Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 01-27-1998APPROVED CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JANUARY 27, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chairman John Stoebner, Commissioners Kim Koehnen, Bob Stein, Roger Berkowitz and John Stoebner MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Mike Stulberg and Commissioners Allen Ribbe and Jeff Thompson STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Anne Hurlburt, Planning Supervisor Barb Senness, Planners Kendra Lindahl and John Rask, Building Official Joe Ryan, City Engineer Dan Faulkner, and Clerical Supervisor Denise Hutt 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. PUBLIC FORUM: 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION by Commissioner Berkowitz, seconded by Commissioner Koehnen to approve the January 6, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes. 5. CONSENT AGENDA: A. FERRELL NORTH AMERICA (97182) Site Plan Amendment for installation of a propane system at Olympic Steel located at 13100 15th Avenue North. MOTION by Commissioner Berkowitz to remove the item from the consent agenda. Commissioner Berkowitz stated that he called Planner Lindahl to find out the capacity of the storage system since he didn't see it indicated in the staff report. He stated that Planner Lindahl said that it was four 1,000 gallon tanks. He commented that he would like to see that information in the staff report as they are large enough to be regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency and would require a Risk Management Plan. Director Hurlburt concurred and indicated that the amount would be included in the staff report before it goes to City Council. MOTION by Commissioner Stein, seconded by Commissioner Berkowitz recommending approval of a Site Plan Amendment for installation of a propane system at Olympic Steel located at 13100 15th Avenue North. Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION carried unanimously. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. KENNETH R. STREETER COMPANIES (97183) Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced the request by Kenneth R. Streeter Companies for a Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variance for two commercial buildings to be known at Plymouth Hills Shopping Center located at the southeast corner of 34th Avenue North and Plymouth Boulevard. Planning Supervisor Senness gave an overview of the January 21, 1998 staff report. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced Ken Streeter, the applicant. Mr. Streeter stated the area is properly guided and zoned for the proposed use. He commented that the entire subject matter has to do with orientation. Mr. Streeter said that the difficulty of the City Center Plan is that in reality, it doesn't work for marketability. He said he would like to have the parking by the front doors. Mr. Streeter stated that he did get previous approval on a different plan where the building would face Plymouth Boulevard, but he couldn't acquire any tenants; therefore, he couldn't move forward with the project. Mr. Streeter disagreed that the plan constitutes a major departure from the central principles of the City Center Plan. He stated that he thinks they have done a good a good job, at least in spirit, trying to accommodate the requests staff made. They are trying to apply master principles for a specific lot, with the topography of the lot being difficult to work with and having a mandated access point. Mr. Streeter commented that they are proposing a plaza, landscaping, and a sidewalk for pedestrian traffic. Mr. Streeter said that it would seem appropriate that customers park in front of the buildings. If parking is not allowed along the Plymouth Boulevard side, then the parking has to be along the Highway 55 side; therefore, the front of the buildings should face Highway 55. Mr. Streeter stated that the trash enclosures are an integral part of the building and feels they comply. To bring the trash enclosures to the front (south side), would be a health hazard, as the trucks would pull in where customers would be. Mr. Streeter added that by moving the trash enclosures, they would also lose parking spaces. Mr. Streeter respectfully requested that the Commission approve his request as proposed in order for the site to be marketing viable. Acting Chairman Stoebner asked if the applicant had renderings depicting the side of the structure that would be facing Plymouth Boulevard. Mr. Streeter presented an elevation plan. Mr. Streeter commented that they did not think it would be a good idea to put windows in the back, as it could be someone's storeroom, bathroom, mechanical room, etc. He said that the proposed landscaping and plaza will mitigate and minimize the building. Commissioner Berkowitz asked what type of retail establishments the applicant envisions. Mr. Streeter stated that there could possibly be a gift shop, a couple of restaurants, dry cleaners, hair salon, or photo store - basically, any necessary downtown services. Commissioner Koehnen commented that she was trying to visualize being a consumer while also being objective to the requirements under the City Center Plan. She asked what staff would envision for a plan they could support. Mr. Streeter stated that it does seem hard to imagine that it will work as proposed, but he has built a couple projects like the one proposed, and it does work. He said that they have made many improvements as suggested by staff. He commented that there will be glass on the inside areas of buildings that can be seen as cars enter into the site. Acting Chairman Stoebner opened and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the issue. Commissioner Koehnen questioned if there could be parking on the Plymouth Boulevard side of the site. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that there is a possibility to look at Variances for parking in the front. She said that staff has to look at balancing a number of things; however, the pedestrian orientation of the City Center Plan is not maintained with this plan. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that staff suggested wrapping glass around three sides of the building so people would sense activity. The other option given to the applicant was to have glazing on the back of the buildings to look more like a front from the street side. Planning Supervisor Senness indicated that staff would prefer the encap wrapping of glass) of the building. Director Hurlburt commented that staff did make a number of suggestions to the applicant, which were rejected. Because the back of the building faces Plymouth Boulevard, which does not comply with the City Center Plan, staff can't support the proposal. Commissioner Berkowitz asked if staff made any suggestions regarding a variance for parking facing Plymouth Boulevard. Planning Supervisor Senness replied that the issue was not discussed. Director Hurlburt noted the applicant rejected moving the buildings. She said what was approved a few years ago was an L -shape building, which may have been better to try and work with. Commissioner Berkowitz asked if staff would consider a parking Variance. Director Hurlburt replied that it has not been suggested by the applicant. Acting Chairman Stoebner asked where the parking was located on the previously approved plan. Planning Supervisor Senness presented the plan depicting the parking on the east side of the side. Director Hurlburt stated that the end facing 34th Avenue would have also been a front entrance. Director Hurlburt commented that staff has not reviewed the previously approved plan to see if it complies with the City Center Plan. Commissioner Koehnen asked if the previously approved plan was the plan that the applicant said he could not find any tenants for. Director Hurlburt stated that the market has changed for downtown Plymouth since that plan was approved. MOTION by Commissioner Berkowitz, seconded by Commissioner Koehnen to recommend denial of a Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variances for Kenneth R. Streeter Companies for Plymouth Hills Shopping Center for property located at the southeast corner of 34th Avenue North and Plymouth Boulevard. Commissioner Berkowitz stated that he agrees with the City Center Plan that buildings should face Plymouth Boulevard, as it makes it more inviting for downtown employees to patronize the facilities. Commissioner Koehnen concurred. She stated that perhaps the previously approved plan could have worked for the site, and did not think a hardship existed. Commissioner Stein commented that while it may be a challenge architecturally, it needs to meet the requirements of the City Center Plan. Acting Chairman Stoebner concurred, and added that the developer and staff should have been able to work something out. Roll Call Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION carried unanimously. Director Hurlburt noted that the item may move forward to the City Council on February 4th, and the applicant should contact staff to verify. 7. NEW BUSINESS: A. ELIM CARE, INC. (97008) Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced the request by Elim Care, Inc. for consideration of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Cornerstone Commons residential development and adjacent industrial site development located at the southeast corner of Highway 55 and County Road 101. Planner Rask gave an overview of the January 21, 1998 staff report. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced Bob Dahl, President and CEO of Elim Care, Inc. Mr. Dahl gave an overview of the history of Elim Care, Inc. and the ownership of the site. Mr. Dahl stated that the plan is for a range of ownership and for a continuum of care to keep individuals out of nursing homes and in a residential setting. The plan includes owner -occupied townhomes, a cooperative building, and an assisted living facility. He said that the project would be the first of its kind in the state. Mr. Dahl said that Elim Care, Inc. is not experienced in building and selling real estate, so they chose to partner with Rottlund Homes to carry out townhome portion of the site. Mr. Dahl introduced Richard Palmiter of Rottlund Homes. Mr. Palmiter stated that while Rottlund Homes has not had experience pertaining to this specific proposal, they are very experienced with building and selling homes to seniors. He said that he is confident that the proposal will be a successful project. Mr. Palmiter gave an overview of what is proposed for the site. Mr. Palmiter indicated that there would be non -age restricted units proposed for the portion of the site adjoining the industrial area. Mr. Palmiter introduced Jennie Ross of SRF Consulting Group. Ms. Ross stated the project would impact approximately 3.1 acres of wetland. The necessary wetland mitigation would occur on site. Mitigation would include wetland creation and enhancement, including the creation of storm water ponds and wetland buffers. Ms. Ross stated any impact to the floodplain would be mitigated on site by creating additional flood storage through wetland creation. Ms. Ross stated that a detailed traffic study was performed for the proposed residential and adjacent industrial development on the Elim Care property. The study indicated that the trips generated by the site would increase by approximately 1,500 per day for the residential site and 281 industrial trips during the evening peak hours. Based on the traffic assessment, the proposed development would require roadway improvements to improve safety and traffic flow. Ms. Ross stated that safety improvements recommended include: 1) Provision of by-pass lanes for southbound County Road 101 traffic at the two entrances to the residential development. 2) Construction of right turn lanes for northbound County Road 101 traffic entering the residential development at both entrances. 3) construction of right turn lanes from all three access points from the residential and industrial developments. Operation improvements recommended include the installation of traffic signals at County Road 24 and Medina Road, and County Road 101 and Medina Road. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced Tammy Ziegenbein of 17730 35th Avenue North. Ms. Ziegenbein stated that she is in support of what Elim Care, Inc. is trying to do, but is concerned with the non -age restricted units. She was concerned about an adverse affect on her property values since the townhomes would be selling for $90,000 to $100,000. Ms. Ziegenbein stated that she is also concerned with increased traffic that the project would generate. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced Scott Sherman of 3490 Lawndale Lane. Mr. Sherman commented that he supports a senior project, but the proposal has now changed. Mr. Sherman stated his concerns relating to density, aesthetics, increased traffic and bus stop safety. Mr. Sherman questioned where the noise monitoring was done on the site. Mr. Sherman stated that the proposal does meet a number of needs for Plymouth, but thought maybe the project is trying to accomplish too much. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced Sean Carroll of 3470 Lawndale Lane. Mr. Carroll stated that the project should remain as previously proposed for an all -senior project, which was supported by the Planning Commission and City Council. Mr. Carroll stated that the EAW consideration should be based on the original proposal. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced John Reynolds of 3460 Lawndale Lane. Mr. Reynolds stated his concern about Rottlund Homes not having experience with this type of project. Mr. Reynolds was concerned with the proximity of the non -age restricted units next to the commercial drying (farm) facility. He stated, because the dryers run 24 hours a day, the applicant may have a hard time selling those units. Mr. Reynolds asked when and where the sound readings were taken. He stated that traffic is a concern, and asked if the EAW takes into account cut -through traffic. Mr. Reynolds commented that some traffic will flow through the neighborhood. Mr. Reynolds said that even though Medina Road is able to handle a much higher level of traffic, the Commission needs to think about accommodating the in and out traffic by putting in center islands. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced Gary Fishbeck of 3410 Lawndale Lane. Mr. Fishbeck stated there are serious shortcomings with the site plan. He said that the one criteria that is difficult to quantify is the visual impact. The two dimension plans are not adequate to visualize the impact to the surrounding area. Mr. Fishbeck said the terrain of the site is submerged. Mr. Fishbeck thought the only way the development can be successful is to reduce the density. Mr. Fishbeck encouraged the Commission to make sure the development is of high quality, as it is a valuable piece of land and very visible from Highway 55. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced a letter dated January 25, 1998 from John and Mara Robinson of 3420 Lawndale Lane. Ms. Ross stated that the noise assessment is to be done for noise resulting from the project; therefore, the analysis was limited to noise impacts related to traffic levels, not the farm drying operation. Ms. Ross stated that the locations for monitoring were at Highway 55, County Road 101, and Medina Road, based on where residential areas would be from the site. The assessment indicated no significant increase in noise levels. Ms. Ross stated that the traffic study looked at the traffic patterns coming from area roadways. Most of the traffic would be utilizing Highway 55 to get to the site and then Medina Road from County Road 24 or County Road 101. A very small number may come through Heather Run, but the likelihood of that is minimal. Commissioner Koehnen asked staff to comment on the noise monitoring and the dryer facility being in close proximity to the proposed non -age restricted units. Planner Rask concurred with SRF, that the EAW noise assessment should involve the noise associated with the traffic from the project, and not noise from the drying operation. Planner Rask stated that the applicant is looking at certain features for the homes to reduce the noise from the corn dryers and also traffic noise from Highway 55. Commissioner Koehnen asked if staff feels an EIS is warranted based on those issues. Planner Rask replied negatively, as there is only a noise difference of four or five decibels. Director Hurlburt noted that an EIS can't be requested based on the noise from the corn dryer, as the proposed use is not causing the noise. Commissioner Koehnen asked staff to comment on the prime agriculture land and the reference to the project being built in a hole. Planner Rask stated the applicant is looking at balancing the soil on site by mass grading. In review of the farmland impact, Ms. Ross stated approximately 18 percent of the site is prime farmland. However, the reality is that this land will not be continued to be farmed, because it is inside the urban area. Mr. Carroll asked to see the map indicating where the noise readings were taken from in relation to where corn processor is located. Mr. Carroll asked if there is access to City Council minutes pertaining to the EAW, as there were comments made by councilmembers to ensure that noise readings were taken with the corn processor in operation. Ms. Ross again presented the map depicting where the noise readings were taken from, pointing out Site #3. She said they did not do an analysis with the dryers on. She added that they could do a reading with the dryers running, if so directed by the Council, but questioned what you would be gaining as far as assessment impacts. Director Hurlburt stated that the comment period will end on Friday, January 30th. Any written comments can be submitted to staff for the record, with all comments being forwarded to the City Council for their meeting on February 18th Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced Doug Bros of 3365 Olive Lane. Mr. Bros questioned the impact of cut -through traffic to the residential neighborhood. Director Hurlburt stated that Ms. Ross already covered that topic, and staff would agree with SRF's findings. Mr. Bros stated that the residents disagree with the findings. Commissioner Koehnen stated the EAW was thoroughly written, and sees no need for an EIS. Commissioner Berkowitz noted his satisfaction with the completeness of the EAW, and concurred that there is no need for an EIS. Commissioner Stein concurred. Acting Chairman Stoebner concurred, but asked staff to locate the City Council minutes pertaining to the item to see if there was any reference made to what the noise readings should include and any other comments pertaining to the EAW. Director Hurlburt stated that the City Council minutes would be attached to the report that goes to the City Council. Acting Chairman Stoebner called a recess at 9:05 and reconvened the meeting at 9:25 p.m. B. HENNEPIN COUNTY (97086) Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced the request by Hennepin County for consideration of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for construction of a 350 -foot public safety communication tower located south of County Road 6, east of Vicksburg Lane and west of Shenandoah Lane. Planner Rask gave an overview of the January 21, 1998 staff report. Commissioner Stein asked about the possibility of adding an antenna to the existing tower. Planner Rask replied that the tower is not capable of supporting the antenna, and there is a need to increase the height to compensate for a decrease in power as required by the FCC. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced Michael Hogan, representing the petitioner. Mr. Hogan stated that this is a joint project for a number of state and local agencies and Hennepin County, and it will cover the seven county metro area. Mr. Hogan stated that the existing tower is structurally deficient and the tower can not accommodate what is being proposed. Mr. Hogan said that the proposal is essential for the public safety departments, and it will help loop the entire system around the seven county area. Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced Bruce Johnson of 820 Shenandoah Lane. Mr. Johnson questioned why they are always last on the agenda. He asked what the size difference is between the existing tower and what is being proposed and what the dish sizes would be. Mr. Johnson asked what the strobe light would look like on a foggy day. He asked if there were any studies done on the effects of the power input and outputs. Planner Rask replied that the power output is regulated by the FCC, in which there are certain standards that they have to company with. Mr. Hogan stated that currently there will be one six-foot dish and two four -foot dishes. The largest dish that would be allowed is an eight -foot dish. The current tower is 330 feet tall, while the new tower will be 350 feet in height. Mr. Hogan indicated that they will be purchasing equipment to test the emissions from their use and the commercial uses. He said that since the tower would be located in a parking lot, it minimizes any radiation effect. Mr. Hogan stated that new lighting technology will direct light upward, as the current light radiates down. Mr. Hogan said that City staff has a tape indicating what the light looks like at different distances. He said they have not received any complaints from existing towers, and there would be less of an impact on the neighborhood with the new light. Commissioner Koehnen questioned what the impact would be on a foggy day. Mr. Hogan was unsure, but said he could check with the manufacturer. Mr. Hogan indicated that the current tower base is 10 to 12 feet, while the new tower will have 36 feet between each of the three legs. In response to the scheduling comment, Director Hurlburt explained that the public hearings are scheduled before new business items, then it goes by date of application. Mr. Johnson asked what the size of the tower is at the top, and how many dishes can go on the system. Mr. Hogan presented a drawing, depicting the number of dishes and stated that the platform is 15 feet of triangular shape, in which antennas would hang. Commissioner Koehnen stated the EAW is well done; the questions have been addressed, and there is no need demonstrated for the EIS. Commissioner Berkowitz concurred, but added there needs to more consideration for the type of lighting so it doesn't cause a visual problem. Commissioner Stein and Acting Chairman Stoebner concurred. Director Hurlburt stated the comment period ends Wednesday, January 28th. The item will most likely be sent to the City Council for their February 4th meeting, but interested parties should contact staff to verify. C. CITY OF PLYMOUTH (97180) Acting Chairman Stoebner introduced the request by the City of Plymouth to review the draft sign regulation ordinance. Building Official Ryan gave an overview of the January 21, 1998 staff report. Building Official Ryan noted one change - staff is now recommending that electronic reader message boards be deleted from the P/I District and only allowed in the CC -P District. Commissioner Koehnen asked if school districts were included in the list of businesses that were notified of the intent to change the sign ordinance. Building Official Ryan said he would make sure that a letter is sent to Wayzata and Robbinsdale School Districts. Director Hurlburt stated that the City has not received any proposals from school districts at this time. She explained that the electronic reader message boards can be very distracting to drivers, and hard to limit what they look like. Discussion with staff members indicated that the City would like to take a conservative approach to the issue. She said that staff would consider amendments to the ordinance if applications are received. Director Hurlburt stated they would allow the electronic reader message board in the City Center District, possibly at the Ice Arena to test reaction to it. Commissioner Berkowitz asked since schools are in the Public/Institutional District and have athletic fields, where is the line drawn. Director Hurlburt replied that the City doesn't have any now, nor would it be allowed under the proposed amendment. Commissioner Stein indicated he would like more time to look over the amendment. Acting Chairman Stoebner said he would like feedback from the business owners meeting. Commissioner Berkowitz stated he would like to receive a summary of the meetings. MOTION by Commissioner Stein, seconded by Commissioner Koelmen to adjourn. Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m.