Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 03-11-1997CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 11, 1997 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Mike Stulberg, Commissioners Roger Berkowitz, John Stoebner (arrived at 7:04 p.m.), Jeffrey Thompson, and Kim Koehnen MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioners Allen Ribbe and Bob Stein STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Anne Hurlburt, Building Official Joe Ryan, Planners Shawn Drill, Kendra Lindahl, and John Rask, City Engineer Dan Faulkner, and Clerical Supervisor Denise Hutt 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. PUBLIC FORUM: 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION by Commissioner Berkowitz, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to move items 6B and 6E before 6A. Chairman Stulberg commented that he would vote against it due to the fact that some people might not be here to testify at the public hearings, as they knew the order of the agenda. Commissioner Berkowitz acknowledged that the order is by the date of application, but asked if staff could consider changing the procedure for future meetings in order to hear applications that are not as controversial first on the agenda. Vote. 1 Aye. (Chairman Stulberg, Commissioners Kohenen and Berkowitz voted Nay.) MOTION failed on a 1-3 Vote. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chairman Stulberg requested that a correction be made to the February 11, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes on Page #40, Paragraph 3 to read " Mr. Theis probably has some basis in his property which affects his financial status." MOTION by Commissioner Koehnen, seconded by Commissioner Berkowitz recommending approval of the February 11, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes, as amended, and the February 25, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes. Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION carried on a unanimous vote. 5. CONSENT AGENDA: 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #48 A. HOUSING SERVICES, INC. (96183) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Housing Services, Inc. for a Land Use Guide Plan Amendment, Rezoning, Site Plan Amendment, and Conditional Use Permit for a 67 unit attached cooperative senior housing development known as "Gramercy Park" for property located north of 45th Avenue, west of Revere Lane, and east of Trenton Lane, Outlot A, Woodlands 2nd Addition. Planner Rask gave an overview of the March 6, 1997, revised on March 11, 1997 staff report and presented photo imaging of the site. Director Hurlburt asked the distance from the proposed building to where the pictures were taken from. Planner Rask replied approximately 175 to 200 feet. Commissioner Berkowitz asked if he understood correctly, that because of the date of the original platting, the tree preservation was not applied to the site, but that the applicant is willing to comply anyway. Planner Rask replied affirmatively. Commissioner Thompson asked if the reason the trees are being removed is because there may be two additional wetlands on the site, but they won't find out for sure until later. Planner Rask responded affirmatively, adding that the applicant is unsure at this time until a spring follow-up can be conducted. Commissioner Thompson asked about the wetland requirements. Planner Rask replied that the applicant is not required to meet wetland buffer and setback requirements, a minimum setback of 42 feet is provided on the site plan. If the wetland setbacks applied, the applicant would be required to maintain an average setback of 75 feet and a buffer of 15 feet. Director Hurlburt stated that mitigation is a state law requirement, and the applicant must comply with the Wetland Conservation Act. Commissioner Berkowitz commented that a loss of trees will occur over time because of the rise of the water level. Planner Rask commented that a small portion would be graded out for a small pond, but the other area is questionable and could take place over time. Commissioner Koehnen asked if the entrance could be placed directly across from Revere Lane, as it would be a good location for a four way stop. Planner Rask explained that if the entrance was placed there, it would impact an area of an existing wetland. City Engineer Faulkner added that the distance between Revere Lane and the proposed driveway is an adequate amount for safety. Commissioner Koehnen asked if a permit were issued and things need to be changed, would it be too late. Planner Rask replied that the applicant would have to stay out of the wetland area, but that there is nothing in the ordinance to prevent a land owner from cutting down their own trees. Director Hurlburt commented that the wetland permits Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #49 would not be issued until after the spring follow-up, and the applicant could not alter the site until such time. Chairman Stulberg introduced Michael Conlan, the petitioner. Mr. Conlan stated that he is the President of Housing Services, Inc. They are proposing to build a 67 unit senior cooperative building. Mr. Conlan stated that he concurs with the staff report. Mr. Conlan explained that with a cooperative building, the seniors that will live in the building will own it. They elect a board of directors, and as property managers, Mr. Conlan stated that they serve the seniors. The building is designed and furnished to accommodate many services and amenities. Mr. Conland stated that each senior pays and 18,000 to $33,200 membership fee and a monthly maintenance fee ranging from $600 to 1,000, which goes to pay the mortgage and operational fees. He explained that when a senior leaves, they sell their membership, which is approved by the board. They will receive their membership fee plus a return of one percent for each year they live their unit. Mr. Conlan stated that a waiting list for a senior cooperative building can range up to 13 years. There are no subsidies or income limits potential buyers. Mr. Conlan stated that over the last six months they have had formal and informal meetings with the neighbors at Zachary Lane School and in various homes. The plans have been revised repeatedly at a considerable cost to the seniors. Mr. Conlan stated that they have set up a neighborhood project impact fund to address any landscaping and visual concerns of the wetland mitigation worst case scenario as a good faith effort. He commented that the computer imaging is very accurate and the building looks like their Rochester and Inver Grove Heights projects. Many of the seniors that would occupy the building are from Plymouth and the surrounding communities, or have families that live in Plymouth. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mike St. Martin of Loucks and Associates. Mr. St. Martin presented an aerial photo with the proposed site plan superimposed. Mr. St. Martin pointed out the existing conditions on the site, including the wetland areas. He said that the proposed building will follow the shape of the wetland, and is within the required setbacks. The entrance will be off of 45th Avenue and will go through with underground parking and exit at the other end of the building and come back around to exit back out on to 45th Avenue. Mr. St. Martin explained the drainage patterns for the site. He stated that the existing system should be designed to handle any water surface runoff. He stated that the applicant has completed the application for wetland alteration and has been submitted to the City and other appropriate agencies. Mr. St. Martin assured that all items listed in the Engineer's Memo will be addressed. Mr. Conlan stated that one reason for the request of additional building height is due to the fact that residents that would be on the first floor would like to be up higher for security reasons. Mr. Conclan stated that their information concludes that the area northwest of the building is not a wetland, but they had to make a decision, so their plan is Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #50 based on the worst case scenario. He stated that they do not have any intention of changing the plan again no matter what the outcome of the wetland is. Commissioner Thompson asked for clarification if the applicant intends on building a pond no matter what the outcome is of the wetland report. Mr. Conlan replied affirmatively and added that they will put in whatever will grow, and they do not want to change the plan again, as it needs to come to a closure. Commissioner Koehnen questioned if the site could handle the water runoff and why the extra four feet in height is needed since the units will have balconies. City Engineer Faulkner replied that the current storm water system can handle the water surface runoff. Chairman Stulberg opened the public hearing. Chairman Stulberg acknowledged letters that were received and included as attachments to the staff report. The letters received were from Maria Gottwalt of 4620 Trenton Circle dated March 6, 1997; Sharon Leader of 4545 Trenton Circle dated March 3, 1997; and, Rick Bloomfield of 4650 Trenton Circle dated March 4, 1997. Chairman Stulberg acknowledged letters received prior to the meeting from Jay and Pamela Trumbrower of 4525 Trenton Circle, dated March 6, 1997; and, Paul & Liz Schupanitz of 4600 Trenton Circle dated march 10, 1997. All letters received were in opposition to the proposal due mainly to the size of the building and loss of trees to the site. Chairman Stulberg introduced Bill Johnson of 4570 Trenton Circle. Mr. Johnson stated that when he purchased his lot ten years ago he paid an additional $10,000 for a premium lot next to the wetlands. He was under the impression that because of the wetlands, nothing would be built between his property and the wetland. If they had known this, they would not have built there. Mr. Johnson stated his opposition to the proposal is due to the building being too large and inadequate, and in some cases, no buffering. Mr. Johnson stated that he asked Mr. Conlan at a meeting last fall, what would be the smallest building they could have and still make it work for them. He said Mr. Conlan told him they could go with a 50 unit building. Mr. Johnson commented that the proposal is a worst case scenario and that the trees will die from the increased water level. He said that the trees are not significant in size, but do provide a buffer. Mr. Johnson said that the applicant must be concerned about the water runoff since they are willing to set up neighborhood impact fund. Mr. Johnson asked if any options have been explored about mitigating on another site or adding to a current wetland on the site. He asked about the procedure to determine the hydrology, and stated that this study should be done early this spring. He asked what assurances can the Engineering Department can give on hydrology in their back yard. He stated that the level of water in the area is high enough already. Mr. Johnson presented an article regarding Woodbury in October, 1993 which depicted an area of flooding. He said that the applicant said he was not in a hurry at previous meetings, and asked what the hurry is now. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #51 Chairman Stulberg introduced Joann Johnson of 4570 Trenton Circle. Ms. Johnson asked what if this plan is not the worst case scenario. She wanted to know how the Commissioners could make a decision without walking the site and urged them to vote no on the proposal. Ms. Johnson said that her mother bought a condo in a cooperative in Golden Valley, and the marketing people told them that there were 100 of people on waiting list. When her mother died there was no one on the waiting list to buy her unit and they lost $17,000. Chairman Stulberg introduced Sally Neil of 4515 Trenton Circle. Ms. Neil asked how many more apartments, townhouses, and the like are the residents going to be subjected to. She stated that the buffer needs to stand as is and the building needs to be scaled down. Ms. Neil presented pictures of Rolling Hills Park after a rain storm in 1994 showing flooding in the park near the area of the proposed building. Ms. Neil was concerned that there are more wetlands than what the residents are being told. Chairman Stulberg introduced a letter from Sharon Leader of 4545 Trenton Circle. Ms. Leader's letter addressed her concern for haste in approving the plans. In her letter, she stated that the residents are opposed to the size of the development. After reading the staff report, she said that the words "reasonable development" sticks in her mind, and that the proposal should be denied in its present form. Chairman Stulberg introduced Liz Schupanitz of 4600 Trenton Circle. Ms. Schupanitz stated that before they selected their lot, they went to the City to ask about potential development in the area, as they didn't want any surprises. At the time, they felt there were enough trees to screen from Plymouth Ponds. She stated that the trees are not significant in size, but do provide a wall of green in the summer for beauty and screening from Plymouth Ponds. Ms. Schupanitz stated that Councilmembers Vasilou and Helliwell made comments in previous council meetings that residents should be able to rely on information that was given to them when they purchased their homes. Ms. Schupanitz stated that the computer imaging is taken at a wide angle, so it reduces the objects. She presented a picture that she took from her deck simulating how the view would actually look. She also presented a picture of Plymouth Ponds Apartments from 170 feet away, which is the same distance that Gramercy Park is proposed to be. Ms. Schupanitz presented information of the previously approved plan versus the proposal for Gramercy Park. In the old plan, the building originated away from the neighborhood. She stated that because of the changes to the Zoning Ordinance, the proposal can no longer be built under a Planned Unit Development, as it was done away with. She asked for an explanation as to how it was determined that the property be guided LA -3. She stated her opposition to the proposal due to the size of the building and that the project encroaches the wetland and the homeowners. If approved, Ms. Schupanitz stated her willingness to work with the City on the path. Chairman Stulberg introduced Greg McMath of 4550 Trenton Circle. Mr. McMath stated he is opposed to the proposal because the structure is too large. If the building was Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #52 reduced, it would involve less destruction of trees and would allow for wetland mitigation on an existing wetland. Mr. McMath stated that the applicant told the residents that the City told them this was the only site available for this type of project. City staff told the residents that they don't direct developers to sites. Mr. McMath said that this is not the only opportunity that Plymouth has for senior buildings, as there are two other projects in progress. Mr. McMath stated that with the lot of record predating the wetland ordinance and tree preservation, it seems too convenient for the applicant to pick and choose what they want to follow. Mr. McMath said that if it is determined later that the site is worse than the worst case scenario, it will be too late. He said that the applicant his the right to request an extension. Chairman Stulberg introduced Sheila McMath of 4550 Trenton Circle. Ms. McMath stated that she understands that the view in their backyard was never a guarantee, and that she is not against senior housing. She stated that no one has said what the project will do property values. She asked what the City or developer will do if there is water problems that are caused from the development. She stated that he project will diminish the trees and the wildlife in the area. She commented that there is no guarantee for the trees that are left because of the wetland mitigation. Ms. McMath stated that the applicant is asking the residents to sign a waiver releasing the applicant from future liabilities. She added that the applicant is offering some residents money to landscape their property. Ms. McMath commented that the replanted trees will not be on the western portion of the site where the residents reside that are the most affected from the project. Ms. McMath spoke to several issues in the staff report. She commented that there is more than one senior project in Plymouth, as two other projects are either underway in the review stage. She stated that the additional landscaping proposed by the applicant is not done by her home. She stated that the wetland delineation can't be confirmed until spring. The trees will already be gone, and the worst case scenario would be the pictures that were presented of the flooding in the park. Ms. McMath stated that the project will limit solar access. Ms. McMath questioned the increased building height for safety reasons, as people will still have access to the unit even at the proposed height. Chairman Stulberg introduced Greg Lindberg of 4630 Trenton Circle. Mr. Lindberg stated his concern with the size and location of NURP Pond #2 in proximity to the walking path, as it is a safety hazard for children. He stated that if the building could be reduced the pond could be moved back. Mr. Lindberg stated his concern with the tree loss and inadequate buffering. Chairman Stulberg introduced Jay Trumbower of 4525 Trenton Circle. Mr. Trumbower asked how the lot of record differs from the Planned Unit Development, and why the lot of record stands, but not the Planned Unit Development. He said it seems like there are inconsistencies as to what is grandfathered in. He asked how the original Planned Unit Development can be eliminated when it is half built. He said that he is not opposed to senior housing, but that the project should not be rushed into. He said the Commission should have confirmation on the wetland first before moving forward. Mr. Trumbower Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #53 said he doesn't understand why the applicant is not required to abide by a 200 foot setback, as the City Council required in 1993. Mr. Trumbower said that the buffering and the size of the building are big issues with the residents, and urged denial of the project. Mr. Trumbower said that he had an appraiser out to look at their home, and was told their property value would decrease because of the view. Mr. Trumbower said that there is already a major increase of traffic on 45th Avenue because of the new townhomes and Valley Forge Lane being a through street. Mr. Trumbower stated that haste makes waste. Chairman Stulberg introduced Tim Meyer of 4660 Trenton Circle. Mr. Meyer asked if the information in the staff report is accurate as changes are continuing, and also if the staff and the Commission have enough information to make a decision on the proposal at this time. Chairman Stulberg introduced Erwin Chatras of 4530 Trenton Circle. Mr. Chatras stated that he is concerned with the hydrology level, and asked what assurances the residents have on increased water level. Chairman Stulberg introduced Jodi Heurung of 4535 Trenton Circle. Ms. Heurung left the meeting before speaking. Chairman Stulberg introduced Brian Larson of 4540 Trenton Circle. Mr. Larson stated that three out of the four reasons for turning down the proposal in 1993 still exists today. He stated that just because the Planned Unit Development is no longer in effect, doesn't mean that the applicant shouldn't have to comply with it. He said that the most impacted property owners have the least amount of buffering. Mr. Larson said that the City should satisfy the needs of the people, not just the developer. Mr. Larson stated that the trees should not be destroyed before final confirmation of the wetlands. He said that the developer is not acting on good faith. He was told by the developer that the project could be built with 50 units, now the developer said he meant in Rochester. The developer has offered people money and were told they couldn't speak at the public hearing against the project. He asked if the City can guarantee that the wetlands won't be affected, and that their property values won't diminish. Chairman Stulberg introduced Paul Schupanitz of 4600 Trenton Circle. Mr. Schupanitz stated that the homeowners are frustrated and confused because during the process of the application the Zoning Ordinance has changed. He said that there was a proposal on the table and residents were not informed of the change of the ordinance, which creates loopholes for the developer. He said that the intent of the Planned Unit Development was upheld over the years. Mr. Schupanitz stated that the Planned Unit Development is gone, but it is constantly referenced for approval in the staff report. He said that the Commission needs to be mindful of the issues and the residents already in the area. He stated that the staff report brings up issues and leaves them on the table without resolving them. Mr. Schupanitz stated that the buildable area of the site has shrunk over the years because of the wetlands and buffering, and asked if it is reasonable for the building to get Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #54 larger when the buildable area has shrunk. He said that mitigation causes destruction of the wetlands, and if additional wetlands are found, it will be more that a worst case scenario. He asked where the compromise is. He would like an option on the table for a smaller building on the site. Mr. Schupanitz asked if Engineering has received the information they referred to in the Engineer's Memo. Chairman Stulberg introduced Joe Keebler of 10205 - 47th Avenue North. Mr. Keebler stated that his concerns are the same as mentioned by the other residents. The tree removal would contribute to more run off and take away the aesthetics of the area. He is concerned with the size of the building and the exterior lighting. Mr. Keebler suggested that the northeast corner of 45th Avenue and Nathan Lane would be a more appropriate site for the project. He stated that the developer told him they could get a higher market price for the units being located next to a wetland. Chairman Stulberg introduced Tom Gottwalt of 4620 Trenton Circle. Mr. Gottwalt stated that in 1984 the Planned Unit Development was brought forth and was approved. In 1987, the City Council denied a proposal because of the lack of buffering and green space. In the mid-1980s, the residents built their homes with the understanding that something was going in, but further to the east. In 1993, the developer requested a wetland exemption and was denied, then proposed townhomes, which were also denied by the Planning Commission and City Council. At that time, Councilmember Helliwell commented that residents based their decision on the plans surrounding the site. In 1996, the Zoning Ordinance was changed. He asked why the residents were not notified that it was no longer a Planned Unit Development. He said that the developer should bear the risk of changes, not the residents. He added that the developer could have developed under the Planned Unit Development during the last 10 years. He asked what is so bad about waiting on this plan. He commented that the City, developer, and the seniors still have choices, but that the residents do not. Chairman Stulberg introduced Maria Gottwalt of 4620 Trenton Circle. Ms. Gottwalt stated that $40,000 was offered to homeowners, and that she is appalled and surprised about it. She stated that in a phone conversation with Mr. Conlan, he admitted that money was offered for a project improvement fund for landscaping. She stated that there is no landscaping that the homeowners can put in. Mr. Conlan said the money would be given to them for whatever they choose to spend it on. She said that the residents, in exchange for the money, would not be allowed to come to the meeting to speak against the proposal. Ms. Gottwalt stated that she reiterated comments made by Mr. Conlan to Mayor Tierney. One of the comments made by Mr. Conlan was why the residents don't pool their money and buy the site. Chairman Stulberg introduced Janet Klis of 16710 -45th Avenue North. Ms. Kliss stated that she is in favor of the project, and that it sounds like the neighborhood would be opposed to almost any proposal. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #55 Chairman Stulberg introduced Bill Dohse of 4610 Trenton Circle. Mr. Dohse stated his confusion as to why the applicant is requesting LA -4 guiding and that there seems to be discrepancies on the building size, density, and lot coverage. He stated that the original plan showed a 200 foot setback, but the current one shows 169 feet. The site coverage is three percent smaller, but the building is seven percent larger. The impact is significantly greater. He stated that the City should maintain the integrity of the original plans and taken into account the information given to the residents when they built their homes. Ms. Schupanitz presented a petition opposed to the Gramercy Park development in its current form because of its impact on adjacent neighborhoods. Chairman Stulberg introduced letters from Jody Heurung of 4535 Trenton Circle, Tim and Amy Meyer dated March 6, 1997 of 4660 Trenton Circle, and Sally and Lonnie Neild dated March 6, 1997 of 4515 Trenton Circle in opposition of the proposal. Chairman Stulberg closed the public hearing. Chairman Stulberg stated that the Commission is not here to reconsider anything, they are only here to consider the application in front of them at this time. The Commission is under no obligation to do anything. He explained that the City staff and Planning Commission act as a police officer of the Zoning Ordinance, which is objective not subjective. Director Hurlburt explained the process of the revision of the Zoning Ordinance and adoption of a new zoning map. She stated that there were quite a number of communications published in the official City newspapers and the Plymouth News. Director Hurlburt explained the specifics of a Planned Unit Development. Under a Planned Unit Development, the City was vulnerable in enforcing it. Under the new ordinance, the Planned Unit Development is reserved for developments that are unique in that they don't fit into another zoning category. The City did keep a few Planned Unit Developments because of the uniqueness and they were required to by law because of timing issues. Director Hurlburt explained that staff feels that this plan does the best job of meeting the intent of the original plan under the current laws. She stated that you have to consider distance to parking under the old plan, as it affects the trees as well. When the City adopted the wetland ordinance and the tree preservation, it affected how land can be developed. When you start protecting, it reduces the amount of buildable land. The decision was made when the ordinance was adopted that it does not apply to lots of record. If an owner wants to subdivide their property further, the ordinances would then apply. This property is not being subdivided, so it is exempt from the wetland ordinance and the tree preservation plan. The issue of the wetland mitigation is because of State Wetland Conservation Act, in which the applicant does have to comply. She said that the State decided that wetlands are more important than trees. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #56 City Engineer Faulkner stated that it is up to the developer to decide if they will mitigate and where. Typically, they will mitigate on site. If the developer decides to mitigate off- site, it needs to be in the same city and same watershed district. Pertaining to the impact of surface water drainage, City Engineer Faulkner stated that the City can give surface drainage guarantees, but no assurances on sub -surface drainage. The recourse would be between the affected property owner and the developer, if the affected party could show a relationship between the development and the occurrence. With regard to the safety issue around the NURP ponds, City Engineer Faulkner stated there are requirements to adhere to, which should impede anyone getting to the water's edge. Chairman Stulberg asked if the proximity of the NURP pond to the trail is an issue. City Engineer Faulkner replied negatively. City Engineer Faulkner stated that the applicant has submitted a plan for the wetland alteration which will follow the appropriate channels. He stated that the wetland alteration plan is separate from the application, but it is integral with this plan and needs to be approved before any grading can take place. He added that nothing can be done in the wetland area until that determination is made. Planner Rask stated that any change to the Land Use Guide Plan has to be approved by the Metropolitan Council. Director Hurlburt stated that the Metropolitan Council does not approve the approve City's Comprehensive Plan, but rather review proposals for potential impacts on the transportation and sewer systems. They need to review proposals before a plan is actually implemented. If the City Council approves reguiding, then the application is submitted to the Metropolitan Council. After review by the Metropolitan Council, the City Council will then act on the rezoning. Planner Rask explained that the current guiding is LA -3, as it was under the Planned Unit Development. The applicant is requesting a change to LA -4 guiding. Under the LA -3 guiding, they are allowed up to 12 units per acre. The applicant's plan indicated 12.8 units per acre, thus the request to change the guiding to LA -4, which allows 12 to 20 units per acre. Mr. Conlan stated that they have looked at the issue of a smaller building, but it is not economically feasible because of the cost of the building permit fees, which then gets passed on to the seniors. Pertaining to property values, Chairman Stulberg commented that the City can not guarantee that their property values will go down, or up for that matter. Relating to the money that was offered by the developer to individual residents, Chairman Stulberg stated that they are in essence a private treaty that the City can not enter into. The residents should consult their own attorney if they have any questions pertaining to the offer. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #57 Chairman Stulberg stated that the Commissioners are well aware of other proposals for senior housing. Chairman Stulberg noted that Commissioners try to visit many of the sites that have proposals in question. He stated that he did visit this particular site. Commissioner Koehnen stated that she too visited the site. Pertaining to the Conditional Use Permit and the impact of solar access, Planner Rask explained that at some point it will be obstructed, but it should provide some separation so that the building does not overshadow the surrounding properties. Planner Rask stated that the staff report is accurate, and staff had enough information to make a recommendation. Addressing the lighting issue, Planner Rask commented that the applicant is proposing shoebox fixtures to reduce glare, and staff has requested a luminaire plan. Planner Rask stated that the City can't regulate the color of the building or the roof. He presented samples of the siding and the shingles. Chairman Stulberg stated that the City can say yes or no to the proposal, and the applicant has the right to come back with a new plan. Chairman Stulberg commented that by leaving the site guided LA -3, more trees would have to be removed. Planner Rask stated that a townhome proposal is also allowed under LA -3 guiding, and with that, you will impact a greater portion of the site. Pertaining to questions on the site coverage on the chart referred to in the staff report, Planner Rask stated that it is difficult to understand, as you are not comparing apples to apples. The property has changed and staff looks at the net density excluding the wetlands. Densities have been consistent throughout the years. The density referred to in 1993 is the same as what is being used now. Commissioner Koehnen questioned the photos of the flooding of the park and asked what would happen if that took place again. City Engineer Faulkner replied that when that photo was taken, there was a blockage in the 45th Avenue and Nathan Lane storm drain that caused the flooding. As long as the pipe functions properly, there should not be any flooding. Commissioner Koehnen asked if the tree removal would cause more flooding. City Engineer Faulkner replied that the before and after development runoffs have been taken into account. Director Hurlburt added that the runoff would be ponded. City Engineer Faulkner stated that it would be ponded, but not detained and metered. Commissioner Koehnen asked what the procedure is for requesting a stop sign at 45th Avenue and Trenton Circle. City Engineer Faulkner replied that the residents should Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #58 submit something in writing to him. He stated that the parking requirements are less, so it would generate less traffic than the previous plan. He added that 45th Avenue was designed to handle the traffic. Commissioner Koehnen asked why larger trees are being proposed for planting since the survival rate is not as good. Planner Rask responded that they are to provide buffer earlier on, and that the trees are guaranteed for at least a year. The City will perform an inspection to ensure at least one full growing season. In response to a question raised on use of another site for the proposal, Director Hurlburt explained that the northeast corner of Nathan Lane and 45th Avenue is not zoned for residential development, rather it is guided for commercial. She stated that there are very few properties of this size that are zoned appropriately for this development. Commissioner Stoebner asked how deep the northwesterly N URP pond would be. City Engineer Faulkner replied it would be an average depth of four feet, and it would be reviewed at the final plan stages. Commissioner Koehnen asked that at the time that more study is done in the spring, will they look at the changes in the water and how will it affect the surrounding area. City Engineer Faulkner stated that an exceptional wetland has already been done and considered. Director Hurlburt commented that the main issue is not the quality, but rather the extent of the wetlands on the site. Commissioner Stoebner asked that assuming the Commission took action to deny the proposal, what could the landowner do as far as tree removal. Director Hurlburt replied that there is no regulation prohibiting a land owner from cutting down trees on their property. MOTION by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Berkowitz to recommend approval of a Land Use Guide Plan Amendment for Housing Services for property located north of 45th Avenue, east of Trenton Circle and west of Nathan Lane. Commissioner Koehnen asked if the property is kept LA -3, will it change the plan at all. She said that the applicant is proposing 12.8 units per acre and that it is a shame to be so close to the 12 units per acre that is allowed under the LA -3 guiding. She stated that it would be unfortunate not to have a compromise since it is so close. Director Hurlburt commented that the City has a high level of discretion on guiding. If the guiding is recommend for denial, then the Commission needs to recommend denial on all of the applications. Commissioner Thompson stated that it is a shame that the Commission has to make a decision right away because of the 120 day time limitation. He stated that the don't live Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #59 by a park, they live by someone else's land, and as an owner, they have a right to develop. He stated that he is sympathetic to changes from when the residents built their homes, but senior housing is needed in Plymouth. Commissioner Thompson stated that it is not the goal of the Commission to tell a developer where to build, but instead to act on the plan before them. Commissioner Thompson stated his concern with the data and the worst case scenario of removing trees, as they may not need to be removed. He commented that the tree removal is a major tradeoff of wiping out the natural buffers when it may not be necessary. He stated that he would like more data before changing the guide plan. Commissioner Thompson said the application can be resumbitted after the data is available. Director Hurlburt noted that the Commission can delay action only if the applicant wants to request an extension. Commissioner Commissioner Thompson said that if the applicant would request an extension, it would change his vote on recommending denial. Commissioner Berkowitz stated that application is for LA -4 guiding and emotionally he would like to keep it as is, but they have to evaluate this proposal, and it looks like a complete package. He stated that it is unfortunate that we are so close with the 12 units standard under the LA -3 guiding versus the proposed 12.8 units. Commissioner Koehnen stated that there are issues that are not clear enough at this time, especially pertaining to the wetland. She stated that she would vote no at this time. Director Hurlburt stated that there is no limit on the number of times you can submit a Land Use Guide Plan application, but there is on a Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Conlan stated that since they are dealing with seniors and putting they are putting their homes up for sale, they did not want to delay this. He stated that their studies show that this is not a wetland, but they had to make a decision now. He stated that if the wetland is not extensive, they are willing to compromise, and let the neighbors decide what they would prefer to have wetlands or trees. Commissioner Thompson stated that the Commission can not put a condition on that. Chairman Stulberg explained that he made the motion for approval because he did not want a negative motion put on the table. Chairman Stulberg added that he does not think it needs to be LA -4, as senior housing can be built under LA -3. Roll Call Vote. 0 Ayes. MOTION failed on a 0-5 Vote. (Chairman Stulberg and Commissioners Stoebner, Koehnen, Thompson and Berkowitz voted nay.) MOTION by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Koehnen recommending denial of the Land Use Guide Plan Amendment for Housing Services for property located north of 45th Avenue, east of Trenton Circle, and west of Nathan Lane. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #60 Commissioner Thompson stated that there is no adequate data to change the guide plan to LA -4. Chairman Stulberg stated that the LA -3 guiding is appropriate based on the facts as presented. Director Hurlburt summarized the Commission's comments on the lack of ruling on the wetlands and potential impact of any development, and that because of this, the Commission believes that there is not enough justification for reguiding at this point. Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved on a unanimous vote. MOTION by Commissioner Berkowitz, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner recommending denial of the Findings of Fact for Rezoning for Housing Services for property located north of 45th Avenue, east of Trenton Circle and west of Nathan Lane. Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved on a unanimous vote. MOTION by Commissioner Koehnen, seconded by Commissioner Thompson recommending denial of a Site Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit for Housing Services for property located north of 45th Avenue, east of Trenton Circle and west of Nathan Lane. Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. MOTION approved on a unanimous vote. Chairman Stulberg called a recess at 10:40 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 10:50 p.m. Commissioner Berkowitz left the meeting at 10:40 p.m. A. RYAN COMPANIES (97007) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Ryan Companies for a Variance from setback requirements to erect a new monument sign at Value Rx located at 4700 Nathan Lane North. Planner Lindahl gave an overview of the March 3, 1997 staff report. Planner Lindahl pointed out that the applicant is requesting a variance for a 4.8 foot sign setback, not 10 feet as indicated in the attachment to the staff report. Commissioner Koehnen asked if the size of the sign is going to change. Planner Lindahl replied negatively. Commissioner Thompson asked why the 15.2 foot variance is considered a hardship. Planner Lindahl replied that because of the trees and the curve of Nathan Lane, it makes it difficult to see the sign at the 20 foot setback. She stated that the footing at the 4.8 foot setback is already poured. Commissioner Stoebner asked if there was a variance granted for the previous sign. Planner Lindahl replied that she was not sure that is was a conforming sign. Chairman Stulberg introduced Kent Carlson of Ryan Companies, the petitioner. Mr. Carlson stated that they bought the property from Miles Homes last year. He indicated that the sign would be more compatible with the new business and the new brick building. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #61 Chairman Stulberg opened the public hearing. Chairman Stulberg introduced Larry Kelner of 4750 Orleans Lane. Mr. Kelner stated that it was odd that the applicant already poured the footings for the sign, since Ryan Companies does a lot of business in Plymouth, and should be familiar with the regulations. He asked if the sign is going to be the same dimension as the previous one. Chairman Stulberg closed the public hearing. Mr. Carlson stated that the dimension is the same, but the brick is slightly wider. Mr. Carlson apologized for putting in the footings, but the contractor did that when the weather was getting cold before he finished up his other work on the site. MOTION by Commissioner Koehnen, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner recommending approval of the Variance request for Ryan Companies for property located at 4700 Nathan Lane North. Commissioner Koehnen sated that she believes there is a hardship with the curve and the trees, and that the size of the sign is small compared to the site. Commissioner Thompson stated that the situation is not a true hardship, just an inconvenience. Commissioner Stoebner stated that the standards have been met. Roll Call Vote. 3 Ayes. MOTION approved on a 3-1 Vote. (Commissioner Thompson voted nay.) C. CITY OF PLYMOUTH (97009) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by the City of Plymouth for an Ordinance amending Section 21175 of the City Code pertaining to wireless communications antennas and related facilities. Planner Rask gave an overview of the March 6, 1997 memo. Chairman Stulberg opened the public hearing. Chairman Stulberg introduced Peter Heimdahl of 1701 E. 79th Street, #19, Minneapolis. Mr. Heimdahl stated that he is currently doing work for American Portable Telecom ADP). He commended that in Section 21175.03 the industry prefers a half -mile search radius, and they don't look at anything under 75 feet in height. He asked staff to consider being able to submit an application for review concurrent with this going to the City Council for approval. Chairman Stulberg stated that an application can be submitted at any time. Director Hurlburt concurred, and added that it is at your own risk until it is approved by the City Council. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #62 Commissioner Thompson stated he was confused by Mr. Heimdahl's comment on the co - location requirement. Mr. Heimdahl replied that they don't look at anything under 75. As it is written, it would require them to document everything they look at. Director Hurlburt stated that part of that documentation is how high you have to be to provide adequate service. She stated that the interpretation is that they would need to provide documentation on the height they need for a tower. Chairman Stulberg closed the public hearing. MOTION by Commissioner Stoebner, seconded by Commissioner Thompson recommending approval of the Findings of Fact for Amendment Section 21005 and 21175 of the Plymouth City Code (Definitions and Antennas). Roll Call Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION carried on a unanimous vote. D. LARRY BEGIN (97010) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Larry Begin for an Interim Use Permit to allow Land Reclamation for property located south of 43rd Avenue (extended) and approximately 600 feet east of Fernbrook Lane. Planner Drill gave an overview of the March 4, 1997 staff report. Chairman Stulberg opened and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the issue. MOTION by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner recommending approval of an Interim Use Permit for Lawrence Begin for property located south of 43rd Avenue (extended) and approximately 600 feet east of Fernbrook Lane. Roll Call Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION carried on a unanimous vote. E. SANDRA VROOMAN (97014) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Sandra Vrooman for a Conditional Use Permit to allow operation of Sassy's Cafe to be located at 1115 Vicksburg Lane North. Planner Drill gave an overview of the March 5, 1997 staff report. Chairman Stulberg introduced Sandra Vrooman of 1830 Archer Lane North, the petitioner. Ms. Vrooman asked about Condition #D in the resolution. Director Hurlburt explained that if the applicant fails to open for business within one year, the Conditional Use Permit will expire. Ms. Vrooman asked if they are held to any certain hours of operation. Director Hurlburt replied negatively. Ms. Vrooman stated that she concurs with the staff report and listed conditions. Planning Commission Minutes March 11, 1997 Page #63 Chairman Stulberg opened the public hearing. Chairman Stulberg introduced Gerry Cochran of 1051 Weston Lane. Ms. Cochran asked where the building will be located. She indicated that she had a problem with the previous business and noise at night. She asked why the City doesn't have a noise ordinance. She stated that she has no objection to the proposal. Chairman Stulberg closed the public hearing. Director Hurlburt stated that the City does have a noise ordinance, and she would relay Ms. Cochran's comments to the public safety department. MOTION by Commissioner Stoebner, seconded by Commissioner Koehnen recommending approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Sandra Vrooman for Sassy's Cafe located at 115 Vicksburg Lane North. Roll Call Vote. 4 ayes. MOTION carried on a unanimous vote. MOTION by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Koehnen to adjourn the meeting. Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:31 p.m.