Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 07-12-1995CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1995 MEMBERS PRESENT Chairman Mike Stulberg, Commissioners Barb Stimson, Virginia Black, Christian Preus, Allen Ribbe, Linda Oja and Saundra Spigner STAFF PRESENT: Director Anne Hurlburt, Planning Supervisor Barbara Senness, Planner Shawn Drill, and Planning SecretarySusanVasquez CALL TO ORDER; Chairman Stulberg called the meeting to order at 7:14 P.M. MINUTES: Minutes of the June 28, 1995 were not presented. STAFF REPORTS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. ROTTLAND COMPANY (95061) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Rottland Company to amend the Zoning Ordinance text regarding parking requirements for multi -family dwellings, reducing, under specific circumstances, the total number required per unit. Planner Drill gave an overview of the June 30, 1995 staff report. Commissioner Ribbe asked how the 4.5 parking space is applied in multiple_ familydevelopmentsunderthecurrentZoningOrdinance. Planner Drill stated that the 0.5 parking space per unit is for guest parking. He noted, as an example, that for every ten units the developer would need to provide five guest parking spaces. Commissioner Black asked why this matter was being brought before the Commission now, when it would appear more logical to present it simultaneously with staff recommendations regarding street width and design, a matter currently under study. Planner Drill stated that it is Staff's duty to respond promptly to all individuals and entities that present a formal petition regarding any matter, regardless of the priority which staff may have assigned to that particular matter. In this case, Staff concurs with the petitioner's announced goals of reducing both the percentage of impervious surface and the overall costs of building in the City. Planning Commission Minutes July 12, 1995 Page 147 Director Hurlburt confirmed Planner Drill's remarks, emphasizing that Staff would eventually have proposed this -or a very similar—amendment, and stating that by attending this petition at this time the Commission is in no way compromising itself nor limiting its options with regard to any matters to be considered at a later date such as street width or design. Commissioner Stimson asked whether the City had approved any complexes for which land had been set aside forfttum construction of additional parking spaces if needed, but the actual parking spaces had not been built. Planner Drill replied that several developments had been approved on that basis in the past. Chairman Stulberg added that during his years of participation on the Planning Commission, and'to the best of his recollection, the City has never had to request any of those builders to construct the additional parking spaces at a later date. Chairman Stulberg introduced the Petitioner, Mr. Donald Jensen of Rottland Company, Inc. Mr. Jensen stated that the idea of amending the zoning ordinance stemmed out of his fum's'efforts to reduce building costs for future subdivisions in Plymouth. Elis firm considers that_one way of reducing construction costs would be to eliminate the requirement for an additional parking area in each development. That could reduce the amount of land required for a development, thus reducing costs of building; leave a larger extension of land free for landscaping and recreational use; or a combination of the two. Commissioner Oja inquired about the current cost of building a parking space. Mr. Jensen stated that he believed it to be between $300 and $500 per parking space, plus the cost of the land, depending on size and on the kind of impervious surface applied. Commissioner Spigner inquired whether the proximity of parking spaces to the corresponding townhomes would be considered should the amendment be passed. Mr. Jensen explained that builders, as well as Staff, always contemplate the proximity of visitor parking to the dwelling deemed its user. Rottland, Inc. plans parking spaces so that 0.5 are within 200 feet of the entrance of each townhome, which is about half of the distance normally planned by grocery or discount stores for their customer parking. Planning Supervisor Senness replied that the factor of proximity is always taken into Planning Commission Minutes _ July 12, 1995 Page 148 Planning Supervisor Senness replied that the factor of proximity is always taken into account by the Planning Department in c•,-nluating building plans. Commissioner Oja expressed her concern that under the revised Ordinance builders would make provision for fewer parking spaces because they would no longer be required to build those spaces nor to provide proof of parking space availability for future expansion. Both Mr. Jensen and Planning Supervisor Senness responded that the amended' Ordinance did not necessarily, mean that fewer parking spaces would be provided in new multiple family developments. The amendment simply allows the Planning Department, under clearly defined circumstances, to count potential parking spaces on garage aprons when determining compliance with the parking ordinance. Commissioner Stimson inquired whether the private driveways considered fire lanes are labeled "no parking". Director Hurlburt responded affirmatively. Commission; Stimson asked if, in this particular case, cars could be parked on the private street which passes through the development, and, if so, would those parking spaces on the private street be counted toward We total in determining whether the builder has complied with the parking requirement under the current Zoning Ordinance. Director Hurlburt responded that on -street parking is never contemplated for that purpose. Commissioner Spigner asked whether fire ordinances had been consulted in proposing parking in driveways. Planner Drill responded that the proposed amendment was reviewed by the City Fire Inspector. Commissioner Black noted her preoccupation with the insufficiency of parking in many existing townhome complexes, stating that she feared the new Ordinance would impact negatively on that problem. Planner Drill emphasized that the sufficiency of parking in both multi -family complexes and in private homes continues to be a matter closely examined by the Planning Department in approving any project, Commissioner Black, after reconfirming with Mr. Jensen that the actual cost of parking space construction Would be between $300 and $500 per space, noted that the savings per townhome would be a maximum of $1,200, a Planning Commission Minutes July 12, 1995 Page 149 Commissioner Black noted that the savings per townhome would be a maximum of 1,200. Commissioner Oja concurred with Commissioner Black's concerns, adding that she was reluctant to approve the amended Ordinance unless it were considered simultaneously with any proposals that Staff may have regarding street design changes.. Director Hurlburt commented that the original intent of the Zoning Ordinance was to avoid parking in front of garages for common use at apartment complexes. It was not intended to affect townhomes, and only does so because of its ambiguous wording. That ambiguity has, unfortunately, not been dealt with over the years. Staff considers the amendment both logical and timely, and recommends that it be approved. Chairman Stulberg opened and closed the public bearing as there was no one present to speak on the issue. MOTION by Commissioner Stimson, seconded by Commissioner Preus, to approve the proposed Amendment to the Text of the Parking Ordinance for Multiple FamilyDwellingsunderthespecificcircumstancesdeemedtherein. MOTION by Commissioner Black to table the measure until such time as Staff can present it in conjunction with street design and width proposals currently understudy. MOTION FAILED due to lack of a second. ROLL CALL VOTE on the MAIN motion. 4 Ayes (Stimson, Preuss Ribbe, Stulberg) and 3 Nays (Black, Spigner and Oja). The MOTION PASSED, and will be considered by the City Council in their regular meeting of August 1, 1995. B. U.S. HOME CORPORATION (95063) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by U.S. Home Corporation for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the temporary stockpiling of dirt on the North side of future County Road 9 between Vicksburg Lane and Dunldrk Lane. Planner Drill gave an overview of the revised staff report of July 10, 1995, noting that, contrary to the original report of July 5, and on the basis of clarifications made by thePetitioner, Staff now recommends approval providing that the Petitioner complies with ten specific conditions. The Petitioner has clarified that the dirt to be stockpiled would all originate over the next few months as West Branch Second and Third Additions are excavated. It would eventually be used in the development Ind grading of the WestBranchFourthAddition. Chairman Stulberg asked whether the builder was already excavating at West Branch 0 Planning Commission Minutes July 12, 1995 Page 150 Second and Third Additions, and needed a place to stockpile the dirt almost immediately. Planner Drill responded affirmatively, Commissioner Ribbe asked whether the primary mason for Staff changing its recommendation was due to the fact that the Petitioner reduced the period of stockpiling required from two years to one. Planner Drill responded that while timing was an important consideration, the clarification that the dirt was both to originate in and be destined for final use in the area was the predominant factor in deciding to revise Staff's recommendation. Chairman. Stulberg introduced the Petitioner, T%fr. Bill Pritchard of Orrin Thompson Homes. Mr. Pritchard apologized for any misunderstanding caused by the lack of a more thorough initial explanation to Staff on the builder's part. Nevertheless, he noted, those :matters have now been cleared up. He explained that Orrin Thompson had originally discussed obtaining the CUP for one year, but in view of a slowdown in the housing market, they had modified that request to two years. Now, however, their company is willing to return to the original time limit, and has so manifested to Staff, Chairman Stulberg opened and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the issue. MOTION by Commissioner Black, seconded by Commissioner Spigner; to approve the Conditional Use Permit, under the ten special conditions recommended by Staff. ROLL CALL VOTE on the motion. 7 Ayes, MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY and will be considered by the City Council in their regular meeting of August 1, 1995. C. OPUS CORPORATION (95064) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Opus Corporation for a PUD PreliminaryPlanAmendment, Conditional Use Permit, and Final Site Plan to allow construction of a 98,577 square foot multi -tenant office/warehouse building in the Bass Creek Business Park, on the Northwest comer of Bass Lake Road and Trenton Lane North, Planner Drill gave an overview of the staff report of July 5, 1995, The ,project's positive characteristics include a small modification in landscaping so as to allow the seeding of Prairie grass on the wester portion of the lot bordering on the wetland, so as to create a more natural environment, and the planting of a several bushes and trees along the side where the loading deck will be located so as to create a natural barrier a Planning Commission Minutes - July 12, 1995 Page 151 Which will reduce the visual impact of the complex on neighboring dwellings. Commissioner Preus requested an explanation of the results of the noise study for this project. I Planner Drill stated that study results confirmed an existing level of noise in the area, i particularly from traffic on Bass Lake Road, which is so high that the additional sound from the new complex will be virtually imperceptible. ; Given that 68% of the total lot for this complex will be covered with an impervious surface, Commissioner Stimpson asked whether other complexes in the area also have percentages of impervious surface so far above the 25% norm established for shoreland areas. Planner Drill stated that the neighboring lots have similar percentages of impervious surface. DirectorHurlburt noted that the new ordinance to promote wetland conservation has impacted this project, nevertheless Staff has made a careful evaluation of the drainage of the complex and confirms that the environmental impact of this project will be minimal. Planner Drill added that water from the complex would drain to the North, toward Pike Lake. Chairman Stulberg introduced Michele Poster, Senior Director of Real Estate for the Petitioner, the Opus Corporation. Ms. Foster noted that her fine concurs heartily with the Staff's recommendation for approval. Opus Corporation has had great success with a similar complex which they are currently finishing in another area of Plymouth. That facility is already 100% leased, even though construction is :not yet finished. With regard to the complex currently under construction, Ms. Foster confirmed that the entire park is well drained into ponds with no adverse environmental impact. The same will be the case for the new project once it is approved, and every care has been taken in the architectural design and plans for landscaping to assure that the complex be aesthetically pleasing and make a positive contribution to the area, Chairman Stulberg opened and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the issue. MOTION by Commissioner Oja, seconded by Commissioner Black, to approve the PUD Preliminary Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit, and Final Site Plan subject to the conditions recommended by Staff, a Planning: Commission Minutes July 12, 1995 Page 152 ROLL CALL VOTE on the motion. 7 Ayes. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY and will be considered by the City Council in their regular meeting of August 1, 1995. NEW BUSINESS A. DRAFT TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE Director Hurlburt gave a brief explanation of the issues involved in tree preservation, noting that the City's current policy is set forth in a City Council Resolution. Nevertheless, Staff feels that at this time it is pmdent to make that policy clearer and more easily enforced. To that end, Staff is recommending that the current policy be repealed and replaced with a Tree Preservation Ordinance, which would be included as a section of the Zoning Ordinance. Director Hurlburt then presented a brief comparison of the current policy and the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance. Under the Tree Preservation Ordinance, any new development would be required to present a formal Tree Preservation Proposal. The current preservation policy requires only that builders indicate significant trees on the grading plan, but there is no requirement that they actually preserve them. The Tree Preservation Ordinance clarifies the definition of a "significant tree"; establishes that the removal of more than a certain percentage of them will result in the requirement to reforest on a 1.25 for 1 per diameter -inch of excess removal, or to pay restitution to a special reforestation fund administered by the City; and provides a clear standard for evaluating whether a significant tree has actually been preserved (i.e., when at least 75 % of its root system has been conserved). The Ordinance also adds the requirement of a bond or compliance guaranty to assure that either the approved reforestation plan is carried out or the corresponding fines are paid, Director Hurlburt added that a draft of the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance was reviewed with a number of Developers who work in Plymouth. They had several positive comments in this regard, indicating that it is clearly in their best interest to conserve trees as a means of conserving housing values in the area. Nevertheless, the developers are concerned about having clear, concise definitions of terms, as well as absolute clarity in the wording of the Ordinance. Builders also ask that the multiple variables of City regulations affecting developers be considered simultaneously, so that builders are not punished excessively, Further concerns of builders include that responsibilities for compliance and enforcement be clearly defined, and that some kind of flexibility be incorporated into the Ordinance., Commissioner Preus asked why Staff recommends that in any reforestation project only a maximum of 1/4 of the trees may be of a single variety, He also inquired as to why the reforestation should not be done with an identical number of trees of the same a Planning. Commission Minutes July. 12, 1995 Page 153 variety as those removed during the construction. Director Hurlburt replied that reforestation programs using at least four different varieties of trees are intended to avoid the possibility of all the trees being simultaneously destroyed by a single disease or insect infestation. With regard to simply replacing all trees with others of the same variety, it is important to bear in mind that the development of a lot changes the entire ecosystem. The resulting ecosystem may no longer be the most appropriate for a particular variety of tree that monopolized the site previously. The new trees to be planted must deal with housing and other human disturbances. Chairman Stulberg introduced Paul Buck, the City Forester, who stated that the new ordinance would allows reasonable administration of trees on new properties just being Ideveloped. Commissioner Oja inquired whether the City has a list of acceptable trees for reforestation in the area. City Forester Buck replied that no such list has been established because each area is too different to say that you can only plant certain kinds of trees. The proposed Ordinance would limit the trees to any of those which are capable of growing in the area. Chairman Stulberg introduced Karen Christofferson, 'Public Policy Director of the Builder's Association of the Twin Cities. Ms. Christofferson confirmed that developers and builders are uniformly interested in tree preservation, since the trees hold great value for them as as attraction for potential clients. One concern that buOders have is that of assuming tree preservation once a development is sold. To that end, they have wondered if it would not be possible to put in a covenant in their contracts so that home buyers would be obligated to protect trees. One possibility they have considered would be to obligate home buyers to plant a certain number and/or kind(s) of trees during the first certain number of months of occupancy, Chairman Stulberg introduced Mark Anderson from Lundgren Brothers. Mr. Anderson stated that the proposed ordinance is well drafted and staff has done a good job, but he has some minor comments, He considers it vital that there be some flexibility so that developers and builders can do what they have to do. He also is concerned with the absolute clarity of terms in which the Ordinance is drafted, especially with regard to where the Ordinance would apply. These matters are key to making this a good Ordinance for all interested parties. Chairman Stulberg introduced Bill Pritchard of the Orrin Thompson Homes, a Planning Commission Minutes July 12, 1995 Page 154 Mr. Pritchard stated that their fur agrees with the ordinance as it is proposed but 1 wants some allowance made for trees which are removed in compliance with Federal, { State, County or Municipal Regulations controlling wetlands, etc. i Commissioner Preus noted that the developers that appear at Commission meetings are I reasonable people who have shown an interest in the preservation of trees. Nevertheless, he asked, what about the developers that have shown virtually no interest { in preservation? Can we build safeguards into the Ordinance so that they aren't free to destroy all of the trees. I Director Hurlburt noted that Staff will present a preliminary report to the Commission fbeforethepublichearing. t B. PRESENTATION ON STREET DESIGN Director Hurlburt announced that at the next meeting of the Planning Commission there will be a presentation about street design. A special schedule may be necessary to accommodate that presentation. MOTION by Commissioner Preus, seconded by Commissioner Black, to adjourn, Vote. 7Ayes. MOTION CARRIED unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9t07 p,m, a