HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 11-28-1984Page
Planing Commission Minutes
November 1984
Engineer Goldberg and Coordinator HaConn confirmed that re-
view of plans for drainage and grad.%ng.., and pians submt t
at the time of 8uildinq Permit issuance, will be the most
detailed, Coordinator-MoConn expfai.ned, there are no
notices sent to property owners, but this I.-, public
Information; and can be re\ lewed at City Center.
Chairwoman asi liou commented, she 'is ` amili,az° with this
area, and agrees there should be concern and special
attention givens to the grading and drainage plansc
Chairwoman Vasi.liou closed the Public Hearing.
MOTION by Commissioner Pa.uba, seconded by Commissioner RECOMMEMATION A
telgerwald to recommend approval for Preliminary 'Plat :and
Rezoning for Al Hillde Or., subject to the conditions re-
flected in the draft Resolution with special attention to
those concerns expressed regarding grading and drat#;age dur-
ing d-e-elopm.ent of the property,
VOTE, 6 Ayes MOTION carried. VOTE - MGTION CARRIED
Chairwoman introduced the request by Robert Walker, Walker ROBERT WALKER
Enterprises, for approval of a Conditional. Use Permit to d,/bla WXLKER E ER-
operate a repair service in the Wheel Center Property es Ct9-V:
building, at 11120 Highway 55. Reading of tie November 1,91 USE PERMIT (84093)
1984 staff report was waived.
Chairwoman Vasiii.ou introduced: Mr. Bruce dames, represent ng
Mr. Walker. Mr. 3ames started he had no comments or
questions.
Chairwoman Vasillou opened the Public Hearing.,
Commissioner 5tei9crwald inquired about the 10 to I? hours
of, operations per week, anti asked for more definitive infor-
mation.on the hours. Mr. Walker responded that, he would be
working parttime in the business, which would include
evenings and weekends. Coordinator MoConn noted, the
Cc nissi.on cold delete the condition restricting the: hours
o operation.
Chairwoman Vasiliou closed the Public Hearing.
NOTION by Commissioner, W-tre, seconded _ b Commissioner CRN+ A 'TORB
teigerwald to approve the Conditional. Use Permit for Rob rt
Walker. d/b/a Walker Enterprises to operate a repair service
from the Wheel Center Properties building at 11,120 'Highway.
5 subject to the conditions as reflected in the draft
Resolution, with deletion of Condition Number 6.
Page 274
Planning Commissionion Minut s
Z8,i
The Coontssion concurred that this type of business would
not produce excessive noise levels, and confirmed. there are
no nearby residences.
VOTE. 6 Ayes, 140TlgN earrie_d, VOTE - 'MOTION CARRIED
Chairwoman Vasiliou introdueed the request for ResidentialHARSTAD-TOOD
Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for ars d.- Todd Con CONSIRUCTION
struction Company for property located northwest of County WOO CONCEPT PLA
Road 9 and Juneau Lane f and northeast of 44th Avenue North
and 3uneau Lane.. Chairwoman. Vastliou requested a review of
the November 19t, 1984 staff report.
Chairwoman :Va iliou introduced Kenneth C. Briggs, and Jim
Meri.la representing Harstad-Toad Construction Company.
Mr. Briggs submitted background information on the project,
Including exhibits of the type of homes built by the comp-
any. The price range for the homes was discussed. Mr..
Briggs advised the Commission, that they had met with neigh-
boring property owners to give them lnform.ati,on on the pro -
Jet.. He noted that the neighbors have the same concerns -
with the range of lot sizes, but have looked avcrably on
the plans. ;
om Chairwoman Vasillou inquired if the 6 vel.oper would, b the
builder of the homes 'in the development. fir. Briggs answer-
ed they would be building some of the homes. A home buyer
could use a different budder, subject to e close review by
the developer. He confirmed they would control the type of
housing to be built.
Commissioner Plufka. Inquired about lot width, and setbacks.
W. Briggs stated the minimum lot widths would be 80, to 95
ft.,, and there would be two 'lC ft. side yard setbacks. He
further expl.E4ned that the homes as designed wil fit on the
ft. side lots, and the less expensive homes will fit the
80 ft. wade lots,
Commissioner Plufka inquired if staff understand the use of
the 10 ft. side yard setbacks. Coordinator McConn answered
affirmativelyy and explained that a typto-al, lot layout is
required with the pr el_iminarN plan/plat application,
Commissioner Steigerwald' stated than he is basically -in
favor of the projects butj, because the Commission had ques-
tioned development of a Planned Unit evelopmen't for this
propertyt this should now be d soussed.
Commissioner Pl.ufka , inquired how many acres are below the
100 -Year High Water Elevation. Coordinator McCann respond --
e, 11..35 acres.
Page 275
AMIL Planning commission Minutes
November P 8, 198
Commissioner Plufa, Inquired about the total arca of green
space. Coordinator MoConn stated it would be'10.Z acres.
Commissioner Plufka commented t1lat 50of the common area
could be dictated by Storm eater Drainage plans.
loner` Pauba Inquired about the connecting trailwa s.
Jla stat <d t1hey do not intend paving. the trails,
tat, 1.. iv a l he informal. pathways. Com isslon r Pauba inquir-
ed if this tior able. Mr. Briggs answered affirmatively,
siatl could use split-ral.l fence td €lell.nea ;e open
space, he a ted they ;are aware of the problems of homeowners
taking over open areas, and treating them as extensions to
their property. However, he assured the Commission, they
would be willing to {f dors any direction given regarding, the-
treatment hetreatmentW opera spac., and green area.
Commissioner Pl-fka, slat d, that he does not find the pro-
p6sal to meet ` MUD attributes, especlatly in the ease of
more useable ao suitably located rec7rdational and; common
faliit:es. It is his opinion that this could be a standard
plat, noting the unique topography in the development. He
suggested the R 18 zoning` designation be considered for this
f+roperty.
Jim Merr.l,a showed slides of the propefty.
Chairwoman Vasiliou opened the Public Hearing.
John 8. Ferris, 4210 Juneau lane, ntated he encourages dev-
elopment <f this area, and the homes as exhibited,. would he
good for the neighborhood. However, he Is concerned about
the lot size, ,and: Is certain it would be too difficult to
construct a large home on these smaller lots.. The outcome
would be a "crowded appearance". He stated, in his opinion,
the outlots for common open area aro a waste of goad land,
and he would rather see larger lots which would clminate the
problems noted with the previous proposal, for this land. No
stated that the development of this a, -ea should be consis-
tent with what Is already in place i=i the neighborhood, and
that the 181500 sq., ft.. lot, should he maintained. This
would prove to give more flexibility in the design of the
high quality hoT,, ° tals developer has shown. Hr. Ferris
commended the developer on thou quality developments.
fon Wntgomery, '4305 ` lei ngsview Lane, stated he had attended
the Com-sionrevlow of the previous proposal for this
area. He rea6 a letter prepared by the homeowners in the
area., and noted they are generally supportive of the devel-
opment. However, they are not in favor of smaller lot
sizes, and is their consensus that thls will loner property
val s. .o the area..
3 , . .
Page 276
planning Commission alanotes
November. 2% 1984
M. Montgomery added, that this plan should not receive a
Planned Unit Development deli. nat}..on. He commented that he
has gone to vleiv the Royals Oaks development by Harstad-Todd,
and the'homes'are quality and very attractive; however, t`1$
development looks "congested". and would look much beat"r if
the homes were built on larger lots. He also noted nat of
the "mare hones being guilt in the ` Royal, Oaks Aduitlon, few
were being. built `y Harstad-' dd=
Commissioner Steigerwald < asked Mr* Montgomery to ci.ari.fy
his "-eaning of "congestion Mr. Monto)mery stated that in
the case of homes built with -car garages the gagesxere
In the front of the home overlapping the living area, so
that "the home wouldld f it on the r4arrow lot. Mr. Montgomery
noted his concern about the homes to be sold in the
90,000.00 bracket, and to be bu:.l.t on the narrowest and
smallest lots. He asked" that transition be provided between
these homes and. surrdund'ng larger homes on large lots.
Mfr. Lyle Joyce $ 4130 Juneau :ane, confirmed n is concurrence
with the concerns of the other speaker.,. He stated, this
builder has the capability of building a development that
would Pnhande the neighborhood$ but these lot sizes are too
small for larger and more expensive hones. He stated that
most of the homes in the area are on 112 ac:.e lots up to 3.7
acres. He suggested a minimum requirement of acre
lots.
Mr,» Jerry Fischer, 4630 Fernbrook [wane., stated he has
quastiir s on the. grading plans.. He noted Z. at :.;Ae ponds are
dry in 'summer but there is spring flooding. His concern is
that the southwest corner of his property is low, he
inquired whether there would be e drainage ditch or pipes
installed to the pond. Mrs Merila explained that, they will
be ve lag with the City regarding ponding and drainage, and
also 4.e improvement of Fernbrook Lane., Mr. Fisoher
inquired If Fernbrook Lane` would be paved this year,
Engineer Goldberg stated he mould: review the Cly' for this
Information.
Fischer'' inquired` about trafflo controls, and explained
the difficult traffic ` situation in the neighborhood.
Engineer Goldberg stated there would be future uprgradMq of
Fernbrook Lane, however, Hennepin County controls the
sinali.zation and improvements for County Road 9.
Page 280
Planning Commission minutes
November 284, 1
Chairwoman Vaslllou Introduced the request by Dave Peterson, DAVE PEXRSON11
Harrison Hil=ls, Inc., for Residential Planned Unit Develop- HARRISM HILLS, INCA
ment Amendment for Harrisonison hills RPUDI located east of
Zachary Lane at 55th Aver ue forth. Reading of the November 79055)
91. 1984 staff report w4s waived. Chairwoman Vasillou
introduced Mr. Dave Peterson'.
Mr, Peterscn stateu that the lot lines restrict the location
of the horse on the lot, and would also restrict the home-
owner from: cutting down and removing shrubs And trees from:
the private open areas, thus redalning the wild and natural
areas; of the development* He stated that home buyers are
Interested In 3-oar garages, decks and patios, and are not
partioUarly :interested an having or maintaining back yards.
o,wdssloner Ware Inquired about using the smaller lots for
the single-story rambler home style Mr. Peterson stated
the buyers tendency 'is for a single story . walkout which
could be prapesed on an 8,000 sq x t lot
Commissioner Wire reminded the Mr. Peterson, that the origi-
nal request for this VOD was to provide open spAice by use
of smaller lots, with more affordable housing. sir,: Peterson
stated that four years ago the ori.ginai RPUD was geared for
towrnhomes and quads, but as far as affordable housing,
11there s, no such animal"; and-, :the
I buyer is looking for a
beta--.r designed single family home, not less expensive,
Chairwoman Vasallou stated, she has noted less sensitivity
by the builders as to the intent of the Planned Unit
Development. olm* ssione Wire concurred, st4ting that the
PUS criteria Is to provide a smal.l:er, home on the smaller
lots;. ind, now builders are regttesting construction of
larger, more expensive homes on these lots.
Chairwoman Vasillou commended the excellene*e of the develop-
ment,, but the problem remains, that the intent of this Plan-
ned Unit Development has. ;changed, and the ;developer and
buildermust be sensitive to this. Mr. Peterson stated, he
thougi4 or 5 existing lots have V to g lot coverage,
and he doesn't believe this has done any damage to the-PUDI
As there will be architectural controls built Into the
bylaws for the Homeowners Assoclation,
Chairwoman. Vasiliou ,stated that builders constructing ;homes
in a PUD need: to look to the future wants and needs of the
homebuyers, such as the addition of porches, decks, and
garages. Mr. Peterson stated, this plan: will work, and has
changed because of the market and what the home buyar wants
today.,
Page X87
Planning Commission Minutes
November 28, 1984
Cilaa ri oz'rar' ° ries to t d v o want the
benefits of the POD Flee, but nog , it seams they want to
chane the POD criteria and standards. $he Is also concern..
ed that the developer i not advising the buyer regarding
the restrictions'withL,, a;POOI and; it Is also Important for
the b;ty r to cheek with the City for regulations.
Mr. Peterson stated that: from the standpoint of the whole
development, the open space is a "mistake", however, the
development would than lose its integral design.
Chairwoman Vasiliou stated that the Commission and Council
are seeking input from the Plymouth Development' Council in
regard to lot coverage in PUR's, and that It would be prema-
ture and precedent setting, to do a case-by-case analysisof
each PUD.
Commissioner ire commented, that decks should not be n-
eluded as Part of the square footaqe calculations. This
would let hors'tcowners proceed with their Plans, and Is a
reasonable eom r-imiseCoordinator MoConn :autianed, that
this may resol - the Immediate questions, t`mt would :not ad-
dress the overal question of including decks on lot coverage
calculations.
t o wnhomes cart.. have lot coverage ofr. Petersen stated that
t g } ¢ y 5Irl
d Coon e, ['ti
Lam*=
n 4nx.*T.S 3.iiS+ii tom# d' fifer nc of #. ee
the desire to have flexiblity by otferinq a variety of de-
taehed housing and the .site plan requirements for
attached housingissues such as reduced setbacks and In-
crease lot covet -ap , should b addressed during the PUD
plan review stage.
Commissioner Steerwald eoneirredwith Chairwoman Vasiliou,
t ,,"t a precedent can t be, set this evening. a whole new ap-
proach to the PSD regulations in she Zoning Ordinance mast
be ,gtudledt and this cannot be se tled'by considering a lot
at a time. Further t i:scussion ensued regarding lot coverage
and Ordinance amendments.,
Commissioner lufka inquired how many, lots in, PUD's are
101,000 sq-* f 0 Coordinator McConn stated that the typical
lc size for PUD's has been is 10,qsq d ft.
Commissioner P .0 ka t =me,ted # It would seem because' of the
uniqueness of the project, that up tea 25%lot.coveragp could
be approved He sees a basic unfairness here, whyre the
home buyer does not ;.have the forum for relief, from the P -M
Commissioner, Stulbarg requestedequt hat the Commission vote onested
the Amendment to the PUD as, presented; _ and,, that the elimirl!-
ation of decks and garages must be dealt with by Ordinanoe
amendment. He further stated) there could be s compromise
Roll Ca,13 `n e , Ayes. Commiss Ener Steigerwald, Nays VOTE - T P
ai
l.anni.ng Commission Minutes
195November, 4
Chairwoman Vasillou introduced the request by the City of CITY OF PLY.
Pl ymwith for rezoning cif property l cat.d south of 60th 0
Avenue Noy. the and east of Neml ck Lake on Goldenrod Lane,
Hemlock Lane Addition. Reading of November 19, 1954
staff repo.*-t was waived.
There were no questions., or comments from the Commission.
Chairwoman 11asili,ou opened and closed the Public Hearing, as
no one was present to speak on this item.
MOTION by Commissioner Steiger w ld, seconded by Commissioner RECOMMENDATION E
Wire to approve the _Rezoning for the City of Plymouth for
property within the Nem),ick Lane Addition as noted on the
Ordinance to Rezone.
Vote. 6 .Ayes, MOTION. carried. VOTE - NOTION. CARRIED
WW ST ESS
Chairwoman Vasil lou introduced the request by Donald Pasohke D[MLO PASCHKE
for Lot Division Variance for property located at 700 Harbor LOT DIVISION/VART.AW.E
Lane. Reading of the November, 201 1984 staff report was 81+0919)
waived*
Chairwoman Vasililou introduoed Mr. David Johnson, 6465
Wayzata Blvd., representing the petitioner. Mr. Johnson
explained the proposal., and stated that the variance
criteria have been met, and r the petition should be
recommended for approval: because the property oviner does not
now have reasonable use of his land. He stated the variance
request is not detrimental, and there is no impact on
surrounding properties'hy grantl,ng the request.
Chairwoman Vasilzou Introduced ter. Donald Paschke, 825
Harbor Lane, who stated he has lived in the area since 19771
and has looked at the subject property for himself, because
of its country setting. He stated he believes the division
would provide a better use of the Land, Mr. P schke
Introduced fir. : Scott Croaker, 2040 Argonne Dr.) who is
proposing to buy the lot created by this Lot Division.
soaker stated that he plans to follow all. Crdinanoe
specifications when he builds his home,:
Coordinator Mc.Conn explained that the parcel Is no different
from other parcels in the area, and t eat the I-ssue to be
discussed is the variance request for lot width (50 ft. vs
110 ft..)f which is not consistent w.lth - er property in the
area. She commented that it i- Important -o nate that this
division, is not for parcels, that are part of an in-fill
area, but :.n an area with an abundance of undeveltVed land.
ai