Council
without having to come back to the Planning Commission. She said that Mr. Timm is
correct, that there have been outdoor storage issues in the past and that the number of
complaints received about the outdoor storage is why there is this condition. She said that
if they have taken steps to correct or improve that, staff can review that condition. She said
that the materials have not been discussed with the applicant and that the City does have a
lot of discretion, especially on a PUD.
Commissioner Aamoth asked if staff had received the information about them hiring a
person to take care of the outside issues before their recommendation for no onsite storage.
Planner Doty said that staff was not aware of a new hire for that purpose. He said the
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
June 6, 2007
Page 4
conditional use permit for the outside storage was for the eastern property and this
application would ultimately result in consolidation of the two properties. He said that
with the building addition, the outdoor storage would go away unless it is considered to be
acceptable through this new PUD amendment application. He said that the landscaping
plan shows a total of 123 trees and they are over planted by 40 trees. He said that the site is
a PUD, so there is flexibility in the number of trees that are required and there are
screening concerns on the north side of the property. He said that if the Planning
Commission wants to require what the City's Zoning Ordinance would require specifically,
a condition could be added that the number of trees be reduced by 40 trees.
Commissioner Jaffoni asked if 102 trees would work and if it addresses the concerns about
planting trees too close. Mr. Holmes said that 102 trees would work fine and it would
exceed the Zoning Ordinance by 19 trees.
Commissioner Jaffoni commented on the issue of the appearance. She said the unified
appearance versus one that is not unified and is contrasting has already been taken up by
staff. Chair Holmes clarified that the applicant is saying something different from what
staff is saying as far as color and glass shades and that the applicant is saying they are not
comfortable with that.
Planning Manager Senness added that staff just found out that the applicant was not
pleased with the recommendation. She said that when something like this occurs, staff and
the applicant should meet and come to some agreement. She said that if they are able to
come to resolution of this issue and the application comes back to the next Planning
Commission meeting, it would get to the same City Council meeting as scheduled if it had
passed tonight.
Chair Holmes opened the public hearing.
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Jaffoni, to continue the
public hearing to the June 20, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. Roll Call Vote. 6
Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously.
B. GREENBERG FARROW (2007039)
Chair Holmes introduced the request by Greenberg Farrow for a site plan, conditional use
permits and variances for a new 1,477 square foot office building for Public Storage for
properties located at 13011 State Highway 55 and 2320 Xenium Lane North.
Planner Doty gave an overview of the May 29, 2007 staff report. He added that staff
recommends amending condition 6.a. in the resolution by removing "and shall not be
parked on that property overnight".
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
June 6, 2007
Page 5
Commissioner Weir asked if traffic accessing the site via Xenium Lane North would not be
able to access the office building. Planner Doty said that is correct. Planning Manager
Senness added that it would be possible to park fairly close to the gated entry of the storage
site and walk to the office building.
Chair Holmes asked for clarification that if they entered the storage site from Highway 55,
that they could not come back out. Planner Doty said the critical point is the gate. He said
that if they are going to the office building and then to the storage area, they can't go back.
Commissioner Jaffoni said that the applicant agrees to park both rental trucks inside the
security gate and asked for clarification on staff's request to revise item 6.a. Planner Doty
said the last part of that drafted condition could create some confusion and staff felt it
would be clearer if it was left at that.
Chair Holmes introduced the applicant, Kim McGlothlin, representing Greenberg Farrow.
Ms. McGlothlin said the intent of the project is for them to improve the existing access.
She said that purchasing the adjacent property and having additional access enhances their
storage and access. She said they fully intend to comply with all the conditions, with the
exception of condition 5.d., where it says that plans for the roof of the new building is to
have a color consistent with the existing buildings and is to be painted to comply with the
existing color of the existing buildings. She said the color of the existing building is cream
rather than white, so they would like to request that revision. She said that they are also in
the process of changing the roof color from blue to orange because orange is their image
color and they would like to embrace that image. She asked that the condition require a
consistent roof color.
Planning Manager Senness said the intent was not to require the roofs to be blue. She said
staff realizes they are in the process of repainting and that the western building is already
orange. She said that language can be changed to be clear. Chair Holmes said the intent is
to be consistent and requested that "white" be removed from condition 5.3. in the
resolution.
Commissioner Jaffoni asked about the shields for the 30 -foot lightpole. Ms. McGlothlin
stated that was an oversight and they will comply with that.
Chair Holmes asked if signage falls in the office building classification. Planner Doty said
the signage will be reviewed based on the fact that it is an industrial property. He said
zoning is still industrial and they have requested the conditional use permit to allow it to be
above 50% office. He said the signage as proposed would include a monument sign. He
said they could also add wall signage at 10% of one wall of the building. Planning
Manager Senness added that signage on more than one side of the building would require a
variance.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
June 6, 2007
Page 6
Chair Holmes opened and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak
on the item.
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Neset, to approve the
request by Greenberg Farrow for a site plan, conditional use permits and variances with
minor language revisions to the resolution for a new 1,477 square foot office building for
Public Storage for properties located at 13011 State Highway 55 and 2320 Xenium Lane
North. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously.
7. NEW BUSINESS
B. CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Planning Manager Senness stated that the first Planning Commission meeting in July is
scheduled for July 4th. She said that a special meeting does not need to be scheduled to
replace that meeting and the Planning Commission will meet on July 18, 2007 as
scheduled.
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Neset, to approve the
request to cancel the July 4, 2007 Planning Commission meeting. Vote. 6 Ayes.
MOTION approved.
8. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Chair Holmes, without objection, to adjourn the meeting at 8:08 p.m.