HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 07-15-1981Page 190
L tNI NG •t MISSIONMINUTES
City of 'lyriltrth
July 15, 131
Th6.reqular meeting :.v` +he Plymouth Planning Cola fission was callid
to order in the unc-11 Chambers of the Plymouth City Center at
3400 Plymouth Boulevard at 7.-14 P.J,44 by Chairwoman Vase i u.
Stulberg and Barron*
BER ABSENT: Commissioner Stelaerviald
STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Dir t r Blair Tremere
Community ment Coordinator Sara McConnommuitvel
Planning Secretary i 4 qY{i W/a
MINUTE
4A/^.4Yrtwm.Mww+W
1,110 T10 N by Commissioner Larson, secoinded by Commissioner aha to approve
the MINUTES of June 24, 1901. 5 ayes, rommissioner Barron ahst r Ped.
AMOTION tarried*
HEARING
Chairwomanoman a i i introduced the first item and ead i ng of the RIVARD DEZIEL
July 8. 1981 Staff Report was waived. She opened the Public 110XB%j RTDGE11
Ifeari nq and recognized thepetitioner who stated had re- PRELIMINARY PLAN`
r vievi d ,he staff report and had nothing o add. AND REZONING
81035)
Commissioner Larson &-n-Me rdted that the ngll ne is
t rvrandrr r in item no. 12 requties that the 47th Avenue
connection to Vicksburg Lang shall be eliminated and access
provided from 46th Avenue only. fie stated this would have some,
f impact on the design including the initial phase, fie. asked
the petitioner whether he was aware of.tbis, and 14r. Dezipl
responded that be gad no prob`[em with the; requirement.
I ` Staff stated that this would necessitate some redesign and
that , there has herr discussion between the Engineering st:a "
f
an14 the petitioner's nsultant. Staff rt'; it d whether
the Commission wanted to see any redesign before this Item
Is taken to Citi Council, and advised the Commission that this
i0ll shoe on Phial Plat. Chairwoman Vasiliou stated that it
shou I d qio t , -i unci I wi th this stipulation and that 'Commission
I
would r v ew the redesign with the Final Plat.
I
I
I
aw aD SY inr
page 192
nh na ComiaissionMinutes
July 15$- 1981
Commissioner Larson suggested that as p - o the MOTION
reference be made n condition no. I to thefact that the
Co-
Irmission
has revievied and discussed item no. 12 of the
rr peer`s Memorandum d d July a, 1981, and that the pet-
itioner retieragreesliththedirectionwhichwillresultina
redesign. The Commission concurred.
Roll ta:l vote. 6 ayes.. IMOON parried«
h i woman nasiintroduced the next item and the reading THO UI ,
of the staff report dated July 9, 1981 was w4 l ved- LAND SURVEY
81008)
Staff advised the Commission that Thomas Humphrey, Jr.
was unable attend the meetIng this evening, but
that he telephoned staff today to advisethat he had
fullyrevievied the staff report dated July 9, 1981
E and concurs with its contents,
140TIOt"I by Commissioner Barron, seconded by Commissioner
Stulberg to remimiend approval of the Final Registered .acrd
Survey for Thor pas Humphrey,, r . r r r ;: s h '
hest of the Pineview Leas and 6th Avenue North intersection,
and northwest of Lake Wobegone in tor' 34,, subject to the
following conditions:
I. Compliance wi h the Engineer's Memorandum.,
2. Payment ar dedication fees -}i - of land dedi-
cation dicationforfuturelotswhentheyarefinalplatted
in accordance with City Park Dedication Policy in effect
at the time of filing*
No private drive access, onto CountyRoad !.r,, including
Tract A should present drive be end d, or should
the tract he subject to further subdivision.
4. The minimurn yard setbacks for ;yards shutting future
County Road 15 shall be per Ordinance.
5.Submittal required uili+ and drainage easements
s approved by the City Engineer.
Tract C shall be designated as an Outlots subject to
future lairig.
a No yard variances are granted or implied.
192-
Page 194
Planni-ag Commission Minutes
JU*IY 115, 1981
He feels'they have planned for future ri h - -war, t but he is
not convinced this is the east area for Fernbrook and thi,. ease -
may Na ma` r *
Chat 6 7T d`' ti Vasf YLl6,e{', asked t1LtFE the Wi -Y can bex assured of tli t gbtV'.
of -way when it is,needed? Mr. Sa hr atd that ;a t,*ovenant could
insure this by stating that no building can be con&tructed
close this ' line. Chairwoman Vasi 1 iou >cormnented that a recorded
easement would be helpful for the future owners, as viell as the City*
Staff advised thit now wa he the time for the City to acquire
land rather thari waiting u Il there are numerous owners f
the prow -,r . Mr. Sathre commented that private ownership s
important here and he feels it is unneressary to tie up or
encumber the land if there is the possibility that it will
never be used,, and it is his thought that it won'tbe and
Ilat additicnal studies will,he done on this
tdff inswered Mr. Sathre'squestions n the itepis in the staff
report and advised that intent in no. Z w ' r Mable
seft s, s ms per `dot and fia the intent i n no., vta no
yard setback variancess a aut or imnlied for future
s rue;Cures and was not addressing she existing s ria t r .
hiirw :pan a i ind opened the Public l eaHng
Mrs. Better Lee of 5815 Juneau Lan stated that she owns neigh-
boring
ei h -
tori g property and that she is very much in favor oil this
development. She feels it will ri rig about the right tyre
of homes .for this area,, she also mentioned there is school
bus service to the area which will be beneficial to new
families. She also advised that other neighbors erre in
f
favor of this development too.
kf
Chuck Bellingham, Hennepin County Park Reserve District, spoke
to the fact that negotiations are ongoing with Mr. Palmer i
relation to the regional trail corridor that will 1 i nk ' Medicine
Make Park with Elm Creek (Parcel ). He stated the parcel 'should
he acquired n w so the trail corridor can be omp e d tie
sated they car work with the City as to future designf
Fe rnrk an endorsed approval fh division hfirhg
Parcel 0 as submitted. ted.
Chairwoman Vasiliou asked whether the negotiations are tied to
the division? fir. Bellingham stated the County was in,a position
to acquire the f rail corridor lend and there was no contingency,
by the un that this division be ppr ved,. He stated the
indicated Parcel D was the land sought by the County,
1-
ft
I
Oully 1 1981
a-itviot an Vasiliou asked Mr,, Satbre whether there would res
one bui7der for all sites? Mr. Sathre stated Mr. Palmer is
interested in building his wn home, INut the rest of the building
tajv be done individually by owners. Mir. Sathre added that he
hopes the City will be in favor of thiskind of use for this,
type of land, he feels it is a good and safe use and is a posi-
tive step in development i s type of land.
MOTIO y Commiq.sioncr Stulberg, secondedi,11.1rss nar Wire
to recommend appr.)val for Arnold paIm r for Variance from Sub-
division Ordinance and Urbanv rirzlen Policy, end Lot Division
for 45 acres located north and and eastof w, r r Lake in the
southeast corner of Section 4, subject to the ' ,l q
conditions.
1. Compliance with the Engineer's Mema, *n m
2. 't'IG building grit shall be issued on a site until
septic system plans have been approvad for that
Site.
yard setback ari antes are granted or implied
r f -more sns
4. Compl 1 ante with City,o n i Policy > tin N
79-30 regarding minim's m floor ievasions for new
structures on sites adjatent to or conta*ninq open
store water drainage facilities..
5. Payment of Park Dedication fees-i n- i etc dedication
prior to issuance of buildingpermit andn
accordancewith he City Codein effect at the Vtw
of buildinq permit issuance..
building p-armit shall be issued until the Lot
x visi n is f'i'led with
11;,
3nn pin County.
7, Appropriate documents approved by the City Attorney
shall be filed on all parcels indicating that in
wnJunction with this division, tonceptua7 grin
docuinents have been laced on file with the City
for future r r encs e-
page 198
Planning Commission Minutes
July 15, 11981
Ro 11 Call vote. 5 ayes. Commissioner Pauba Ray MOTIOR carried.
Chairwoman Vasiliou introduced the proposed 1982 - 1986 Capital
Improve-ments Program, as subnit-ted by. Fred Mloor-A,, City Engineer*
Staff advised the Com.ission that action on tjj4S should be taken
during the Planning lu"'O'%liziission mteeting sclieduled for july 29,
198211 before goinq:, to City Council in August.,
Chairwomlan Vasiliou asked Commission Mel,ibers to bring their
cornment4 and qualstions to the meeting of July 'C9, 1981
discussion. Staff advised that the Commissioners, tould also
telephone either the Planning Director or City Engineer with
questions or cowwnts.
Chairwoman Vasiliou called a recess at 3:15 P.M.; the meeting STUDY DISCUSSION
resumed at 8.-30 P.M. and special study items were open for ITEMS
discussion*
Chairwonan, Vasiliou. recognized Mr. Hans Hagen and f4r. Gene
Holderness who represented Vie Plymouth Developer's. CounCijL
Co-,!nmissioners Barron and Larson presented, their research find-
ings and preliminary conclusions regarding the Zoning Ordinance
Residential Develapment Standards*,
C "org-li, Sioner Bal*ron' 5+..I-eA there is a need to evaluate, b h., the7 V'kXV V.9 V bot
Planned Unit Development Standards and the convzntional zoning
standards. He referred to the PUD Section of the Ordinance
and the stated attributes, as well as, the criteria for award-
ing density bonus poirit. He stated that research indicates
few projects have received full bonus points for a11 of the
c 'teria, and that the only consistent criteria has been thatri
for size, which he recorimended should be retained using the
same formula. fie stated Ithe criteria for low to moderate
inconte housing should be -deleted; the criteria for a variety
of,housing types could be retained spetifying a certain number,
of points for specfic types of housing -type mixtures; and.,
the criteria for affirmative design, efforts should be better
stated as an expected attribute for PUO's.
Regarding language on page 56 of the Zoninn Ordinance as to
gross density, calculations, he sugges"t.ed that in addition to
the criteria for high water elevation, the Ordinance shouldA,
speak to allowing density for only the net developable land
after deducting,tbe area used for streets. Thus density would
be only for the land usable exclusive of that below the
established high water elevation and that to be dedicated for
A& Streets*
198-
Page 200
Planning Comins Minutes
July 16, 1981
Co,,maissioner Larson s1tated that he preferred a 90 ft. width in
the RI -A District, and 75 ft. lot width in the RI -A and
Districts
Corin.issioner Pauba inquired whether inducing 'the lot widths
couldrelated to reduced costs of housing the dr*
Commissionlar Barron responded in the negative*
Commissioner i r r d to a study, prepared by, the
Association, of lrol'arr Municipalities and the drop
G i an Council relAive to, the reduction of the cost of
housing; he noted that the primary factor in the cost of
housing was financing and that it was doubtful l".. reduction
of lot size alone would significant.
Extensive discussion ensued regarding the desirability, of
reducinj lot areas and widths*
n lmiss over Stulberg commented that the, attractiveness, a
least to the developers, *vf reducing lot sizes, was that the
Citycan control t1hese standards ' whar as other factors are
not within the City or ,even the developers' control*
Councilman Treirten states that the information provided by
Minnesota` HomesInc.. on b0,;,if of the bevel eW*Council
indicated the impact of reduced land costs on hoasinar
rHolderness comented on ways of reducing costs in order
to provide a more fordabl product to the consumer. fie
reviewed the information that had been provided to the Com-
missioners*
In further discussion, Chairwoman Vasiliou stayed that
Councilmember had cautioned her that the Cans ion should
not change the Ordinance Standards simply in reaction to
depressed ousin arke only,, bort rather,, should full
consider the impact of ani contemplated changes. She
staffed there was also factor of what the net savings would
be to the future Moyers of c s in the City.
Chairwoman asilio noted that Commissioner Stelgerwald' had
c riwen d a an earlier meeting that o r oumi ssoW s
main concerns should, be for the future, p rat rrs fin Plymouth
and their ability to live here.
a
Page202
P Commission i s
J-,jIY 1,_ 1981
Stmt.merited that the latent of tho A.M.M. was'to provide
ccimmunities with a r=, rrg r,na i q ininirium standards-. ,and that
the key consideration was the not effect of density..
Councilman fire i.r= n stated that the Commission.should be sure
at 1'1'tny adjustmentsto the Zoning rdl nan are compatiblc
with t kd. 9 iyStandardso° harts
guide pian categoriesin f - City's utility and other
pleas are ::sed upon those density assumptions.
Staff comeizinted that the Commission should also consider
ow density ranges such s provided ` n she RPUD SeZtion of
the Zoning Ordinancewo l d be implemented if the bonus
point criteria were effectively eliminated. Staff cited
the language in the Ordinance as to the purpose f the
borate point system,, - -, to implement a density range 'scheme
rather than having by rd established densities with no
flexibility.
V Ir. ftld rn s C nt d as tto density. teat the developerss
wev.,C not seekipg a higher overall de'rsit , but were seeking
more affordable lot cost err r du,,,: r ore of lot sl s.
lie noted the- viemo from the l p isCouncil x
various rocommendations and the suggestion that a density
in the -1 areas be retainedned t ? - 2.4 units per acre.
Ci r:ar ssioner xf i r r iqui red s art would happen to- the
tra" lead if the density were to be retained, nut the
lot sizes were to be reduced. MIr. Holderness responded tat
given a typical developnent, some lots within the develop-
ment
v l r -
meat would be larger than others.
Reflarding the use r' density ranges, llr* li grr stated that
Sop je g0delines need to be provided in the Ordinance t
assure consistercy In the berg -term. as the con.rjunity
develops,
ofnmssinr Wire stated that believeq there is
need for incentiVe ; n the Ordinance for promt l n good
design
ChA r n 11 i o suggested that perhaps density s e rd
could sta lis d providing. for the possibility
variances upon evaluation of the plains. Comraissioner Wer
stated that there would thus be no consistent guidelines
at the front end of the development rF ss and the evaluation
of plans geld tend to be subjective,s currently experiencedW
Page 201
Planning Commaission M5 nutes
July 15, 1981
Commissioner Barron continued his review, the conventional
standards and ' noted that it was inpnrtant to consider that
the Coproission is dealing With i nimurts o
5. Reduce Mlinimun Front Yartl Setbacks from 50 ftp to
35 . in all Districts and'all it € s uanes '
n nimum Side Yard - to r# vi , as is.
MinimumRear Yard-to remain is.
fi. t1jaximum Building Height to remain as is*
9. Minimum Distance between Principal Buildings on Baas Lot
to remain as ism
Commissioner rr n commented that regarding side yard and pre-
valent house widths, he stated that a 90 ft. width for .I
Distritt woultibe appropriate if the 1 -. side yard standards
were retained.
r. Hans, Hagen :I -Itd 1 s con„errs with the,side yard standard
noting that the most imported”, Yard to the end user was, the
rear yardyardi, and that in effect, si4e, ":)rds ripre a waste in teres
f presentation as a usableyard, He sugg std that the
Coriwiission consider a standard for detached single family
housi=ng of 5 ft. on the garage side of the lot and 10 ft.
n the residence side*
Commissioner Wire stuped that it appeared the purpose of the
spialler lot was to achieve a smaller hous, and thus, there
would be vierit in retaining the !stablfished side yard standards
while reducing the lot width standards. Mr. Hagen responded
by offering examples of typical marketi ng. experience's by his
firm, and consumer preferences for house widths.
Commissioner Larson stated the problem continues to be con--
struction of large and V,gc rofore t3ore expensive housing,
regardless of the size, _e got.
missilr Wire noted that the Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities Study noted that on a '`national 'researCh
iasis, 6,000 to 8,000 sq. ft. lots were deemed acceptable a
Ipai • PI q
Patio M
Planning Cmiv; do Minutes
July 15, 1981`
tt al of all easements prior to filing Lu
Divisit)n with Hennapin County.
9. &pproi,riate Perpetual access easement, as approved
b 'It e City Attorney,, providing r ,pa S+
access to the proposed parcels to an approved
intersection with Juneau Lane shall be filed. prior'
to issuance building pr i s4
Gratting of the waivers does not necessarily constitute
approval by the City of alignment f the access ease#moat
with t-c-spect to Possible fu ur public roadway d di-
Ui rr, nor incur onbehalf ofayre City any rs nsi-
1 i* for imaintenance.
11. Land covenants ane/or home(raners, association documents
to be reviewed and approved by the City Att,,,,orney steal
e filed prior to -'ssuance of permits with ',anguage to
to notice prospective pur Nis rs and future ownersrs
relative to r s ons4hlli l£, s 'ori mai Lance f ou -
gid utilities, ma rr a f e private road, an
the location of the property in tiro rural service
area*
12. Parcel D is approved for regional trail corridor only;
and if this parcel ` is not acquired by the County for
the trall, it will be coizibined with adjacent parcels
El and F. A Covenant to; that effect shall be
placed upon Pa; -cel
Commissioner Stulberg scated that io doesn't warit Parcel D iso-
lated as a landlocked parcel,, and Commissioner Barron askeofir.
Bellingham when a decision will be made by the County regarding
his parcel. sir. Bellingham stated they are ready to acquire, it
w and the only reason not to would be 1f they could not. con-
tinue north with the trail, ;')ut they ex e C. this will be done.
Chairwoman Vali l l ear stated der concerns if negotiations should
drag on. Staff noted that if it is not z qui r ed for intent ; of
use as regional trail, It will be combined with adjacent parcel.
Mr. Palmer advisedd; theorrr r ss on, that, his first plan is to build
his avin bore and will offer these bu l di ne sfltes.to those who,
wish to build'n!0,;e hories, ayid lie '0-ated that he is lir
complete i9reement with having the trijil system.
197-
Pact
July 15, 19al
Mr. $surra stated that if property were acquired by, the County the
parcelc would have to be divided. Chairwoman Vasiliou asked if this
area does, tecome Countyewhetiet it would take pare of the Pari.
Dlaldicat-n? Staff answered that this would act, be ss r i l
sa and advised tiiat the Commission needs to address 'Ehis, as
policy decision fr; in City Council. 'Staff noted the problem of
v D be nqlandlocked and h area is part of a Cityand
Country Trail Plan. Staff advised that per City Code only cash
fee-, `n -lie -x of land dedication r a required for rural develop-
ments
v p-
ertes wh ch is the reason for the language Condition No* 5 in
Vie of r pdr
Staff eXpldined that covenants or easement cd on Parcel
rsrvi 't foracquisition for atrail idlor4sof possible
way of restricting development si rice' there is no access to this
parcel.
Howard hsda 5655 Juneau Lane advised the Commission that
he had just heard about the, jueeting two days ago and he saw a sign
in frcnt of the property announcing "Palmer Creek Estates" and
s conterned what type of development will be i g in here.
Chairwoman Vasillou advised Mr. Lonsdal that his 4 mem is not
a p b! ic hearing and thea no notices were, stent= Mr. Lonsdal
fir cherexplained that h moved into , the area ;because is i
the c untry and has a rural setting,, and he is concerned about
density with any development proposal.
rSathre explained to Mr. Lonsddle that the 45 acre site will
rt5 niniwtim acre building, sites and will be n keeping
with the rest of the neighberhood. Mr. Lonsdal was concerned
about the road access to Juneau Lane. fir. Sathre pointed out
Vie a-l%-ess and private road proposal n the graphic.
nsd l was concerned about: the City coming, with sewer
alis wider to the area iri the rear future. Mr i hre stated
that this area, is outsidethe MUSA line and that rtd sewer and
eAer are s d 'f od for this area until 1990 or late. Staff
adeed that at , that time owners could petition for those
utilities ut'f4 rd Council vion't permit nst lla on until
Etrank, intercellto, Capacity is available and t 1 1-s would not be
prior tv 1990.
t
it
i
iI
page 193
P ll fig Omm s s on Minutes
July 15, 7931
Roll Call Vote. 6 ayes, l ION carried-,
Chairwoman Vasiliou introduced the Gext item. The ropfling ARNOLD PAINER
Of she staff report dated July $1, 1981 was waived. VARIAN f-11 I la
ICE Af;
Mr. Rick Sathre was i n r duc d ds r )resentative tor I AT DIVISION (81034
the petitioners. M r. and Mrs. Arnold Palmer
were also present.
Chairwoman Vasiliev asked staff to curtment on this hent.
Staff advised that > there-tv C oro slopes, anfli a soils
n 'reads ttoa a aCcC, Shod re a -ive to the septic
that will have to °rovido . The petitioner's
Engineer heli ves that tv,.bedont, The petit or r has
shorn possible future development and future planning that is
possibleO '
The proposed drivate dead end road exceeds Ordinance sanardsx
The City Engineer race$Mends that an easement be granted for
future FernbrooK Lane*
Staff also reiterated concerns in staff report rogardi rl
oo rmnity pari: reeds in this >.r a, 'llfi lent of those
reeds in t ergs of any 7 acrd ao of h i n now is perhaps
premat"e for a rural arcs.
Chas rwomanas l l o u questioped staff regarding item, number
8 relative to potential purchasers who would be unaware
that urban services would not •r a 'abs t a f f advised
that covenants by the owner would give notice to,future
buyers that there are constraints and that the City would
not maintain private roads, and noted that specific language
would b developed .: for approval Attorney and Cit.,
j`'' kCounc € t
Mr. PH cls Sathre of athre-ere st, Inc.,, stated that
h. petitioner concurs with most of the i` ams in the
staff report dated J10y 8, 1981, but that ire would like
to make statements to clarify several of these items, as in
number 2 of the oo44ditions, that it should state that septic
systems wog el be installed for each parcel; .and number 3,
they would risk for no setback variances fir future buildings,
but, that there is an existing house on Parcel C and it is
hoped that a varl an((e would be granted for it noting it is possible
the house may be abolished, but the present existing ho ise
ll.es within the future road setback now. fir. ` athre was also
o$i-ern d about item no. 11 in, the Engineer's Memorandum
dated July 6, 1981, that vio l d require ea tment for future
Fernbrook Lane.
P Pam Commissionss n i nu
July 1981
As there was no one nrpqpnt to.s-p this it
Mai
nasi i u closed the Public Hearing. TheVCommission moved to
take action on this item. MOTION by Comm.Issioner Wi r
seconded by Commissioner Pauba to recommend approval of
Preliminary Pat and Rezoning for Richard i ` "Oxbow
Ridge" `iocated east of Vicksburg Lane andhurmen
and 'east of the bio l yd e Golf Course in the southeast corner
Secl',Aon 4, subiect to the following n trr .
I. Compltanfe withthe Engineer's Memorandum.
Removes", l-' ill Daae or dying agrees from.the property
at n owner's expense.
1. No building pernOt shall be issued until municipal
sewer and grater are physically available to the site.
rezoning hal be finalized 4ith h r1ih of
t Final } a ; Ou,lot A shall be rezoned upon, final
platting when municipal services are avail abl .
S. Payment f park dedicaLion Fees-in-lieu of dedication
in accordance with Dedication Poiicy i n effect; at
the dme of filing of the Mal Plat.
6. r nares n rrber s sh lcomply 1'h the City's
street naming system.
7. No building permit, shall be issued until the i real
plat is fiied and r cordqd with H nnepin County.
8. The density for Outlot A shall not exceed two units
per acre*
9. No private drive access shall be permitted on s-
bu re Lane.
10. Private drive access for corner' los abutting' cul-de-
sac
ul-dem-
sac 'streets shall be onto the cul-de-sac street.
11, The final plat application shall diagram the entire
rrT r rnun able easement,and verify that dwelling units
may be constructed n those lots that the cable ra-
vrss#
X12. The Nna" Plat aplA i a i nn Otill adds ,es the existing drain
age-way wax h . s , t to the imract of and upor, the develop-
13. No setback variances are, implied or, granted.