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