Loading...
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.