Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 06-08-1994CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMNIISSION MINUTES JUNE 8, 1994 The regular meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Mike Stulberg. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Mike Stulberg, Commissioners Barb Stimson, , Ed Albro, Jack Hill, Virginia Black, Linda Oja and Allen Ribbe. MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Director Anne Hurlbutt, City trigineer Dan Faulkner, Planning Supervisor Barbara Senness, Associate Planner John Keho, and Planning Secretary Jackie Watson CONSENT AGENDA: Chairman Stulberg asked that item 4.A. be removed from the Consent Agenda and discussed after the Consent Agenda has been acted on. LAUKKA-WH.T LAMS PARKERS LAKE (94047) Chairman Stulberg introduced the inquest by Laukka.Williams Parkers Lake for a PUD Landscaping Plan Amendment to allow the u11 of MNDOT seed mix 1000 in place of approved sod located south and east of Shenandoah Lane and Vicksburg Lane. MOTION by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Albin to recommend approval of the request by Laukka Williams Parkers lake for PUD Landscaping Plan Amendment to allow the use of MNDOT seed mix 1000 in place of approved sod located south and east of Shenandoah Lane and Vicksburg Lane, subject to all conditions listed in the June 1, 1994 staff report. Vote. 7 Ayes, MOTION carried on a unanimous vote. NEW BUSINESS: ZIEMAN CONSTRUCTION (94041) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Zeman Construction Company for a Site Plan Amendment for the addition of 31 parking spaces at 5353 Nathan Lane North. 0 a Planning Commission Mantes June 8, 1994 Page 101 Chairman Stulberg,stated that he would remove himself from any discussion of this request. MOTION by Commissioner Albro, seconded by Commissioner Hill to recommend approval of the request by Zeman Construction Company for a Site Plan Amendment for the addition of 31 parking spaces at 5353 Nathan Lane North, subject to all conditions listed in the June 1, 1994 staff report. Vote. 6 Ayes. Chairman Stulberg abstained. Motion carried. BURGUNDY VILLAGE (93122) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Burgundy Village for a land Use Guide Plan Amendment to reguide 14.1 acres from LA -3 to LA -4 for property located on the east side of Medicine Lake Drive north of Highway 55. Associate Planner Keho reviewed the May 31, 1994 staff report; This included background on staff's conclusion that the affected site is actually _quided for commercial use. Commissioner Hill asked what staff's recommendation for denial was based on. Associate Planner Keho stated that the recommended denialwas primarily based on the allowed uses in LA -4. Commissioner Albro stated that the request met most of the LA -3 criteria. Associate Planner Keho stated that most of the criteria matched' except the requitement for public, open space. He said that if the request is denied City staff will ask to have the site reguided to LA -3. Chairman 5tulberg introduced Mr. Greg Frank representing the petitioner. Mr. Frank stated in the late '60s this site was zoned as R-4 and was approved for development as R-4. He said that after 1970 it was reguided to LA -3, and they were not aware that it was really zoned as commercial. He said he felt that this request should also be compared with the commercial zoning.. He said the site does notmeet the LA4 criteria for, public open spaces, but this also applies to LA -3. This is the only item this site does not comply with. He said that the comparisons of the impact on the Comprehensive Plan and the traffic study also just compared LA -3 and LA -4. He said that traffic would be less under LA -4 guiding than as Commercial. i 0 Planning Commission Minutes , June 8, 1994 Page 102 r Mr. Frank stated that the site is unique because 20 percent of the site contains wetlands. He said that some filled areas on thesitedone over the past years meet some of the wetland criteria. He said it would be better to build a high rise on the site because of the poor soils and for the preservation of the wetlands. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Gene Louismet, the petitioner Mr. Louismet commented on his future plans for the site if the site is reguided. He said that the site currently looks trashy. He said they would build a new service road north of the Highway 55 intersection. He said he had also come to agreement with the owner of the filling station to remove the station and landscape this area. He said that the future building would have 275 parking spaces within the building and other amenities. He said that Burgundy Pond*is full of silt and would like to restore the. pond and install a fountain. He said this would be a 26 million dollar 12-story,nroject with the ground floor 2.7 feet above 100 -Year High Water Mark. Chairman Stulberg opened the Public Hearing. Chairman Stulberg introduced Ms. Erica Urban of 1541 West Medicine Lake Drive. Ms. Urban said she thought this site was zoned for a shopping center. She said she did not want to seen high rise in this area adjacent to the wetlands and Medicine Lake. She said that if reguiding of the site was approved it could lead to other reguiding in the area and the horizon could become filled with high rise buildings. She asked how many units would be in the high rise if it were constructed. Chairman Stulberg introduced Ms. Amy Sakayan of 1029 West Medicine Lake Drive. Ms. Sakayan stated that she lives across the street and she would be looking at this 12 story building from her backyard, She said she was opposed to a 12 -story building and would prefer a 3 -story building on this site. She said that the heavy traffic would be a safety issue for those who walk and bicycle in this area. Chairman. Stulberg introduced Mr. Art Rafshoi of 1800 Hillsboro Lane. Mr. Rafschol stated that Mr. Louismet was well known for his financial well being and character. He said that Mr. Louismet's character was legendary in the Twin Cities as well as throughout the country because of his creativity. He said the City could not go wrong with Mr. Louismet as the builder of this project. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Dick Milner of 2355 Jonquil Lane, Mr. Milner said he felt this complex would complement this site on Medicine Lake. He said it would beat having a steel warehouse of some sort on the lake, a Planning Commission Minutes June8,1994 Page 103 Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Robert Lee o€1105 West Medicine Lake Drive. Mr. Lee stated that the closest multi -unit building near this site is the West Medicine Lake Apartment building which is 3 stories; the rest of the area is single family homes. He said the construction of this proposed project would be an eyesore. He said that the traffic in the area is already heavy, and the possible increase of 275 more cars would make safety a real concern for children. He said the wetlands contain a lot of wildlife and this development would drive the wildlife away. Chairman Stulberg introduced Ms. Annamarie Lee of 1105West Medicine Lake Drive Ms. Lee stated her concerns for the wetland and wildlife. She said there is a big difference between 3 -story and 12 -story buildings, and a 3 -story building would be more suited to the site. She stated her concern fora loss in residential values and safety. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Louis Lavoie of 2675 Larch Lane. Mr. Lavoie stated that the resource of the lake should be preserved. He said he was against the height this reguiding would allow for a building. He said that the ITT buildings destroy the ambiance of the lake. Chairman Stulberd introduced Ms. Bridgett Jodell of 10100 South Shore Drive Ms. Jodell stated that the area should be looked at as a resource and is already overdeveloped. She said she was against a 12 -story building on this site but would also be against a 3 -story building on the site. She said the lake is an economic resource and she finds it hard to believe the site can be built on. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Gary Googins from the Sun Rise Bay Condominiums, Mr. Googins stated that he was a member of the Sun Rise Bay Condominiums Board of Directors and most residents there oppose this proposal' because of the height of the possible development, and the destruction of the wetlands and wildlife. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Jim Freitag of 1035 West Medicine Lake Drive. Mr. Freitag stated that the area is not trashy. He said there was a lot of wildlife on the site. He said his main concerns were the increase in traffic and safety. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Jim Dochniak of 1115 West Medicine Lake Drive. Planning CommissionMinuics June 8,:1994 Page 104 Mr. Dochniak stated his biggest concern was the traffic and the negative impact this development would create. He said he heard anew boat launch was to be constructed up the road which would create more traffic. He said the City needs to consider some other way to direct traffic in the area besides West Medicine Lake Drive. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Harold Hill of 1111 West Medicine Lake Drive. Mr. Hilt stated he thought this site was to be a shopping center and he was concerned as to whether the site could support this proposed type of development. He said this project would negatively impact the value of homes in the area and create an economic hardship for the residents. He said the use of property has been established, and to rezone would negatively impact the area. He said he could not support High Medium Density either. Chairman Stulberg closed the Public Hearing. Associate Planner Keho stated that a past proposal for a shopping center which included a Rainbow grocery store did not succeed. He explained that the number of units that could be placed on this site would range from 141 to 250 units depending on whether the guiding was 1,A,3 or LA -4. Commissioner Hill asked what determines the number of units that can be placed on site. Associate Planner Keho responded that it would depend on the application type. Chairman Stulberg stated that any reguiding of other parcels would be handled in the same way as this request. He said that each request is reviewed on its own merits. Associate Planner Keho discussed the traffic study and the impacts which would result from reguiding from LA -3 to LA -4. City Engineer Faulkner stated that the roadways could handle some increase in traffic but some improvements are recommended, such as lane widening, tum lanes and relocation of the frontage road. Chairman Stulberg stated that the impacts on property values front development are not dealt with by Planning Commission, this is the responsibility of the City Council. Commissioner Ribbe asked if this site could support this proposed development since a previous study said it couldnot. Mr. Frank responded that he was not aware of a previous study. He said there are some wetlands on the site, He said that by concentrating a building with a high profile Planning Commission Minutes June 8, 1994 Page 105 they would not have as much soil correction to do and there would be less impact on the 14 acres. Commissioner Hill asked if soils were looked at when an application is submitted. City Engineer Faulkner stated that the City does not look at soil conditions. Commissioner Black asked how many units would be allowed on the site with LA -3 guiding. Mr. Louismet responded that 24 units would be built on floor, LA -3 guiding would allow only 12 units in a building. Commissioner Black ask whether the Commission could limit the number of units allowed on the site if they approved the reguiding to LA -4. Associate Planner Keho responded that this could not be done at this stage, it would have to be done when a site plan for the building was submitted and reviewed. Commissioner Hill asked if some of the traffic could be directed onto the service road to eliminate congestion. City Engineer Faulkner responded that this would be done. He said that if this future development was approved very little traffic would move along West Medicine Lake Road. Commissioner Albro asked which condition of LA -4 guiing this inquest did not meet Associated Planner Keho reviewed the land Use Guide Plan criteria. He said that the Commission needed to look at what uses are allowed under both guid ngs and there review what the impact of the allowed uses would be under LA -4 guiding. Commissioner Albm asked if the applicant could get more horizontally on the site. He said that the impact of a high density, multi story structure was discussed previously by the Commission regarding another application and site and citizens stated that a high rise would have been better so as to not impact the wetlands. He said,a high rise would create less disturbance during construction. He said that he would like to see something denser than single family detached on this site if it was possible to control the density. He said that the City was known as not being diverse in types of housing. He asked if this site was within the Shoreland Management Overlay District. Director Hurlburt responded that is was just outside the Shoreland District. a Planning Commission Minutes. June g,. 1994 Page 106 Commissioner Oja stated that this type of building does not fit with the neighborhood.. If this type of housing is heeded in the City it should be on a site closer to the ITT buildings. Commissioner Albin stated that with the present density a "sprawl" could be built on the site which would tear up the site. Associate Planner Keho stated that this could also be done under LA -4 guiding, but LA -4 guiding would encourage more levels in the structure. Commissioner Black asked if the site were reguided to LA -4 would the City be faced with this type of building if it met all the criteria. Director Hurlburt stated that Conditional Use Permit would be required and the burden would be on the City as to whether is could be approved or not. She said that nothing can be predicted until an application is received by the City. Mr. Frank stated that the current LA -4 guiding only allows a maximum height of 3 stories, so tiffs type of structure could be denied with a Conditional Use Permit. It does not give the petitioner the right to build a 12 -story building. Commissioner Hill stated that if the guiding was left as LA -3 it ties the hands of the property owner, since the Conditional Use Permit allows the Planning Commission to control the number of units allowed. MOTION by Commissioner Bill, seconded by Commissioner Albro; to recommend approval of the Land Use Guide Plan Amendment for Burgundy Village to reguide 14.1 acres from CR -2 to LA -4 for property located on the east side of Medicine Lake Drive north of Highway 55. Substitute Motion by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Black to recommend denial of the Land Use Guide Plan Amendment for Burgundy Village, based on the finding that the site can be reasonably developed under LA -3 guiding. Roll Call Vote. 3,Ayes, Commissioners Stimson, Hill, Albro and Ribbe voted Nay. Motion failed on a 4-3 vote. Commissioner Albro stated that the Commission is now back to the original main motion for approval of the reguiding. Commissioner Albro asked if the Planning Commission needed to include a recommendation to reguide the site from CR -2 to LA -3. 0 Planning Conunission Minutes June 8, 1994. Page 107 Director Hurlburt said the City would initiate reguiding the site from CR -2 to LA -3 if the rezoning request of this application is not apprur ed. She said that if the City received a request that met all the CR -2 criteria before the reguiding was done to LA -3, it could not be stopped. Commissioner Black stated that she liked the concept of condensed units which would save the wetlands but does not like idea of multiple units in general. She said she would like to see some zoning classification which would limit the site to alower number of units, because the impact of such a large number ofpeople would be dramatic on the area. Director Hurlburt stated that the LA -4 guiding would allow more units per building. She said that a new district designation would have to be created to limit the number of units in condensed housing types. Commissioner Stimson stated that she supports the motion to approve but the petitioner needs to understand the citizens feelings and maybe come up with some alternative type of housing on the site to protect the wildlife. Chairman Stulberg stated that the Planning Commission is charged to support the City ordinance and said he feels .his site can be developed as a shopping, center. He said he can support either the LA -3 or CR -2 guiding, whichever is legally correct. Commissioner Rbbe stated he was not in favor of the reguiding and was not in favor of the site being rezoned to LA -3. He said t` '- nroposal would nottcompliment the neighborhood. He said that the City is not enhanced by voting for greater density. Commissioner Albm stated that there would be more damage to the environment allowing 12 units per building under LA -3 guiding, than reguiding to LA -4 where the City would have some control on the number of units allowed with the Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Black asked if the City would initiate the reguiding to LA -3 quickly if this inquest is denied. Director Hurlburt responded that staff would initiate the reguiding as soon as the City Council has made a determination. Roll Call Vote, 3 Ayes; Commissioners Black, Oja, Ribbe and Chairman Stulberg voted Nay: Motion to approve failed on a 3-4 vote. MOTION by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Black to recommend denial of the request by Burgundy Village to reguide the site from LA -3 to LA -4, based on the finding that the site can be reasonably developed as zoned. a Planning Commission Minutes June 8, 1994 Page 10& Commissioner Black asked who would initiate the new reguiding if this request is denied. Director Hurlburt stated that staff would ask the City. Council to direct staff to initiate the reguiding from CR -2 to LA -3. ' Commit,sioner Hill asked Chairman Stulberg if he wanted the site to remain as commercial. Chairman Stulberg stated that he was open to holding a public hearing for the reguiding of this site if this motion to deny passes and is approved by the City Council. Roll Call Vote on Motion to deny. 4 Ayes, Commissioners Stimson, Hill, and Albro voted Nay. Motion passed on a 4-3 vote. i BETH AND PERRY BLOOM (94040) Chairman Stulberg introduced the inquest by Beth and Perry Bloom for a RPUD Preliminary Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a 4 1/2 foot tall fence in the front yard setback at 18740 39th Avenue North. Associate planner Keho reviewed the May 31, 1994 staff report. Commissioner Oja asked what the allowed fence height would be if it was in the back yard. Associate Planner Keho responded that a 6 -foot high fence is allowed in the backyard. Chairman Stulbug introduced Mrs. Beth Bloom, the petitioner. Mrs. Bloom stated that the reason for the fence request is to enclose her dog so she would be able to keep him unleashed. She said they had the approval of the Homeowners Association for the fencing. Commissioner Oja asked if the fence would obstruct the view for vehicles on the cul- de-sac. Associate Planner Keho stated that the fence would not obstruct view, that it would be further back than 10 feet from edge of property. Chairman Stulberg opened and closed the Public Hearing as there was no one present to speak on the request. Planning ConunissionM mites June 8, 1994 Page 109 MOTION by Commissioner Stimson, seconded by Commissioner Black, to recommend approval of the request by Beth and Perry Bloom for a RPUD preliminary planAmendmentandConditionalUsePermittoallowconstructionofa41/2 -foot tall fenceinthefrontyardsetbackat1874039thAvenueNorth, subject to all conditions listed intheMay31, 1994 staff report. Roll Call Vote. 7 Ayes. Motion carried on unanimous vote. Chairman Stulberg called a recess at 9:00 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9: 10 p.m. DISCUSSION ON SHORELAND MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS Director Hurlburt reviewed the proposed revisions to the'Shorehand ManagementOrdinance. She said that the City has a deadline from the DNR to get done by July 1. Director Hurlburt introduced Mr. Blair Tremere, the consultant working with the CityontherevisionstotheShorelandManagementOrdinance. Mr. Tremere reviewed the history of the ordinance and gave an explanation of a flood plain and.shorelandoverlay district. He reviewed the changes recommended to the ordinance. He said that there is very little land left in Plymouth that is undeveloped or privately owned in the sboreland overlay arra. He said that the City map will also beupdatedtoincludestreams, lakes, and high water marks. Commissioner Albro stated that there are no minimum lot sizes stated in the ordinance. He asked whether the City's setback requirements would apply when they are morestringentthanthoseoftheState. Mr. Tremere stated that the City's Ordinance is already more stringent than that of theStatesotheseitemsarenotintherevisions. Commissioner Albro asked if the proposed changes were to bring the ordinance into compliance with the State law. He asked why minimum floor elevations are measuredinverticalfeetratherthanalinearmeasurement. Director Hurlburt responded that the changes were to comply with the State law. She said that some of the sections deal with horizontal measurements. Commissioner Albro asked why criteria for protecting water quality on page 14 was notconsistent. a Planning, Commission lvMnutes June 8, 1994 Page 110 Mr. Tremere explained the difference between recreational and general development for sewage and septic systems. Commissioner Albro stated that the biggest polluter of water is the runoff from lawns. He asked why certain lakes have different setbacks and densities. Mr. Tremere stated that this ordinance covers only Shorehmd areas. He said that there rill probably be other restrictions coming from other State agencies in the future. He, said that density in Plymouth is no problem because in the undeveloped areas the City is more restrictive. He said that each of lake has different characteristics and different standards. Director Hurlburt stated that the Public Hearing for these ordinance revisions will be on June 22. She asked the Commissioners to call her with any concerns they may have. CONSULTANT ASSISTANCE FOR PREPARATION OF WETLAND ORDINANCE Planning Supervisor Senness discussed the June 2, 1994 memo to the Planning Commission. She said she hoped to bring a recommendation to the City Council on June 20, 1994 regarding this item. Chairman Stulberg asked if the Planning Commission could meet with the consultants once they are selected to discuss concerns and give some input. Director Hurlburt stated that this would be done. MOTION to adjourn by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Oja. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. ra