HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 09-08-1999Approved Minutes
City of Plymouth
Planning Commission Meeting
September 8, 1999
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Mike Stulberg, Commissioners Allen Ribbe, John
Stoebner, Kapila Bobra, Roger Berkowitz, and Sarah Reinhardt
MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Bob Stein
STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Anne Hurlburt, Planning
Supervisor Barbara Senness, Planners Kendra Lindahl and Shawn Drill, Park and
Recreation Director Eric Blank, and Clerical Supervisor Denise Hutt
1 Call To Order
2 Public Forum
3 Approval of Agenda
4 Approval of Minutes
MOTION by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Bobra to approve the
August 25, 1999 Planning Commission Minutes. Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved
unanimously. (Commissioner Berkowitz abstained.)
5 Consent Agenda
6 Public Hearings
A AASE WARREN (99081)
Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Aase Warren for a zoning ordinance text
amendment to allow metal roofs on residential buildings.
Planning Supervisor Senness requested that the Commission open the public hearing,
take comments from anyone present, and continue the public hearing to the September
22, 1999 Planning Commission Meeting.
Chairman Stulberg opened the public hearing. There was no one present to speak on the
issue.
MOTION by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Reinhardt to continue the
public hearing to September 22, 1999. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved
unanimously.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #143
7 New Business
A SALVATORE AND NANCY TESTA (99072)
Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Salvatore and Nancy Testa for a variance to
allow a 4.5 foot side yard setback where 15 feet is required to construct a third garage
stall for property located at 2305 Walnut Grove Lane North.
Planner Lindahl gave an overview of the August 31, 1999 staff report.
Commissioner Bobra asked if most of the homes were built in the 1970s. Planner
Lindahl replied affirmatively, adding that most have two stall garages. Planner Lindahl
stated that there haven't been any setback variances granted in this neighborhood for
garage additions.
Commissioner Stoebner asked what the setbacks were for other developments that were
previously developed as a PUD. Chairman Stulberg stated that one development has zero
foot setbacks. Director Hurlburt said that some of the PUD developments had 6 -foot
setbacks, while others were 10 -foot setbacks. She stated that this particular development
was not a PUD and has always had a 15 -foot setback requirement.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Salvatore Testa, the petitioner.
Mr. Testa stated that his neighbor to the south submitted a letter in support of the
requested variance. He said that the letter also stated that the proposal would enhance the
neighborhood. Mr. Testa stated that the tandem garage in the rear, as proposed by staff,
is not an alternative, as there is an existing screened porch that is attached to the garage.
Mr. Testa stated that staff s alternative for a garage in the front is even more difficult, as
it creates an alleyway between the house and garage with a roof overhang. He said that
70% of the area would be covered, which prohibits sufficient light, and that drainage
would also be a problem. Mr. Testa said that are numerous three car garages in the
neighborhood and also some four car garages. Mr. Testa stated that the proposed garage
would still maintain a 22 -foot distance between the buildings. He said that they are
requesting the variance to accommodate their third car.
Commissioner Reinhardt questioned why the house was not centered on the lot. Mr.
Testa replied that he didn't know why.
Chairman Stulberg asked the applicant to address how he complies with variance
standard #4. Mr. Testa stated that the 15 -foot setback requirement in the zoning
ordinance is causing the hardship. He said that they need a minimum of 11 to 12 feet for
the garage.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #144
MOTION by Commissioner Stoebner, seconded by Commissioner Bobra recommending
approval of a side yard setback variance for Salvatore and Nancy Testa on property
located at 2305 Walnut Grove Lane North.
Commissioner Stoebner stated that he believes the application complies with all seven
variance standards. He stated that standard #2 relates to the lot and the way the house is
situated on the lot. He said that the Commission has permitted many other houses to
have smaller setbacks in other parts of the City, and he can't see any justification for
denying the application.
Chairman Stulberg commented that he was having a problem with the proposal meeting
variance standards #2 and #4.
Director Hurlburt commented that there have been some recent court cases that a self-
created hardship on its own is not reason enough to deny a request. She said that the
Commission may find that this condition does not apply to this particular application.
She stated that an application doesn't necessarily have to comply with all seven standards
to be approved.
Chairman Stulberg asked if Commissioner Stoebner's comments would be different if the
petitioner had built this home. Commissioner Stoebner stated probably not, if there was a
reason the home was skewed on the lot.
Commissioner Reinhardt stated that the alternatives mentioned in the staff report aren't
viable options for the applicant.
Commissioner Stoebner commented that the neighbor's approval is a strong factor in his
recommendation for approval.
Commissioner Ribbe concurred. He stated that the problem was inherited rather than
created; therefore, he would vote in favor of the motion.
Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved on a 5-1 Vote. (Chairman Stulberg voted
Nay.)
B ROBERT AND SIGNE HENSEL (99082)
Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Robert and Signe Hensel for variances to
allow a pool and six foot fence in the front yard at 725 Olive Lane North.
Planner Lindahl gave an overview of the September 1, 1999 staff report.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #145
Commissioner Stoebner asked if they would need a variance to construct the pool if it
was the lot next to the subject lot. Planner Lindahl replied that they wouldn't need a
setback variance.
Commissioner Stoebner asked what the status is on revisions to the zoning ordinance
definition pertaining to front yards. Director Hurlburt stated that there isn't any proposal
to change the definition. She said that the ordinance defines yard requirements for corner
lots based in part on the type of street the yards front on, and that in this case 8th Avenue
is not a restricted road and driveways are allowed.
Commissioner Berkowitz asked if it would be possible to restrict curb access off of 8th
Avenue for a particular lot. Director Hurlburt stated that access is not the issue with this
particular application, but rather the nature of the street.
Commissioner Reinhardt asked if the front yard setback was 25 feet, whether the
applicant could build a home addition with 25 feet of the front lot line on 8th Avenue.
Planner Lindahl replied affirmatively.
Commissioner Berkowitz commented that the Commission has struggled with the issue
of two front yards, and asked if the fence was proposed at the setback line, if the
application could have been administratively approved. Planner Lindahl stated that the
pool is considered a structure which requires a variance. Furthermore, she stated that
there isn't an application for a minor variance for a fence.
Commissioner Bobra asked if a smaller swimming pool would be a possibility. Planner
Lindahl stated that a smaller pool would get them closer to complying with the setback,
and stated that Alternative A outlined in the staff report is also an option for the
applicant.
Commissioner Ribbe commented that the fence seems to run parallel to the street.
Planner Lindahl stated that the survey should be correct.
Commissioner Reinhardt asked if Alternative A is in the drainage easement. Planner
Lindahl replied negatively.
Commissioner Ribbe stated that Alternative A would mean that one corner of the pool on
the lot would slope dramatically, which would mean a higher cost to the applicant for
additional grading. Planner Lindahl replied that staff does not have a grading plan, so she
couldn't address the issue.
Commissioner Berkowitz asked what would become of the fence if the application is
denied. Planner Lindahl stated that the fence can remain, as it is an existing non
conforming fence.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #146
Commissioner Stoebner asked how far south staff moved the pool for Alternative A
versus the applicant's proposal. Planner Lindahl replied that the pool was moved 8 feet.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Robert and Signe Hensel, the applicants.
Mr. Hensel presented pictures of their lot from various angles depicting the back yard and
the existing fence. He said that the fence is at an angle and that there is a 15 foot
difference from the front to the back. Mr. Hensel stated that Alternative A isn't an option
for them, as the pool would be located too close to their existing deck. He said that the
grade would slope 3.5 feet and then looking at a six foot fence would not be aesthetically
pleasing. Mr. Hensel stated that he has talked with all his neighbors and they all signed a
petition supporting the proposal. Mr. Hensel stated that the hardship is caused by the
angled fence, which is an existing condition. Chairman Stulberg asked if the applicant
would consider a smaller pool. Mr. Hensel said that it is a possibility, but for their family
size, the contractor has recommended a 20 -foot by 40 -foot swimming pool.
Commissioner Reinhardt asked if the applicant would consider placing the new fence at
the 25 -foot building setback. Ms. Hensel said that they just wanted to square the fence
up. Mr. Hensel stated that moving the fence back to the 25 foot building setback would
allow the fence to be squared up and still provide space for the pool.
MOTION by Commissioner Stoebner, seconded by Commissioner Berkowitz
recommending approval of fence height and pool setback variances for Robert and Signe
Hensel on property located at 725 Olive Lane North.
MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Reinhardt, seconded by Chairman Stulberg
requiring a 25 foot setback.
Commissioner Reinhardt noted that a pool is an optional item and the applicant must
realize that they will have to give up backyard space if they want to add a swimming
pool.
Commissioner Berkowitz stated that he concurs with the reasoning, but in this case, the
existing fence at the 21 foot setback doesn't cause any problems and makes sense
visually. He said that he still thinks that corner lots need to be addressed further.
Roll Call Vote on MOTION to Amend. 2 Ayes. MOTION failed on a 2-4 Vote.
Commissioners Stoebner, Berkowitz, Bobra and Ribbe voted Nay.)
Commissioner Berkowitz stated that this is an existing fence and that the setback has
been established. He said that building in an established setback won't create any
problems to the residents.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #147
Commissioner Ribbe commented that no one has objected to the proposal including the
residents north of
8th Avenue. He said that the existing fence has been there for a long
time and that Alternative A could create a financial hardship and wouldn't be as
aesthetically pleasing.
Commissioner Reinhardt stated that people realize that they will lose their back yard
when they have pool, and that it is appropriate to have reasonable setbacks.
Roll Call Vote on Main MOTION. 4 Ayes. MOTION carried on a 4-2 Vote.
Commissioner Reinhardt and Chairman Stulberg voted Nay.)
Chairman Stulberg called a recess at 8:00 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 8:10 p.m.
C FERNDALE NORTH OPEN SPACE/NEIGHBORHOOD PARK
Chairman Stulberg introduced the item to consider whether to hold a public hearing to
amend the Comprehensive Plan relative to the Ferndale North open space/active
neighborhood park issue.
Planner Drill gave an overview of the September 1, 1999 staff report.
Chairman Stulberg introduced letters that the Commission received prior to the meeting.
Letters received were from Urs & Marie -France Keller, Glenn and Linda Koppin, Art and
Patti Keeney, Wayne and Sherry Frederickson, Sue Siegel, Mary Waldrop, and Thomas
E. Casey.
Director Hurlburt stated that staff discussed Mr. Casey's letter with the City Attorney,
and that the City Attorney stands by his original interpretation.
Chairman Stulberg asked what information has been given out on the property over the
years. Director Blank stated that staff has supplied information consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Stulberg asked if there were any maps given out that
differed from the Comprehensive Plan. Director Blank stated that unfortunately some
maps were distributed that differed from the Comprehensive Plan. He said that the
Comprehensive Plan is the official map and that the site is designated as open space.
Commissioner Reinhardt asked what the policy is for a walking neighborhood. Director
Blank stated that there are currently 50 neighborhoods in Plymouth classified as walking
neighborhoods. A walking neighborhood is typically made up of 3,000 residents which
would trigger a full neighborhood park of not less than five acres. He said that the typical
neighborhood park is 10 to 12 acres. He explained that under the proposed
Comprehensive Plan, the walking neighborhoods will be called service areas. He said
that they are looking at areas that would be under -served because of roadway barriers and
are anticipating the establishment of "mini parks" for those particular areas.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #148
Commissioner Reinhardt asked how many areas are under -served. Director Blank stated
that there are 4 to 5 neighborhoods along the northern border of the City and the southern
border along Ridgemount Avenue. He said that the neighborhoods along the southern
border have schools that serve neighborhood park needs .
Commissioner Reinhardt asked if PRAC's intention is to continue seeking an alternative
site for a neighborhood park to serve the Ferndale area. Director Blank replied
affirmatively.
Commissioner Reinhardt asked if they would at some point give up on locating a site.
Director Blank stated that as long as it is indicated in the Comprehensive Plan, a site will
be sought.
Commissioner Stoebner asked what the entryways would look like if they were to be
improved per PRAC's recommendation. Director Blank stated that no action would be
taken unless directed by the City Council. If they were to be improved, there would
likely be appropriate signage at the entry points and the opening would be thinned out at
the southern entrance point. Chairman Stulberg asked if that would require a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Director Blank said no, but a long range management
plan would need to be developed.
Commissioner Bobra asked if population changes are factored into the consideration of
where parks should be located. Director Blank replied affirmatively.
Commissioner Stoebner asked if any studies have been done to show the difference in
water runoff and environmental issues between areas left natural versus a neighborhood
park. Director Blank said no, but added that the neighborhood parks are left 80% natural
and have a large open meadow suitable for flying kites. He said that a mini park would
be the same, only downsized.
Commissioner Ribbe asked what the public hearing would be directed to consider, and
what the positive alternative is to the public hearing.
Chairman Stulberg commented that PRAC can't order a public hearing, only the property
owner, Planning Commission or City Council can order a hearing. Director Hurlburt said
that the issue is whether we should consider amending the Comprehensive Plan to change
the Park Plan map as to how the subject property is classified.
Commissioner Berkowitz commented that this could also be handled procedurally by the
City Council and that they could initiate the public hearing. He asked if the Commission
is to look at any alternative sites at this point. Director Hurlburt stated that staff is in the
process of revising the Park Element of the Comprehensive Plan. She said that if a
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #149
decision is made to leave property as is, and if an opportunity arises for the City to find
an alternative site for a mini park, then it will be part of the overall park plan.
Commissioner Reinhardt asked if it makes more sense to wait until after the
Comprehensive Plan is completed and then initiate a change. Director Hurlburt said that
it makes more sense to address the issue now. Commissioner Reinhardt asked if this
would hamper the timing of the overall plan. Director Hurlburt replied that it would
depend on what is decided, but it shouldn't delay it.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mary Belden of 18725 4th Place North. Ms. Belden stated
that the staff report was very clear and that the parcel is intended to be left natural. Ms.
Belden said that there are a very large number of homeowners who think a change to the
Comprehensive Plan would be injurious, and that they were assured that the outlot would
remain an open space when they purchased their homes. She said that the neighbors most
affected by the change should be considered, which in this case are the 22 homes, and the
majority are opposed to a park. She encouraged the Commission not to order a public
hearing. She said that the neighborhood is suffering over this and it would be good to
resolve the issue quickly. Ms. Belden said that if another public hearing is held, it could
deepen the hard feelings in the neighborhood.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mary Fenske of 725 Alvarado Lane. Ms. Fenske stated
that she has friends that are opposed to the park which makes it hard for her. She said
that she would like to see at least a walking path. She commented that there is a lot of
animosity among the neighbors. She said that a park would be good for the children in
the neighborhood and for the resale of homes.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Cherie Frye of 18435
5th Avenue North. Ms. Frye stated
that she moved into the neighborhood 17 years ago and was under the impression that
there would be a park. She said that she would like to see at least a mini park. Ms. Frye
stated that the area needs a place for children to play.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Patti Keeney of 900 Brockton Lane. Ms. Keeney
presented panoramic pictures of the site.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Sue Seigel of 18520
5th Avenue North. Ms. Seigel stated
that the Comprehensive Plan states that one-half mile is the farthest distance for an
acceptable walking area. She presented a map of the area indicating how far someone
would have to walk to the site from different areas. She said that if the neighborhood is
going to have a park within the parameters outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, then it
needs to be within the area of Outlot A.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Dan Waldrop of 18845 8th
Avenue North. Mr. Waldrop
questioned what impact the number of families have on the decision that is made. He
said that there is a lot of misunderstanding on the use of this site. Mr. Waldrop said that
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #150
when residents spoke with the City, no one could tell them if the site would be a full
blown park or just a picnic table. He said that they were told that they could purchase
homes to tear down and put a park in place.
Commissioner Reinhardt asked what the next steps would be. Director Hurlburt
explained that if a public hearing is ordered to consider amending the Comprehensive
Plan, and if the decision is made for a park, then the maps would be changed. She said
that the City would then consider implementation and schedule it on the capital
improvement plan for funding. Director Blank said that once the green light is given for
a potential site, it is considered annually for the capital improvement plan update. Once
scheduled in the CIP, then staff would initiate neighborhood meetings to come up with a
concept plan for the park.
Commissioner Berkowitz asked if staff would be seeking a site within the development
or elsewhere. Director Blank stated that the search for a site may have to be broadened
outside the development. He noted Greenwood Elementary School as an example of an
official City park to serve a neighborhood.
Commissioner Berkowitz commented that there is a large area on the south end of this
development. Director Blank stated that most of the area is a wetland with a series of
waterways, which make is unsuitable for development.
Chairman Stulberg stated that PRAC is in charge of open spaces, and they have
recommended that the site remain as an open space.
MOTION by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Berkowitz to take no
action on the matter, thereby, leaving the site indicated as "special use park" on the Park
System Plan Map.
Commissioner Berkowitz stated that he believes the process that is being followed
essentially is putting the "cart before the horse." He stated that there aren't any
alternative sites for a park being discussed at this time. He said that the item would be
better handled by the City Council and returned to the Planning Commission if necessary.
Commissioner Ribbe said that he will support the motion, as he doesn't think that the
Planning Commission should recommend a public hearing for one site that doesn't have
the agreement of the neighborhood. He stated that voting on this item at the end of the
public hearing would be too difficult.
Commissioner Reinhardt stated that she realizes new information probably wouldn't be
brought forward in a public hearing, but she is not comfortable making a decision for the
area at this time.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #151
Commissioner Stoebner stated that while he agrees that a public hearing could deepen the
division in the neighborhood, it is the only fair thing to do. He said that the site has had
three different decisions made since inception --nature preserve, park, and nature preserve
again.
Commissioner Bobra stated that the object of the public hearing is to allow additional
information to be brought forward, which might lead to other alternatives.
Commissioner Berkowitz stated that supporting the motion doesn't mean that he doesn't
empathize for the neighborhood, as he too feels that they are entitled to a safe, accessible
playground. He said that his support of the motion has more to do with the process, and
he would like the entire picture in front of the Commission.
Chairman Stulberg stated that the public did have a chance to air their concerns at the
PRAC meeting. He commented that PRAC hasn't said that there isn't a need, and staff
has indicated that something will come forward for a site. He stated that there isn't any
need to have a public hearing to amend the Comprehensive Plan for this item.
Commissioner Reinhardt stated that if there isn't a public hearing, then we are saying
there isn't a need to update the Comprehensive Plan.
Roll Call Vote. 3 Ayes. MOTION failed on a 3-3 Vote. (Commissioners Stoebner,
Reinhardt and Bobra voted Nay.)
MOTION by Commissioner Reinhardt, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner to order
that a public hearing be held to amend the Park Element of the City's Comprehensive
Plan. Roll Call Vote. 3 Ayes. MOTION failed on a 3-3 Vote. (Commissioners Ribbe,
Berkowitz and Chairman Stulberg voted Nay.)
MOTION by Commissioner Stoebner, seconded by Commissioner Reinhardt
recommending that the City Council determine if a public hearing is necessary.
Chairman Stulberg stated that the job of the Planning Commission is to make the
decision, not pass it off to the City Council.
Commissioner Stoebner stated that it is not a question of shirking responsibilities, as the
Commission is deadlocked.
Commissioner Bobra stated that if staff can come up with an alternative site, maybe
everyone in the neighborhood would be happy.
Commissioner Ribbe stated that the City Council has enough information to make a
decision. He said that PRAC has said not to develop the site, and there aren't any
alternative sites to consider at this time, so it won't do any good to hold a public hearing.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #152
Commissioner Reinhardt stated that a public hearing is needed before the Comprehensive
Plan can be amended. Director Hurlburt stated that if the neighborhood wanted to have
an option to vote for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, then they would need a
public hearing.
Director Blank noted that the City Council could chose to do nothing at this time, and
wait until the new Park Element is brought forward that could contain the answer to the
issue. He said that a public hearing would be held for the entire Comprehensive Plan and
the question of a site could be addressed at that time. Director Hurlburt said that there are
disadvantages to waiting, and she would prefer the issue be tackled now.
Commissioner Berkowitz suggested an amendment to the motion to include that if the
City Council recommends that a public hearing be held, then alternative sites for a park
should be identified. Commissioners Stoebner and Reinhardt approved of the
amendment.
Commissioner Bobra concurred.
Commissioner Berkowitz said that it wouldn't do any good for the City Council to order
a public hearing without any alternative sites to consider, as it wouldn't be any different
than what the Commission is deciding on now.
Chairman Stulberg said that if alternative sites are required, then it is just like looking at
the Park Element of the Comprehensive Plan now. Director Hurlburt stated that it is the
same information that is required in the Park Element of the Comprehensive Plan, as staff
has to evaluate service areas and available options.
Chairman Stulberg stated that the only question is should this site be changed to
something other than what it is now.
Roll Call Vote on MOTION. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried on a 5-1 Vote. (Chairman
Stulberg voted Nay.)
Commissioner Stoebner stated that he doesn't want to micromanage the motion, but if
there is a public hearing ordered by the City Council, then staff needs to address several
issues, which include the concept of mini park and all that entails, the trailing system, and
what types of structures could be proposed at a mini park. Director Hurlburt stated that
those types of issues will be made clear in the Park Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Director Hurlburt reminded the Commission of the joint City Council/Planning
Commission meeting to be held on September 29th. She stated that the land use element
will come back to the Planning Commission at their October
13th
meeting.
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
September 8, 1999
Page #153
MOTION by Commissioner Berkowitz, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner to adjourn
the meeting. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. The meeting was
adjourned at 9:32 p.m.