HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 08-16-1972iPLANNING coMMlSsznN
VILLAGE, OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA
August 16, 1872
A regular meeting. of the Planning Commission, was called to order byChairmanJimWahlat7:42 in the Council Chambers, of the Public
Warks :wilding on Wednesday, August 16, 1912,
XEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman. Jim Wahl., Commissioners Fran Hagen,
Reg Kroskin, and Jim Threinen
MEMBERS ASSENT Commissioners Pill. Keeley, Marren Chapman, and
John Roth
STAFF PREUNT Martin Overhiser, Georgia Rehbein
4081Minneapolis Industrial. Park A 68 MPLS',
INDUSTRIAL
The Public Roaring opened at 7!4S p,m. PARK
Planner Overhiser provided background by summarizing three Rezoning
alternatives open to the Planning Commission in this situation: from
1-1 to B-1
1.. That the Plannirg Com.-nission can recommend rezoning and
from. 1-1. to B-1 as requested Conditional
2, That the Planning Commission can recommend denial. Use Permit
of the rezoning request and, assume that the Plymouth
Court Building is , permitted conditional use within Public
an, 1-1. district,
Planner Overhiser added that in this case, the entire
building would be-viewed as a conditional use in an
I•--1 district, thus making it unnecessary for each
tenant to secure a Conditional Use Permit from
the V ill_age .
3. That the Planning Commission can recommend denial of
the rezoning request and assume that every occupancy
of the building will have to be viewed as a conditional
use within the 1-1 Planned Industrial District.
Planner Overhiser added that bath denials would create administrative
problems both for the Village and for MIP officials. He stated that
Staff would recommend that Alternative #1. -- to re,00mmez d rezoning
as requested - be taken by the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission M,*Inutes --_ A4agu: t 16, 1972
Chairman Wahl opened discussion to the Commissioners; Commissioner
Hagen stated that the original, purpose of the Plymouth Court
Building was to serve the Industrial Park by providing officesforattorneysand '-,al,es representatives in the Plymouth Court
instead of alloting part of industrial warehousing for this
purpose. He believed it impossible to justify rezoning, in this
case as it would be; spot zoning.
Chairman Wahl stated he felt Solution #2 -- that the entire building
be treated as a conditional use within the 1-1 District -- would:
be the most desirable.
Commissioner Xroskin posed a question as to the disadvantages of
B--1 us -es in an, l -J district. Commissioner Hagen -stated that
planning was unsound if B-1 zoning was fixed on property for the
sole sake of convenience.
Chairman Wahl stated that since the Village wields site plan control,
B-1 uses could feasibly be permitted in any l--1 Planned industrial
District. Commissioner Threinen then questioned the Chairman as
to whether he was implying that the Zoning Ordinance needed changing.
Chairman Wahl answered that either the Zoning Ordinance or its
interpretation should be changed. Commissioner Threinen: stated at
this point that B-1 and 1-1 uses are not necessarily compatible;
that there has been a reason, for setting up Business and Industrial
Districts.
Chairman Wahl, stated that he felt the Business Districts were
more restrictive as to the use of land. He pointed out that in the
Residential Districts there is a staged increase in the intensity
and character of land use. He added further that at this point one
would not have: to take the position that the 1968 Ordinance: was that
clearly thought through in rela,ion to what is true today:
Commissioner Hagen believed that the terminology of the I-1 Planned
Industrial section was broad enough to allow offices and that a
medical facility could just as well be for people in the Indt.strial
Park, He added that the. Plymouth State Bank will be used by the
people employed in the industrial district.
Planner Overhiser believed that the scope of the B-1 Business District
more olearly spelled out office uses as being permittedthan that of
the 1--1 Industrial District and thus the proposed use should be in a
B-1 District. He also pointed out that since the use is already
there, it could be assumed that the Planning Commission. and Village
Council wanted this use there as they approved; the Site Plan for the
site. Theiefore, Planner Overhiser believed that if the Commission
were to select Alternative #2 they should further recommend that a
Conditional Use Permit be granted for this Building as one has never
been obtained.
Planning Commission Minutes --- August 16, 1922
Commissioner Kroskin then posedaau.estion as to whether o' r not
we are operating effectively under the Ordinance as it standstoday. Planner Overhiser stated that if an office building ofthisnaturewouldComeintoanindustrialdistricttoday, he
Would recommend two possible measures: either amend the Ordinanceitaspertainstothe1-1 Planned Industrial District or specifythata.building of this nature should: be located. in a B-1 LimitedBusinessDistrictasthisiswhereitshouldlogicallybeunder
the existing Ordinance.
Chairman Wahl polled the Commiss ion as to consensus on a solution.
No one favored Alternative Action #3. When asked for responses: regarding Action #1;, Commissioner Threinen declared that rezoninginthiscasewouldclearlybespotzoningundertherulessetfortinGoals, Objectives andand Criter-`o; namely, Objective S under thet - Goal - Security, Criteria. No. as' follows
114. Areas of non -conforming and mixed land uses
should be eliminated and the grouping of
like land usage be encouraged," (Page 11)
Commissioner Threinen made a motion to select Alternative Action #2 -. MOTION
to recommend denial of the rezoning request from I-1 to B-1 and To
assume that the Plymouth Court Building is a permitted conditional RECOMh'rND
use permitted in the building whether primarily to serve the 1-1district DENIALortoservethegeneralpublic.
Commissioner kr:oskin seconded the motion. Chairman Wahl placed themotionontheflourfordiscussion.
Commissioner Threinen stated that the Conditional Use Permit for
business uses within the -1-1 Planned Industrial District could
be undesirable; Chairman Wahl assured him that this would be self-
liMi;ting due to cosh of land in the I-1 District
Chairman Wahl closed discussion; the motion on the floor was restated MOTIONandvotedupon. Motion passed, 3-1-0., Commissioner Hagen voting CARRIED
against.
Chairman Wahl made a motion that a Public Hearing be held to consider MOTION
amending the Zoning. Ordinance to include B-1 uses as a Permitted Use TOinthe1--1 District. Commissioner Dagen seconded the motion and it HOLD
carried with three ayes, Jim Threinen voting nay. PUBLIC
Chairman Wahl declared the Public Hearing closed, 8:09 p.m.
HEARING.
Commissioner Threinei made a motion that Plymouth Court Building MOTIONbegrantedaConditionalUsePermit (CUP). Commissioner Hagen, FOR CUP
seconded the motion; motion carried, 4 ayes. CARRIED
Planning ComLssion Minutes ..x}- August 18, 1972
MOTION TO
Subdivisions 2 and 3 of the Zoning Ordinance be waived in order RECOMMEND
A08 Judith Gilster -- St. Philips Zoning Variance FA --4--08-1 JUDITH
The petitioner is requesting that the Zoning Ordinance be wa-.red
GxLSTER
in order to allow a nursery school in the St. Philips Lutheran Request forChurch.. Variance
Chairman Wahl questioned if this were a private enterprise.
Planner Overhiser answered it was. The Chairman then asked if
the conditions set forth by Staff - erection of a fe4ce complying
MOTION
with state regulations and annual review of the nursery school.
CARRIED
had been reviewed with the petitioner.
Mrs. Gilster wondered if the second condition recommended by Staff
that the Variance be granted for a year's duration at which time
were approved and developed according to recommendation, it
a review of the situation be made - was traditional in the Village.
would be an ,improvement to the area..
Chairman Wahl answered that it was.: He added that the Village has
not been granting Conditional. Use Permits for periods of more than
a year until it is certain there will be no problems in whish case
renewal of the Permit is a matter of form.
Mrs. Gilster then asked that the Commission qualify 'problems' and
if she would be notified if a problem; should develop. The Chairman
explained that'a problem would perhaps consist of complaints fron
the neighbors, etc. and that she would be notified.
Commissioner Threinen asked the petitioner if the nursery would
utilize Oakwood School f cilities. Mrs. Gilster replied that
perhaps the school would be used once fol a tour ofthe kindergarten
before the children start ,school: Commissioner Threinen then
wondered if a busing facility would be needed; Mrs. Gilster replied
not.
Commissioner Kroskin made a motion to recommend that Section 7,, MOTION TO
Subdivisions 2 and 3 of the Zoning Ordinance be waived in order RECOMMEND
to permit the operation of a day nursery at this location subject APPROVAL
to the conditions outlined by Staff:
1. The erection of a fence complying with state regulations
be made prior to the opening of the nursery school;
2. The Variance be granted fora year's duration, at which
time a review of the situation would be made.
Commissioner Hagen seconded the motion; motion, carried, 4 ayes. MOTION
CARRIED
Pr -4-1-11 Plamo Tool Campy A. PLLAMO TOOL
COMPANY
Planner Overhiser stated he believed that if this Site Pian
were approved and developed according to recommendation, it Site
would be an ,improvement to the area.. Plan
and CUP
Planning Commission Minutes -5- August 16 1972
Comm' ts.3oner Krosk.n wondered f fence would mean a 5 -foot
high solid fence so that it be a screen for outdoor storage
of marine merchandise. If so, he felt 5 feet would not be
sufficiently- high to screen boats from public vier. Commissioner
Threinen believed that a 5 -foot fence mound the entire enterprise
might be advisable.
Mr, Tom Rutledge, contractor for Plamo Tool Company, explained that
the .fence would be located in the southeast corner of the site. He
added that at this point he was unaware that anything was being stored
outside for more than a 24 -hots period. Mr.. Rutledge asked the
Commission, if this condition could be omitted unless merchandise
is be.ing sto. ed outside
The Commission asked Mr,. Rutledge, what shape and size the future
addition would be. He replied that he did not know but there
was room for passible utilization. Chairman Wahl stated that
the future addition would encroach on parking space. Mr. Rutledge
replied that the addition could not be as large as shoran on the
Site Plan if parking requirements were to be me -t.
Planner Overhiser stated that there are two driveways to this
site one on Kilmer and one at the south end of the property.
He stated that the petitioner would lixe to maintain these
driveways and Staff has no objection as neither is classed. as
a thoroughfare street.
Commissioner Threinen made a motion to recommend approval of MOTION TO
the Site Phan and granting of a Conditional Use Permit for RECOMMEND
Plamo Tool Company subject to the following conditions; APPROVAL:
of
1. That a paved parking area with concrete curb .stops Site Plan
be provided with parking not to be closer than fifteen and
15) feet from any property line for twelve (12) or Conditional
more vehicles as shown on the Site Plan as reviewed Use Permit
by the Village Staff on 8-8-72;
2. That six (6} or more junipers of from fifteen to
eighteen inches be planted between the parking
area and Kilmer Lane•,
3. That any extended storage of 24 hours- must be screened;
4 That no more than five (5) persons be engaged in tool
and die making.
Motion was seconded by Commissioner Kroskin; motion carried,, NOTION
4 ayes, CARRIED
A 41,5 Dundee Nursery [A7415 DUNDEE
Dundee Nursery proposes an addition to their existing garden
store, thus expanding the
NURSERY
present structure (28' X 301) to Site Plan
a 60' X 70' structure,
Planning Commission Minutes -6 August 16, 1072
Commissioner Kroskin asked the number of ;parking spaces Dundee
presently had. Planner Overhiser stat; -d that the Nursery now has
sixty (60) parking spaces but 20 to 25 percent of those spaces,
are presently used for storage.. He added that Staff believes
the parking lot is in need of improvement.
Chairman Wahl questioned whethar or not the petitioner had
agreed to the conditions set forth. by Staff. Planner Overhiser
Mated the petitioner did receive a copy of the Staff Report but
that the paving aspect had not ;been discussed. If the developer
does not wash to comply he may appeal this at the Council meeting.
There was no one at the meeting representing Dundee.
Commissioner Hagen; stated that the object of Staff recommendation
was improvement ofthe Villages Chairman Wahl concurred and, added
that it v,= -Id especially improve the front yard portion of this
particttlar site.:
Commissioner Hagen made a motion that the Sit; Plan be recommended MOTION TO
to the Council for approval subject to conditions recommended RECOMMEND
by Staff: APPROVAL
1 A paved parking area for at least sixty (60) cars
be provided with no parking within fifteen (15)
feet of the State Highway right-of-way;
That all landscaping materials stored in the
required front yard area be removed;
Commissioner K'roskin seconded the motion; motion carried, MOTION
4 ayes. CARRIED
x-372 Schaper Manufacturing Company A--372 SCHAPER
MANUFACTUTT G
Commissioner Krosk ,n made a motion. to recommend approval of COM:FA TY..
the Schaper Manufacturing Company request for Site Plan
approval for a 26' X 44' office addition. Site Plan
Commissioner Threinen seconded the motion; motion carried MOTION TO
with 4 ayes RECOMMEND
APPROVAL
CARRIED
A-416 Harlan C,* Freund Subdivision Variance A-- 416 ffi :KLAN C. FREUND
Subdivision
Planner nverhiser explained that presently the petitioner Variance
owns two parceI6 of land and would like to move the line between
4the two parcels so that when he sells the land the buyer of1thesmallerparcelwillbeableisturnhiscaoaroundonhis
own ?and. Mr. Freund will also be recording a driveway easement
over the north parcel to irve the south parcel.
Planning commission Minutes --7_, August *11-61 1972
O Commissioner Kroskin questioned Mr. Freund as to whether :here
was any other motive for his action other than recording of
driveway easement and moving of the line between the parcels.
Mr. Freund assured him there was not.;
Commissioner Threinen stated that this action would be both MOTION TO
convenient and would enhance the value of Parcel. B. He then RECOMMEND
made a motion to recommend approval of the Subdivision Variance., APPROVAL
Commissioner Kroski,n seconded the motion; motion carried with MOTION
4 ayes. CARRIED
L _
Warner Manufacturing Company'A-419 WARIER
MANUFACTURING
The developer proposes to construct a 20,000 square foot COMPANY
plant for the warehousing of putty knives and, related small
tools, Site Phan
Chariman Wahl polled Mr. Richard. Cox, representing Garner
Manufacturing, on meeting requirements established by Staff.
Mr. Cox,said a twenty -foot utility easement could be developed
along the west property line (Condition, l). Provision of
two additional fire hydrants (Condition 2) would be made if
this were necessary under the 1971 directives of the National
tire Protection Association. Mr. Cox stated that the trees
would be planted at the sues provided in Co,'aditi,on 3
Mr. Cox clarified Condition 4 regarding parking requirements.
He stated that he had not made 'it clear that Warner Manufacturing
was to be a warehouse facility, not manufacturing,, therefore,,
parking requirements would be different: One parking space for
each employee on a major shift, plus one space for each 2,000
square: feet of gross floor area,. Planner Overhiser calculated
that under the Ordinance Warner Manufacturing would need 32
perking spaces; Mr. Cox informed the Commission that the Company
had a total of 46 parking spaces:
Chairman Wahl asked Mr. Cox how much of the area directly south of
the building would be, blacktopped. Mr. Cox replied that the
entire area would be and added that the area provi,;ed enough
space for a good truck turnaround.
Mr. Cox qualified Condition 5 - a Variance for the parking setback
on the east side of the property - by saying that although setback
requirements are no problem today, the Commission might entertain
a variance for future plans on the south lot line. He stated that
Johns --Manville, directly across the street from garner, has a
setback from East Center Circle at less than 50 feet.
Planning Commission Minutes --- August 16, 1372
Cbairmar, Wahl stated that the Planning Com.., 'ssion would record
Mr. Cox's statements that setback requiremic.nts Nere waived for
Johns -Manville because of the character of East Center Circle.,
Commissioner Kroskin made a motion to recommend approval of MOTION TO
the Warner Manufacturing Company Site Plan for tbp- building at RECOMMEND
the southeast corner of Xenium subject to the foLlow"ng APPROVAL
conditions:
I. A 20 --foot utility easement along peti,ti xe-r's west
property line;
2. The provision :for two additional fire hydrants, on
the northeast corner and on the west property line;
3. Trees to be planted be at least 2" in diameter and
the shrubs be of mature stock;
4. That a Variance of ten feet be granted for the parking
setback on the cast side of the property (parking
4Iould be five feet off railroad right--of--way; Ordinance
requires it to be fifteen feet,)
Commissioner Hagen seconded the moti.cn; motion carried with MO'T'ION
4 ayes, CARRIED
Planning Commission Membership - Seven or Nine? PLANNING COMM
Discussion opened; Planning Conmission o.onsensus was that
MEMBERSHIP
things had been moving smoothly and membership should be
continued at seven instead of nine.
Commissioner Kroskin made a motion, seconded by Chairman MUTTON TO
Wahl,. to recommend changing she ("-`lanning Commission member- RECO14MEND
sharp in the Village Ordinance from nine t,a seven. (Tote CHANGE
was 4-0 in favor.
Review of Planning Commission By -Laws (Approved byCouncil. 3-2-72)
Chairman. Wahl opened discussion: Commissioner Kroskin made a motion BY-LAWS
to adapt the By -Lags as approved by the Village Council,
Commissioner Threinen seconded the m°ltion motion carried, 4 ayes
237 John Gullickson A-2.37 JOHN
Planner Overhiser presented, the revised density calculations
GULL-ITITSOI'
for this project: Under the existing Ordinance, tl Site Plan
developer can have up to 0.8 units. Seventeen (17) units
are already built, so 81 ,.; e can be built. As proposed,
Pltanni.rts ConuAssion Minutes August 16, 1972
there will, be 27 unr.ts in each building, whichis still the
maximum under the old C: ii.- ~rv-e. If this project is considered
under the new Ordinaz-o- July 27, 1972) only 55 more
units may be built, -hiser as?ed that the Commission
concur on the numbe C for this. project.
Commissioner Xroskil - to recommend approval of MOTION TO
the project with a d, . k81 new and 17 existing). RECOMMEND
APPROVAL
Commissioner Threinen seconded the motion; motion carried
with4 ayes. MOTION
CARRIED
The Commission wished to make it clear that they urge Staff
to follow very closely the development of this project to
ensure that the number of units be adhered to.
Minutes ofCommissionerThrei.nen moved that the Commission Minutes of
August 2, 1972 be approved. Commissioner Kros}tin seconded 8-2-72
the motion; motion carried.
Meeting adjourned at 9:08 p.m.
08/21/72gr Jim C Wahl, Chairman
Plymouth Planning Commission
Martin W. Qverhiser,
Secretary
APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION 9-6--72