HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 06-25-1980City of lym
June 25,19-80
The regular ineeting of , he Plytmhan i4n sin was cdlled to order i
the Council er f the y au City Center at $400 Plymouth Boulevard
7:35 by Chairwom.an Vasiliou.
MIEM SIN' Chairiaorman Vasiliou,, Cor.nnissioners, Barron., Pauba., Steigeiivald,,
Wire and Larson
SIE,14SE S, T: Conmiissloner lietchler
STAPF PRESENT: ny. Development Director Blair r re. Cor,,Lnlunity
in&e or i at%,,r M Fay and, Planning cr gary,
arra Anderson
46 On R. ARWirspAmended Preliminary Plat
and Conditional Use Permit
This m ijias introftced ky staff who revievied the June C20, 1.80 s a report.
mii ss r r i ° about oath floral use permit and staff res Onded
that planned unitmz s require, a condition# use permit because the
ordinance class=y yes them as conditional uses in the residential zoning districts. lStaffalsosty . -,Aaai, in the CityCouncil approval of the toncept plan they, gave
direction that landscape plan subimitted, with the r i ! plat and
should be revic-1.
fi
this evening.,
r. Fred Haas was present on behalf of the itiDeer and he gavea review of the
proposal. Mr. Haas stated they want to put townhouses , this particular area
because of the topography of the area. stated that the townhouses do, not exceed
the height o a two-sl,ory si l ani hoes. H stated teat t r ra, ;
less traffic generated by a townhouse development.Hem=nt that they would
maintain the private streets and would have a homeowners association which would
prohibit recreational vehicles,, boats, etc,, being parked or stored outside.He
stated they, provide their own lai-intare and watering so the exterior of the develop,.
ment would probably look better tear a single family residential neig od
They are spending approximately $64,000 on the terming along Zachary Lane OilZ.
will r idi transition screening to tht homes on the east side of Zachary Late.
Chaiiiiawan nasiliou declared the public hearing open.
Peggy, Har t,, 3630 Saratoga Lane asked about the. cast o townhouses
and inquired about whether there would be any accessibility to tho lake by the
She also; inquired about trap €o patterns. Mr. Haas responded that
thea. was a considerable range in price of the townhouses; anyw r from $34jOVJ to
85,001x. He stated there wrd be no public access to the 'fake because of this
v . He explaineit the traffic flow pattern and' stated that it was feasible
tto°a g -onto 49thAvenue. a
David Craint 4860 Forestview, Lane,, comrtzented on the transition p l v and stated
that there were homes which are not 'totally screened from this property,*, he has
read the Percy and all homes in the area shov d be screened,, He stated that
there is no apparent reasonforthisdevelopment to exit onto a residential street
x
x a Face sca'ek k M91"Nz E —2-t= tag A
MMM, Leas) and he feels that there should e '11'ot*al Qttz- 4,411.4h,AvenueN N r t
and DerhaDs an additio-"! ex*t Quo_ = Y'? j g *
as w '-s Possible would b O have this exit onto thoroughfareand
cofactor streets*
CommIssioRer Steigerwald arrived at the e g.
I . Crain all.,zo discussed the trafftc floe patterns and stated he objjoctshaving
the additional r f ion. 48th Avenue Nort i.
Ch-iirworzan Vasiliou s ac that it v s the concern of Councilm.ember Schneider that
all homes act, " Zachary, y, , screamed this proposed development wt h
conceptplan appeared beforethe City CourciII., and: tiles tits` cou-n-"i detemf*neud
that the policy does not vequtre thatthere must be total screening,. xIr. Crain
stated that he regi einbe ' -' "tat discussion.
aas respondol. to corr,,rtents rede liyredVlv% Crain and he stated that they have t -re
than two entrances into thiseve-I me . The home on the east s I of Zachary -
Lane is not totally screened duo to topography but they will see twenty. percent
less roof mass than with singly= family detached homes.
Mr. Crain stated that the traffilz pattern had not beeryoitoy and tsar. Haag
s4a that peonie from the i, st. r auld,be driving into this develt-nT-tent,, as part
of the area traffic circulatica ger City plans and earlier approvals of plats in
thi s area
T
Vern kr., .0- -4 Avenuevenue North,'. sat +hat he a9reQs with
n5feaxose
first
s yt _nd that he x7 wO
ha3raf 43 co-, irns& V' #tnvl=me. He
asked why the traffic couldn't be directed east onto Zachary Lan,--,. Mir. Haas
responded that the terra i rr rakes this prohibitive as it is too steep
Stephan Pezalla., 11715 - 48th Place North,, stated that he also had traffic concerns..
He feels that' 48t1i Avenue wouldd become a thoroughfare and 49th Avenue would bacons .
less used than was intended. He stated he feels betraWed by the Planning Conn-rission
and the C a- thiv rade an inquiry into tthe plans dor this area and they purchased
their home with thrd a standing that it would be developed as single faraily
residential. Now theyr trying to salvage what they can froii this new proposal.
David gain asked whether there, Bald be any variate of color for the buil ns.
Mr. Haas stated that each group gad be a different tone of earth color and they
also will provide $1.600 for extra plantings and shrubbery for each townhdtrs
Peggy Ha rte stated that she was told that the park would not have any public
lake access when she '4 her lot and she does not believe that 48th Avenue'
should go all the ray through, She also consented on the exterior finish on the
townhousesand stayed that other townhouse developinents, had had problems wl l- "
bubbling of the sheeting. Haas stated that they will not he cheaply sided
and if anything should happen to the exteriors.. they would he repaired or
replaced.
Geta i rwoman Vasiliou closed the public hearing.
A,
June fir
IWP oia Rs[ vne ato takeaction o i
PetftiOn this evening.
TION CARRIED 5-0-0g IN FAVOR
tois that public" oat access onto " "Ch idt Lake. The
planned p - park abuts the lake and thus peop e could qct to the shore. Also,
uF. .tkd that the Cite Counctl has reqjired, with the approval of s di is- requirednsthatapatha!j
ee\ryto .. itr xn nr C-ji kmTa street system ofthetStaffcomqentedthatpeoplewouldgotothenorthto49"h Avenue t
get Zachary Lane, e City Council did not, allow an access to Zachary LaneOeCauseoftheseveregradeproblemsemsandtrafficcondiBoris.
Ery.'i s ner 1i ire inquired about *!Ie "dot o the west side o ac ark Lan regard- ing the scree p problems«_ red Haas stated that it is a. walk -out lot and it i
very difficult to put any plantings in at that he' ht. He stated he would work
with she owner of the property to -put in some, plantings which would hopefullyprovidetorescreening,,, and stated that 6t. wished this entered into the record.
ConeIsayer Barron stated that he does not feel it isincutllllben-t, on the developer
0 screw this unit from the le eaop e - the ownor of the property Is not present, and did not have such concerns at earlier hearings.
1
Chairwoman gas' zcu stated that she felt it was very, reasonable of Mary ndersoConstructionctionpantooffertoworkwiththepropertyownerre4ardingthisP, re b I ek:3.
I
O N k xorn ssioner Wfire, seconded by Coimmissioner Vauba to ree end appro a of _ the revised pre minar plat and a condi io pe°aaa t -for_ ar AndersononstructionCo. involving 1,00 townhouse units and 84 Single family detached dwellingunitssubjecttothefollowingconditions
comupliance with the CityEngineer's Memorandum.
2. Ot.-Mcat en of trail corridor segments (approximately 1.95 acres) and of "park"
area p `o i ate y 3.4 acres, l`
fiith
the finalp aft i *, with the balance of
the dedication requirement fees -in -lieu o dedicator accordancewith the
Perk Dedication policy in effect at the time of final platting.
Compliance with City Council: policy Resolution No.70-80 regarding subdivisionscontainingord# acant to stogy water drainage facies.
Street naves and numbers to Comply with the City's ordinance"
C No building pe is to be issued until the final plat .*s fijed and recorded
f` with Hennepin County.
6. Final landscape plana prepared per adopted Landscape Criteria.
Additional landscaping shall he added to the rear of the "exception tit
west of Zachary Lane.
c 'Revised
The reading of the Juneo0*staff report vi 6 . u s °
I;1 a 1'1',' tv resquireh,., she houses on the lots with
Vdr yes + set C n.ini um vas e hlc widths Comp ped c tie
ordinance 1 feet) .
MOTION y Carnunissioner Barron, ascended by Comraissioner Steiggerwald to recomarnend
approval of the prelimtinarplat (Alternate 111' r"Oakdale W " r Doll ' e r r
conditions - subject to the following
COMPliance vii th the City Engineer's ilemor d %
y pari, dedication" ` i lieu dedication i accordance i h he
Y POlicY ineffect at the time of final platting-, and improvement of trail
corridor per Cite standards with r ive for the cost of Stich improvements
s verified by the City Engtineer i with the Peek Dedication, Policy.,
3. 'No buildingmi be issued until municipal ms' s and services are
physically v i bi,- to the property.
4. , c icy Resolution 111 }
regardingdivis - ii
ions containingadjacent r .eater holding -
S.
di
building setback variances are greeted or ii, particularly for those
lots approved with aria r m ordinance Mlnimum width and depth s"andards.
A -r t namingt e c s s with adopted street nai in tM.
7. Final platting shall i>. elude certified sae -From a regisured land
surveyor that all gots wRet or exceed ordinance rin.inimum. area standards.
S. Lot width and depth variances are approved as followst Lots 2 & 3,, Block
Lot L, Block 1, Lots Block 7,
9: Structures on Lots 2 & 3, Otock 33
shall be setback at a minimumtthe distance
from, the front property line where h lot is 110 feet wide so as -i";o comply
with the width requirentent in the ordinance.
Commissioner arson arrived ` t 8420 P.M.
MOTION CARRIED 5-0-1 Commissioner Larson Abstained
ameq din . Rezoning and Pr l irain-
ar Plat , for "Carlson Center"
ChairwomanVasiliou introduced the item and explained the fortrat of the meeting
which was_not the official public hearing. She stated that regarding any is-
Y ;e tlons that r4ay exist about the Carlson Center proposal,, there have been no
approvals by either the Planning Commission or by the Cite Council to date.
Staff reviewed the 4une 20, 1980 rp.port and co men ed that the pink covered
developer's booklet titled " dde and in W ad dated June, 1980 s per eded all
x I , C+,1'M 1 aN I NLIT - s`Y' baa°ii St9 b".5.6 °
a
previous publil-.1ations relative to tn`iis proposal and contains Vla most current
S is fr M h evel o er . z Aff l -, € 3 3 - x ..za fi !2e x•.w w.T sm#Nw .. a:., o S:s sig¢ FIV tae teff is 'I in B"'w' Ial t# ian 3tf
report" OPOR) prepared by Barton-AscNrianAssociates regarding theproposed inter-
change of 1-494 and County Read 15 had been sub,.riitted for informational p rp ses.
Staffcemme-irr ed that the petition consists of Three rrelatedr. requidi
rez and preliminary plat.
Chairwoman Vasiliou recognized Mr. John e d $ l ¢r. Dick Knutson, and Mr. Tedd
Hea.lund who, represented the pet one -r; she asked then to cowraentthe changes
thich had been de since, the Planning erw $ ion pub] Ic hearing :his ma ger
in April.
r. Dice Knutson r, mumen'ted as to general changes and discussions wilich the
petitioner had had anth neighboring property wers. He suggested that the
petitioner could respond to specific concerns and questions raised by the
Coaission and/or the neigh!-'-rs who were present.
In response to qaestions by Commissioner Barron as to information in the pini,
covered book on pages 13 through 17, Ir. Knutson explained that Exhibit, H had been
modified with three supplemental exhibits which Mh i h ed', r.har ges in she various
areas.
Discussion ensued regarding the proposed revised alignmeat of County Road 15 and
Berkshire Lane e,,, of 1-041.
R table 5 regarding proposed lot dens"ity on Let .,,, Block , 1.44r. Knutson
stated that there had been a typographical error and treat the height of the
s+r **'t wo,04" 1-e s"Caries.
Commissioner Steigerwald inquired about specific beaming plans partilcularly east
o -49 s represented on Exhibit -3. Mr. Knutson responaed that the proposal
is at a concept stage and as the platting process continues the developer ecoid
work out details of the perming with the Coniission and the neighborhood,
emrrssen.er Steigerwald stated _concerns about the transition frvin. the residential
to the proposed industrial developments.
Chairwoman Vasiliou stated that among the calls which she had received on this
project, a number had regarded the proposed tax increment financing. She stated
that; theown'ss oh would, d not he acting on the tax increment financing, proposal
s that is a matter for Council review. She stated that the 'Gurmrission has Ag ed
t the public bearing for a brief ever? l cwt of the tax increment finaneingfor
general information purposes.
Commissioner Wire requested that the Cowission her from thoseproperty Janes in
the vicinity of Berkshire Lane and County Read 15 regarding their reaction to the
proposed revisions.
Russ Rahernia , 414 Berkshire Lane, stated he represented five property owners in
the neighborhood, all of whom were present. He stated they had not seem anything
in the way of a nerve or transition that would be effective as far as screening or
buffering the development. He stalted concerns 'as to being Isolated by. th( read
proposal and he Loud not be able to get to neighborhood homes without going
through the industrial park, He also com ien d as to Hoke problems in the area
and n ha -t fie had type recordings of n,,)Ise generated by earth : i o6lpae nt
ii` 3°_!_+ 4"`. '* t P"iap 1, t4i V*a s"°'"4 g' 'pea +ma[}y r' thatp* "^' yyt'a. c*w ai a Snxe. . +F+... w" a.. "1.. »..: +. ,yintilevicinity. nrw,&lpw '_Al t'4's.$ ha Fp 6a Ti I£; Con1ce& , VL w„ . js— I *on was
valid one,, mssµ_ . aerBarroninquired as to what s v1r N,.h rn a would
propose, Mr. Nahrni . esponded he and erre neighbors would prefer tQ be relocated.
F r e- discussion ensued regarding the cul -de -sae design east of 1 494 and
Chairw*man Vasiliou stated that It t1as her understanding that Carsen Companies did
not recd to purchase the houses andIr. SeboU confirrriedthis wa's the case.
Discussion ensued regarding the berming and buffering in the area and the genera
development plan revisions and Exhibits H-3 and -4. Mr. Knutsoln stated that there
would be substantial plantings and berming proposed with the finai plans and that
the work would be dere initially as pari of the overall project development.
Corm ss o er Wire commented on the modification shown on xhi bi H-2 and the k -k ign-
rnent of County Road 15 rest of -4944 Mr. Knutson stated that the developer was
assure°fig County Road 15 would probably terminateRoad 61 to the east and
that the roadway would revert to Citywn t.it °' r 'Wire noted that
properties on the north side of County Read 15 west -494 were affected by she
proposed read design and he questioned the viability of future access Froin, those
properties. o%wilssioner Larson stated cencern as to the inters,?ction of CountyRead15withCarlsonParkwayparticularlyfrotathewestanditsimpacton, the
properties along the north side of County load 15.
111r. Knutson commented as to Exhibit H-"' and noted that a neighborhood meeting had
been he'd wherein the developer afire d that the maximum height of the proposed
buildings t;ould be 26 feet and Viat the pondinq/berming design had been reversed
re -In the originalnal rep a l at the re ue-sof the neighbors.
Commissioner Wire inquired as to whether any of the neighbors had oiz e on the
preposkid shopping center at the southwest quadrant of the proposed 1-494/County
Road 15 interchange.
Jartlev, Sentman, 13510 County Read 151 stated that general concern was that the
guide pian "footprint" did not call for industrial development in the area. He
stated that it would be an undesirable impact upon the residential area by. ther'epd-ed com r tial and industrial density and that the shopping center would
attract more people into the area. He stated he was generally opposed to the
proposal.
Robert Tr emel,, 14808 County Road stated he believes the shopping center would
increase the pressureon County Road 16 to the rest and would prefer that it remain
guided CL.
Mr. Tom Redman, 13420 County Road requested further Information regarding the
proposed shopping canter. Mr., Knutson responded a to the type of uses. Mr. Redman
commented that he was also concerned with the traffic generation in the area and
the impact on County Road 15.
As to the general development plan as shown, Exhibits H-1 and H-2,, Mr. Knutson
responded that approximatelya ages had been changed In Minnetonka to provide -for
additional mi al -residential housing , nd that the neighborhood shopping center inthePgPlymouthportionwouldserveasaneighborhoodceter. Mr. Knutsontso also,
addressed; information contained in Table 2 of the pink covered booklet regarding,
trip gendratIon and noted that t- e effective numbers of trips had been cut fror,
PLANNING COMMISSION June 251 1980
those that could, he generated by the existing guiding.
Mr., Knutson also coramen ed that: discussions with the staffs of Plymouth and
M,innetonka suggested that Parkers Lake Road south of County Road 15 could he
terminated in . cul-de-sacs or soave o her design on both the north avidthe , south
therefore- not allowing hrou h traffic to State Highway 12. "';aff commented that
this was in response to Original concerns fr eA b
uthroughabout
traffic increase especially from the norl,, and that the iiihnetna staff stated
access to Minnetonka properties could be from, the .gest.
Cha"IrWo en, Vasiliou and CornIrlissioner stei erwald commented as to the traffic
generation data and stated tiat'more area data would he desirable especially
considering the press -rt development of the Rod edale perimeter area. Mr.
Ne kind of Urton-Aschliaan Associates stated tn, such an area wide analysis would
be a 'along shote
at hest and that the analysis prepared had concentrated on the
specific Carlson Companies development, At the request of the Commission, Mr.
egldnd reviewed the project development. report (PDR) relative to the proposed
interchange. He stated that the design was based primarily on engineering criteria
in response to the general land use planning and world he forwarded to the State
Department of Transportation. He stated; that daring the approval process it could
be expected tha;. changes wo ld be made and eventually vol ve formal ' City approval.
Chairwoman Vasillou commented as to concerns regarding County Road 15 expressed at
the earlier public hearing and Pyr* fleglund responded that the proposed design now
shoes the bridge ,At 4 lanes in addition to provision for bicycle lanes,
Mrs. is ovs i' 1. 1 County Road l stated that her hors is the first hoarse
gest of the interchange,, and that she was concerned about the impact of he i ter-
cphan e and Ccunty Road 16 improvements since the graphics showed impact upon her
prcpert . the stayed that future access freer her property to County Road 15 was
not clear and she was very concerned about the ultimate impact of the improvements
on her land and the involvement of her property in the development,,
Mr. Knutson and Mr. Haglund responded that the design at this point is preliminary. and that concerns of the neighbors would be taken into account as final plans are
eventually developed
Chairwoman Vasi l iou recognized Mr. Lee Wentzel who stated concerns about tree
proposed interchange designs as they ;related to the east side and the Berkshire
ane area
Mr. 'Knutson commented as to the total road network for Carlson Center' and
i sinner Jeig rc a' d inquired as to the completion of County Road l as well asI -
the 1-494/County Road 15 interchange; He stated his concern was the co, pletio, t
dates versus the developers proposed construction timetable. Mr. Knutson respond-
ed that the development timing would probably be adjusted during the plan approval
process and the the completion date for the County, Road 61/County Road 15 interchange, mpr vee definite.
Commissioner Barron' stated concerns that traffic analysis information in that
section of the pink covered book did not appear to be consistent vith information
in the planning portion of the pink covered book. e stated that the dune 23, 1980
memo rod Westwood Planning and Engineering who had reviewed the traffic analysis
information for the City also indicated, discrepancies. fie stated concern that the
PLPRiNING COQ N1 N ,IUN -3- dune 25, 1980
information resen ed by the developer's consultants should be consistent se that
it could be more readily understood .and related the proposal
Ir. Heglund commented that the reason various tables did not seep to coincide in
the ur-as was that different sets of figures were used as to traffic generation
peak hour traffic versus daily trips). Mr. Knutson co ented that the petitioner
did not fall, agree with certain a ped is of the We;;ktwoodu Planning rue-morandum`€
staffed ra the discrepancies vere significantas suggested. ale sae
that the petitioner agreed with the overall conclusions of ibe, Westwood Planning
MeRlo.
Cormaissioner Barron reiterated that cons y ency is essential given the large
volume and technical nn oil` the in or G tlon=a rwo gar `Vasiliou stated that
he Planning Co mi sicF_. are not technically oriented nor are they engineers
and e information was. ,, to cvcr 1 ° ,suggested t a Itioner
could put future materials n a o 'umar firma , which would be easier to digest
and cross-reference. She commented that perhaps a loose-leaf birder forret might
help with, any additional revisions
The meeting recessed at 10.-00 .M. and resumed at 10:20 k1
Staff reviewed the requiding portion of thepetition and noted that staff had
prepared a graphic showing eight re idin "areas" which, cold be used by the
Flaming Commission in their deliberations. Chairwoman asillon' suggested that
the Commission discuss the iters individually and ry-to incor-Dorate then. into
ona action if pcssible. Discussion ensuo - Commissioners Wire and Barron
arrd Steigerwald Indicated that they bad ct.aixrns about various areas and that
ea -.,h area should bo. d. alt with separately.
c,=dssioner Barron referred to Table 1. of the pink covered report (page 19
and stated that fear different guiding categories were Involved.' He stated his
concern as to, the loss of residential' guided land and its replacement with
industrial land, thus :reatinq an industrial strip along 1-494.
ne Commission then discussed the proposed guiding in Area 1.
N;OTION by Cotpxflissioner Barron, seconded by Couniissioner Stdigerwald to, recommend
hat Area I regain guided -4 consistent with the proposal.
MOTION CARRIED 6-0-0 ALL IN FAVOR.
The ComlldsssJon then discussed Area ll. Commissioner Barron staked that approxi-
niately 1acres of LA -2 land (up to 60 dwelling units) imld be lost and changed
to industrial usage. Mr. Knutson need; that the area to the south in Minnetonka
s stere eo¢merci a.l guiding would change to high density residential. He also:
o€nnented' that the petitioner has met with neighbors regarding the buff=ering and
screening which was proposed as transition in lieu of LA-2guiding. Cates..isi ,ner
tei erwald commented that establishment of industrial in this area in lin OT -
could be considered in terns of ether areas where he believes residential quid ng
was more critical.
P N' -ISSIOINt iMUINUTES June 25, 11,130
moTIONI
by Commaiss ones Stelgerwaald, seconded ky Chairwoman Vasiliou to r eom;.tend
that ? Y3 1 1 g k 4 s"* U -Z
JSuF aproposed. Area 1
la Tr M
Discussion ensued. Comanissioner Larson stated he disagreed with the proposal
because of the residential area to the north and he felt that Area 11 should
4 i LA -3 vtas to be changed from the existing
MION FAILED 3-3-0 Comimissioners Larson, Wire and
Pia Deposed
Chairwoman Vasiliou stated that the Corumizsion could return to consideration of
Area; 1 and discussion ensued as 111.
1*4'4' by Commissioner Barron, seconded by Covirmissioner Pada +,-;-,00rd1,.end
approval of the rego d ng of Area III from CL to CN as proposer.
MOTIOU CARRIED 4-2-0 Commissioners Larson and Wire
Opposed
Cormaissioner' ire corgirented that the neighborhood shopping center would increase
traffic and Comumissioner Larson stated that he does not see the need nor* it as
Ridgedale and the ,perimeter cournercial developments are so close.
Commissioner Barron stated that he felt that a walking neighborhood shopping center
as needed and that a location on the east side of 1-494 was preferable to the east
side.
The os r ss on herr discussed Area and o issioner Baron stated tna , the only
industrial guiding on the vest side of 1-494 is in Area TV. He stated his concern
about creating a "pocket" of industrial land and he felt that the land should re fain
guided CL or it least be the sage as Area 11,' om ss oner Larson disagreed that
the guiding should be the same as Area It noting that tn e is a different trans-
tion l situation on the ease, side of Carlson Parkway.
MOTION by. Commissioner Wire, seconded by, Commissioner Larson to, recommend approval
of the regoid ng of Area IV from CL to IP as proposed*
Further discussion ensued regarding the Comprehensive Pian concept of CL guiding
providing a "gateway" " development; consideration was given to the physical con-
straints
o -
stra nts In this area and the feasibility of proposed uses. Chairwoman ` asil oo
called for a Grote.:
ION N PP S -2Commissioners t lerg ald and
Barron Opposed
Commissioner Barron suggested that the Commission now. refer back to Area M,
MOTION by Comm ssioner; Barron, seconded by Commissioner Steigerr ald to recommend
approval of the regold ng in Area 11 from LA -2 to IP as proposed
MOTION FAILED - 3- Commissioners Wire, Larson and
Pana Opposed
NNUNG C0iN'*4ISS1ON M11NUTES-10- June 25, 1930
Chairwoman Vasiliou stated that t6y would reform to consideration of Area 11 and
discussion ensued; regarding area V. oemalssloner Barron oomroe ted that this
reguiding involved orange of approximately 22.8 acnes from , the CL category andhecreationofTpusage.
MOTION by Coirxiiissioner Wire, seconded by Co,runissioner :Larson to regio .end approval
of the reguid ng of Area V : from CL to IP as proposed.
Discussion ensued. Cd fission r Steigerwald stated his concerns about providing
effective buffering of the residential areas to the north. Commissioner 'Wire
stated that he felt there was distance buffering provided with the existing CL totyrenorth_
f4OTIOW CARRIED 4-2-0 Commissioners Steigerviald and
Barron Opposed
The` m;n ssion toren discussed Area VI and Commissioner Barren questioned the
information in the pink booklet bet seen Exhibit K and Table I on page 19. He
stated it was not clear as to the extent of existing LA -2LA-2guiding. Staff
referred to the Existing Guide plan Map and to ExhibitG in the pink covered
booklet. Mr. >",n son ;stated the intent was that the CL guiding, wouldd extend from
Area V to realigned County ;Read .
MOTION by Commissioner Barron, seconded by Chairwoman nasi io re%:emm nd
approval of the r g idii.-g in ,Area VI fromLA-2 to CL as indicated on Exhibit G.
Furthertyre discussion ensued retarding buffering and transition in this area. The
R and second wc-r r i t ad a .
It was the concen us of the Commission to designate en the staff graphic that area
of existing C, north of Area V as area ,
MOTION by, Commissioner arron, seconded by, Commissioner Steigerwald to recommend
that Area VI remain guided LA -2,; that Arpa VIT be established w -didi ;
and that Area: IX be requided from CL to LA- .
MOTION CARRIED ALL IN FAVOR
Discussion ensued regarding Area Vill. Commissioner Steigerwald stated that he
was very concerned about proper transition in this area as well as the concern
expressed by Commissioner Barren relative to elimination of a substantial resident-
Tally guided area.
MOTION by Commissioner Steigerwald. seconded by Commissioner die to recommend the
following guiding in Area VIII referring to the preliminary plat graphic, Exhibit
the approximate north one -gyral- of bots 1 and 2, Block 6 and the approximate east one-
half of bot , Block 6 and Let 2, Block 7 be mains aned as LA -3, with the balance of
Area Vill regded to IP.
Discussion ensued and Commissioner Barron stated that be disagreed with the motion,
and that he would be more in favor having a continuation of LA -2 guiding rather
than LA -3 for pari. of the area with that area designated in the motion as IP be left
s bA- .
PLANININIG COMIDIIISSIONMINUTES -11- dune , 1900
Commissioner Steiderwald read frog the comprehensive plan lane u4j as t,,_t burden
taeg.ea. v' #+..'.e... ^i a,: a3.Lx x,.tK. ,i:`. .2,. x e a
w,r
t # to aaan c ' n roc he . r uses the various digit districts
eigerwald staffed that he felt the petitioner has oaken steps to preservethe
natural area to the south and that he yeas attemp vie a transitioni
e Clty of Plymouth for the: existing single family dwellings. He stated he Could
see merit in the developer's proposal to have somee industrial in this area provided
proper tranon was allowed.
Commissioner nrro noted the substantial amount of industrial land which had been
proposed In earlier action, Chairwoman Vasilld called for a vete.
11,0TION FAILED Commissioners Wl re, Barron and
Vasiliou Opposed
MOTION b, Commissioner Barron, seconded by Chairwoman Vasiliou to recommend the
guiding of area VIII be as f llov s with reiPerence to the: preliminary, plat and
Exhibit K in the pink covered book: the ap roxima e ; north half of Lots I and 2.
Block 6 and the approximate east one-half of Lot 2, Block 6 and dot 2,, Block 7 be
r q ed o A— 2 , with the balance of area VIII o remain .-3.
Discussion ensued. Cow,,-,.niissioner Wire stated that he felt that some IP guiding
s qu d be allowied provided that substantial tfr n i C on area in the foram oft LA -2
or - was provided. C mr ssion r Barron stated that he felt substantial. amount
of Ip guiding had been recommended and he was concerned with the loss of housing
in this area
N TIOR CARRIED 4-m CommissionersWire and Steigerwald
Opposed
Further discussion ensued regarding Area II.
MUM by, Commissioner Wire, seconded by Copriissioner Larson to recoimtend that the
guiding in area II remain LA-.
MOTION 4-2-0 Commissioners Steigerwald and
Barron Opposed
Commissioner S ei erwa' d co ented that he felt the Industria: guiding in the area
should be unified and that as CopnissionerBarron had stated. Areas II and IV should
be treated alien
MOTION by Comiaissioner t1ire, seconded by Commissioner .Zteigerwald that the petition
should be deferred so that the developer could prepare a revised general development
plan reflecting the reeownended guiding on a consolidated plan,
MOTION by Commissioner Barron, seconded by Conmiissioner Stelgerwald to amend the
main motion to defer only the rezoning and the preliminary plat portion of the
petition and to forward the recommendations as to guiding on to the City Council
for disposition prior to Commission action on the rezoning and replatting,
Commissionerissiner Barran stated; that due to the complexity, of the issue and the differen-
ces,
iffren.
e s between the developer's proposal and the Commission's action Cite Council
determination should be mads at this time. Mr. Knutson stated that the petitioner
NUrE 1 Juno 5 1980
mom
VF had no obe- tiorr to that "' lapproachnotingthattyre ' r}e iim* ar t t-Ias essential :"ty a
W Tunis °-evclopment due to the processing requirements fr,_ errenv rorr reata
assess,,kientt vor .sheet and other matters, regarding the proposed interchange at
1-494. . further discussion, Chairwoman Vasiliou stated in the resolution of
tyre re aidirr < by the Council would expedite the oonplete review of the total
propa,sal hy the ion; the petitioner concurred.
MOTION RD ALL IN FAVOR
Cormnissioner 1.4re cormnenteo regarding the proposed graphics and specifically the
area rest of 1-4.04 north of CountyRoad 15 that the petitioner should investigate
Possible terra rves to alleviate the problem with the houses on the north side- ideandandtheirfutureaccess.
Tile * ing recessed at PJAI. and resumed at 12:i'.l midnight.
Kission Hills Pari Conce2t,, Plan and Variance
The readinS of the June 19,, 1980 staff report was ,.,. avec . herrn Goldberg and Gene
o dere s ere - e represe tin the e i i e ` _ i so ! r. Forester was present
as he a.nrs the property to the viest of the propos41
Mr. Shen Goldberg gave a brief overview of theproject and compared it to the
rest of the 14 ssion i pari, additions. Mr. Forester that they haveI's stated a
1 ncern at,ut access onto County Road 9 and asked whether this road,viould go o
to tine Girth staff responded that the City would not contemplate a road going
north tnless developent required it. Mr. Forester stated that he would like to
see the read exit r°oitr the development in alignment water his",fires access to
County Road 9 frotmtine north. Mr. Goldberg stated that this is a problem air
wouldldandlo the 'rand to the nest. r . Forester stated that he feels that the
and lotr County Road 9 should be a_ ti her density than single family residemia
because o the high traffic volume.
E Mtr4 Goldberg showed photos of the County Road 9 sight distance from the proposed
intersection.
µW1
Chairwomanpan Vase l lou referred to concerns expressed in the staff report,, one o
white is the access onto County Road k Staff stated that the ci.-cu ation on tr'e
site rias sta 's oncern- with the new concept pian these concerns have been
add s^Med _.
Commissioner ®ire Mated that the concept plan still does not integrate the property
to the east. Mr. Goldberg, responded that there -are development problems on the
parcel Gird they have seer t the only way they, feel it can feasibly develop.
Commissioner Wire stated that as a b the laird ad acenu should be included. He
noted tine parcel has a for sale sign on it.
4r. Goldberg also stated that the trail can be ha, died to the north rather than.
to the south or east along the backs of the lots In the Mission Hills development.
He stated that slreenii lg from ount Road 9, will be quite difficult as the rand is
depres4ed and they, feel ft is 'i>apractical to try of construct berming between the
ire deve cp ent and: County Road 9, He also discussed the depth.' of the lots abutting
x AAatttXMNG- tll'INUTES dune 5 MG
County Road (11 and suggested that the area would provide buffering,
Staff 'oa k# *4Te t hat a trail corridor r linkage should,out the southeast corner
and eventually cQanect with the trail easeiziskent x10119 7achary Large.
aiscuss*on ensued#uua' inner Barron asked if this were a conventional plat
rather h.n a RPUD, would it require a landscapeplan. Staff said that a formal
an woula not be requ i red , but concerns relative to buffering peri rwould
proieably result in i ds - zm design requireiments.
Co;iuiissioner Wire stated Ithat since i' was a sub -standard PUS mere should e a
deduction of density points. Staff stated that the petitioner was seeking
variance for being under~ thearea requirement for planned unit d v m ts.
Co;=Iiissioner Sarron stated he is generally opposed, to theapproval of a PUD with
variance as to size because it s tos a precedent which is undesirable. 4e would
rather consider c nvena ,anal platwith warranted r antes rather hPUD
which provided little in its design other than numterous lots srua 7 r than she
ordinance rainimunni, requirements.
IN i ION by Commmissioner Barron, seconded byilT Corimiissioner Wire to rialmt t s}4t1'nd ienial
o hsize variance and PUD c P for Mission Hills Park ar ners pbecause1) the request requires a variance from theordinance provision for deduc-t-
ingdensity points-, the proposal does not incorporate the parcel to theeast
which cold provide adds ill n l land area and open space for the number of lots
proposed
Y0.*; iplai. t '.a § 'i T^L1 1 §.t "` 5314 ' di 4, 4 Tt,, ,Az :: M a ., y. y
Wxl.
xhn $ $
ZV s ; s d l s14= 14l . w1al, ;.a ' r 1 1. 1 d lc nland
should not r 'red but leaving s a remnant and not providing more open
space for the substandard PUB were considerations in evaluating the su s` ani .l
g'Ni nc s requested,
MIOT1 ION CARRIED - ALL IN FAVOR
Staff interpreted omm ssi nr 'Wire's concern that since hpetitioner got an
option on this land over time, it should be as feasible for then to obtain
additional land for a more viable PUD.
1` krwrmn V silio ,, seconded by CorMssfloner Barron to approve the
nutes of the dune 11,, 1960 meeting.
MOTION CARRIED Commiss ne* s Steigerwfald and Pauba
Absta4ned due to absence from that
meeting
Chairwoman Ve_,4iliou stated the first tn.eetinq in August should be on Tuesday,, Augusts 2 so as not to interfere,withMusic in Plymouth.
There i}
y
n n furtherhr businessbeforer Commission,, fission, tie t e °adjourned a
q 1 i _ A.M.
S.