HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 04-27-1988CITY OF PLY14O Tt t
PL4rkNHTNC CO ISSION MTNU.TFS i
APRIL 27, 1988
til Regular i €?e t nC t3 V V , P y au; , t # 0
called to order at 7:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRMS.'t4T: Charman Pauba, Commissioners Wire, j
Stulber ,. Zylla, Marof%ky and Tierney
ME"BEERS ABSENT Commissiz tter Plufka
STAFF PRESENT-. Community Development Wreotor
Stair Tremere
Assistant City Fn4ineer John Sweeney
Public Yorks Director Vied Moore
Communit*- Development tooreinator
Chuck Dillerud
CNk.iTFS
Chairman, Pauba and the Commission deferred action on: the
K nuts for April 13, 1988 until later in the Meeting.
Director Tremer-e introduced Community Development Coordina-
tor Chuck tai..lerud,
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chairman Pauba called for a review of the April :i t 1988 PATRTC GOOF
staffreport. Director Tremere explained the purpose of the GOFF` Htt S T +CM
hearing and, that the City Council had approved the Rezoni.nq SITE PLM AND
and Preilminary Plat for this property in February., COMITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR, "FERHOROOK
Commissioner Marof sky inquired about the availability of KANOWI (880159)
sewer ii -t the arca. Assistant Engineer Sweeney explained the
constraints, and the location of the Sewer District.. . The
east portion of the property would be very difficult to
serves
Chairman Pauba opened the Public Hearing,
Randy Mord-, 4420 Marbor Lane North. Mr. (lord :stated he was
speaking as President of the Kingsv ew= H'eights Homeow iers
Association. He reiterated ; the concern a of many of the
neighbors who spoke at the ReZoning a.nd 'Preliminary Plat
hearing,. e, stated concerns focused on property value -,.i acid
the Impact of the proposed development: He state.i the
neighbors had met with the petitioner and had identiSed
concerns in a ,letter to which they had: nc received a formal
response,. He inquired whether the., vernal, assurances, from,
the developer to them still had: standing. He said that
transition is critical and the Association fee -is that the
City ;should require owner occupancy of the proposed, units,
Page 94
planning Com i.ssiort Jljnutes
April. 27,
Patrick Cuff, ptitit toner, stated tl,at he agrees IYUb mast, of
the items in the letter referenced by the Homeowners
Asso(} anon,
Chairman Pauba closed the Public Baer ng.
Commissioner Zy.11a expressed concern about proposed
Condition Ne, 6 regardinq the variance from Fire Code
requirements for fire lanes and the Fire Inspectorl5 March
30, 1988 memorandum,, He. stated the requirement to sprinkler
owner -occupied units was "ludicrous" and he felt the matter
should be brought to the ..City CounclAPs attention. He
stated hc• dial not see a iy purpose in the requiretrr,""I and
that it: Nas not real istlc,. lie questioned whether the City
Code Fare Lane requi.rMeLLS were reasonable as well.
Director Tremere explained the City Fire, Code re ji.rements
and that the sprinkler 'requirement was ar optioa available
to the petitioner in -lieu of the required fire lanes. He
exxplai'°ied that, the City 'Council had recently reviewed amend -
meats to the City Code r ega-r ding sprinkler requirements and
that the Public SafetyDepartment had conducted t. .-ensive
research about the need for such systems-. Fire Codd! vari-
ances are reserved for City Council action because the
Cour<11 is the 6o4rd of Appeals or Fire Code matters; the
information about the requested variance- is provided as a
F matter of information to the Pl.anainq Commission
Con nlssio er Zyi.la 'stated that he appreciated the matter of
Jurisdictionon but that he intended to raise the matter with
the City Council as a matter of policy,
Commissioner Marofsky s.tated there should be delineation
between the proposed east common area and the City parte he
stated he was concerned with potential liability and the
need to provide demarcation of the boundaries.
PIQTrtaN by Commissioner Wire, seconded by Commissioner "OTION TO APPROVE
Swlbetq to recommend approval of the applicatior, by Patrick
Goff -Homes, subject to the ten conditions lst ^d in
the April 18, 1988 staff report.`
MOTION by Commissioner Marofsky to amend the I -lain Motion by
adding an 11th con i.t iGn as follows. Tt* east Qommon area
shall be delineated from, the puvlic park area with fencing
or signage or shrubbery) so to effectively indicate the
boundary.
MOTION died for lack of second.
Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes,; Commissioner Marofsky, Nay. MOTION YORE M MOTION CARRIED
carried.
Page 95
Planainq Commission 141T,,tutes
April 27, 1985
Commissioner Marofskv c-1 rifled hs vote, noting ttaat he was
concerned rtIth the proximity of the two buildings near Fern -
brook Lane, as well as the need to betterdelineate the
public park from the common open space.
Commissioner Zylla reiterated his disagreeme>tt with the
philosophy of the City Cod., regarding fire .lanes.
Chairman Pduba called for a review of the April 18, 1988 ACUS DEVELOPMENT
staff report by Di r ettor Tremere. The petition includes a LAND USE GUIDE PLS
housekeeping item directed by the City Council & egard ng the fTs REZONING
adjacent. so-called "Larson Automotive" property. Also, the PRELIMIRCZY PLAT
staff report cover page indicatt,!s the current Culde Plan FINAL PLATO SICTE
Classification and -Zoning. The City Council did approve a PLAN AND VARIANCE
requidinc which was. conditlona,lized on the implementation; of 88022) ,
the proposed plans. The submitted plans wi11ch are subject
to review at this stage, have been reviewed in terms of
proposed zoning, based on the approved new quiiding,
Commiss loner Marofsky suggested that Condition fro. 11 of
Resolution leo., 87{ a be carried forward to the proposed
Resolution regarding the Larson Automotive property, That
condition stipulates when the Development Contract` should be
executed and bdildinq permits issued.
Chairman Pauba' recogrri v},& t=rare:' Senn, petitioner, who
reyie ed the application. stated trta.t approval was not
sought at this time for proposed Lot 1, Klock 2. That would
be subject, to future Site, Plan approval wh a the peoperty is
cleared and ready for re -development. He rev`: ewed the
requested variances, stating they were .. eeded Cue to ori t i-
cal location considerate -loos for the buildinq aftd to- cosi
actor He stated that the eooxzomles of the 0evelogment
Avere such than: the proposed building was (,ssentl al'to the
success of the develop`-aeot:
Mr. Senn also referred to the Engineer's Memorandu,) Mem 27
C.) and indicated that grey desired to retain in entrance
from West Medicine Lake Road, contrary to the
recommendation
He also stated concern with tie second item unc°er Cond"tlon
4o. 9 of theproposed Resol.'ut,.en regarding re rovu.l of 411
existing structures prior to the .issuance, of building
per nits. He suggested that this be tied to the issuancu of
are Occupancy Permittit acrd not to the issuance of -a building
permit.
David Davenport, attorney for the pot,i loner, stated that
the petitioner ' could r.desirtn -the site to eliminate the
variances, but thatti4 petitioner's tiringsry tight.
p:lannina Commission Minutes
April 27t 198
i He stated that the options included Eliminate both side
yard setback var.ianc.-s as suggested f eliminate one
of the variances, either one of which would require an.
adjustment of the number of parking spaces since the build -
would
i,ltd-
would have to be moved; or, reduce the buildinq size
which is not economically feasible
Mr., Davenport cited a number of factors which should be
taken into account. including, the expense df constructing the
frontage roads the upgrading of West Medicine Lake Drive and
Highway SS intersectioat, arid, the direction that a diffet-en-
tial be paid with respect to sower and water area charges
because of the chance in the Land Use jrdidinq. He stated
that the original building had been: larder than that now
proposed and that the petitioner is committed to develcpi.nc
a major design statement at this f.,itersectaon. He also
stated that the inclusion of the Larsen Automotive property
was undertaken at the direction of the City Council and had
proven to be very costty.
He stated than the etitianer recounizes many of these items
wer.! economic considerations' he stated that there are also
site condi+ti.ons which warrant varidneess The wetland
caracteristics and the area road layout,
Mr. Davenport further discussed the rationale for setbacks
and for the proposed var iances. lie noted the pet it;i mer'
narrative and the description of the proim ,t,y of neighbor-
inq buildings, He stated the site sloes provide effective
transition.
He stated the topography of the site represented a hardship
beoause of the constraints it placed on this type of
development. He also explained that the 'variance di.mensior
was about 7 ft rather than the 5 ft., indicated in the staff
report.
Mr*, Davenport commented on the concerns expressed by the
peti.tllonor' with the taming for the removal of ` existing
buildings. He stated that it should be a condition of the
Certificate of Occupancy and the petitioner ` would be pre-
pared to provide the accessary legal assurances th,a* ghat
would occur,
Chairman Pauba inquired as to Oe prospective tenancies and
Mr. Senn stated that they were firming up a number of
tenants but he was not prepared to. indicate specific ones at
this time,
CX issioner Marofsky noted that3. Condition No. 12 of Resolu-
tion No. 87-555X55 called for the uppradi,nq of the Larson Auto-
motive property ars part of this development and that the
petitioner .seemed to be i idicatfing that that worts would ba
aqe 7
Planning Commiss-*on Minutes
April V, 198q
deferred until some future date when the Larson Automotive
site was actually built Capon. If this is acceptable., it
shouldbe specii icaliy carried forward with the Ovelopment
approval
Commissioner Wire inquired as to the color and ,exterior
finish of the proposed bulldinq$ noting, that there were no
graphigs that detailed that
Mr. Senn responded that they were not sure at this time what
the color scheme would be; he st ted they were not that far
along to address it
Discussion ensued regarding exterior ligntinq and the
Ordinance standards with respect to glare.
Comnl sioner Zylla inquired about traffic He asked whether
the service road was a City street or a'` highway property
and, he wondered why the developer had to pay: for. the
Improvements of the sere +oe roar+.
Public Works Director Moore responded and explained the City
policy` and the ownership of the service road
Commissioner Zylla. inquired as to why 'the City and/or the
1laway Department would want to close the curb out onto
Highway 55 and, whether it Gould be required. Public Works
Director Moore stated the City could' require this since i
is a private driveb not a public- access. He explained the
traffic safety ,reasons fur doing that either' now or to the
ttuLej especially as the area developed with businesses,
such as this:
Commissioner Zylla noted the petition: which had been
received at the meeting from neighboring businesses. Direc-
tor
rec-
for Tremer noted :the persons who. had signed the petition
and
et ition
1d the location of the businesses with respect to, this
property and the access onto Highway 55.
Commissioner Zylla inquircd whether the City .should consider
ba,vinq this reviewed by a traffic consultant- Public Works
Director Macre` indicated that the project was reviewed by
the Cis traffic co,45dltant: He stated the problems that
were cited could be resp}l,ved with the .recommended'
improvements.
Commissioner Zylla inquired whether Miers was any City
inancial. assistance involved with this proje .t, such as lax
Increment Financing. Uir eu or Tremere responded there was
none.
Page 9
Pl:anninq Commission flinutes
April 71 19"
Chairman Pauba opened the Public Hearing,, He explained that
I Altion hack bef)tn °co ved from neicthborinq business
i.iterests, regarding the rec,)mmended closure of the orive
aoceLs onto Highway 55 x He also, rioted that a letter had
been received from a Rlohard`Edwards.
Richard Edwards , 112a5 l th Avenue Horth, #81 stated that h
wrote the, letter and he reiterated . his concerns with the
impact upon the wetlands and the wildlife. He stated this
prof t would have a grave ne€tative impact. He stated he
has lived In the area for about two years and he is i.mpres-
sel wz t;.h the account of ; wildlife, that has taken refuge in
this wooded area.
Chairman Pauha stated that the option of no. development
would be only possible' if the City orsome other puha,%c
agency were to buy all the lana and that that was not
feasible.
El izabe th 11orns, 2099 Peninsula Rd . , ` Medicine Lake, stated
that she owns an apartment complex north of the sit te. She
disagrees with any variances -from the yard' setback standards
and especially ones that would allow a larger development
beyond the City requirements. She stated she was concerned
with the increased traffic ,in the area and noted that many
of her tenants were concerned, :the stated that the inten,
ity of the development was greater than the area could sup-
port dnd that reconsidez ation should, be given to the size of
the project, Her primary concern was proper transition and;
the impact upon the neighborhood
Erwin Strobbe, 11215 12th Avenkie Porth, stated that he was in
favor of the development and would even favor some access
from the north which would tend to brinq more traffio past
the apartment, which could be stood for his business. He
stated he owned an apartment complex north of the project as
well; and that the uses proposed would be proper for the
art:
Alard Wheeler, ,11331; Highway 55, stated that: he wanted to
clarify the scope of the future improvements a;, the area
because he was concerned with traffic circulation problems
today and In the f i* ure
A brief discu,sion > ensued regarding the ;proposed ;upgrading
of t -he Intersection and the frontage marl.
Harvey chzebe, i 5 Goldenr;d lanes stated that he hard
submitted the petition from some of the area businesses and
that he owned the "Wheel Center'; shoppinq center to the cast
of this propprty.t He said that businesses In the area were
eonsµrued -boutcirculation prpbler^s and that access onto
Highway 55'` was critical.
4
s aqe 99
Pla,Jiinq Commission Minutes
April 27, 1788
Chairman Pauba closed the Public Hearing.
k
ire for Tremere stated that a summary of the, issues at this.
point included the t minq for removal of the buildings;
whether there should bt 4 private drie access onto Medicine
Lake Drive} arid, the yard setback variances.
KITION by Commissioner Mardfsky seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Wire, to recommeno approval of the Land Use Guide Plan RECt 'IDIK,
A,mendmo-t, adding the following condition: The Development
Contract shall, he executed and the building permit_ shall be
issued with all, fees paid prior to, September 19. 1988, o
this Resolution will be void and the requidjnq wi..11 not t,II,e
place Fv*-ther, there shall _beno extension of this
deadline,_
D scu cion` ensued regarding the added condition and Commis-
sioner Zvlla a --ked .,Yhether the September 1, 1088 deadline
was too short, Mr: Sean stated that it was no.t and that
they plan to be underway with the development by that date
Di rein -.tor Tremere clarified, however, that the condition was
being placed on the requi.din of the Larson Automotive
property which now Yr 'ul.d' be considered part of the overall
development. Mr. Senn Reiterated that he had no problem
with the condition. .
Roll Call. Vote 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. , VOTE -- MOTION r.ARRI
MOTION by, Commissioner Wire, seconded by > Commissioner NICO Ib 1,
11101PROVE
Marofsky to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat a}id PPZt-11M11 V PLAT
the Vezoninq for the land 1!,vol,inq the prop sed "Plymouth RE 6471 G
Peiat" development, subject to the eight condi:tiegs as
listed ire the staff recommendations and subject to the zon-
ing be "nditi ned upon the effectuatldn of the approved.
Land Use Guide Plan classifications..
Roll Call': Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED.
Comi.s :ioner Maro sky discussed. with Mr. Senn the degree of
the rear yard var a.nc-... It. was verified that it is 7 ft.
and not 5'' ft. Extensive diseussio.n ensued reclarding the
Site Flans and Chairman,Pauba polled the rommi.ssioners as to
whether either or any of the variances were appropriate.
MOTION by, Commissioner Wise, seconded by Commissioner Zylla M01ION TO APPROVE
to recommend approval of, Ute Site Plan and Varianc` for Lot SITE PL44 ANO
1Lock 1, of Plymouth Point, for Marcus Development VARIANCE .
ecd - Corporation, sub eot to the conditions the staff recom-
menda ion with, the following excepticeN tr The seoond itemmendation
ender. Condition No. 9 should tae the rel, val of existinq
a
April-981
WU tur s to ssua the lea te of
uu a Per:: approved by the, City AttOrnPYi InQluolnq'
the placement a v rva t on the Project to assure the
impjementatiota; opproved variancefor the side yard only a
t s d, and no, rear yard variance approved; e build-
jhg, hall be redesiqt" the extent n ssa k l m nat .
t ft variance- -0 its
shall be earried, f orward cell,ativ to the u c ,Idi ;1,
Lot t su) t t furtherreview and
approval, u a separate Site, Plana.
Dis ussi t: Onsued regarding the recommendatidn, ' and , Mr.
Davenport and 14r 'I'Bene concurred that the building could be
r daslod to eliminate the rear yard 'setback varianee, with
impacting the required, arkinQ for the development*
Mr. Berm asked whether, the detailed Site- Plans 'could b
revised C l. action- Director r m re
resounded in tete affirmative.
dIt Call Vote. 6 Ayes,, MOTIOR carried. UDVOTEVT 'CARR
rmy auba wa ved the r ad*,n of the ri 1,1+1 '1988 DIAL NO Cha
staff` report. COWITXORAL USE
He r a n d r. Nord, ' wrto ;ox al ud his request d
utd was for purpose
y#
sr'+ ingt
yt ,}[}
ad.'` t}there
h .r' elop =lent
that
r, h * . lu 4R ff.`s Autw j $, ".
Mr. Nord stated tie u durstoo(I the concerns expressed in the
t auruao
lrS.i. report but that felt to sPeC
meat proposed would riot compromi,t,.e the development ur set An
undesirable precedent, sa i tj he had examined alt v a iv s
and that they were not feasible for this u r r l l a t h, is
area
a rma t Pauba iiut< d that there were a number o -car ar
aqees In the area which were apparently, tly, designed and built
with the original home$
brief W oussion ensued reqerdiog possible alternatives
such s eon t- uctinf, a detached Garage {
airman Pauba geed t e Pu ll Hear uq- and, oon deter-
lnI. q that o one was present to s a ,. c u d t ar
o ss o eltulber res- sed concerns, about s tabl is l q
sedapreodet Vithjn the PUD which was based u un certain-
parameters speCial " dent whichcould Impact.
g
future pr sod flee s. orot es and house adds do sa
ae.0
annin 'C cbtu
April 27, 19S_8
In further discus 1, ,, it was n t:-(' that:, the ` 10 ft* sides
yard setback represents r duct n From she City's normal
standard s( a a d ` '
s e i " to plan would,not, apply thruu huut the development as,
a variation of the side yard setback"
MOTION by Ctha rmon Pauba s u d d by Commissioner tuI er X)TION, TO DENY
r nd denial of the Condit"Ma type e rmit Amendment
aferealsonssed *1 draft,
eq s t RandallNord, for the r h
j_TS F ie oomme }ANS& .'x n <
Roll Call 10 to. 6 Ayes. MOTION oarried
OLD 13USIRESS
Cha Irman Pattba -1s ° for a rev lew of the March '1986 OWLEY 110
staffreport and th _- r i ] , 1988 Memorandum. i r tor REVISED SIT
r m r ax .a n d that t petitioner had not been r pr
l-
WETTO t
s nt at the first meat .n and the C m IS, had dei gradd Y.
the item to this meeting, He also noted that, In, response
to an nus'Co Iss un bar 's ,. 't had r 1 d
that the Commission would n ,effect belactinq upon r v sad
Site Plan in udin the feta for a n s ru ural`
additionAn the fors of . parkim. ramp.,
The'petitioner, has submltt+d plans showlaq the prof 11e Of
such an addWon if it, n c,ssary.
fi rman 'at1 a r niz d r bra« ley n.t, who a her
explained the propos it and stated they did riot expec to
have to build the ramp but were prepared to show 1-
x5ss n MF S 'ty* : SY 1i titiAwner whet R.Ae h ?uX{
stood and agreed to proposed Condition No. 81. Mr. . Hoyt
responded in the a firmative*
Et nsi d ,scuss.Aun ensued and Director Tremere x lain d
the recent City counall action r gardInq another developer
w'ho hadqua dthat reuirme t
r i ss s n r ar f sky';stated It eras important fur the
petitioner to realize that a ramp could be required at any
t me erased, u n the detarminat un that a ar ink arobm
exi std 40 t sta ndinq the speoift erg nta e Of the
udq data to cit sppace, r* utatd ads
stood that but felt lul ramp would never )e fteeded as a
practical matt r4 He stated that as a matter of tokunomie' s,
it, wou d even e questionable whether it was worth reta nin
1n fact,a parking ramp- were needed . the building Jfir
rtur rme r xaand that as a mattrK o nurment
g r ad ar probtzni could a resolved ire zany ay$
before the remedy o f a rimp, was n ad d
Page 102
Planting Commission t~* inutse
April 27,. 198
r c ea t l. 5 r, se f -e airing thei'explained th4. City u f'i'i,.JG T' pu p, .,{ ..;.
covenant was to flag that possibility for future owners.
MOTION by Commissioner Wire, seconded ,by Commil sioner MOTION To APPRWVE
tulberg, to recommend approval of the Conditional. Use
Permit and Site Plan Amendment for 3radley Hoyt, subject to
the eight conditions listed in the draft recommendatim
Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carred. VIE - MOTION. CARRIED
WROVAL OF MINUTES
MOTION by Commissioner Zyl la, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO APPROVE
Marofsky, to approve the Minutes of the April 13, 10.88 meet-
Ing, noting two grammatical. chanqes.
Vote. A Ayes* MOTION carried. VOTE - NOTION CARRIED
OTHER BUSINESS'
Director Tremere distributed additional. information ` from
Barton-Aschman Associates regarding the C;Ltv's parking
standards and the study they made of those standards. He
stated the Commission had dirpcted the pkeptiration of
additional: information based upon the City's standards and
this would 4,e available at the next meeting,
Fxtens,ive discussion ensued about the appropriateness of
reducing City) parking standards when there did not appear to
be a pressing problem :other than the desire of property
owners and developers to increase the amount of buildable
l.artd.
Coimii,ssioner Wire stated he was particularly concerned that:
evidence might seem to indicate today that: a particular
shopping center and:d its tenant mix did not need as many
spaces, however, the zoning such as 8-3, might allow more
intense uses that would oenerate a higher level, of parking
in the future for 'the asama shopping facility. He stated the
City Ordinance must anticipate that event.
Commissioner Marofs_ky noted that: there is a significant
degree of overlap in the Zoning Ordinance between zhe 8 -
and 8--3 Districts and thus, it is diffi.cvlt to explain why
the current Ordinance parking standards require one level
for shoppa nq centers in the 8-2- District;` and another ,lovel,
for virtually the same development: in the R-3 District,.,
Director Tremer noted that the study indicates the need to
clarify the City standards, al.tho`igh it does not suggest
that the City must reduce its standards.
r