HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 02-07-1979PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
February 7, 1979
A regular meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission was. called to order by
Chairman Davenport at 7:40 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard,
MEMBERS PRESENT; Chairman. Davenport, Commissioners Barron, Schneider, Threinen,
Vasil iou,, Wire and -Erickson
STAFF PRESEN1' Blair Tremere and Mildred Jansen
Fred Moore, City Engineer
79006 - Hixon Properties RPUD Concept Plan
Staff introduced. the item referring to the February 2, 1979 report on the proposed
RPUD concept plan fora two-part development to be known as "Plymouth Creek" at the
southeast corner of Rockford Road and: Vicksburg Lane. The proposal indicates
135 tovinhouses on Outlot A Plymouth Hills Addition and 270apartmerit units on
Outlot C. Staff explained that this development had been verbally referred to by
the petitioner in the: application for "Overland Park" a proposed RPUD on Outlot E
of Plymouth Hills Addition. Staff explained that when the "Overland Pa'rkilproposal
had been reviewed by the City Council graphics were shown of the "Plymouth Creek"
development and the City Council had directed that the Commission reconsider the
Overland Park" development in the context of an amendment to the Plymouth Hills
development plan, forwarding recommendations on such amendment, on the "Overland Park"
RPUD, and an the present "Plymouth Creek" RPUD:
Staff further explained that the required informational hearing had been scheduled
at this time for the "Plymouth Creek" RPUD and that it was anticipated all the above
matters would be formally considered by the Commission at the February 21 meeting.
Chairman Davenport opened the hearing explaining the planned unit d_velopment process
and he recognized Mr,Gerald Hauer of McCombs-Knutson Associates representing the
petitioner_. Mr, Hauer presented graphics of the proposed development and explained,
the concept. He stated the petitioner was unable to be at the meeting but would be
at the February 21 meeting,
There was considerable discussion regarding buffering, traffic load, and traffic
signal nation on County Road 9. City Engineer Fred Moore indicated that the proposed
County Road design showed only a single accoss from the proposed apartment site and
that access would be directly opposite Plymouth Boulevard which would eventuallybesignalized. lie also commented that the proposed access on Vicksburg Lane should.
be further north. Following extensive discussion Chairman Davenport requested that
the City Engineer prepare a written analysis and recommendation regarding street
access based upon the approved Plymouth Hills general development plan as well as
the proposed 4evelopment,
Pat Davideit, 4420 Vicksburg Lane, inquired as to the: height of the proposed town-
houses and the elevation as seen From neighboring properties. In discussion, Mr, Hauer
was directed to ;have elevations prepared for the February 21 meeting which would
indicate the line of sight to the development from surrounding property,`
t
PLANNING COW4ISSION MINUTES 2 February 7, 1979
Kay Stivland, 4025 N. Vicksburg Lane, expressed concern over the effect of the
development upon spring flooding, flow of Plymouth Creek, and the width and size
of the proposed creek corridor. She noted that a portion of the land on the other
side of Vicksburg Lane flooded in the sprang and she inquired whether this develop- ment would intensify that flooding. Further discussion was generated regarding the
nature of the general flood plain district which includes portions of the proposed
development.
Chairman 'Davenport and the City Engineer responded as to the approval steps of
developments such as this and the utilization of city stormwater drainage plans
and specific drainage plans and designs for a particular development. Staff also
commented that an environmental assessment had been made of the entire Plymouth Hills
development; area and was currently being reviewed by the State Environmental QualityCouncil. It was explained that this assessment included detailed information regarding
the drainage characteristics and needs for the area,
Commissioner Threinen stated that a flood plain overlay should be provided for this
particular development and Mr. Hauer stated that such a graphic could be provided
at the February 21 meeting,
Cou rnissioner Erickson inquired as to the planning design in the Central Park area
and the extent of the developer's involvement with that construction. The City
Engineer responded and stated that planning was underway regarding the drainage needs
for the entire area including the provision for ponding in the Central Park area
and that specific development would be required to provide additional appropriate
drainage related to construction,
Sue Ohman, 15610 County Road 9, expressed concern as to traffic increases resulting
from the development on Rockford Road. She inquired as to the anticipated completion
of new County 'Road: 9 through the Plymouth Hills area. Staff indicated that this
segment of new County Road 9 would be completed as part of the Plymouth Hills develop -
Mont; but that it is not definite when the balance of County Road 9'would be completed.
Ms. O hman stated concern that there would be higher traffic generation on old County
Road 9 and that it was not in the best condition.
Following further discussion there was a motion by Commissioner Threinen seconded
by Commissioner Schneider, that ttee •informational hearing on the proposed "Plymouth
Creek" RPUD concept plan be continued to the February 21, 1979 meeting; and that
the following be offered as direction to staff and the developer for further informa-
tion to be provided at that time:
1. An overlay representing the General Flood Plain District as it impacts upon
the development area and particularly on Outlot A.
2. Engineering analysis and recommendation regarding access to development
sites with particular attention to the distance of access points along
Vicksburg Lane from County Road 9 and to the alignment of the access from
County Road 9 with relation to Plymouth Boulevard.
3. Engineering determination of general downstream drainage characteristics
and needs.
4, Submittal of elevation drawings showing the appearance of the proposed
townhouses and apartments from adjacent and nearby properties.
MOTION CARRIED (7-0-0) All in favor
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES --3 February 7, 1979
Chairman Davenport requested staff to comment on a later agenda item regarding the
City Council action relative to the RPUD concept plan for „Overland Park" to be
vcated on Outlot E Plymouth Hills Addition (application 79002). Chairman Daven-
port also recognized Mr. Dan Fazendin who represented the petitioner on that matter.
Staff explained that the City Council had considered the Commission's recommendation
for denial for that concept plan and had referred the matter back to the Commission
with direction contained in the January 15, 1979 City Council minutes. The Council
directed, among other things, that the Overland Park proposal should be first con-
sidered as a proposed amendment to the Plymouth dills general development plan, and
then based upon that consideration should be reviewed on its merits as a planned unit
development,
Commissioner Threinen stated that at this time his direction to petitioner would be
the 4:9 --acre site for elderly housing should be separated in such a manner that if
not developed as elderly 'housing it should be developed with no more than 98 units
which reflected the maximum LA -4 density of 20 units per acre. That direction received
the consensus of the Commission,
Chairman Davenport referred to the earlier hearing on the Overland Park development on
which the petitioner had stated that apartments were not feasible on Outlot E and thus
quadraminiums were proposed; he inquired of Mr. Fazendin how the "Plymouth Creek"
development on Outlot C across the road proposed 270 apartment units. Mr. Fazendin
responded that the Overland Park development was in response to perceivedmarket
conditions and was proposed by a different developer.
Commissioner Threineri otpressed .concern that the proposed revision to the concept plan'
in. Outlot G to the northeast of Outlot E showed access onto County Road 9 whereas the
original plan indicated traffic would be directed toward Downtown Plymouth and not to
the outside.
Commissioner Vasiliou suggested that the petitioner have available marketing studies
which would substantiate the inability to develop Outlot E with apartments as orig-
inally proposed,
Chairman Davenport recessed the meeting at 9:10 p.m. the meeting resumed at 9:20 p,m.
79003 - Trammel Crow Com anI Site Plan
Staff introduced the item and reviewed the February 2, 1979 staff report regarding
the proposed two -phased, three -building development for a warehouse distribution
center at the southwest corner of 13th Avenue North and Berkshire Lane on approxi-
ratnly 19.75 acres, Staff explained that the property owner, Carlson Companies,
had recently petitioned for e lot division creating the property, and for a vacation
of a large portion of the peripheral road between the site and the I-494 right-of-way,
Staff noted that without this road vacation, the proposed site plan would not comply
with ordinance lot coverage, parking, or setback requirements.
Staff expressed concern over the high building density (approximately 34.9% ground
coverage versus the ordinance maximum of 35%) and design assumption that the road
would be vacated to provide needed parking and setbacks. Staff recommended that
the Commission advise the Council on the proposed road vacation, deferring action
on the site plan untl:) the Council acts on the vacation petition,
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -4- February 7, 1979
Chairman D,',enport recognized Mr. Kirt Woodhouse who represented the petitioner
and Mr. Dale Kennedy who represented the owner.. Mr. Woodhouse asked the Commission
to take ;action on the site plan at this meeting so that it could be considered with
the vacatio,n petition by the City Council,
Exteiisive discussion ensued as to the proposed road. vacation. Commissioner Barron
inquired of Mr. Kennedy that if the peripheral roadwere vacated in its entirety, how would property at County Road 15 be served. Mr. Kennedy responded that if
access were possible from County Road 15 then total vacation of the perripheril goad
was all right.
Commissioner Schneider and Chairman Davenport indicated t"t the capaci'y of the site
to suppa,,t any given building was a matter between the property owner and the developer;
and that if it were necessary to vacate a public road to extend the site, then that
should have been done before the petitioner was led to beliese the site had a certain
capacity that in fact did not exist.
Mr. Gerry Hauer, representing Mc -Combs Knutson Associates; commented on the history of
the development of the area and that originally the proposed sites made sense as to
the needs of four or five years ago. He stated that developers since then have gen-
erally proposed larger developments and therefore there is a need to enlarge the site,
Commissioner Erickson stated that the maximum percentage gteund coverage proposed
was not at all typical with the rest of the developments in the park in that even
with the street vacation it was fractionally less than the ordinance maximum.
He stated that he did not feel the peripheral road had an adverse impact on the site
and that the site with the road was buildable. Mr. Woodhouse commented that the
site would be too narrow for their purposes, i.e. for warehouse distribution buildings.
Commissioner Erickson stated that he felt the site could be developed and while
perhaps the development would not meet the needs of tnis particular developer, the
issue before the Commission was not whether the site was buildable or not.
City Engineer Fred Moore offered comments asto the proposed vacation and stated
that allowing publicstreet access at the south end of the site and at the north
end of the site would establish an undesirable traffic pattern in the area. He also
commented that tt,,r length of the proposed cul-de-sac to the south was over 1000'
which was in excess of ordinance standards
Commissioner Threinen commented that the proposed vacation effectively permitted
the use of intended public street area For private parking purposes and that the
basic problem was that traffic would continue to use the private parking lot to
gain access from the south end of the Grea at County Road 15 to the north end at
13th Avenue.
In response to a question by. Chairman Davenport, Mr. Woodhouse stated that the
desire for access at both ends of the site was in consideration of possible future
division between Buildings B and C wherein Building C would be landlocked if public
street access Jere not available from the south.
Commissioner Wire staged that the present peripheral road allows access to all
possible sites in tlwi-s'rarea and it provides for a positive traffic circulation
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -5- February 7, 1,979
The Commission briefly reviewed the proposed sitelans and observed that while
there did not appear to be any major problems with the plans other than the total
dependence upon the vacation of the peripheral road, it would not be appropriate
to act on the site plans in a presumptive manner until the City Council had given
direction with regard to the proposed vacation. Staff observed that since certain
minlinum time was required to establish a road vacation hearing should the Council
so direct, there would not be an undue delay in processing the site plan ;once the
Council had initially considered it and had given some direction to the Planning
Commission..
Mr. Woodhouse repeated his request that the Commission take action this time on
the plan and Chairman Davenport suggested that it appeared the Commission's
inclination at this point would be to deny the proposal.
Following further discussion there was a motion by Commissioner Threinen, seconded
by Commissioner Vasiliou, that the Planning Commission make the following recommen-
dation to the City Council that the request by Trammel Crow Company fo" site plan
approval of a two -phased.:, three -building development on a 19.75 acre site at the
southwest corner of 13th Avenue North and Berkshire Lane be denied, because the lot
coverage exceeds ordinance standards, and parking and setbacks are deficient without
vacation of the peripheral road which is not recommended as proposed, because the
road is needed for access and circulation, and the cul-de-sac from County Road 15
substantially exceeds ordinance standards,
In further discussion Commissioner Schneider suggested that the minutes should
reflect the Commission's concern that the double access proposed to the site creates
a private street across the parking lot;
Mr. Woodhouse observed that the petitioner would be willing to have no cul-de-sac
at the south end if the property owner would be willing to totally vacate the road,
Chairman Davenport suggested that that matter be taken up with the owner anO perhaps
discuss with the City Council during the consideration of the proposed vacation.
Chairman Davenport then called for a vote.
MOTION CARRIED (7.0-0) A1.1 in favor
79008 " Wallace Cates Subdivision Variance
Staff introduced the item and referred to the February 2, 1979 staff report, explaining`
that the petitioner had been subdividing the property in the southwest quadrant of
County Road 47 and Vicksburg Lane into lots with minimum area of 5 acres and minimum
w4edth of 3001, Staff explained' that State statute allowed for such divisions outside
f local subdivisio;' regulation for purpose of dividing and conveyance. Staff
mplained that City subdivision code requirements, however, provided that building
4paa-its would not be issued -on ;such lot unless there was abutment at a public street.
Most of the lots divided by the petitioner abut either Vicksburg Lane or County Road 47
however because of the design of the subdivision, there are three parcels which do
not have standard width abutment at a public street line. Staff explained that the
buyer of one of the parcels south of County Road 47 and west of the lots abutting
Vicksburg lane had applied for a building permit to erect a single-family dwelling
and that the permit was not issued because the parcel did not conform with City
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 7, 1979
ordinance standards for lots In the R -O zoning district, Staff explained that the
Petitioner's surveyor had designed the subject three lots with 3Q' -wide "pan handle"
driveways to either County Road 47 or to Vicksburg Lane. It was explained that the
minimum lot width for zoning and. building purposes is determined by measuring the
width of the lot at the minimum building setback line defined by ordinance which in
this case is 501 back from the street right-of-way line* He stated in the case of
the lot for which building permit application had been made., the lotwidth was 301.
Staff commented that the west boundary of this property was in line with the center
line of future Archer Lane; and that if the indicated 301 easement along the east
side of that line on this property were accepted as the equivalent of public street,
or if dedication were accepted for public street along this line, the subject parcels
would have 300' frontage.
Staff commented, however, that the need for and the desirability of dedicated public
street at thi,,, location was not within City plans and was not anticipated for some
time, Staff also noted that.this property is outside the metropolitan service area.
Chairman Davenport recognized Mr. Wallace Cates cind inquired as to the justification
for the variance. Chairman Davenport stated conft;rn that because the petitioner was
operating outside of tho City subdivision regulatiois, design and access considerations
which would be a normal part of subdivision review had not been anticipated by the
surveyor and that it was questionable whether City ordinance standards were respon-
sible for the alleged problem, Mr. Cates responded that he had understood at the
initiated
PLANNING COMMISSI N MINOM February 7, 1979
MOTION by Commissioner Schneider, seconded by Commissioner Barron, that the Planning
Commission make the following recommendation to the City Council
That the variance request of Mr. Wallace Cates for property in the southwest
quadrant of County Road 47 and Vicksburg Lane to permit issuance of a
building permit for a single-family dwelling on Parcel J be approved., subject
to the following conditions;
1. The approval applies only to Parcel J, and Parcels K and L shall
be combined into one parcel.
2. The 30' roadway easement adjacent to the west property line shall
be deleted.
3. Access to Lot J to be onto County Road 47 as indicated,
4. Provision for an additional 71 dedication along County Road 47
from Lot J,
5, Determination by the City attorney whether the ordi;ianc,e provisions
for park dedication and fees -in -lieu apply to such situations.
Commissioner Schneider stated the reason for recommending the variance was deter-
mination of a financial hardship on the buyer of Lot J, peculiar shape of Lot J and
the need for street access, and the finding that there would not be a detrimental
effect on adjacent land.
Further discussion ensued regarding the easement along the west property line,
MOTION by Commissioner Schneider, seco-nded by Commissioner Barron, to amend the
original motion as follows: There shall be a dedication from Lot J of 30 feet
adjacent to the west boundary of the property for a roadeasement; said easement
to take effect at such time as the City is in a position to accept full dedication
of a'street at this location.
MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED (6-1-0) All in favor except Commissioner
Vasiliou who was opposed
MOTION by Commissioner Erickson, seconded by Commissioner Barron, to amend the main
motion as follows: That the proposed dwelling shall be located on the property in
such a manner that the building setback line is at a point where the lot is at least
300 feet wide,
NOTION TO AMEND CARRIED (6-1-0) All in favor except Commissioner
Vasiliou who was apposed
Chairman Davenport called for a vote on the main motion, twice amended.
MAIN MOTION,TWIC£ AMENDED (6-1-0) All in favor except Commissioner
Vasiliou who was opposed
A-265 Gleason Construction Company Final Plat
Staff introduced the item and reviewed the staff report o' January 12, 1079, explaining
that the matter had been deferred from the last meeting since the petitioner was
unable to be in attendance.
1
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -8- February 7, 1979
Chairman Davenport recognized Mr. Robert Gleason who represfinted the petitioner.
Discussion ensued as to the earlier direction that the original 20 parking spacesinthelotbehindthebuildingsshould, be reduced to 1;0 spaces, and that the revised
landscape plans submitted by the petitioner indicated too spaces' at all,
MOTION by Commissioner Vasiliou, seconded by Commissioner Erickson, that the PlanningCommissionrecommendtotheCityCouncilapprovalofthefinalplatandlandscapeplanfor "Merrimac Addition" as proposed by Gleason Construction Company for propertyontheeastsideofMerrimaclanesouthofCountyRoad6, subject to the following
conditions.
1. Final plat shall include the filing of homeowners' association covenants
as approved by the City Attorney.
2. The homeowners' association covenant shall specify that, if adequate
maintenance is not performed with respect to the streets, utilities, and
common areas, the City will have the authority to maintain such areas
and assess the cost to the homeowners' association..
3. The landscape plan shall be revised to provide for 10 outside parking
stalls. along the east side of the rear driving and parking area,
4. The required site performance guarantee shall be submitted and termed
for 18 months,
5. Payment of park dedication fees--in-lieu of dedication in the amount of
2,750 (10 dwelling units x $275).
G. Compliance with the City Engineer's memorandum for this project,
MOTION by Commissioner Barron, seconded by Commissioner Wire, to amend the main
motion as follows: ,Item No. 3 shall provide that the landscape plan be revised to
provide for 10 outside parking stalls with'5 spaces behind each of the buildings,
MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED (7-0-0) All in favor
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (7-0-0) All in favor
A-94 U.S. PostalService Landscape Approval
Staff referred to the February 6, 1979 staff report and explained that the matter
had been deferred from the October, 1978 meeting whereby the Commission had directed
concerns regarding the landscaping to the Postal Service and had made specific
recommendations. Staff explained that a revised site plan had been submitted and
that the Postal Service now proposed to paint the exterior of the building in abrowntone, but that the original stucco finish would be retained..
Extensive discussion centered on the comparison of the Planning Commission's recom-
mendations versus the proposed improvements, especially with regard to ;germing, sodding, trees, underground lawn irrigation, and the exterior finish.
Chairman Davenport recognized Mr, Ray Frisby of the Postal Service,, who was questioned
as to why certain Commission recommendations had not been responded to regarding the
number of trees, exterior finish, sodding, and lawn irrigation.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -9 February 7, 19-9
Mr. Frisby stated that construction budget constraint was the major factor as well
as the time it would take to make major changes on the approved plans from the
regional. office.- fie stated that the Postal Service had followed the architect's
recommendation and felt the plans were in order and were aesthetically compatible
with the surrounding area. He explained also that the estimated additional costs
for a brick exterior, as opposed to the stucco, would be substantial and were not
feasible given the status of the project..
Commissioners voiced concern that bids had been let and construction had commenced
prior to final approval of the landscape plan. Mr. Frisby responded that the
petitioner had assumed the 1976 "site utilization" approval had represented City
approval of the proposed development. Staff responded that that resolution of
approval specified that a landscape plan would be submitted and approved. Mr, Frisby
commented that the Postal Service wishes to cooperate with the community and provide
an acceptable facility; he stated, however, that the participation in the plan
approval process was a voluntary one and that improvements had to be within budgetary
constraints for the project.
Further discussion ensued; regarding landscaping and the preference for an exterior
finish other than stucco. In response to comments about the desirability of an
underground sprinkling system, Mr. Frisby stated that annual rainfall for the area
generally precluded installation of such systems
MOTION by Commissioner Erickson, seconded' by Commissioner Vasiliou, that the
Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the landscape plan
as shown on Exhibit B dated 12/27/78, subject to the following conditions -
1, Nine additional evergreen trees on the east and north sides shall be
i provided as per Exi7ibit C dated 10/4/78.
2. No break in the proposed center island of Plymouth Boulevard shall be
provided.
MOTION CARRIED (7-0-0) All in favor
MOTION by Commissioner Schneider, seconded by Commissioner Wire, that the minutes
of January 17, 1979 be approved.
MOTION CARRIED (7-0-0) All in favor
Other Business
In other business staff presented background materials regarding Item A-856 a
proposal for 'he "SJH Industrial Park" north of Highway 55 and east of Xenium Lane.
The materials reviewed the Council direction of January 8, 1979 and the direction
and Council' Resolution 77-452 relative to the realignment of future County Road 61,
26th Avenue North and highway 55 intersection.
MOTTO, -1 bej Commissioner Vasiliou, seconded by Commissioner Wig.:, to adjourn the Planning
Commission meeting (12:40 a.m.).
MOTION CARRIED (7-0-0) All in favor
APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION
David J. Davenport, Chairman
Plymouth Planning Commission
Blair Tremere, Secretary