Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 05-20-2015Approved MinutesCity of Plymouth Planning Commission Meeting May 20, 2015 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair James Davis, Commissioners Marc Anderson, Bryan Oakley, Gary Goldetsky, Jim Kovach, Donovan Saba MEMBERS ABSENT: Commissioner Julie Witt STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barbara Thomson, Senior Planner Shawn Drill, Senior Planner Marie Darling, Planner Kip Berglund, City Engineer Jim Renneberg 1.CALL TO ORDER -7:00 P.M. 2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3.PUBLIC FORUM 4.APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Commissioner Oakley, seconded by Commissioner Goldetsky, to approve the May 20, 2015 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. 5.CONSENT AGENDA A.APPROVAL OF THE MAY 6, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGMINUTES MOTION by Commissioner Kovach, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to approve the consent agenda. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS A.LCBS, LLC (2015017) Chair Davis introduced the request by LCBS, LLC for a preliminary plat for Vicksburg Pines to allow the subdivision of a 1.36 acre parcel located at 815 Vicksburg Lane. Planner Berglund gave an overview of the staff report. Commissioner Oakley stated that the staff report indicated that the existing pool would be removed but noted that the plans do not show that item removed. He questioned if there would be a condition that the pool be removed prior to filing of the plat. Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 20, 2015 Page 2 Planner Berglund replied that item would be required and the plat would need to be revised to show the swimming pool removed, similar to the shed. Chair Davis introduced Kevin Johnson, representing the applicant, who stated that he purchased the home in December and is doing an extensive facelift on the exterior and interior. He noted that one of the reasons he purchased the property is because of the extra lot. He stated that he did speak with the neighbor to the south who wrote the letter opposing the plat, and offer to sell him the lot at a discount but he was not interested. He said he appreciated the concerns of the neighbor but stated that with the value of the lot and home that will be constructed on that lot and the improvement to the existing home on the other lot he believed the neighbor's property value would increase as well. He stated that he spoke with realtors who also agreed that the value of the neighbor's property would most likely increase. Chair Davis opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing, as there was no one present to speak on the item. Commissioner Anderson stated that the application seems to meet all the city's requirements for a plat. Chair Davis agreed, noting that there would be no variances needed for this request. MOTION by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Oakley, to recommend approval of the request by LCBS, LLC for a preliminary plat for Vicksburg Pines to allow the subdivision of a 1.36 acre parcel located at 815 Vicksburg Lane with the added condition that the swimming pool be shown as removed on the plan. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. B. OPUS DEVELOPMENT COMP ANY (2015025) Chair Davis introduced the request by Opus Development Company for a PUD amendment and preliminary plat for a 96,500 square foot office/warehouse building for property located at the southwest comer of 25th A venue and Niagara Lane. Senior Planner Drill gave an overview of the staff report. Commissioner Anderson asked where the storm water would go. Senior Planner Drill responded that when the PUD was developed there was regional ponding, explaining that the ponding was created to support the overall area. He noted that in addition there would be an infiltration basin and identified the location on the site. Commissioner Anderson questioned the percentage of office that would exist and related that to the available parking. Senior Planner Drill responded that the number of parking stalls dictates the percentage of office that could exist and noted that the allowable percentage would be 47 percent. He stated that the Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 20, 2015 Page 3 building is being built on speculation so they do not yet have a tenant but once a tenant is found the owner would work with the tenants to fit the allowable ratio of office and warehouse. Commissioner Anderson referenced the rendering and stated that it does not appear that the building shown would be 32 feet high in relation to the height of the cars and windows and questioned if the applicant used creative licensing. Senior Planner Drill deferred that question to the applicant. Chair Davis introduced Phil Cattanach, representing the applicant, who stated that they are very excited about the opportunity to advance this development in Plymouth. He believed that this would bring a new more modem era delivery system for some of the higher tech and industrial users. He referenced the comment made by Commissioner Anderson in regard to creative licensing with the rendering and stated that he is a developer and not the architect. He stated that there was no intent to misconstrue the height. He explained the benefits to the clear height for the newer users that are interested in this type of product. He stated they believe that this would be well positioned for the market. He stated they have a lot of tenant interest in the building. Chair Davis clarified that the building will be 32 feet high. Commissioner Anderson asked if the HV AC systems would be on the roof, and if so, would the equipment be screened. Mr. Cattanach replied that the HV AC system equipment would reside on the roof and parapet screening would be used. He stated that this would be a place of business for higher end users, noting the decorative fac;:ade proposed. He stated that there may be a viewpoint where you may be able to see the equipment but noted that they are sensitive to providing screening for that equipment. Chair Davis opened the public hearing. Chair Davis introduced Mary Burgess, 2250 Ranchview Lane, who noted that her home backs up to the property and stated there are trees and a runoff pond in that area. She questioned if the trees would be removed. Chair Davis introduced Matt Thell, 15615 24th Avenue, who stated that it appears this request is a consideration for a PUD for office and warehouse space and that the discussion regarding the proposed construction mentioned warehouse and manufacturing. He questioned if there is a possibility that there would be manufacturing in that location in the future. Chair Davis closed the public hearing. Senior Planner Drill identified the trees mentioned and noted that the treed area is off the subject site and would not be affected. He stated that the subject site is currently mowed and there would be additional trees added to the site. He responded to the question regarding manufacturing, stating that while the PUD would allow any 1-2 uses, which would include Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 20, 2015 Page 4 manufacturing, this would be a higher finish and higher rent building. He stated that possibly there could be a med tech type user but noted that type of use would have no impact outside of the building walls. MOTION by Commissioner Oakley, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to recommend approval of the request by Opus Development Company for a PUD amendment and preliminary plat for a 96,500 square foot office/warehouse building for property located at the southwest comer of 25th Avenue and Niagara Lane. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. C. PETERSSEN KELLER ARCHITECTURE (2015031) Chair Davis introduced the request by Peterssen Keller Architecture for a conditional use permit to exceed the maximum allowable garage size for property located at 135 Black Oaks Lane. Planner Berglund gave an overview of the staff report. Chair Davis introduced Kristine Anderson, representing the applicant, who stated that they are working very hard to blend the addition to the existing home without interfering with the neighboring properties. Chair Davis asked if the vehicles would exit from the front while the recreational vehicles would exit from the back. Ms. Anderson replied that there is not a garage door from the back, noting that there is a window that would be used to capture sunlight. Chair Davis opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing, as there was no one present to speak on the item. Commissioner Anderson stated that this is a conditional use permit to exceed the maximum allowable area and questioned if there is anything requiring that what is shown on the plan would be built. Planning Manager Thomson replied that a building permit would be needed prior to construction and the applicant would need to conform to what is approved here. Commissioner Goldetsky stated that he likes what he sees on the plans and did not see any problems with the proposal. Commissioner Oakley stated that the Commission talks about variances and the need to do something that is not allowed by ordinance. He stated that this is an example of allowing the natural surroundings to dictate the design rather than vice versa and would not impact anyone other than the property owner. Chair Davis agreed that this is a nice plan that fits well with the property. Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 20, 2015 Page 5 MOTION by Commissioner Goldetsky, seconded by Commissioner Oakley, to recommend approval of the request by Peterssen Keller Architecture for a conditional use permit to exceed the maximum allowable garage size for property located at 135 Black Oaks Lane. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. D. LARKIN HOFFMAN ATTORNEYS (2015037) Chair Davis introduced the request by Larkin Hoffman Attorneys for conditional use permits, site plan, variances and preliminary plat for Vicksburg Marketplace for property located at the southeast comer of Vicksburg Lane and Highway 55. Senior Planner Darling gave an overview of the staff report. Commissioner Anderson asked who would monitor the signal to determine if adjustments would be needed. Senior Planner Darling responded that the city would take on that role. Commissioner Anderson questioned if the traffic report would recommend no U-tums at the signal on 32nd Avenue. Senior Planner Darling responded that the study indicated that a sign should be posted prohibiting U-tums to avoid conflicts. She stated that drivers would tum down 32°d A venue and use the primary access. Chair Davis stated that it appeared that one of the plans showed a walkway and questioned what would occur when the pedestrian would get to that location. Senior Planner Darling responded that it would connect to an existing crosswalk. Commissioner Anderson questioned if there is a sidewalk or access between the stores or whether patrons would walk through the parking lot. Senior Planner Darling responded that patrons would walk through the parking lot unless they wanted to walk to the north to the crosswalk area. Commissioner Anderson questioned if the traffic study was a requirement of the city and whether the city or developer hired the consultant. Senior Planner Darling replied that a traffic study was required by the city because of the higher intensity uses. She explained that when a traffic study is required, the city hires the traffic consultant, but the applicant pays for the study. Chair Davis questioned if the plan shown reflects the results of the traffic study. Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 20, 2015 Page 6 Senior Planner Darling replied that there are conditions of approval that would require the plan to be amended to change the access as recommended by the traffic study. Commissioner Saba stated that his biggest concerns when reviewing the application were regarding the traffic in and out and the appearance of the buildings. He stated that he does like the layout and proposed design and would vote in favor of the request. Commissioner Kovach referenced the hours of operation and questioned the opening hour for Dunn Brothers located across the street. Senior Planner Darling replied that she was unsure. Commissioner Kovach questioned how this additional coffee business would affect the other Starbucks location in Plymouth Station. Senior Planner Darling replied that would be a market issue. Chair Davis stated that there is a Lowe's-anchored center across the street that would create a similar situation and questioned if there are concessions being made to this property that were not made to that property or vice versa. Senior Planner Darling replied that in general the answer would be no. She stated that staff is recommending a limit to wall signage that is similar to the limitation placed on wall signage at the Lowe's center. Planning Manager Thomson stated that the city did approve the smaller parking spaces and drive aisles on the Lowe's site. She noted that the parking spaces and drive aisles proposed on this site are conforming. Chair Davis introduced Peter Coyle, representing the applicant, who introduced the others in attendance with him to provide information and answer questions. He acknowledged the efforts of staff and thanked staff for their cooperation. He stated that they feel confident with the application and are in agreement with all the conditions recommended with the exception of the traffic conditions, noting that they would bring those concerns forward later in the discussion. He provided background information on Oppidan and stated that the uses proposed are permitted, subject to the conditions in the conditional use permit. He stated that this would be a mixed use center. He stated that the way the site is laid out is not unusual and the variances requested are not unusual. Jay Moore, representing the developer, Oppidan, stated that they are excited about what they are presenting today. He stated that Fresh Thyme Farmer's Market is a healthy organic grocery store and noted that there is another location under construction in Bloomington and 13 other stores in the upper Midwest that are open for business, with another 29 locations proposed to open in the next year. He stated that this would provide residents with more options as they shop for food. He provided photographs of the store and explained that this would be a different layout as there are not rows and aisles; instead there is a wide open footprint where you can see across the whole Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 20, 2015 Page 7 store. He stated that the store would carry fruits and vegetables, fish flown in daily, body care items, vitamins and health care items, as well as beer and wine. He stated that they are still working on the layout and advised that staff has been involved in the discussions. He stated that Goodwill is another tenant for this site and is a favorite client of theirs. He provided background information about the nonprofit organization. He stated that the third tenant is Starbucks Coffee and stated that they, as the developer, are not involved in what would happen to the other Starbucks location as that would be up to the business. Mr. Coyle addressed the variances requested, acknowledging that those are discretionary to the city. He stated that in this case, it is his opinion that the variances being sought are typical of the variances encountered when creating a shopping center. He stated that this is a standard shopping center layout and would be in compliance with the comprehensive plan. He stated that they discussed the architectural and landscape plans with city staff, noting that they are complying with the city center standards although this is not located within the city center area. He stated that originally there was a fast food tenant proposed but after discussions with staff they determined that is not the desire of the city and therefore their plans were modified. He referenced the traffic aspect and stated that like any retail center, traffic is the life blood and convenient access is necessary. He stated that they feel the no right-out and no U-tum conditions are unreasonable and burdensome and are not supported by the studies completed by the city's traffic consultant. Bryant Ficek, Spack Consulting, stated that he reviewed the city's traffic study. He stated that he did not conduct the study but merely reviewed the analysis and results of the SRF study. He stated that he assessed the risk of the U-tum and right-in/right-out and believed that there would be very little risk of those movements, based on the analysis of the SRF study. Commissioner Goldetsky questioned why Mr. Ficek did not feel the need to complete his own analysis since he was going to give an opinion on it. Mr. Ficek replied that he had no disagreement with how the analysis was completed and did not see a reason to complete a separate study as the only disagreement was regarding the conclusions SRF drew from the study. Mr. Coyle stated that there was no reason to do another traffic study as they are in agreement with the analysis and simply do not see a risk from the U-tum or right-in/right-out option. He stated that the original study did not indicate a limitation on the U-tum or right-in/right-out options, noting that those limitations were added through a second and third iteration by the city and their consultant. He stated that those limitations will have an impact on the site and will make the site more inconvenient to access. He stated that the traffic study was required by the city and it appears that that study was not necessarily needed because ultimately it was not the study that recommended the limitations on those aspects but the professional judgment of city staff. Commissioner Saba stated that he would agree that a U-tum would not be acceptable in that location but asked for additional information regarding the right-in/right-out limitation. Approved Planning Commission Minutes May 20, 2015 Page 8 Mr. Coyle explained that a vehicle could enter the site at the right-in, but not be allowed to exit the site at the same point. He stated that he found this prohibition to be an unwarranted hardship. Planning Manager Thomson pointed out that Mr. Coyle stated that there were several iterations of the traffic study. She noted that the applicant and the developer saw drafts that were incomplete and she further noted that the recommendations were not included until the final version, which is included in the staff report. Mr. Coyle responded that he accepted that characterization. Commissioner Kovach questioned if SRF has had a response to the applicant's concerns. Senior Planner Darling stated that the review was not turned back over to SRF as the review of the applicant's response was done internally, and staff continues to support SRFs recommendations. Chair Davis opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing, as there was no one present to speak on the item. Commissioner Anderson questioned if the city would have the authority to change their original decision if the commission were to find that the U-turn and right-in/right-out would be acceptable at this time and later found that those were unsafe. City Engineer Renneberg responded that the U-turn issue could come back before the council for changes. He said he was unsure if the property owner would have the ability to come back and sue the city if the decision regarding the right in/right out access were to be changed. Commissioner Anderson asked for input from the applicant in the case that the commission were to grant the applicant what they are asking for now and whether the applicant would be in agreement with changes in the future, if it is found to be unsafe. Mr. Coyle stated that he would find it hard to speculate, as it would depend on the project. He was unsure that the city would be able to make those changes without the cooperation of the property owner. Planning Manager Thomson asked if it would be helpful for City Engineer Renneberg to talk about the traffic recommendations. City Engineer Renneberg stated that Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane is one of the busiest intersections in the city. He stated that the biggest concern is the potential for crashes or conflicts associated with a right-out option because of the proximity to Highway 55. He reviewed the Hennepin County guidelines in regard to access. He stated that the only two options that did not increase the risk of conflicts were no access and right-in only, which is why the right-in only is recommended. ApprovedPlanning Commission Minutes May 20, 2015 Page 9 Chair Davis stated that he lives near the CVS at County Road 101 and Highway 55 that has the right-in only access and finds it extremely annoying and rarely sees people using that access. He stated that he would not oppose the right-in/right-out option but would oppose the U-tum option. He stated that he has no other problems with the variances or start times. Commissioner Saba stated that behind the Lowe's, the marshland restricts a lot of the traffic that would access that area from that side. He stated that he would not be able to support the U-tum option. Chair Davis agreed that encouraging U-tums is dangerous. Commissioner Anderson questioned if the study looked at allowing a U-tum in combination with not allowing a right tum until the green light is shown. City Engineer Renneberg replied that the study did not review that option. MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Goldetsky, to recommend approval of the request by Larkin Hoffman Attorneys for conditional use permits, site plan, variances and preliminary plat for Vicksburg Marketplace for property located at the southeast comer of Vicksburg Lane and Highway 55, with the removal of the condition eliminating the right-out at the west access to the site. Vote. 5 Ayes. Oakley abstained. MOTION approved. 7.NEW BUSINESS 8.ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Chair Davis, with no objection, to adjourn the meeting at 8:47 P.M.