HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 01-27-1982Pare
Planning Commis ion t4inute,$
dituar
onalInethefutureroleoftheAdultCorrectcon- Fi l ity and its impact on the City and In
ju'rictiontherewith to encourage legislation to
address the effect of determ-na
uIdelImes On the -class of offetAd r in arcerated
at the ACS',
3. x mine the Issues of ha ar'dous waste and solid
waste and the commun ty U pa:t of the proposal
to site a hazardous waste facility at the Anchor
Industries :location.
4 Conclude our exe,;iination of the P.Jannino Commission
reeommer do t lops with r`es pest to amending the City's
Zoning Ordinances in respect of outside storage,
minimum lc SiZes, etc., and `mx)re timely prods_
sing of dhy ;recon m ndat tons su muted by the City's
advisor commissions I response to Council
directives. j
Acquire a sate for senior citizen housing In Down-
town Plymouth and promote the development of own-
town PlyMouth f,'OPsistent with the General Develop-
meet Plan submitted by the developers and approved
by the City.
Chairwoman Vasiliou thanked C uncrlmember Threinen and
stated the Commission is looking forward to the Joint
meeting of the Council and Planning Commrss ott where these
iters may he further discusa,.'d and these items will be
scheduled fir Commission work and study sessions,,,
PUBLIC HEAR
Chairwoman Vasiliou introduced the first item can the agenda PLYHOUTHIHILLS
and asked staff to review the appl catiDn. 4TH ADDITION"
Staff reviewed the January 211, 1982 staff report stating
REVISED RRIJAD
PLM/PLAT
that Notice has been publishee In the legal newspaper and CONDITIgNAUSE
property ownel% within 500 feet have been n tifled. P MIT MD
Chairwoman Vas, llou asked for questions from. the- heCommission.
REZONINC, (61073)
Commission.Commissioner Steigerwald questioned the source
of the 20 units per acre density ceiling- staff s=tated that
the C mprehen Ivo Plan allows for a density range that could
qc to 20 units par acre In the LA-4 Guiding classification.
Staff also stated that. the City Council has established
higher densities for residential areas in the Downtown
Plymouth area.
Page
Planning Commission 14,1nutqs
om is loner Magnus had questions relative to the internal
read s stent acrd st iff showed the current approved plan.
014 rveMdt, Vasiliou I roduced the representatives for *h16appliat!Ort. Mr. Dick lKnut-son comb-Knutsow t Associates,
A tha the density has been set as close to units
acre as, po sibl?, notinq that the par : to, the north
11ttle l l$ ;density and the parcel to the east Is 4.0
units per -.cre, so that it has opinion that fo,4this
pc&ocularthe criteria has herr met, ate stated that
several plans have been submitted and this plan is a
m0dif kation of the road system shower on original plans.
Ir. :
page 11
Planning Commission minute's
3anuary 27 t 1982
Chairwoman V4sill.ou asks if #.t looks as though comrj;erotal
development, %ill be held up until ries .dentlal housin . Isbuilt? fir. Fxdtik Larsen stated that -staff has assite(ih Irrr
it' all analysis of residential hous-rig proposed aril existing
within areas around ,Downtown Plymouth so, ghat ,this Informa
tion Is AVai dole to commercial .al developers., He stated there''
arse commercial developers wild are intendlnq t develop lit
Ownto rs Plymouth, when the residential area.:. are Actual1
underway.
Staff rioted that Tipton Corporation IS Proposing 122
townhouse$;and that Toma,k is ready to o ahead with their
development.
Mr. Mark Rdvich representing " omark" was present, and
OMMIs iort r RdgnUS asked how Many stories heir buildln s
would have. Mr. Ravich stated they would be --storybuildings, dnd would be condominiums rather than
apdrtments.' ht- purchase price of these tv 4its' Is proposed
to be In the low 0',s and high $60,s*
Commissioner pa nus asked about type and number- of ar'ages
proposed. Mr. avlohtat d- the=re would be €aside stalls
plus ori urid rround Parking, 9ara9t for each building.
Commissioner Magnus .jsked about access onto Counter Road
from this proposed development. Mr. Ravilch, stated that thud
did riot; show access Onto County Road 9 though they once had
anticipated a right -In -right -out dein oMissio er
Magnus asked staff about the entrances and ; exits, and
whether there will be adequate ingress and egress 'without
without traffic "hangwdpsO., Staff"' rioted the traf`* ic
dellrreators` and tura .lames ora Plymouth Boulevard,.
Extensive discussion ensued regarding the proposed
part -handle" from the elderly site to the trail corridor.
Commissioner padba stated that the comments made by, the
dt ,eloper giving the reasons for leavinct the "p,4 -handle", as
part of the proposed elderlY housing site seen reasondbie
Commissioner Plufka suggested the special creeds of elderlyhousing: were conducive to an "ex -c lusl.ve corridor"- and the
recreational needs of younger residents right. riot be
compatibleible with elderly residents.
Staff Mated that from a p1drinino standpoint easements for a
trail along, a common property line proud be preferred
considering c0rrcernz.egardain liability and maintenance; it
is doubtful ' actu use of the 'trail will be "exclusive" to
residents of Only one deve,l ipment:.
Pair"u
lefulln Commission Minutes
January Z-7 1982
The Intent of the entre o tlot )elnq a PUD, no with tandin
various owne-,4hip I is to have open space and .
internal oC rC,ation for the entire nel hborhood. 'St a
also stated that at the final plat stage the Citi€ ` Council
will determine hat Improvements are needed in he trail
corridor and who will be responsible for the construction
and mtAlatenante recommendations from the Commission can be
made thee.
Mr. Knutson stated a ments for trails would be
encumbrdnees upon the adjooent Homeowner's. Association) and
since eas-ements voui. d b difficult to get from dja entonerthepattedcorridorwaspreferred*'
Mr. Larsen stated the intent of a platted eorrido, vas t
dceomm date futdr=.. residents ' f the elderly develop v -, he
suggested the " r, --hath " could be ars outlot. hL. stated
cid accesis, to the corridor was desired since i tpr veme-nt
contemplated a bridge crossinq over Plymouth Creek.
Mr. Ra icb stated he, supported a platted corridor and did
not want easements and responsibility for maintenance; he
stated the condominiums woula have their own access to the
or trail.
Commis loner Stelgerwald tat:sd that easements would be
appropriate to asz.Su e access until the proposed elderlyhousingsiteIsactuallyevelope
Commissioner Magnus, questioned who would be responsible for
building the bridge and trails.
Buff stated that the improvements for the entire trail
system in residential outlots are determined bPark
Redicat Policy prev ous approval fur Downtown
l mouth In a .previous development where a bridge was
needed, the City Council credited construction of the bridge
to the developer against the Park Dedication eq i.rem is
Commissioner atelq r ald pc,inted out the staff
recommendation that a bus pull. -over be implemented and asked
if tele petitioner agreed. Mr. Knutson stated that he does
rpt see the need for the bus pull -over at this time and
fee-isfee-is it could be detrimental to traffic flow. if It is put
ins i s should be idjacent to the proposed elderly housing
situ but t%iq he feels should be decided in the future,
page
Planning issi nMinutes
hairw r art Vdsiliou concurs it staff and Feels it shouldbeprowidedfor' at this time. Cormissioner flagnus also
r urred
Staff stated thatx while the timing could' be deferred, : the
etre l.4 n Trdoslt AuthOi has design, standards and Itshouldbeshownonplanks <that developer,,, are aware thiswillbeplannedfor. staff also pointed out tht IUD
criteria for the suitability of the proposed elderlysiteinvoludeavailabilityoffacilititiesformasstransit.
Chairwoman Vdslliou stated that I t Should be noted to bringhisfOrVYdrdwithfurtherplans, and ai . %ed staff to hetdesignInformation `.
yfrom
th etr :cinsl :. orris.-
re 'ative t th.i w.- items.
Mark Revioh stated that as a developer,,, he does not wanttodealwiththe ` entire burden of t e trail, : system
IOV ementswith his firPhase It his contention that
the engineering could be drone' at this time tr) plan out thesetrails $0 that the Park 0edication can be d tt.rr fined for ail
adjacent developers, but he does not rant to "frout- nd" ` surotherdevelopments.
M if by Coiraoissioner Ste,tge wald, seconded ommissionerPabereommendlnaPPre-Ya , for the Revised V 'D Preliminarylan,/Plat., Conditional Use Permit, andzonln for
Plymouth Rids 4th Addition"' located northeast of PlymouthBoulevardand37th, Avenue North subject to t!ie foljowin
nditions*
I- COMP11drice with the Engineer's Memorandum,
the final Plat /plan include provisions for the l e -
as Per the Master Sidewalk Plan; bs Pull -over
adjacent to the elderly si.tet and -art 'inter to pedes-
trian circuldtiOn Plan Offering access to the trail
3. Removal of all dead or dying trees from -the propertyattheownerisexpense.
4. Rezoning shall be flnlallzedwith Ming of the FinalPlat.
5. . aymeat of Park Dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication
with the DedichtiOfl Policy In effect otheUmeoff1llntheFinalPlat
14
anrr rrc Corwnilsslon Minutes
3,nitw ry 27.. 1982,
0. omplidnoo with City Council Policy Resolution No.
78-80 regarding minimum floor elevations for new
structures In subdivisions or cin sites adjacent to,
or containing afay open storm water drainaqe facilities.
u No bu idinq permits t issued until thefinal Plat
is fil d and recorded with nnepin County.'
6. Compliance with Section 9 of the Zoning Ordinance r -
g rding the filina of covenants and other documents
qov rn nq control and maintenance of common areas,, in-
cluding utility and frail easements
UStru t. on of the public trail improvements Includingcobstruotionofabridoein , 000rdanoe with City
statrdards shall be completed concurrently wiLh develop-
ment of adjacent sites
10. Maximum density for the entire D shall not exceed the
Comprehensive Pian LA-4 maximum density of 20 units ger
LMt tso" questioned the intent of the density
require ent, and suggested the mdAi um should relate to each
i e. Discussion, ensued and it was oonclo ed that this was
the intent with the option available for the Council to
consider a higher density on the ' elderly site when
development , pians are reviewed.
Ro.ti Cali vote, 6 ayes. MOTION carried.
Chairwoman `asiliou called a 5 minute recess and reconvened
the meeting at, 9.03 P.M.
airwom an asiiiou introduced the next ite h under ubii.o
WALLACEFREE
SITE PLS MDfledringStreadingofthe' anu ry 16, 1,081 staff report was CONDITIONAL USEWaivePERMIT
Commissioner Magnus questioned item no. 5 in the staff
A' CARE tiR
report relative to landscaping. end screening and whether the
play yard could h& e art impact If left open vi.suajy to its
neighbors.
Staff explained the landscaping }plan and noted that the east
and south developments will be commercial, and on the north
a combinatiotr Of plantings should provide good visual break
to the residential area
Page 16
Planning Commission Minutes
34nudry 27, 1982
11. Submission of required financial guarantees for
ceMplet.tcll Of t o site improvemerts termed for
months.
1 Appropriate legal documents to be submitted for re -
view and approval by the i,.; attorney ,prc0din
for stared access and parking facilities.
13. Fire lane slgnas e shall ht installed per the Fire
Marshalls recommendation prior to occupancy of
the "Day Care Center"..
14. Building shall he sprin lered per Ordinance No.
Roll. Call Vote, 6 ales. MOTION carried.
W BUSINESS
WALLACEPREEWM
Chairwomen Vasillou in,. -educed the first .item under New SITE PLAN
Business- reading of the 3anuary 18, 1962 staff report was WILLOW -CROV "
waived. She recognized ;,r. Reese who represented the S PIS CENTER"
petitioner, 8{ 0.54)
NOTION by Commissioner paubay seconded by Commissioner
Magnus to recommend approval for Wallace Freeman for Site
Plan for the "Wil log y Grove Shopping Center" Located
northeast of Nathan lane grad Betty Crocker Drive subject to
the following conditions:
I. GOmpl ditce with the CityEngineer's Memorandum.
payment of 'ark Dedication fees-lin-lieu of dedi-
cation pollicy if) effect at the time of building
permit issuance.
3. Appropriate l,eg41 documents specifying that no
outside storage or outside trash disposal facll-
ities are permitted on the site, and that the
tenants shall vtll.i e the ;.internal trash compactor,
and facilities, shall he submitted,for review by
the City Attorney and filed as a covenant on the
property..
u r,slon of required financial quarantee for
completionof the site improvements termed for
Months..
Page
l°
p yt y m opy QQ"gguyyyy
3,anuary 27, 1962
5. All signage shall comply with tie petitioner's
sign program.
S. Appropriate Cross easements $hall be suLvitted
grid approved by the C"Itty Attorney for the use
of shored access and parking faoil. tles:.
7. The fire ine siqriafe stall be in tailed zr Com-
pliance wiZvi tete ire Marshal Is reoommendattort
prior, to a.,upaney of the shopp 114 center..
All rooftop equipment to be screened -Prost publt
view.
4 All exterior lighting shall bi,. shielded.
Zell Call Votet 6 a o esu MOTION carried.
D. sous lor, ensued reqarding curb outs onto etty Crocker
Drive,, dnd staff related the consideration and tcrms of
this Matter per tete Final Plat approval.
FOD EWINEER04
nairwot rt Vasil -ou tn't-rodl. ce=d the net i tem; r ad i ng o tete RATION-
atiudry 191 1952 staff report was waived. She recognized SITE PLAN
4r Hary Kaiser representing tete pet tiorter. Brief dis- A,670
u s ion' nsue-d .
U104iON d,v'Commissioner Stulberq, seconded by Commissioner
Pauba to rxommend approval for Food Engineering Corporation
TOr 4 Batt Part amendmetit. subject to the fo.l Lwin
conditions-*
I. Compliance with the Engineer's, Memorandum.
2. Submission of required firtancial guarantee
for Completion of site Improvements termed
fGr Z4 -months.
S. Any landscaping removed as part of the e p<ltl-
s. to oe x - placed In kind to a comparable area
gonhsite.
4. Defe kral of the construction of three
parkinq spaces ble approved "int it deemed
necessary based on land ava.il4billt .
Page 18
Planning Commission Ml,ivates
January ` 196?
Vote, 6 ayes. MOTION carried.
Chairwudmara Vdsiiiou int oduced the next item ort the agenda, ARM H MNthereadingofthe -inuar 19 2' staff report was LOT'IVT ION
waived VAR1WCES (6jo,66)
Commissioner Pauba asked if there was information on rootord
which would show how this ",:w dealt with during *ne
de elo atent of "Meadowlain states"'
tafc stated that there was n; record available on that
subJect) other than tte s atus of the parcel as an
Chairwoman Vasil iou intro used Mfr. John Clift, 36 Wi.nnetka
Avenue South, epresenti.r-g tha, petitioner, stated he
is conoerried that the Cl does riot have the. full history tori
this propertywhich would, help the ommisslo j to be ter
understand this petition, n, e stated that the Roq gemann,
family homesteaded the land In this area, dnO the n titin ear
is the widow of tea founder of the Village".
He stated that uniqueness". is filet a strated by the fact
that the land is surrounded by deieelopment and thus options
as to accoss are limited.
Mr. Clift described the survey and proposed division. He
ex lairied that the petitioner,$ home Is tieing. repaired at
this time and that the tai 4slon resultinq in two lots, as
suggested b; staff, would be a waste of the lana, a loss of
taxes, and a loss of potent>al income for the petitioner.
Chairwoman Vasiliou stated that staff is not reacting
negativelY Or unsympathetically to the petitioner, but they
must evaluate the application against the Comprehensive pian
and the Zoning Ordinance to provide the information to the
P14W11119 Commission and City Council..
Commissiorre,. Na nus asked Mr. Clift if shared driveways
could be considered by the petitioner* Mr. Clift stated he
didn't feel this was feasible, and that it is reasonable to
txsk for the driveways onto they street. He rioted the
to ation of the existing driveway and that residential Lots
Would not penerdite much tri; file.
COmMiss over pauba stated that he cannot support the
additional curb cuts onto 36th Avenue North.'
i
R011 Call 'este. 6 Ares. MOTION harried
Planning Commission Minutes
arruary27, 1962
ha, rwo an Vasiliou introduced the next Item; reading of the RICHARD DEIEL
3anuary le,1982, staff report was waived. She recognized FINAL PLAT .
the petitioner. OW RIDGE"
61035Commissioner 'llufka asked about the "hole" betryeen Lot 7,
Blocq and Lot It Mlook 3 created by the extension of
Out. of A.
Staff reviewed the final plat and not,?d the differe ice with
the general. development Ba an where, the petitioner was
anti iPiA 1119 that a strut connection between 46th Avenge
and 47th Avenue might not be needed when Oudot A Is
replatted err the future. Staff stated the road connrct ion
would be necessary in the future for proper traffic
o1rcul.ation for the entire plat. The General Developmient
Pian proposes creation of two substandard outlots on either
side of the road, the right-of_way for which would, be
dedicated with the final plat of Outlot A and not now
xte# sive discus niort ensued ;and Commissioner Plufka asked
about the required right-of-way dimensions. Staff stated
the right-of-way should be -ft. wide, and the "gap" shown
Is 90 -ft. wile.
i4r.. De iel stated he pre0erred to keep his ,options open for
possible street accesses for Qutlot A from the north and
from Vicksburg Lane, rather than from the south.
commissioner Pl.ufka stated that the future street
right-of-way should be provided now.
Mr. Dez el stated they developed the east cul-de-sac of 47th
Avenue North based upon City policies to keep Intersectioni
onto major, .roads such as ick5burg Lane to a minimum. He
said he hoped to pursue this 3i the future when Gut:ot A -is
platted.
Staff stated. that City Council directed that any connection
to Vicksburg Larne should be alctiq the north boundary of the
plat, shared wl.tb the lard to the north, and not at 47th
Avenin As Indicated. Staff advised that the petitioner
could retain his possible optionsby retaining control of
Lots 1 and 7, so that, if the connecting aright. -way were
vacated; in the future, the l- is could be replattt.* ;1th that
laird to create three lots.,
Staff Mated recommendation no. 12 should be changed to
reflect t%. Commission's finding that the ioh -of-way
should be platted nowj with Lots l and 7 being; wLderied.
gage 2
Planning Commis -lorr Minutes
3anuary 27, 1982
Vote, 6 Ayes, MOTION carried.
oalrwoman 1--lasiliou Introduced t -h 1-st A
im on the agenda; a$ N CORPORATION
reading of the 3anuary 22, 198Z staff report was waived. FINAL ;PLAT
It SPICER DIVISION)
was no -:ed that no orie was present from Dana Corporation 81054)
to represent this petition. -(hal.rwoa' arsVa$41, iou stated the
ommiss,lerr does not appy plate .zt when a petitioner does not
attend ajid questioned whether action should be deferred..
Star f verlfled the petitionerover was notified,
Mr. Tori Bt rgqu!..t Sathare--Bergquls , stated h 'is a
oonsu,„att the petitioner and oculd answer questions the
Commissioner's may have on this Item.
Staff exp dined . th recommended disposition ofthe lowland
shown as Outlot 8. the City initi dJlY scgge;ted she land be
legally tied to the mail parcel, btt the petitioner objected
because of the swamp and questiona` e. use of the ,land, at
all. The City accepted open space from the adjacent plat to
the south, and gutlot B could be deeded to the Cita and
combined with that land for natural open space and drainage.
Ol rl by CommIssio.!er Pauba, seconded by Commissioner
tulberg re-on.mendinq approval for Darr. Corporation for
Final Plat for "Spacer Division" ` located, In the southwest
Corner of Vicksburg lane and Highway 55 subject to the
following Conditlons*
I. Compliance with the Engineer's Memorant m.
r> a of all dead or dying trees from the
property at the owner's expense
No bull -ding permits shall ' be issued until, mur-j ,
cipal sewer and water are Physically available to
the site.
A 30 -ft. ids easement shall be provided along
the west side Vicksburg lane, and 4utlot A
shall be df.eded to the City for trail purposes.
Compliance with City Council Policy Resolution No.
79r-80, regarding minimum floor elevations for new
structures and subdivisions, or on sites ad-aCent
to,, or containing an.y open' storm water, drainage
facility,