Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 12-07-2016Approved Minutes Planning Commission Meeting December 7, 2016 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair James Davis, Commissioners Marc Anderson, Gary Goldetsky, Donovan Saba, Jim Kovach, Julie Witt and David Witte MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Steve Juetten, Planning Manager Barb Thomson, Senior Planner Marie Darling, Senior Planner Shawn Drill, and Planner Kip Berglund OTHERS PRESENT: Council Member Ned Carroll 1.CALL TO ORDER -7:00 P.M. 2.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3.PUBLIC FORUM 4.APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Commissioner Goldetsky, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to approve the December 7, 2016 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. 5.CONSENT AGENDA A.APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 2, 2016 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Witte, to approve the consent agenda. Vote. 7 Ay es. MOTION approved. 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS A.THOMAS SWITZER (2016082) Chair Davis introduced the request by Thomas Switzer for a conditional use permit for an oversize garage for property located 13200 57th Avenue. Planner Berglund gave an overview of the staff report. Approved Minutes 1 of 9 Meeting of December 7, 2016 Commissioner Anderson asked the types of uses that would be allowed on the remainder of the property. Planner Berglund replied that there has been a history with the property and stated that perhaps the applicant can speak on the outcome of the outlot being combined with the property, noting that there may be stipulations on the property following the combination. Planning Manager Thomson stated that when this combination was done, the stipulation was that it could not be subdivided in the future. Commissioner Anderson stated that this is a lot of garage space and asked if that would open this up to some type of commercial use. Planner Berglund stated that the applicant has not made staff aware of any plans to use the garage for any type of home occupation. He noted that type of activity would be restricted under the home occupation ordinance. Commissioner Saba stated that the plans do not show a driveway in front of the proposed garage and asked the applicant what the plans are. Chair Davis introduced Thomas and Kristine Switzer, the applicants. Mr. Switzer stated that for financial reasons he does not plan to put a driveway in front of the garage addition at this time. Commissioner Anderson asked the applicant to address his comment regarding possible commercial use of the garage, and the intent of the outlot that has been combined with the lot where the home is located. Mr. Switzer replied that he will not be using the garage for commercial use. He stated that he combined the outlot so that there would not be development on the lot in the future. Chair Davis opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the item. MOTION by Commissioner Goldetsky, seconded by Commissioner Witte, to approve the request by Thomas Switzer for a conditional use permit for an oversize garage for property located 13200 57th Avenue. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. B.KAAS WILSON ARCHITECTS (2016087) Chair Davis introduced the request by Kaas Wilson Architects for a PUD amendment to allow building signs at "The Axis" Apartments located at 350 Nathan Lane. Senior Planner Darling gave an overview of the staff report. Commissioner Goldetsky asked, from the city's point of view, if the sign serves any purpose for safety or for directional purposes or whether it is conceptualized as an advertising item. Approved Minutes 2 of 9 Meeting of December 7, 2016 Senior Planner Darling stated that signs always draw attention and provide some wayfinding to a business. Commissioner Goldetsky asked if approval of this request would increase the number of requests for signs on residential buildings. Senior Planner Darling stated that this is a unique application as the site is zoned planned unit development, which allows deviation from the regulations depending on the design, and in addition, the site has visibility from two highways. She noted that other apartment buildings are within a different zoning district with different regulations. She said she did not think that this approval would bring additional requests. Planning Manager Thomson stated that this is the only LA-5 guided property in the city, which limits the possibility of similar requests. Commissioner Witte asked for clarification on the signs requested. Senior Planner Darling explained that the applicant is requesting illuminated signs to the north and to the east sides of the building, although staff is not recommending illumination for the sign to the east. She stated that the letter provided to the commission this evening is from the property owner to the south, who is showing support for a sign on the building. Commissioner Witte stated that there are a lot of commercial buildings in that area with large signs on their buildings and asked about the restrictions for those types of commercial buildings. Senior Planner Darling explained that there are different allowances for the different zoning districts and provided additional details on the different sign allowances. Commissioner Anderson asked if the city has received a rendering of what the sign will look like when illuminated, specifically the color of light. Senior Planner Darling stated that the City has not received that rendering, but noted that the color of the light would be blue. Chair Davis asked if there is a limit on the brightness of the sign. Senior Planner Darling replied that there are limitations on sign brightness in the ordinance. Chair Davis asked if this request is approved, what would then stop the apartment owner near this location that also has visibility from Highway 169 from making a request as well. Senior Planner Darling noted that would be a variance request as the zoning would not allow it. Commissioner Goldetsky stated that the buildings appear to be qualitatively different. Senior Planner Darling stated that the ordinance has a clear definition of the types of buildings that are allowed wall signage. Approved Minutes 3 of 9 Meeting of December 7, 2016 Commissioner Goldetsky asked how the City would handle similar requests that may come in after this request. Senior Planner Darling stated that there is a different between a PUD amendment and a variance request. She stated that this is a gateway location, and this building has prominence and draws attention as it was intended. Commissioner Witt asked if that is how the determination was made to allow additional height, because this is a gateway location. She asked for additional details on how the earlier decision was made. Senior Planner Darling explained that when the application for the apartment building was reviewed, the City determined as the subject parcel was the last undeveloped parcel near the Highway 55/169 interchange and as the surrounding parcels were developed with large commercial buildings, that whatever was developed on the vacant parcel should have an equal mass and height in order to fit into the neighborhood. She stated that is why the residential apartment building was found to be a good fit. Commissioner Witt stated that this is a multi-use area but noted that she is concerned with precedent setting. She stated that when a variance is granted, it is hard to back off from the stance when additional requests come in. Commissioner Witte stated that he likes the building and agrees that on-building signage would work, but stated that all the other buildings were only allowed to have monuments signs, which are probably more expensive. He asked how St. Louis Park has handled this type of activity and asked if setting a similar policy would address some of these issues. Senior Planner Darling stated that if the commission wanted to change the code that would be a very different practice for the city and reviewed the current sign allowances the City has in place. She stated that most apartment owners have invested in monument signs and therefore she did not know whether they would want to forego that investment to request wall signage. She stated that this is the only site in the city guided LA-5, which allows more density than any other land use classification and was crafted specifically for this site. Commissioner Saba stated that not only is this a unique zoning district, but the building appears to be a condominium, and people may not know that the units are rentals. He stated that the additional signage is needed to draw attention to the building and guide people to the access for the site. Chair Davis introduced Brian Johnson, representing the applicant, who explained the difference between the sign he is requesting compared to the cabinet style signs that the neighboring commercial buildings have. He provided details on the coloring of the signage and proposed lighting. He asked that the east sign also be allowed to be illuminated. He stated that he reached out to the neighboring apartment owner who also expressed support for the illumination of the sign. He provided elevations of the building to show the scale of the signs and aerial photographs to show the scale and proximity of the building to the highways and nearby Approved Minutes 4 of 9 Meeting of December 7, 2016 apartment building. He stated that the building was designed to be more a commercial grade rather than a residential grade. He stated that the request is not for advertising, but more for wayfinding signs in a way that is architecturally fitting and not intrusive. Commissioner Anderson referenced the example photographs that were provided, which featured a blue sign with white lighting. He said he did not understand how a blue sign with blue lighting would be readable. Mr. Johnson stated that he tried to find examples of signs on buildings and was not able to find an exact match to show, but ensured the commission that it would be readable. He stated that in working with the sign contractor, they are within the lighting requirement guidelines. Commissioner Witt stated that the requested type of signage is better fitted to a hotel than a residential use. She stated that Google maps can be used for wayfinding, and she believed that the signage would make this gateway look like one to a big city or downtown area. Chair Davis opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the item. Commissioner Goldetsky stated that he did not believe the signage would cause problems but had concern with the requests that would come in down the road. He said he did not think the signage would be very visible from the highways. Commissioner Witt stated that this is going to be residential and people who live there will be able to find it. She said she had concern with making the area too commercial. She stated that the intersection is very busy, and people who are going to the building are purposefully going there and will not require the wayfinding. Chair Davis stated that this is a great building and the City has achieved its goal of having a prominent building in that location. He stated that the building is well lit and stands out, and no one will have a problem finding it. He said he did not believe putting a name on the building would make it easier to find, and it is a dangerous precedent to start allowing this type of signage on apartments and therefore he would not support the request. MOTION by Commissioner Goldetsky, seconded by Commissioner Witte, to deny the request by Kaas Wilson Architects for a PUD amendment to allow building signs at "The Axis" Apartments located at 350 Nathan Lane, based on the potential for precedent setting, which could lead to additional requests for apartment building signs. Vote. 4 Ayes, 3 Nays (Anderson, Kovach and Saba voting Nay). MOTION to deny approved. C.THE BOOT CAMP, LLC (2016091) Chair Davis introduced the request by The Boot Camp, LLC to allow a sports and fitness facility within an existing industrial building located at 3650 Annapolis Lane. Senior Planner Darling gave an overview of the staff report. Approved Minutes 5 of 9 Meeting of December 7, 2016 Commissioner Witte asked if the hours of operation listed are fixed or whether the hours could be expanded if the business is successful. He asked if there is a difference in traffic between a business where people come and work all day and then leave compared to a business of this nature where people come and go more frequently. Senior Planner Darling replied that the City has approved a number of health and wellness clubs in industrial areas, and the traffic patterns have not overwhelmed the adjacent neighborhoods. She noted that in this situation there is a collector roadway in front of the building. She stated that the higher levels of traffic during class turnover would be limited to the south end of the building. She stated that most of the people who attend classes will come before or after work when there will be less competition for the parking spaces. Commissioner Witte asked if the hours could be expanded. Senior Planner Darling replied that she did not put a specific limitation on the hours of operation as most of the use tends to occur in the evenings and weekends. She noted that more limitations could be added if desired, but at this point there has not been much of an impact with similar uses. Planning Manager Thomson stated that as a conditional use, parking could be monitored over time with possible consequences applied if problems arise. Chair Davis introduced Brandon Sandberg and Mitch Bidleman, representing the applicant, who stated that they have been a part of this company for a few years and have seen the business grow across California and Nevada. They stated that typically the classes are held early in the morning before the workday begins and a 9:30 class for moms. They stated that between the hours of 11 :00 a.m. and 3 :30 p.m. they conduct their daily business duties and do not hold classes. They stated that the next class would then start at 4:00 p.m., and if the business is successful they could add classes later at night, such as a 9:00 p.m. class or a 10:00 a.m. class. They noted that in other locations they have not held additional morning classes past 10:00 a.m. or additional night classes past 10:00 p.m. Commissioner Anderson asked if there would be shower facilities. Mr. Sandberg replied that there would not be showers at this facility as that uses additional square footage. Commissioner Kovach asked if this would be similar to Orange Theory. Mr. Sandberg replied that would be a similar comparison, although there are some differences as people from any background or experience level can feel a part of the class and accomplish their goals. Mr. Bidleman replied that to his knowledge Orange Theory does not provide the nutritional aspect as this business does. Commissioner Saba asked if the activity moves out into the parking lot. Approved Minutes 6 of 9 Meeting of December 7, 2016 Mr. Sandberg stated that typically they stay within the business. He noted that in California there are instances where they received special approval from the landlord for outdoor activity. He stated that this site has additional interior space, and therefore they would not need to be outdoors. He noted that perhaps they would go outside for a warm-up if they had landlord approval. Mr. Bidleman stated that perhaps with an elite class of six to eight people they would go outside to a ten-foot area if they had landlord approval. Chair Davis opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the item. Chair Davis stated that this sounds like a good idea. He wished the business well as there are a lot of these types of clubs opening and a lot of interest in this type of high intensity workout. MOTION by Commissioner Witt, seconded by Commissioner Saba, to approve the request by The Boot Camp, LLC to allow a sports and fitness facility within an existing industrial building located at 3650 Annapolis Lane. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. D.MID-AMERIC A REAL ESTATE (2016092) Chair Davis introduced the request by Mid-America Real Estate for a conditional use permit and site plan amendment for PCI Academy to locate in a C-3 zoning district and add parking for property located at 4305 Peony Lane. Chair Davis stated that staff is asking that the item be continued at the request of the applicant. Planner Berglund confirmed the applicant's request. Chair Davis opened the public hearing and continued the item to the December 21, 2016 meeting. 7. NEW BUSINESS A.CITY OF PLYMOUTH (2016086) Chair Davis introduced the request by the City of Plymouth for review of an environmental assessment worksheet for a mixed use project to be called Agora on the former Four Seasons Mall site located at 4200 Lancaster Lane. Senior Planner Drill gave an overview of the staff report. Commissioner Anderson stated that it was said that the developer is working with agencies to develop solutions or alternatives in order to proceed on the water distribution. He asked how the EA W could be considered complete if that information is not included. Approved Minutes 7 of 9 Meeting of December 7, 2016 Senior Planner Drill replied that this project could stand alone and is not contingent upon those agreements. He noted that if the alternatives could be agreed upon that would be a benefit to everyone, but this application is not contingent upon them. Commissioner Anderson referenced the wetland and the disturbance that would occur. He asked where the mitigation would occur. Senior Planner Drill replied that the applicant would buy wetland credits, and the profits from the credits would be used to create wetlands elsewhere. Commissioner Anderson referenced the use of the foundation mentioned and asked if the applicant would be building upon the existing foundation. Senior Planner Drill replied that the applicant would be building upon some of the existing foundation structure because of the poor soil conditions. Commissioner Anderson stated that his recollection is that some of the area is sponge-like and asked if additional piles would be needed and the environmental impact of that action in terms of noise and vibration as that was not addressed in the EAW. Senior Planner Drill stated that he would accept that comment but would not respond to it tonight. He thought there was a mention of the noise from the pilings within the EA W but noted that if it is not, he will ensure that it is included. Commissioner Anderson asked if the sanitary lift station is a new station or an existing station. Senior Planner Drill replied that there is an existing lift station on a city parcel, which he identified on the map, and noted that will not be part of the plat. He stated that there is a well house on the site and the portion of land on which the well house sits will be dedicated to the City as part of the plat. Planning Manager Thomson identified the portion of the EA W that addresses the noise from the pilings. Commissioner Anderson stated that historically Plymouth has avoided lift stations and stated that he has a hard time believing that an existing retail building generates the same amount of water that a hotel, office building and second hotel generate. He said he did not believe the lift station capacity is correct and asked if there is an alternate to a lift station. Senior Planner Drill stated that staff will look into that and address the item when it moves forward to the council. Commissioner Goldetsky stated that he lives closest to this location and is delighted that the plan looks very nice and will be a vast improvement from the dilapidated building that exists today. He stated that from an environmental impact perspective, he does not see much difference between the activity that occurred when it was a shopping center and the new use. Approved Minutes 8 of 9 Meeting of December 7, 2016 Senior Planner Drill confirmed that the impact from the activity would be similar. Commissioner Saba stated that there is a fair amount of data on the traffic in this area, and it appears that the infrastructure and proposed improvements can easily handle the amount of traffic proposed. Chair Davis opened the public meeting. Chair Davis introduced Jody Shands, 10800 401h Avenue North, who asked if the amount of permeable surface will be similar under the new development to what currently exists. She asked if there will be additional sound and light pollution. Planning Manager Thomson replied that those issues are included in the EA W and the comments will be forwarded to the City Council. Chair Davis closed the public meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Kovach, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to recommend to the City Council that they review the environmental assessment worksheet for a mixed use project to be called Agora on the former Four Seasons Mall site located at 4200 Lancaster Lane, including the questions raised at this meeting, and that there is no need for further investigation regarding environment impacts, and there is no need for an environmental impact statement on the proposed project. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. 8.ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Chair Davis, with no objection, to adjourn the meeting at 8:37 P.M. Approved Minutes 9 of 9 Meeting of December 7, 2016