Loading...
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.