Loading...
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