Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 03-07-2018Approved Minutes 1 of 7 Meeting of March 7, 2018 Approved Minutes Planning Commission Meeting March 7, 2018 MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chair Bryan Oakley, Commissioners Donovan Saba, Kira Vanderlan and Justin Markell MEMBERS ABSENT: Chair Marc Anderson, Commissioners Julie Witt and David Witte STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barb Thomson, Planner Kip Berglund OTHERS PRESENT: Councilmember Ned Carroll 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PUBLIC FORUM 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Commissioner Vanderlan, seconded by Commissioner Saba to approve the March 7, 2018 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION approved. 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. APPROVAL OF THE FEBRUARY 21, 2018 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by C_ommissioner Vanderlan, to approve the consent agenda. Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION approved. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ENIVA HEALTH (2018005) Vice Chair Oakley introduced the request by Eniva Health for a PUD amendment to allow a second freestanding sign at 2700 Campus Drive. Planner Berglund gave an overview of the staff report. Vice Chair Oakley referenced the "Do Not Enter" sign on the east side of the drive and asked if there is anything else that indicates the drive is one -way. 5A Approved Minutes 2 of 7 Meeting of March 7, 2018 Planner Berglund confirmed the location of the "Do Not Enter" sign. He explained there is no additional one-way signage on or near the north entrance. Vice Chair Oakley asked if there is parking near that area. Planner Berglund displayed a view from Campus Drive looking east up the north drive aisle. He identified that there is parking occurring that it is not striped and is located near the north property line. He stated that staff could not find approvals for that parking area and noted that this drive aisle does function as a fire lane. Vice Chair Oakley asked for information on the materials used for the si gnage. Planner Berglund replied that the sign has a standard wood base and the sign itself is made of wood. Vice Chair Oakley introduced Andrew Baechler, representing the applicant, who stated that it appears the application was denied, and the sign was then installed. He stated that he worked with staff on the initial application and felt that the correct information had been identified to proceed with the sign. He stated that he received an interesting phone call the following week in which he was told the application was denied and he was directed to the city website. He stated that there is an issue regarding safety because of the sprinkler location along the north drive aisle. He noted that the other entrance is commonly used for semi -truck access and therefore there are signs that state "No Truck Entry" and attempt to direct traffic to the correct entrances. He stated he wants to keep the building and the neighborhood safe. He stated that the ordinance language he was quoted states that a building can only have one sign per property but provided an example of an adjacent property that has more than one sign on their property. He stated that his intent is to protect the safety of the people and to assist in directing traffic. Commissioner Saba referenced the north entrance and asked if that is intended to be a one -way roadway. Mr. Baechler confirmed that it is intended to be a one -way drive aisle. He confirmed that most members of the public use that entrance while the other entrance is intended for ve ndors and truck traffic. He stated that the signage is intended to clarify the driving patterns. Vice Chair Oakley asked if the applicant was aware that staff had instructed him not to put the sign up when he installed the sign. Mr. Baechler replied that he was not aware. He explained that he went to the city hall to complete the application and believed that he was doing everything correctly. He stated that he had not been denied when he installed and sign and believed that he was following the guidelines. He stated that he was surprised when he received the phone call the following week that his request was denied. Planning Manager Thomson stated when Mr. Baechler submitted his application and it was denied, that meant that he could not install the sign . She asked if the sign was installed before the application was submitted. Approved Minutes 3 of 7 Meeting of March 7, 2018 Mr. Baechler confirmed that the sign was installed before the application was submitted. He explained that he is not involved in every operation of the business and n oted that somehow the sign was installed without the application being submitted. He stated that he then went to city hall to determine how this could be made compliant. He stated that the sign was not installed with the known denial. He stated that once h e received the denial, he contacted staff as the sign had been installed and asked how to proceed. Vice Chair Oakley asked if the applicant spoke with the city staff prior to installation of the sign. Planning Manager Thomson replied that the applicant spoke with staff prior to installation of the sign. Planner Berglund stated there was a previous sign application submitted August 25, 2017, which was denied. Mr. Baechler stated that he is not aware of all of the business operations, and this is simply his knowledge of the events. Commissioner Saba asked ifthere is any one -way signage near the north entrance. Planner Berglund replied that there is no one -way signage that is installed on or near the north entrance. Mr. Baechler stated that there is a small sign that indicates truck traffic shall not use that entrance. He stated that he simply wants to fix a problem with the flow of traffic on his site that has been difficult. He stated when he found out that his business did not have a permit for the sign, he personally drove to city hall in an attempt to resolve the matter and hopes that shows his intent to be a good community partner. Vice Chair Oakley opened and closed the public hearing as there was no one present who requested to speak on this item. Mr. Baechler asked why other businesses near his location have been granted additional signage when his business is not being allowed that opportunity. Planning Manager Thomson stated that Crowne Plaza went through the appropriate process to obtain permission for additional signage. Planner Berglund stated that a study of the adjacent properties was not done to determine if the signage is in compliance on those sites. He stated that there are a number of different signage options. He stated that in this case, there is a PUD that contains different uses (commercial, industrial, office), which have different signage allotments. He stated this property is allowed 100 square feet of signage, while other properties in the district are allotted a higher s quare footage. He stated there are also additional sign options, such as on -site directional signage, that this property could utilize. Approved Minutes 4 of 7 Meeting of March 7, 2018 Vice Chair Oakley clarified that the process would be to first submit an application for a sign. He explained that if the sign meets the requirements, the permit would be granted. He asked for details on what would occur if a permit is denied. Planning Manager Thomson replied that when the application was denied, staff explained that a PUD amendment would be required to allow this type of sign. Mr. Baechler asked how he would apply for a PUD amendment. He expressed his frustration with the activity thus far and asked for help. Commissioner Markell stated that he appreciates that Mr. Baechler wants to be a good corporate neighbor and wants to provide safety for the users of his site. He noted that staff has said that the site would be allowed a directional sign and asked if that would serve the purpose the applicant is seeking and would also be within the ordinance guidelines. Mr. Baechler stated that he would be willing to do that and would like assistance from staff in how to create signage that would comply. He stated he would also like to have assistance on why his adjacent neighbors do not have to comply with the sign ordinance. He stated in terms of directional signage, he simply wants the sign to be inviting and not aggressive. Vice Chair Oakley stated that one of the things that is surprising when one looks at a zoning code is the number of rules that are found within. He explained that the code exists to protect the interest of the people that own the property and the people that live in the neighborhood. He stated one of the reasons that someone may look at an idea that an applicant present s, is that there are a lot of ways to comply with the ordinance and until there is a set plan, it can be difficult to approve or deny. He stated that city staff does not have the authority to approve a request that does not meet the requirements. He noted that adjacent sites may have different regulations and therefore their signage may comply with the regulations for their site. He said he will be recommending denial, but believed that there is a potential for the applicant to find something that will need their needs. Commissioner Saba stated that he will also support the denial, but also believed there is a way the applicant can meet their desires to direct traffic and still remain in compliance with the ordinance. MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Vanderlan, to deny the request by Eniva Health for a PUD amendment to allow a second freestanding sign at 2700 Campus Drive. Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION approved. B. CITY OF PLYMOUTH (2018006) Vice Chair Oakley introduced the request by the City of Plymouth for lighting zone map amendments for three City of Plymouth parks. Planner Berglund gave an overview of the staff report. Approved Minutes 5 of 7 Meeting of March 7, 2018 Vice Chair Oakley introduced Barb Northway, representing the Parks Department, who stated that East Medicine Lake Park, West Medicine Lake Park, and the Meadows have amenities that draw members from the community and not just adjacent users. She noted that this type of use often draws longer times from the users and the parks are open until 10:00 p.m. She explain ed that lighting the parking lot assists users in finding their vehicles and assists in preventing vandalism. She stated that the zoning changes would allow the parking lots to be lit in an efficient manner while still complying with the dark sky guidelines and remaining cost effective for the City. She provided additional details on each park location and the intent for lighting of the applicable parking area. Commissioner Saba asked how long the parking lot lights would stay on during the nighttime hours. Ms. Northway replied that the lights are on timers and are usually set to turn off 30 minutes after the closing time of the park to allow users to get to their vehicles. Vice Chair Oakley noted that the Meadows is not yet designed and asked if the public will have an opportunity to provide input on the design. Ms. Northway replied that the process will include a community engagement process that will help to solicit input on the community park, when that is developed. She noted the exact timeline is not yet known, but is estimated for 2019 -2022. Commissioner Saba asked for details on side shielding. Ms. Northway replied that the City works with a project architect and the shield goes on the side of the light to ensure that the light does not shin e off the site. Vice Chair Oakley opened the public hearing. Vice Chair Oakley introduced Steve Chase, 11901 23rd Avenue, who stated that he spent an hour today meeting with city staff. He stated after meeting with staff, he was impressed with the plans for the city compared to plans that were presented 10 years ago. He said he believed that everyone wants safe lights and just not the wrong lights. He provided recommendations on lighting, as he specialized in light installation during his career. He asked the commission to consider his recommendations. He commented that shielding will be important to direct the path of the light into the desired areas and avoid the light from spilling off the site. Vice Chair Oakley introduced William McNaughton, 265 Peninsula Road, Medicine Lake, who stated that he would like the commission to consider the impact of the lights on the natural areas. He stated that users are coming to the parks because of the natural areas. He stated that French Regional Park has parking lots that are far removed from the beach area and asked the City to consider something similar for these parks. He asked that the City consider residents beyond the 750-foot radius that could still be impacted, such as residents across the lake. He asked the commission to look at mitigation to try to reduce the impact of these changes. He stated that perhaps the lights could be turned off or reduced after 10:00 p.m. when the park closes as well as in the morning hours. Approved Minutes 6 of 7 Meeting of March 7, 2018 Vice Chair Oakley introduced Scott Shinnick, 17758 5gth Circle, who asked why these three parks are grouped together. He said he was unsure why the parks with crime reports are being grouped together with the Meadows. He aske d for details on where the lighting would be for the Meadows. He asked if the lighting would be used for purposes other than lighting playfields. He asked if there are other comparable parks or whether the parks are zoned differently, and the distinction b etween the two lighting zones. He stated in the winter there would most likely be decreased use and asked if the lighting is reflective of the lesser use and perhaps used for decreased hours during those months. Vice Chair Oakley introduced Brian Schumer, 17746 5gth Circle, who stated that he appreciated the community input for the neighborhood park design within the Meadows. He stated that he is interested to be involved in the design process and would like to feel like he has an opportunity to influence design choices. He stated there was a sidewalk connection proposed to connect the neighborhood park to the community park. He noted there was a comment made that sidewalks would be lit and stated he would have concern with lighting that sidewalk as it pass es directly adjacent to his backyard. He stated there are 60 kids within the neighborhood, ranging in age. He stated he was aware of the neighborhood ,park when he purchased his home, but one of the things he learned during the neighborhood park review was the discussion of a park and ride. He stated he is concerned with the lighting, but is also concerned with the intended use for the community park. He commented on the traffic problems in the area that have become a nuisance. He stated that having a bus stop in his backyard would not be ideal. He asked for more details on the proposed lighting for the sidewalk connection and additional details on bacl<lighting. He said he wanted to ensure there would be zero tolerance for lighting shining off the sidewalk and onto his property. He stated that he intends to take advantage of the park features with his family and simply wants to request a reduction of lighting toward the residential area. Vice Chair Oakley closed the public hearing. Ms. Northway stated that the City would take the option to drop the light level at a certain time that would still allow users to find their vehicles. Planner Berglund reviewed the city code language that addresses hours for lighting. He stated there are curfew hours within city code. Ms. Northway stated that in some parks lights come on in the morning while other park lights do not. She explained that it is determined by the usage of the park, using the example of programming, or requested need. She stated that generally pa rks open at 6:00 a.m. and therefore at times of the year the morning lighting is not needed. She commented that there is usage of the parks in the winter, such as skating rinks and therefore there would be lights during the winter that would follow along w ith the park hours. Planning Manager Thomson commented that there will be a public review process for the park design. She commented that the lighting ordinance is intended to ensure that lighting limits off- site glare. She stated that Plymouth is one of the only cities in the region that follows the Approved Minutes 7 of 7 Meeting of March 7, 2018 International Dark Sky Association lighting standards. She stated that most of the parks and playfields fall within LZ2 lighting zone. Planner Berglund stated at this point we do not an exact number, but listed many of the parks and playfields that are within the LZ2 lighting zone. He stated that neighborhood parks do not typically have parking lots and therefore there is not a need for LZ2 designation for those areas. Ms. Northway stated that LZI parks are neighborhood parks that do not have lights, such as the neighborhood Meadows park. She provided two additional examples of LZI parks that do not have lights. Mr. Schumer stated he is still confused with the difference between LZ2 and LZI. He stated that the community of Meadow Ridge is adjacent to a new development and was curious why, on his road, there is lighting that is similar to daylight and on other posts there is different -colored lighting. Planning Manager Thomson stated that the lights were installed at different times. She explained that some lights are LED and some are high pressure sodium. She stated that LED lights have more of a white color and high pressure sodium more of a yellow color. Ms. Northway stated that these parks were grouped together because these three parks are the last three community parks that are not designated LZ2. She confirmed that there will be an opportunity for the public to provide input on the community park design. Planning Manager Thomson provided information on backlighting. Commissioner Saba commented that the lighting is well deserved and needed. MOTION by Commissioner Saba, seconded by Commissioner Vanderlan, to approve the request by the City of Plymouth for lighting zone map amendment s for three City of Plymouth parks located at 1740 East Medicine Lake Boulevard, 1920 West Medicine Lake Drive and 5805 Lawndale Lane. Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION approved. 7. NEW BUSINESS 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Vice Chair Oakley, with no objection, to adjourn the meeting at 8:38 P.M.