Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 03-18-1981page 70 City of Plymouth March 18,, 1981 0 regular meeting of the "lyrtouth Planning Comission was called to order in the Council Chambers of the Plymoith City Canter at 3400 Plymouth Boulevard at 7:00 P.M. by Vice Chairman Steigerwald. EIKRS PRESENT: Vice Chai.r.m..AnStecg wazld;_omurn n er Barron, t Barg,bl Wlre,, Larson and Chairwoman Vasilioul arrived at the meeting a Council liaison 71reinen was also present. P1043ERS ABSENT.- eons STAf F PREKNT: Community Develornment Directov Blair Tremere, Associate Planner Alda i n and ItMan,ningSecretary a. -tiara Anderson ML A U °::+s ash' Vice Chairman Steigervald consented that he had one correction NU S - REGULAR, to be i-nade to the *Y rout s# the times when ChairWortian Vasiliou PLANNINGCOMMISSION left the table and returned to the table vire r v rs d. MEETING February 5,. 1981 MOTION by Commissioner Saulberg, seconded by v=043 n r Pauba to approve the Minutes the February, 5, 1981 meeting as corrected* Motion carried on a roll call vot five ayes, Commissioner Larson as stain d. PUBLIC HEARINGS The reading of tete March 11, 1981 st4ff report was waived. LOWRY HILLS CONST. Neil Webber, Schwa rtt°f e r Architects, reviewed the CO. : - RPUD CONCEPT concept pian for the Commission. He discussed tete density PLAN APPROVAI. FOR traffic c1rculation and transition and stated tears would be HA t (81011) no access onto County Road 10 and one access onto Zachary Lane. discussed the proposed bonus points for the preservation o natural site characteristics, and reviewed the grading and berraing for screening ""roML adjacent residential property. H stated that they have a substantial amount of open spare above the ghvia r elevation. ealsostated aexceptionioni ibe, 544 # from within: this :development E theai4i future. He introduced Mrs. Dorothy Krekelberg and err. Berne Barr who are the petitioners; they. had no comments to stake at this titne4ov Co mopi ss-: n r Barron inquired about the length of the cul-de- sac to Atli ins I through 5. Mr., Webber responded that it 70- ng'i Minutes 18, 1981 Page 71 was approxinwately 500 feet. Cotmnissauba i q u.\ed wh ettier the for County Read 10 and Zachary Lane were accurate- ly shown on the plans, Mr. Webber responded in the a ri vee mmissr'Pauba asked whether profiles of the units were available:- Mr. Webber stated these would be part of the r - 1 rn. ar plat,-. be stated the maximum height of the units woulal e no greater than a lare detached two story dwe l 1 " rad, c nlss' er Larson inquire d setbacks buildings 15, 16 and 17. Mr. Webber stated that the315 foot setback per ordinance: requirements; can't be achieved se tiiey wotld be seeking variance for setbacks for those building -It. i s rssl n Onsa ed regarding he setbacks and previous City Council action on a nearby planned unit development. Copmnissioner Barren inquired as to the setback distance o the private road by, building 17. Mr. r eb er stated that i was 40 feet from the centerline of, acbary Laneo ViQe Chairman Steigerwald declared the public,beearing open. Wlendell Davidsm, 11931 - 54th Aven e "North, stated that h was present representing the Bass Lake Homeowners ss a, rpt Its stated that they are concerned ra h the quality f the development,, and would refer to see single family residential om s onsire certain considerations if the LA -2 guiding is left as proposed. H stated that they had uIlderstood that there would be gradual transition between the single family and this development and this development does not provide that gradual transition'. He stated that they, have worked hard, to restore 'Bass: Lake and cera up the debris and mud from construction; they want assur- ances of protection from further pollution by construction o th is r e se :lev la ,E nt. They prefer that the land e guided LA-ILA-I and sta dd that they have met with the developer to discuss the >proposal* Jitnlydeen, 5605 Evergreen Lane 1 ort r, stated fie represented the Valehoff lior. eowners Associati.oq. He stated that there are about 1.6 homeowners in the .association. Re ,tat.ed ,tat.that they are not opposed to thQ development of the land if it it consistent with the surrounding environment nd sensitive to the natural terrai n. Howtever, they are opposed to -design concepts which attempt to maxim.11te development based on economics zind dev lop Ing=.a It -y * ;, which can be found on any flat piece of ground He read a list of the specific one rns of their hvia.eowner"'s association, and submitted that list `or the record to the Planning nn ssl n , ale noted long standing neighborhood con erns that the land should be guided A-1. Michael a 11610 - 57tti venue 'North, stated that he is a resident , s )1u d's Oakwood Shores, which abuts the proposed Planning coi,,zllission, 1111nt March 13, 1931 Page 7 erha en project to the hest. lie stated they have mt Ottr the developers and have several ipecific concerns. Ile read a list of those concerns which he Oen submitted to the Planning mission for the record. He stated he would like to compliment the developer for Wing the time to discuss his plans with them and while thq are rot in total agreement on the proposal, be felt the meetingsg were fruitful and indicated a desire on the developer's part YT work out some solutions to their concerns Chairwoman VasiIi .r arr. ed at the meeting at 7:44 P.M. Dick Essen 5610 Evergreen ane' North, sated that he is a DNA Valehoff Hoono e 's Association and his property directly' adjoins this proposed development. He has appeared before the City. several t ries; he listed his concerns re a-dirx! the Land Use Guiding and sated that he has consistently been opposed to any to guiding and still is dosed to it becartse it creates a de0itydensitywhich f5,, feels is too high. He stated that a density of units per acre would be satisfactory and would comply with LA -1 guiding requirements. He stated that he Loud prefer, the Commission and Council keep the guiding at a level even if the buildings constructed are not single family homes. He stated the project did not provide a gradual transition froat the "Harrison Hills'' RPUD to the east. Bernard Barr, . 61st Avenue petitioner, stated that they are going to build -Oce units in this development er they wouldn't have proposed it. He discussed the sizes of the existing houses in the area and stated that they want to yid townhouses eca ise that is the most feasible type of construction for this development. : seated transition was goodt, especially considering comme cia devtilopmnent in the area. IaMaret 0a vis, 1.1515 57th Avenue North, inquired whether there is an cdess that could, be un4er water. Mr. Nei` -Webb r stated that there were no iccesses under eater. Ms. Davis stated the buildings weree l orated across the s- reetrnmr her home and inquired what they would look e. fir. Webber stated that they Mould e more defined at the next stage in the development process. Vice Chairman Steigerwald explained the Concept Plan and the RPUD approval ° process. 19s* Davis stated: that she is, concerned about the height of the units. Comiissioner Barron stated; that they can only build units that are 35 feet in height at the maximum. Discussion ensued regardingn the elievation of the land versus the height of the buildings* Staff stated that the Zachary Lane access is not he ow the high eater elevation and any development: in wetland ureas s subject to review bthe Department of Natural Resources. planning "amiss n Millutes t'Larch 1-84, 1981 Page 73 MMr. r :stayed that they will comply i a _ the require. e. Vila Tine He seated re bonus t f wrere subjective,, but they believe they qualify considering the t: "est t. io n o f Ithe existing wt and open space and the design of the units. He stated transition was a matter of design and not of density Vice Ch, r .r ei erwa d. closed the public hearing. 1 ' byo issinn r Barron, seconded by ConnizDissioner Wire take action on this proposal this evening Motion tarried on a roll tall vote, six ages, Chairwoman Vasiliou abstained. MOTION by Con)taissioner3arr n, 's c d d by Conwitissioner Pauba to recommend approval of the RPUD .'-oncept P1, an for ^ ry MI I s Cons"'ruction Company for " rhave " subject to the o l lows t-19 conditions: 1. Compliance with the City Engineer's IIemorandtim. Submittal of n r nm n a Assessment Worksheet prior to or with preliminarypa 4 3. Approval is for a maximum,of 52 units at a density -a"., units per acrefor the approximate17.35 acres dbovR the estab'"shed high n mark (to be verified by, the **fy Engineer),- approval contemplates assignment of 0denstyns~ b nus points, 4. Final plat shall include n r p r at i n of the platted I foot wide outlot along the west boundary of the plat, 5. Prelitatinary site elan shall include provisions for berming and buffering on tyre east, north and past perimeters otl site. Preliminary flans sal i dicafe ap ro ruts trail corridor alignment along the east side of the r p rty adjacent to new Zachary Lane right-of-way; m n mum trail corridor width shall be 30 feett to 'Further revise and reco,.niiendation b the Parks Department.. 7. All building setbacks shall be; adjusted so to complywith minimum ordinance requirements for setbacks `r m public right-of-way. B. Plan approval shall be subject t -appropr i ate permits from. the Department of Natural Resources and other applical)le agencies. 73- aij ssrr Minutes March. 18, 1981 page 7 9. Prelimi nary plat arra plan shall include detailed staging graphic to Comply with Utility availability. 10. Preliminary plan shall include detailed through sections prof.ilesi of the proposed at# f s from the west and sou h- wes # Commissioner Barren stated that while there may appear to, e some efforts at preservation of natural site characteristics, the density of.59 units is too high for the'site. He stated that the propos d density and ayo4t is too high to comply with the ordinance su et requirements, assure private road the eases is Mau i soe the Zachary Large right-of-way, and toprovideminimal yard setbacks on the north, fie stated substantial affirmative design ears are not evident* Commissioner ire stated that he is concerned about thetransi- tion on the west side of the development. He feels that 52 omits could be too tight and stated that they would he looking for substantial perming and screening on the west side of the . development when they review tne preliminary plat and plan* ommi ss i ones pa ha stated that he is l so concerned a- o C the ransxit on on the west side of the development. Vice Chairman Steigerwald called o- a vote on the motionAl Motion-arried on a roll tall vote, six ayes, Chairwoman This item. was introduced by Chairwoman Vasiliou who wal vel the DEANNA ULT reading of the March 1 1981 staff report. Barbara Sime and BARBARA i - Deanna LaVault, petitioners, were present. CommissionerCONDITIONAL USE ei erwa d stated that as he is a member of St. Philip the p R i°' FOR NURSERY Lutheran Church he .would abstain from voting n this SCHOOL (81014) pnece6o pew R 1F R Chairwoman Vasiliou declared the public hearing open. George Wilson, 17140 - 14th Avenue North, revsew,d his history of the nursery school vie on the premises of the church which s adjacent to his property, ate reviewed the problems they have had with this operation in -the past and. stated that the conditions imposed with the renewal of the condit.Ional use pewit last April were not folly met. He stated that `here remains a problem with picking op the area of tricycles a.nd toys. Re stated that they have rooeived poor cooperation from the person who har the current conditional use permit and he is opposed to a new permit beim issued to the present peti ti oners because it is a private cotimrer°offal business operating in residential zone. He stated that if it is approveda again 74- Planning Corivaission Minutes larch 18 1981 Page 75 for this' petitioner the saes conditions should b: imposed 4 for the previous petMon r. Chairwoman Nasik a stated that the Planning Commission has reviewed this request several tines and each time. Mr. 14,11son has related similar problems, she appreciates his concerns* Mr. Wilson stated that it would nilt be fair to the present owner to terminateat the operation and she shouldallow6d to continue until the end of the year and thea relocate to another~ site. He acknowledged the petitioners; were not responsible farr past problems. fle stated he sopposed to having a nursery school continue to opey*ateat ''s present: location. Deanna LaVattlt, one of the petitioners, stated that they will comply with the rules set out last year. They will not take over the nursery school until next September; however,, they are requesting the conditional use permit now because they need to be assured of getting it for their state license, and also to begin registrations. wirsery school provides day care for local children and will be ' licensed b the state* Commissioner Stuff berg inquired wh h r the present operation was shill runt by Judith Gilster. Ms. LaVault responded af firmat ively Barbara Sifaie stated her unaerstanding that the church i s pr8parinq a plan to expand the parking lot and to provide screening and they., have told her that it will be completed prior to next September,, Barbara Bina stated that they, Meal that they- `deserve a chance to prove themselves with this conditional use, and the drop off/pick up activity would continue on the est side, per the present approving conditions orm issiun r Wire inquired when the conditional use permit issued to Judith Gilster for the nursery school would expire. Staff responded that it was due for renewal inApril of this year. Commissioner Wire inquired wha screening is to be done by the church. Staff responded that the City ordinance requires opaque s ro nin parking loco. fru rood ra s bort the church was developed prior to the adoption of the presentordinance. The church has indicated that a site plan amendment to expand the easy parking lot will be submitted in the near Futuro, and screening would be part of.that plan., Commissioner Mire stated the ;drop afr't, up location should remain on the east side even if the east lot is eventually screened. Discussion ens"ed regarding the conditional use permitand the responsib,111ty, of the church for the screening and buffering. oleo problems with the neighborhood were discussed. Chairwoman Planning mriss n Minutes Mrir 18, MI Page 76 Vasillou stated that the conditions of approval for the drop off/pick up location for Judith Gilster were not complied ::whiz for sixmonths.-, the church has'a rnllft.{ for ensuring compliance with the terms of the conditional use permit. Commissioner rr n inquired wfirer the petitioners have rUr s d the n1r s r s# dd operation r ln Judi Gi s r at this time. Barbara Sime responded that rhey.are in the process of'doing s however they do not own it at this ime.mm- i ss nr Barron stated that ' that Jud s r ol be reneging her conditional use permit; ;this petition for conditional use pemit for the same operation is inappropriate' at this time. Chairwoman Vasiliou closed the public.hearing y_Wirv,,, seconded by Commissioner Pauba to take action On this petition this evening. 144 -tion carried on a roll call vote,' six ales,,ss: on r Steigerwald abstained., MOTION by Chairwoman V ail iou, seconded by Commissioner Wire defer acts n on this conditional use permit request for Deanna LaVault and BaOara Sime until such time as a representative o the church can be present to address various concerns before he Commission. Staff recommended that this petition be reconsidered at the same t''Ime as the "renewal of tete nd'*ti oal use permit for dcrd uir i stem«` Chairwoman Vasli galled for a vara on the m on. Motion carried on a roll l vote, six :" s, Commissioner Stet gera d abstained. The meeting r c+ %sedP.M. and resumed aP.M. NEW BUSINM The rad nq of 6-g March 12, 1581 staff report was waived. Mr. FIRST BANK SYSTEMS - Vern.Wilpox was present representing Fi rs#t Bank Systems. He SIYEPLAN AN stated he wished to compliment the Dei°o.lo r Review Committee VARIANCE(811006) n their procedures and assistance in assuring the plans were in order. fie discussed the compatibility of the site plan with theis n lCity Center and stated. that they were in excess of thgir budget for this project by $300,000 because of the various improvements sar h is, 1981 Page 77 required by the City of the subdivider and the bad soil condi- tions* s Howev r , them have ec go- ahead with the pr ofect because they feel the site s a viable iacain for the bank4 Mr. Wilcox introduced Mr. Bill Anderson, the architect for the project. Mr Anderson reviewed the 1'e plan regarding the compatibility of the proposed building r City Hall and he discussed she site elp vvtions and showed graphic representa- tions epre en a - ns of what the building would look like when p e edo He discussad the aisthetics of the; site, Vir. Utilcox discussid cranes on tka, s €gdageand reviewed the rO,,l.snns for the s -gnage as proposeu. He stated that they view the wall signs as temporary until they construct Phase 11 when they will be removed. They feel the directional sigma need to be larger than square fit,, He passed out pictures o p lon signs and dir ee i nal 05ng05nsuch as those nrdpcsed. Chairwoman Vasiliou stated that she Commission is only dealing Phase prpcsalaPhseI require site plan approval when t-hev propose 4ons ruc . Discussion ensued regarding .. 4 parking requirements for the site for ` both Phase -A and phase 11. o wk.ssioner Wire i ngur d why .they need a four-sided free- standing sign' as opposed to atwo-sided sign. ?fir. Wilcox n#sy n +ht.t+ +h ea from a r - ssm...t v mSm t' t, +.4x °e c a m^t r n cx, e a ss +.., s mmm 6 v s and that they; can internally l l umi nate a Baur-sided pylon sig ' more easily than a sign., and with less expense. Staff stated that`' he ordinance does allow for internal illumina. tion -sighs but no blinking or flashing sighs are permitted. Pur her discussion ensued regardAg sight l i ries for the signs in terms of the overall site. K- Wilcox stated this: is a ung byre site of unusual size and shape, and thus there was a special need for identification, He stated a two-faced freestanding alga was possIble, in conjunction with the proposed wall signs. rinissieney Steigerwald stated he could appreciate the Matter of the site size and shape, but the main reason for the nr posed signage seemed to he advertising. He stated concern witn setting an undesir3ble precedent -for Downtown Plymouth. MOTTON by Cormissioner Wire., seconded by Ommissionor Stelgerwald to recommend approval, of the site plan and sign variance for First Bank Systools subidct 'to thefollowing conditions: 1. Compliance with the City, n9ineer`s Memorandum, 77- Planning o ss n Minutes March IS., 1931 Page 7B 2. Submittal of required performance financial guarantee to sure-co-letU a yin pf, qapproved sitte mipr r 1 s g a d for 24 aunt hs . 3. Construction of proposed trail shall be in accordaGee with City standards and shall constitute satisfaction of par dedication for this develop-ment in conjunction with sub- mittal of trailase-imnper sol uon , nom -661, 4. Construction, of proposed sidewalk pe r approved o n ffrn Plymouth Sidewalk Plan and City standards. Adjustment. of proposed plantings as recommended ha City Forester to assure proper -spacing and s tha s for long term survival ; the quantity and qual qty of plantings shall be a indicated on approved `dans# 6, Sign, variance for a two-sided free standing gn in Wit' nn to two wall si ns all signage, hal be within nanoe Iodation, heights and area standards as veru the Building, cia at the time of permit iss f: Approval; is or "has only; a r construction,and ex,ansion shall be subject to site plan revise and approval including ordinance parking standards. Rview shall include evaluation as to _ e,,perV-nce with Phase I and installed parking relative -(,o the proposed mix of officeand bank i nctns* Commissioner Wire ;.pl road the intent was for al I signs to be w1 it n ordinance standards Cims ion' Barron stated that, as with other corner uses, the only Mariana is to illow another wall sign. Commissioner Pauba sated he felt the four --sided frepstanding s IIgn had merit considering the size acrd shape of the parcel'. Motion carried on a roll call vote, six ayes, Commissioner Pauba, opposed} OLD BUSINESS Chairwoman Vas I l n stated that since no one was present regarding the petition for sign plan and variance approval for Equity onstr r nn dean for Steven esl nd, that this petition be tabled until all otter petitions had been acted upon. Planning Comma ssi ' n t page 79 The reading of the March 11, 1981 staff report was waived. Mr. PALE GRAN, Bale Grave was present, and die h.i» a nomn-m.!'nt s relative VARIANCE.. FOR... to the staff report. A brief discussion ens d regarding DIVISION future use of the largo par; l and the exception parcel. PLATTED OPERTY 0064 yy qqff ee yyff ""gg yy y }AL. y yq4 p jrYMOT10404 ornn is ion r. 14ire, w d oim+ i ione ' fin$ to recoimnend approval of the variance- d,.vision of platted propertyy wi lot width deficiency for Dale 41'ravo subject to she follaving conditions: 1. ConlMance with the City Engineer's e° randumk Payment of park cats ori fees in lieuars i n for one single family lot in accordznce with Parka - i o Policy i at the ifiling the lot division. further division of Parcel A is approved by this acts future considerations shall Include provision for full public street access for any new proposed additional lots. UmPauba inquiredmissionenr the private drivehe abandoned Dace the division is approved, and how the large parol could get street access if further developed, Mr. Grave responded that he only showed a concept of how access could, be gained ,nor the rear parcel through the exception parcel; has no pas to acquirethe.exception parcel Chairwoman Vs i ,iallel for a vote on she motion. Motion arri d on- a roll call vote., raven ayes Chaff r oma Vasiliou stated that the Commission would now EQUITY CONSTRUCTION consider the petition which had been tabled. The reading of UMPANY FOR ST EVER theMar h 13, 1901 staff report was waived. '`here was no LUN - SIGN PLAN one present representing the petitioner. she consensus of thePNO VARIANCE (7907 2) Commission was that they should act on the petition this evensngo MOT10,111 by Commissioner narron, seconded by, mm ssl n r Wire to deny she request of Equity Construction Companyfor Steven Ns and on the basis that the proppied signage does not conform to Ordinance standards., il"{a ion carried on a roll call vote, ,sevum ayes'. Chairwoman Vas l i ou announced t t there would be a studyd THER BUSINESS meeting on Marchh , 1981 to revise the Development nci 4 79- cont. matterns and homedesigns. The character of the land must be, maintained for ars aesthetically pleasing development for the future residents of this development and the surrounding- existing residents. l4 The high density plan ' increases the problem of traffic congestion and f"ety. The existing volume of traffic travelling at high speeds on Bass Lake (toad is tremendous. The location of L,ibb 's Supermarket and Liquor Store has already caused numerous accidents on Bass Lake Road. In addition, the new Prudential office building, the Maple Grove Mall Shopping enter and more housing in the immediate area has created a great deal more traffic on Bass take Road. The proposed plan creates a road. pattern that will fired the majority of the residents of this new development travelling onto eerl t Qd lane e nc then' on to bass fake oad. Also, the other out- At on to Zachary Lane creates another potentially hazardous intersection at the hill where traffic on Zachary Lae is'travelling at high speeds. 1*;'.iAoritcally, designed with minimal off-street parking for residents We question the adequacy of the amount of cuff'- street par irag s plan. 6) The i : .g rr flood plain indicated on site dans sb°'wn to us in 1979, was erroneou since every spring the swamp "wetlands" meets or exceeds the leuelt In the mater level was artlr inches of the walkout doors in several hones. The storage capacity of the wetlands is questionable right now. The torage capacity will certainly be inadequate for the amount of accelerated water runnoff created by a high-density development with all of Its .non-absorbent hard surfaces. 7) The proposed development Indicates e street and residences adjacent to Zachary Lane and on the east side of the swamp- Very little buildable land exists in that location. The majority of the area is generally under water, It Is difficult to Imagine how trees on the knolls will be saved when the dev- eloper puts the large housing units on them, unless his plan requires decreasing the wetlands area by reclaiming 4he portion of the swamp for the homes and street, thus creating an addrtonal problem of storage capacity of the remarninq wetlands. a) We assume the wetlands are under the jurisdiction of the Watershed Commission and ultimately the State of Minnesota Department of Naturai resources, who must regviate erosion control, drainage, land: fill, preservation of the, natural habitat of wetlands: inhabitants, etc. 9) Finally, from our knowledge of past developments of this type, developers have been known to deviate substantially from, the approved plan when it comes tree to actually construct the project. What assurance oto we have that this builder will follow throucr'i with. designs of the site plan, buildings and materials after he receives your approvals. s