Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout05-11-2004PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — MAY 11, 2004 PRESENT: BILL LOE, MARILYN FORTIN, DICK PICARD, LENNY LEVER, RON JOHNSON AND MARY VERBICK ARRIVED AT 7:55 P.M. ALSO PRESENT: CITY ADMINISTRATOR CHAD ADAMS, CITY PLANNER JOSH DOTY, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR JIM DILLMAN AND PLANNING AND ZONING ASSISTANT SANDIE LARSON ABSENT: ELIZABETH WEIR 1. Vice -chairperson Dick Picard called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Dick reminded everyone that the Planning Commission was a recommending body and the City Council made final decisions. He also reminded anyone who wishes to speak to please identify yourself with name and address and to please direct comments to the commission. 2. DEAN JOHNSON —1255 WILLOW DRIVE — RE -ZONING AND SUBDIVISION — PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM APRIL Josh Doty said this item was tabled at the last planning commission meeting where a number of items were addressed. Staff has met with the applicant and no new plans have been received as of today so staff is recommending this be tabled. Lenny Leuer asked about the time table and Josh said we will ask the applicant for an extension and if they do not grant it, the application will be denied. MOVED BY MARILYN FORTIN AND SECONDED BY RON JOHNSON TO TABLE THE DEAN JOHNSON APPLICATION. MOTION PASSED. 3. UPTOWN HAMEL ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS — PUBLIC HEARING — CONTINUED FROM APRIL MEETING Josh Doty said the committee had been meeting to discuss amendments to allow more density and also to create language so no variances would be required. He put up a chart with the main changes listed. Lenny Leuer asked if the changes are noted that came about after the meetings. J. Doty said they are as we listed them: 1. No longer listed as a PUD — a PUD should be a specific project and not an entire area like Uptown Hamel. 2. Preserving the identity as `Old Town or `Small town' removed throughout the ordinance to allow development. 3. Single Family transition area — removed.. By making this change it would affect the single family lots which could allow commercial development there. L. Leuer wanted to know if the guide plan map would also be changed to remove the single family transition area and if we do remove this area would we still allow single family to be built and those that are there would they still be a conforming use. Josh said yes. Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2004 1 4. Side yard set back is currently `0'. The proposal is to have it remain at `0' with no openings in the wall and if there are openings then the setback would be 8'. 5. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit would change some to be consistent with the rest of the ordinance. Single family would go from 6,000 to 5,000 square feet; multiple dwelling would change from 1700 or 4000 to 1,000 to allow more density. Josh said this would self regulate with the current lot sizes. 6. Impervious cover — the requirement for multi family is the change; from 40-45% to 90% allowed and also this was under design guidelines and now moved to the lot size area of the ordinance Josh said this is reasonable given the size of the lots. 7. A new illustration added to give a better sense of what the City is looking for — this illustration shows the `terracing' of the height requirements. 8. Design standards for public improvements — this has been removed — the same design standards will be brought back to the next planning commission and adopted by resolution instead of being part of the ordinance. 9. Rain gardens 10. Joint use of parking lots — this to be encouraged and rewarded. 11. Old Town — Small Town — scale removed 12. Site plan review — not a lot of text changes — location changed within the ordinance 13. Building height — complete re -write — currently 3 stories — change to 4 with a tiering requirement for 3 & 4 stories; 3rd story tiered back 6' and 4th story tiered back 12' with a total height of 50. The main change relates to definition of how you measure height. It currently is from the lowest grade to the median of the highest — the new definition is measured from an average of the lowest and highest grade to the median of the highest. This again will be brought to the next meeting. 14. Roof run-off — must drain to the property that creates the run-off 15. Amends the signage requirements — bonus area for `Old Town' theme removed — proposed is 32 square feet for each wall sign on street frontage. 16. No outside storage — location change in ordinance 17. Townhouses, apartments, condos — location change to it's own section in the ordinance L. Leuer said there were some changed the committee had recommended that did not show in this draft plan on pages 12 & 13: pg 12 — Subd 3 (ii) — to be deleted; pg 13, (iii) — deleted; (v) — changed to: grade that exceeds 5% must be approved by the city engineer and (vi) add fire code at the end of sentence 18. Issue of sprinkling buildings — for legal reasons the City cannot require this in certain districts unless it is adopted city wide. This relates to building code issues and will move this directly to the city council. L. Leuer asked Josh to elaborate more on the building height changes. J. Doty went over the proposed changes. He reiterated that the highest point definition would stay the same — the change is where it is measured from. Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2004 2 L. Leuer asked if this new definition of the average of the lowest/highest point would work with all designs and is not the new definition more generous. J. Doty said yes to both questions. He also said that the committee has asked if the fire chief has had a chance to look at these proposed changes. He said this is a concern because the height of their ladders is 30'. He said the fire chief did say that Plymouth fire would always be called for a fire in anything more than 2 stories. Josh said his interpretation of this is it is a concern that can be addressed. He said the `0'lot line is a concern for the fire marshall, but has no real objection to the changes. Ron Johnson asked about the sprinkler verbage in the ordinance. J. Doty said this is often seen in development approvals L. Leuer said he was on the committee and a lot of the changes did not set well with him. He said his biggest question was on the minimum lot size and would like some comments from Ben Schmit of Farr Development. Lenny said the density is the # of units per acre and he wondered what the average of the 3 of people in a unit was. Lenny said he had heard 2.3-2.7. Ben Schmit said he did not know. L. Leuer said he had done some calculations and what he came up with was: 1700 square feet = 26 units per acre and 1000 square feet =44 units per acre and he said his first reaction was that this was an unprecedented density to Medina and asked Mr. Schmit his thoughts. B. Schmit said that 2.3-2.7 per unit sounds reasonable and what we will find in Uptown Hamel will most likely be lower than that — the appeal is to empty nesters, young professionals, etc. Ben said what he sees is the desire to keep Medina rural in nature and having the density in the Uptown Hamel area would help that. He said the desire not to have the density throughout the city makes sense and 44 units per acre would probably be on the low side. Ben said they have gone from 100-150 units per acre and in Robbinsdale they did a 130 unit/5 story building. He said 44 per acre is not unheard of. He wondered how many acres were in Uptown Hamel. J. Doty said a rough calculation shows there is about 64.6 acres. Phil Zietlow wondered what the density was on the west side of Hamel — (no answer) L. Leuer said he did the calculation for Gramercy; at 107 unit and 8.9 acres = 12 units per acre. Lenny said the density in Plymouth at 55 and 101 south is 164 units per acre. He said looking at those figures it mitigates his feelings. P. Zietlow said he would like the density looked up for the 4 plex buildings on the west side of Hamel. Dick Picard wanted to know what prompted the need for changes in this ordinance. Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2004 3 J. Doty said there were a number of things. He said the main issue was looking at the ordinance for the issue of TIF in the area. He said we needed to look at inconsistencies in the ordinance. The City Council directed the planning commission and staff to look at it for some higher density in the area. Chad Adams said the city council looked at more density needed to fund the public improvements no matter how it is funded. He said we need 1.7 million for improvements in the Uptown Hamel area. Chad also said that in talking with our city attorney, there were things that needed cleaning up in the ordinance. D. Picard said for many years Hamel was sacred ground and now in a couple of meetings it's gone. MOVED BY MARILYN FORTIN AND SECONDED BY LENNY LEUER TO RECOMMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 834 — UPTOWN HAMEL PUD ZONING DISTRICT WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: 1. Page 12 — Subd. 3 (ii) — delete 2. Page 13 — (iii) — delete 3. Page 13 — (v) — change to: the grade of a private roadway, driveways and parking lots that exceed 5% must be approved by the city engineer 4. Page 13 — (vi) — at end add: - - City fire code. MOTION PASSED 4. CITY OF MEDINA — 2052 COUNTY ROAD 24 — CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SALT/STORAGE STRUCTURE — PUBLIC HEARING Josh Doty went over his memo to the planning commission and stated that the request met the requirements of the PS, Public/Semi-Public zoning district. He put up an overhead of the area and the proposed structure. Staff finds the request consistent with all ordinance requirements and therefore recommends approval. Lenny Leuer asked if both ends would be open or in what direction would it be open and will there be electricity to it. Jim Dillman, Director of Public Works, said there would be one opening to the north and there would be no electricity. L. Leuer wanted to know if the City had a conditional use permit. J. Doty said there is one CUP for antennas granted in 1975. Josh directed the commission to look at the criteria for this request. L. Leuer said he has been thru several CUP's in the City and we have made Churches in the residential districts follow the criteria for commercial zones like no outside storage, etc. He said the City has lots of outside storage in excess of what we would apply to the commercial zone and also he does not see the septic listed on the site plan. Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2004 4 J. Doty said you have to look at each application separately and we need to follow the ordinance. Josh said this request is directly for the salt storage structure. He also said the churches are in a residential zone and the city if in Public/Semi-Public zoning and currently there is no site plan review required, just CUP approval. He said in the future we might be looking at a staff recommendation to change the ordinance. L. Leuer said we did not look at the park as PS, we looked on it as commercial. Phil Zietlow said we are following what the rules say There was further discussion on parks, city property, etc. L. Leuer said the City looks like commercial and there is lots of outside storage. J. Doty said the ordinance says the planning commission and city council can add what ever conditions as they see reasonable. He said criteria should be followed and staff recommends the ordinance be followed no matter what has happened in the past. L. Leuer said if there are proposed changes for the ordinance it would be proper to table this. J. Doty said what would be added would be a site plan review process. He said the site plan review and CUP review are quite different. P. Zietlow said the outside storage provides a public service. He said if the neighbors were here up in arms he might feel differently, but the outside storage does bother him. Marilyn Fortin said this makes economic sense. She wondered about the storm water run-off J. Dillman said it goes right out in back and drains toward the woods and there is a 2nd pond on the Eisinger property. Dick Picard asked Jim if this proposed facility has a lot of wasted space. J. Dillman said to get the width needed you need the height for structural strength. D. Picard asked when it would be built and Jim said as soon as the city council approves it. MOVED BY MARILYN FORTIN AND SECONDED BY MARY VERBICK TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 2052 COUNTY ROAD 24 FOR A SALT/SAND STORAGE STRUCTURE. MOTION PASSED WITH LENNY LEUER VOTING AGAINST — NOT BECAUSE OF THE STRUCTURE BUT BECAUSE HE FEELS WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ENTIRE CITY SITE. Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2004 5 MOTION PASSED. 5. RESOLUTION FINDING THAT THE TIF PLAN FOR UPTOWN HAMEL (DISTRICT 1-9) IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL LAND USE PLANS OF THE CITY OF MEDINA Chad Adams said the public hearing for the TIF district will be at the May 18th city council meeting, but state statute requires the planning commission to review and determine if the proposed Modification and Plan are in conformance with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City as described in the comprehensive plan. Chad put up an overhead of the area being talked about. Ron Johnson said it seems like 2 separate entities; Uptown Hamel and across the highway. C. Adams said if we were looking at a raw piece of land it would be harder to justify it as a redevelopment area and if the area north of Highway were looked at alone, it would qualify on its own. Mary Verbick asked how this might affect the zoning, changes, etc. C. Adams said the intent is to remain in the commercial line. He said it wouldn't qualify if all townhomes, etc. M. Verbick wanted to know if this would lock the city into what could go north of Highway 55. C. Adams said the intent of the city is to get 1 developer in to control the entire site (north of 55) Marilyn Fortin said what we are looking at, without it (TIF) would be hard pressed for the infrastructure improvements. Lenny Leuer asked what the Highway 55 Gateway District was that was mentioned on Page Al — appendix A. C. Adams pointed out the area on the map. L. Leuer asked about one of the areas in the Ryan concept plan and Chad said that area was in the initial concept plan, but they are not looking at developing there. L. Leuer said the area north of 55 is zoned UC and the plan talks about townhouses, etc. He said our current zoning doesn't allow residential and if this is talking about mixed use it is inconsistent with our land use plan. C. Adams said we have to look at a broader standpoint of the City's comprehensive plan and not necessarily the fine points of the TIF plan. He said the Urban Redevelopment commercial area would qualify and meet the standards of the comprehensive plan. L. Leuer said this paragraph makes it sound like we are looking at a proposal. Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2004 6 C. Adams said there is a huge difference in `concept' plans and a proposal. He said the economic benefits show it more feasible to fund infrastructure and doesn't mean we need to go that way. He said this is a broad outline of what the development could be. Chad said there are different TIF's; ie Industrial or Urban Redevelopment. We are looking at "Urban Redevelopment. Proposals will come before the planning commission and city council at a later date. Dick Picard wanted to know what they were voting on and what did it mean. C. Adams said the resolution before them which says the planning commission finds that a modification to the development program and a TIF plan for TIF District 1-9 conforms to the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the city. Chad said it does not necessarily mean the TIF will or will not go thru. There was further discussion of the "Redevelopment District". D. Picard quoted from the state statute that did not necessarily mention the planning commission being involved. Phil Zietlow talked to Lenny's comment and wording regarding the TIF and how it wasn't consistent with our zoning. Phil said if the city doesn't need or want a Target, the TIF plan as a redevelopment district, keeps the City's options open so we don't lock ourselves in a box. The City may decide that a mixed use development may be better suited for that site. MOVED BY MARILY FORTIN AND SECONDED BY MARY VERBICK TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 04-01 AS PRESENTED. MOTION PASSED WITH DICK PICARD OPPOSED. Dick said he is opposed to a redevelopment district that is not funded soley by a private party and he is concerned we should not consider TIF for any retail business. Medina is prosperous and does not need to go out of the city. MOTION PASSED. 6. CITY PLANNERS REPORT Josh said at the next planning commission meeting we should have the Keller property proposal for re -zoning and preliminary plat; we should have a resolution adopting public design standards for Uptown Hamel and also a new height definition. Josh also said the annual tour of city parks is at the next park commission meeting on May 19th and will start from city hall at 5:30 p.m. He invited the planning commission and said the bus will leave promptly at 5:30. Dick Picard said the March planning commission came and went and we did not elect the new chairperson. Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2004 7 It was decided to wait until the next meeting when Liz would be back. 7. MINUTES OF APRIL 13, 2004 The minutes were not completed yet, but there were a few corrections in the portion that was done. The grammatical errors were corrected and also in item #6, Bill Loe corrected his lst sentence. The first sentence should read `- - - -with or originate ideas for criteria'. The completed minutes will be presented at the next meeting. 8. FURTHER DISCUSSION There was discussion on criteria for changes in the comprehensive plan. Josh Doty said that staff recommended not adopting formal criteria. He said staff reports will highlight the key issues in the comprehensive plan on any applications. Bill Loe said if it is left unstructured or undefined, it leaves it too open. He said we cannot guess at the planning commission level where we are going. Dick Picard said as a planning commission who deals with absolutes, to do a job we need some guidance. We should have some type of general guidelines. J. Doty said he agreed, but the planning commission should not have a formal list. Criteria can be addressed as applications come in. Each is looked at uniquely and with any kind of list legal issues come in. Chad Adams said staff attempts to do that with staff reports. There was further discussion and the planning commission said there should be different sets of criteria to look at different applications. It was stated that state statutes have criteria for variances, but comp plan changes are very different than variances or CUP's. For comp plan amendments the level of discretion is high and what is required of the planning commission is different. P. Zietlow said if there is a good comp plan don't change it. MOVED BY BILL LOE AND SECONDED BY MARILYN FORTIN TO ADJOURN. MOTION PASSED. Meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2004 8 Planning and Zoning Assistant Date Planning Commission Minutes May 11, 2004 9