HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 02-26-1986CIT F PLYMOUTH
PLANNING COSSON MINUTES
FEBRUARY 261, 1986
The regular :%" the Ptannlg t:t#tlsaitYa
c ' to order at 700 P. M.
MEWERS PRESDIp: Vice Chairmdaub ,, Commissioners
alber 'x ,a nus, Plu` kat and Mellen
hr+iaaan ctzt
Deer Wire
STAFF PRE"T. Community Development Coordinator
Sara MeC nn
Associate 1a.nn r At Cca -rt ham,
City frigineer Sherm C01dher
Community DevelopmentDevelopmc.-,nt Secretary
r4 e wifte Ilan,
NOTION by Cot lss on r ` Plufka j seconded by Commissioner ; M ' , - FEBRUARY
approval tiaos sagnusoroommeficsubmitted., 12t 1986
VOTE* 5 . MOTION c a ri d MOTIONCARRIED
LC HEAKCHGS
ViQe Cha r aan uha requested a a ov ylew of he rat res- OUUNC ELEWNT OF
port, o, f the usiti El me -tit of the Comprehensive Pian by COMP H RSIVE PLAN
Associate Panner A Coning am.
Vice Chairman Pauha opened the Public Nearingt as there" was
no one present, o speak on this Items, ;the Public Hearing w -vi
Commissioner Pl ufka stated h ,as reviewed the ousin le -
mens and is satisfied wt -h its acceptability to send forward
the City Council- 3"e tomm;iced nn one exception. there
there should be reoca nirli n, the partnership of the City
and the developer to continue ta use PUD provisions as a
planning tool to preserve the n Lural areas.. He believes .
this i implied,, but that an ;af rpt ive sat mens should be
insor edo He stateded that Plymouth has hese well. planned and
preservation of the env ronmentel features: of the tity of
Plymouth should he addressed He. asked that staff inoorpor
ax,,e :language for this statement.
Commissioner Stulberg stated that this should he part'of tile
overall framework of planning. develoomwit in Plymcau o but
should not he in direct association wiV4, the Planned Unit
Dev441opfr nt standards.
gar.+.c
Comi,ssloner Plufka stated he Is niot. concerned about this
Fe', rtr a r Y 2 6,y, X086
Conaiss,toner Stulberg 60ncuteed that thiS is written otily a
suqoestion arid, the Cite would revise any Ordinanoe m xid-
Mt or jr y before making regulatory changes.
Commtssioneir Nagnua stated it is his opinion that this would
e a requiation the citizens of Plymf,Goth dutrxt want t
constitutes more horeavcraoy and puts burden on the sel-
ler who would be required to go,tolthe,C"ity for p ermit s He
t ted do n nnotagreewithhstittiyrs tionpro-
r Klm uc s this for r v t residential property, however,
he dogs see somem€'`r It In, A program such as this or rental
g*u r IC, Frove « y.t i.
leu .t vote on, the Amendmentndment to the Motion.. 2 Ayes4 VOTE ON, AHROW NT
Commissioners tol r , P u kti and Paubao Nay. MOTION MOTION FAILS
fa I I a,
Roll. Lail Vote on MAIN, MOTION. 5, Ayes'. MOTION carried. E ' OR
p¢p¢
yT jyO{
y
F4kYf rvh :'?. PCEO
TI `mmissi a oomme rd d s r o t l r r r Al ott r r t` i ran
o well done.
Vice Chairmann Pa introducedd t AA r t ur b HAND ' l TSI T NG
n tri ut rtq u I Frio. , an r k si std ars overview COMPANYi INC '.
of the,tebruAry 19, .V86 staff report by, CooraAnator MoConn. ISITE(85135)
dI t r+ NC nn stated there was correction on the size.
o; lie building, whieh, is 1l 16 .. ft * rather than 45,480
t as stated n the t r(.pu,t
Inc.,, o exa in d tip r c u t for y r Ianef and the
site plan, for a distribution center. He stated the biggest
problem Is in the northeast corner where there Is cul-de.
sac. fle described. tete ,-ssetback variances which Parise froma
their, desire that the bulldirrj, have I Symmetrical appear -
arxo . He. does riot believe the variances dre excessive and
1V1111 afford a balanced' IoW for the building. Mr,, Hance
owed an alternate: d s ,, He "tate-dL they can tn t
some parking stallsarrdst: 1,1. ` in with the Qrdinanr
standards for parking.
CommissionerPlufka inquired about the v rianoe on the north
ofn the u ibuild -1 ft.), to _ t park.r c lot '$ 0/
y
t , uys
gttC {` Mr l.L j, Y..p to,rt:FAr a}}
q9 yg.
i` i. ". designed to.,. the
p1. ;
it A xricestated iy .:. ,,a443as..' i`48
yyisi+
statedolldot+ngL J4 r '. Miil:e vfi a ,d tea& RREF tx#t the , da ffi. :
that 1 t. r m t t rrrrt r r tf o = r L their feet
Vice Chairman Paluba ogened the PUbtle Hai, - as there was
Rade
Plar'ninq Commission Minutes
February 2, 1986
Coordinator McGinn explained, that there have been several,
wherebuildings were oonstruotech with no pans for
ruture needs and these buildings and sites could not KaI ndl
future, expansion and intensif ted uses. She stated that no
cfrma I; app cation has been made on behalf of the ' proposed
bui dxnc Mr. Carlson, Y entioned, but if variances are re.
uc steel, these e iewed 0 n r merits dust as has
been done during Lia- t.,. ' ew u these development pians. She
noted that the petitioner Faust meet the var,lt4nee criteria
and tont a pro < , cannot be Tante for economic reasons.
Sh e explained that the Sheehy building to the east has two
front yards and requested only a variance from the fire bane
requirement.
MOTION 'by Commissioner Stulber, seconded by Commissioner NOTIONERTO, DEF
lug° ka, to recommend deferral with direction to the petition-
er to reduce the number of variances. Commissioner Stulberg
stated his concern about meeting the '°proof- o -parkin ll re-
quirements and the 2 ft, from the drive to the parking on
the southwest cornu rof the building. He, stated that traf
fie circulation Is a primary concern,, and that he had lesser.
with the variances in the northeast corner. oncern yard
iica, Chairman Pauba inquired if the petitioner had a prefer^
enoe for deferral., or a rQ ommendation of denial o the City
Council. Mr. Ranee stated he would not move forward to the
City Council with o recommendation of denial from the Plan-
nine Commission, He stated their choice is to, prove thea
can provide Ordinance parking or not ,build at all. He
stated they nave not peen able to do this, and ern though
economics cannot be taken, consonsieratWn, reducing the
bu id n size will not be economloalty feasible,. He states
they will review ether cep -Dons and alternative pians.
osis ion r Ptufka confirmed with Commissloner Stulberg
that the direction is to eliminate as many variances as
pss be.
Roti Call Vote. 4 Ayes. Commissioner Mellen,, May. OTION VOTE - MOTION, CARRIED
carries.
Vice Chairman Pauba introduced the Residential Planned Unit DAVE PETERSON.
eve.lopment D Amendment, proposed by Dave Petcrsonj. IIARRISON HILLS ISR
Harrison is7 Ines and L e uesv d arevlelinvy of theFebruary RPLID1 A14ENa T-
1986 plannina staff report by toordinator VlcConn. O
i
Page
lianninq Co iissionk Minutes
February 261 1986
uu oner Stulbergstated coneurs with the Motion, _.
of the number of lots Involved; ands that he concur with -
previousus City CouncU direction thdl the developer select
and graphically demo rte t osse lots, so the Commission
AInd-Council can review it o er . rather that on 4 Pie0e
meal %,psis,#
110111 Ca i 1 t OTC - NOTIONCARRIED
Vice Chairman Pauba called a Recessat 905 P.Mlk RECESS
Vice Chairman Pauba called the meeting to order and intro- GLORY OF CMIST
the.ppli,( ion by the, for oviewLUy' -1f WINGyy
ff* ^
z ig..r
1t }
Lutheran
l.; .b 4e "S^4 k* TN ?+ b ti.-9.kF. $`# Church. requested brief y
yRCH,
Ze,.G VE 4
staff report by Coordinator McCona. TEXTUAL AMUCK
I
Commissioner Pilufka stated it is important- that dl eussion
be direr ted Lo t fact that 'this Ordinance Amendment
affects the entire D (future r strz ted ; development)
District-, end, that tele guiding for this particular property
is for an industrial use
Vice icy#5 i#i-da PVi ib i.it S.r.4 F.e'i, ? L4$ YaRF4x x{fiuZ '4?'x ra`Y&4..
arnd advised Reverend Stroh ehein the Come -sSIO 'mud , O-
s der any new material submitted that would be additional t
with. their a icattort t the e( omb r 1thayt`
yysubmitted
lit eet i .
evere d trc h he,r h d ka of the property owned b
the church and ad oinin properties, explaininq they do not
feel that industrial, guiding is an issue. He stated the
City should consider returning to the 1980 standards to
t1ow Chure.hes in the FFD District He disc,o_qsed ` why,this-
land should. rcpt be quided for I lustrial us th t there
wod, be traffic problems.; and, road construction and utile-.
ties to this area would be costly to the City e dues not
nt. believe, this request, aloriq with their future development
plans, ennsititutes 0sout zoning". He anted this area is
particularlysuitablet%le tur a church use. e stated that:
had teasite. for ,church deve op -
me t, however, the least expensive of these ate a
3001000-.00*' He anted teat at one time the City had also
been Interested in a ropert but did not purchase I
because of the He stated that a business c ued pass
on the oef t but 4s ' aonr x ofit nrga izat ion, the church
eeuld not le this.,
Omni
Paq,- 36
Planning Colum .s$ion Minutes
February 2-1 1981)
He stated a church *.s not only an urban cjse, but, fits a non -
therean ten # rur a I obur ; e« He, stated
the- Citi Is, not o-.ear In their definition of urban and non-
t'r an. He noted that the rdxndnef- states that resident la
xsesj, private clubs and golf courses are uses that cyan be
urban or on -urban ani tha e Ci h>uld arify
ggitb
C ttmissi n r Plufka,. stated that a city 'is o,'at led a City
because of Its urian characteristics,, howel ver a city can
also .ncude rural land which Is not served by public -
at ;11 it ies .
Reverend Strohschein, reit r: t d that t4e City it, allowino
private residences And private c-lu s in unserviced arses
should consider church Noilitles as a permitted use. He
stated that a church. would- not increase thn sewer flow to
any d it e. The stat i tics they, have provided regarding
water consumption anal sewer flow for churches were obtained
from the City of Maple Grove. He stated they have tioc -
nted that church facilities use, less eater and would not
uopact the
sewerAM
He stated they are not asking the Cite to threw out. the
Guide'Planbut that the City Wdel a tstake in 19,830, by
changing the Ordinance s that: churches Nvo ld not he al :n od,
in the FRD Zoning District. He nota that the Cite Co ncz.l
upon review of their Initial> a plicationf.=m nded denial
by a split votes,, acid this should give notice to the City
that there are problems with the-7oninq Crdioanc e.
e aIr3Ian t a ba open 1 KI e: zrrc ` s' s
no one preseat to speak (I this item the uhtic fledring iv d,
closed..
MOTION by Com isstoner Stulberg,seoondedbyCommissioner MTTOX TO D
Pluf a to recommend denlal of the Zoning Crdirianae Textual,
Amendment based on the saes reasons as stated for the r c m-
nda, ion of denial for the ovemb rl, 198,5 application; that
development of this lard is Predators and nothing has
chanced since their review of the previous application.
cll Call ntc . Commiss,onor ellen, lay. T 1 K I i CARRIED
carried.
He.y +ea1'r.xMF
Vic Cha man Pauha in,r dc d 'the Application R RICK. R >
adcok . dor Lot Consolidation,, Lot Division, and Variance. LOQ" CM-SOU")ATION
He requested an overview of t4he February 13,* 1986,staff, LOT 'DIVISION
reportlb4y Caord nd1t r McCann, A(87)
T'n e, m eet j ned at lGz06 P.,M* Ing ad 'our