Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 07-01-2020Planning Commission 1 of 1 July 1, 2020 CITY OF PLYMOUTH AGENDA Regular Planning Commission July 1, 2020, 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1.1 Instructions to participate in the Virtual Planning Commission Meeting 2. PUBLIC FORUM 3. APPROVE AGENDA 4. CONSENT AGENDA 4.1 Proposed minutes from June 17, 2020 Planning Commission meeting 4.1 4.2 Variance for impervious surface coverage at 14730 51st Avenue (Chris and Tracey Bringe -- 2020-044) Planning Commission Report Information Draft Resolution Approving Variance Location Map Aerial Photo Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map Variance Standards Applicant's Narrative Site Graphics 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. ADJOURNMENT 1 Regular Planning Commission July 1, 2020 Agenda Number:1.1 To:Dave Callister, City Manager Prepared by:Steve Juetten Reviewed by:Steve Juetten, Community Development Director Item:Instructions to participate in the Virtual Planning Commission Meeting 1. Action Requested: The Chair provides instructions for the public to participate in the meeting by phone or online. 2. Background: Planning Commission meetings will be conducted virtually (via Zoom webinar/conference call) due to the state of local emergency for the COVID 19 pandemic. Members of the Planning Commission and staff will participate in this meeting via telephone/video conference To Watch the Meeting: - Online at https://ccxmedia.org/ccx-cities/plymouth - Cable Channel 16 (CCX Media) Written comments may be submitted for inclusion in the Planning Commission packet by emailing planning@plymouthmn.gov. You may also request that comments of up to one page be read into the record by the Planning Manager. You may speak during the meeting via telephone or via Zoom Conferencing Service at no cost. Please notify the Planning Staff at planning@plymouthmn.gov if you wish to speak to an item at the meeting or if you have questions about connecting to speak during the meeting. We ask that you provide notification at least one hour prior to the meeting time to ensure your message is received. The password to the meeting will be provided to you at that time. To Call In to the Meeting: (312) 626-6799 Using Zoom to Participate: https://zoom.us/join • Meeting ID: 848 3250 9238 • Password will be needed - obtain from staff a least one hour prior to the meeting. 3. Budget Impact: N/A 4. Attachments: 2 Regular Planning Commission July 1, 2020 Agenda Number:4.1 To:Planning Commission Prepared by:Barb Thomson, Planning Manager Reviewed by:Steve Juetten, Community Development Director File No: 1. Applicant: 2. Proposal: 3. Location: 4. Guiding: 5. Zoning: 6. School District: 7. Review Deadline: July 1, 2020 8. Brief Description: Proposed minutes from June 17, 2020 Planning Commission meeting 9. Attachments: 3 4.1 4 Proposed Minutes 1 of 7 Meeting of June 17, 2020 Proposed Minutes Planning Commission Meeting June 17, 2020 Chair Anderson called a Meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, on June 17, 2020. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Marc Anderson, Commissioners Bryan Oakley, Donovan Saba, David Witte, Justin Markell, Michael Boo and Julie Jones COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barbara Thomson, Senior Planner Shawn Drill, City Engineer Chris LaBounty, Community Development Director Steve Juetten, and Community Development Coordinator Matt Lupini OTHERS PRESENT: Councilmember Ned Carroll Chair Anderson led the Pledge of Allegiance. Plymouth Forum Alejandra Orcett referenced the intersection of Dunkirk Lane and 57th Avenue. She stated that there is a blind spot for pedestrians and drivers. She stated that she spoke with the City Engineer who stated that he would send someone to complete a study. She commented that the intersection is heavily used by pedestrians and noted that something needs to be done to prevent an accident in that location. Approval of Agenda Motion was made by Commissioner Saba, and seconded by Commissioner Witte, to approve the agenda. With Oakley, Saba, Witte, Markell, Boo, Jones and Anderson voting in favor, the motion carried. Consent Agenda Motion was made by Commissioner Jones, and seconded by Commissioner Oakley, to adopt the Consent Agenda that included the following item: (4.01) Planning Commission minutes from meeting held on May 20, 2020. With Oakley, Saba, Witte, Markell, Boo, Jones and Anderson voting in favor, the motion carried. 5 Proposed Minutes 2 of 7 Meeting of June 17, 2020 Public Hearings (5.01) Public hearing on rezoning, PUD general plan and preliminary plat for Rachel Development, Inc. for a townhome development to be called “Perl Gardens” on property located at 3735 and 3855 County Road 101. (2020026) Commissioner Saba recused himself. Senior Planner Drill reviewed the staff report. Commissioner Markell asked what would be planned on Block 3, Lot 1. Senior Planner Drill replied that it would be a detached townhome. He stated that it would look like the rest of the townhomes but would only be one unit, rather than two units connected. Commissioner Markell asked how the lot sizes in this development would compare to Cornerstone Commons. Senior Planner Drill provided additional details on the plat layout. He stated that it would be fairly comparable to the development across County Road 101, but with a lower density. He stated that the proposed development would have a slightly higher density than Walnut Grove Ponds. Commissioner Boo asked how much higher the north and west sides would be compared to the existing and whether those areas would look over the lots to the west. He asked if the drainage would resolve the issue raised by the residents to the west. Senior Planner Drill identified the sloping area where swales would be created to carry water. He confirmed that area would be higher and overlook some backyards. City Engineer LaBounty stated that the majority of the water that had been flowing to the north and west would be redirected and released downstream. He stated there would still be some runoff that would drain to neighboring properties, following existing drainage patterns. Commissioner Boo commented that it appears the developer has done a good job of addressing the drainage concerns. He noted that the adjacent homeowners association is requesting additional screening because of the raised height and asked if that has been addressed. Senior Planner Drill stated that staff had conversations with the developer related to additional plantings. Planning Manager Thomson stated that the Walnut Grove Ponds neighbors have requested that their submitted letter be read aloud. City Engineer LaBounty commented that staff can work with the applicant to find appropriate locations for plantings. 6 Proposed Minutes 3 of 7 Meeting of June 17, 2020 Senior Planner Drill read aloud a letter from the Walnut Grove Ponds homeowners association that will become a part of the record. Commissioner Jones asked if the entrance on County Road 101 would be a right-in/right-out only and asked for details on the Medina Road entrance. Senior Planner Drill confirmed that the County Road 101 access would be a right-in/right-out access. He stated that the Medina Road access would be a right-in access. He stated that a number of access options were reviewed, but the proposed accesses were found to be the safest options. Commissioner Witte stated that the last proposal for this property involved three ponds to handle stormwater while this proposal only includes one pond along the eastern edge. He asked for input on how the water would be directed to the pond. He referenced the 18-inch culvert that would drain to the northwest and asked if that culvert would be adequately sized. City Engineer LaBounty stated that the drainage system proposed for the development would be subsurface storm sewer and provided details. He stated that the filtration basin would meet the City and PCA standards, and based on the calculations, the 18-inch culvert appears to be adequate. Commissioner Witte stated there was discussion about the sidewalks and asked if they would be privately maintained. Senior Planner Drill replied that is correct. He explained that in most developments, the developer installs sidewalks that are maintained by the adjacent property owners. He noted that in this case, the HOA would maintain the sidewalks. City Engineer LaBounty stated that the HOA would be responsible for any necessary replacement. He noted that the City also has mechanisms available. Planning Manager Thomson asked if the sidewalk would connect to 39th Avenue. Senior Planner Drill confirmed that the sidewalk would be extended to 39th Avenue. He also provided details on the tree preservation plan. Commissioner Witte asked if Public Safety has provided input on whether there would be any road safety concerns. Senior Planner Drill provided additional details on the distance from the homes to the roadway. He noted that the pond would have a retaining wall with a safety fence. He noted that Public Safety and Hennepin County reviewed the plans and did not have any concerns. Chair Anderson introduced David Stradtman, representing the applicant, who stated that they have worked extensively with staff to address many of the concerns. 7 Proposed Minutes 4 of 7 Meeting of June 17, 2020 Chair Anderson introduced Rick Denman, representing Charles Cudd Co., who stated that they are excited about what could be offered through the project. He noted there are challenges on this site because of the water and access issues, but believed that this was a good fit. He provided details on the proposed layouts for the homes. Commissioner Witte commented that the home designs are innovative with open concept living space. He asked the price point for the homes. Mr. Denman provided details on the bonus room, noting that it could be used as unfinished storage space or as a bonus room with a bedroom, closet, and bathroom. He stated that Rachel development would set the prices because of the land and development costs. He estimated that prices would range from the high $400,000’s to low $500,000’s. Commissioner Oakley stated that the rendering shows slopes to an interior roof drain and asked if this type of unit has been built within the Twin Cities and how the winter drainage is managed. Mr. Denman stated that the roof drain would be sized to handle a set volume. He stated that they have built single-family homes with this model. He stated that the water would go underground to the street storm sewer. Mr. Stradtman stated that currently there is uncontrolled drainage from the site that is causing problems on neighboring properties. He said he believed that the engineer for the proposed project would solve those issues. He stated that the natural flow to the site is to the north and west, but those locations did not work for ponding because adjacent properties have homes with basements and the needed depth could not be gained. He stated that the challenge to planting trees in certain locations is because of the underground storm piping in those locations. He stated that they can create visual landscaping in those areas. He noted that in one situation he is going to plant trees on the neighboring property in order to provide the trees for screening desired by that property owner. He provided details on access that would not require a U-turn movement on County Road 101. He stated that they are proud of the design and believe that these twin homes would blend nicely into the adjacent areas. Chair Anderson opened the public hearing. Chair Anderson introduced David Swenson, 18135 39th Avenue, who stated that his biggest concern is related to the increase in runoff on his lot. He stated that his property runs along 256 feet of the Perl property, and presently there is no issue with drainage. He stated that the rate of runoff will increase because currently his runoff goes onto the Perl property and that will be reversed with the sloping that will occur on the Perl property. He indicated the statements in the staff report that the runoff rate to adjacent properties will be reduced does not apply to his property. He stated that he met with the developer, who has agreed to add to his existing retaining wall to assist in preventing runoff from going into his basement. He stated that he would like trees and bushes planted between the units to provide additional privacy for his home. He stated that the water runoff toward his lot is substantially increased with this proposal. 8 Proposed Minutes 5 of 7 Meeting of June 17, 2020 Community Development Coordinator Matt Lupini read a comment from Barry Altman, 18120 39th Avenue, asking for clarification on the sidewalk connection to 39th Avenue and whether additional plantings could occur in that location if that connection were removed. Mr. Stradtman replied that the sidewalk connection to 39th Avenue is something City staff requested to be included. He said he believed that the sanitary sewer connection runs in that area. He stated that they are more than willing to add landscaping to buffer between the neighborhoods, but the location will be dependent upon utility connections. City Engineer LaBounty commented that there are water and sanitary sewer connections that run along the western property line and through the cul-de-sac. He stated that he could work with the developer to find appropriate locations for landscaping. Chair Anderson introduced Karen Parks, owner of Parks Place, who stated that they are excited about the development as they feel their concerns with past development proposals have been met with this proposal. She commented that this will fit nicely into the neighborhood. She noted Parks Place has a proposed second addition that would occur sometime in the future and would hope that trees that are removed would be replaced to provide a transitioning between the properties. She addressed the drainage concerns, which appear to be met by this request. Community Development Coordinator Matt Lupini read an e-mail from Phil Lee, HOA board of Cornerstone Commons, who asked where the overflow water would go, should the pond in the proposed development overflow. City Engineer LaBounty provided details on the emergency overflow for the basin. Chair Anderson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Witte commented that this is a creative and innovative proposal for this difficult site. He noted that the density proposed is within the density range for the parcel, but asked if it is an appropriate density for the site. He noted that reducing the count by even one unit could assist in drainage management. He stated that he is troubled with how the City allowed this property to become landlocked and did not require access from adjacent development. Commissioner Oakley echoed the comments related to the density on this piece of land. He stated that it feels like they squeezed as many units as they could on the site. He stated there are exceptions to setbacks requested in order to accommodate the density. He stated that perhaps one of the units could be removed from the western edge, which would resolve the drainage concern in that area. He commented that the street layout appears to be the best option. He stated that he believes this is a supportable development, but would prefer one less lot. Commissioner Markell asked for clarification on what Commissioner Oakley would like to see done to remediate the concern over drainage, if the lot were removed. Commissioner Oakley stated the concern he expressed is that there would be a steep slope down to the existing lot. He stated that if the home were removed, the slope could be reduced, and a swale could be incorporated to reduce the drainage. 9 Proposed Minutes 6 of 7 Meeting of June 17, 2020 Commissioner Witte stated that he would support the suggestion of Commissioner Oakley. Commissioner Boo commented that he would also support that suggestion. He stated that the city is not bound by the ability of the developer to maximize their profits. He stated that this appears to be a solution that would require less changing of the rules. He also echoed the comments related to planning, as this is the second infill project he has seen on his time on the commission. Planning Manager Thomson stated that there is discretion with a PUD and the commission can look at the reduction of the unit, if desired. Mr. Stradtman stated that he struggles with the momentum that seems to be occurring. He stated that they have looked at this site and this design for months and he is balancing many factors, not just economic, as there as physical limitations with the site. He stated that in hindsight the adjacent neighborhood homes should not have basements because of the drainage. He stated that the engineering solves the drainage issue. He stated that he met with Mr. Swenson on-site and that he is willing to increase the size of Mr. Swenson’s retaining wall in order to help direct water to the swale and cul-de-sac. He stated that the volume of surface water is miniscule compared to the uncontrolled flow currently. He stated there is currently water draining to Mr. Swenson’s property because it is often damp in that area. He stated that currently there are acres of the site that sheet drain west and north, and 90 percent of that flow would be controlled and directed to the filtration basin through this proposal. He stated that the rate of flow into the storm system would also be controlled. He stated it is easy to look at a plan and simply say that removing a lot would make it better, but that is not how it works. He noted that this proposal in under the density in the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan. He said he recognized that some flexibility for setbacks is requested, but there are few appealing options that would comply with the zoning. He urged the commissioners to consider that fact. He stated that they have already lost units in order to accommodate the necessary drainage measures. He asked the commission to consider that they have worked with City staff and Engineering to control the storm water as designed. He stated that it is not a fair assumption to request one unit to be removed. He stated if that occurs, he would be unsure that the project would work and may withdraw the application. He stated that a similar incident happened with Bass Creek Villas also in Plymouth, with a last- minute increase in the setbacks, which severely hurt his ability to build the project out and sell the homes. Commissioner Oakley asked the benefit to the City for this PUD application. Mr. Stradtman replied that the overall storm water management would be a significant benefit to the City. He explained that there are acres of sheet drainage onto adjacent parcels, which will be managed by this request. Commissioner Jones stated that she is not hearing anything from the engineers or the developer that would indicate that removing the far western unit would improve the storm water drainage. She stated that adding a swale in that location would only increase the problem. She stated that she supports the comments of the developer that there would not be a benefit in removing that western unit. 10 Proposed Minutes 7 of 7 Meeting of June 17, 2020 Commissioner Markell stated it is not the job of this commission to solve existing problems and instead to review proposals for new development. Motion was made by Commissioner Markell, and seconded by Commissioner Jones, to recommend approval of a rezoning, PUD general plan and preliminary plat for Rachel Development, Inc. for a townhome development to be called “Perl Gardens” on property located at 3735 and 3855 County Road 101. With Witte, Markell, Boo, Jones and Anderson voting in favor, the motion carried on a 5-1 vote (Oakley voted nay). Adjournment Chair Anderson adjourned the meeting at 8:51 p.m. 11 Regular Planning Commission July 1, 2020 Agenda Number:4.2 To:Planning Commission Prepared by:Shawn Drill, Senior Planner Reviewed by:Steve Juetten, Community Development Director File No:2020-044 1. Applicant: Chris and Tracey Bringe 2. Proposal: Variance for impervious surface coverage 3. Location: 14730 51st Avenue 4. Guiding: LA-2 (living area 2) 5. Zoning: RSF-3 (single-family 3) 6. School District: ISD 279 (Osseo) 7. Review Deadline: October 6, 2020 8. Brief Description: See Planning Commission Report Information (attached). 9. Attachments: 12 Planning Commission Report Information Draft Resolution Approving Variance Location Map Aerial Photo Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map Variance Standards Applicant's Narrative Site Graphics 13 VARIANCE REQUEST – CHRISTOPHER AND TRACEY BRINGE (2020-044) PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT INFORMATION – JULY 1, 2020 DESCRIPTION: The applicants are requesting approval of a variance to allow impervious surface coverage of roughly 40.2 percent, where 25 percent is the maximum impervious surface coverage specified. The variance would allow the applicants to install an in-ground residential swimming pool in the rear yard area of their property. The proposed swimming pool would comply with all city setback regulations. Notice of the public meeting was mailed to all property owners within 200 feet of the site and to the Department of Natural Resources. A copy of the notification area map is attached. CONTEXT: Surrounding Uses All nearby properties are developed with single-family homes. Natural Characteristics of Site The site is located within the shoreland district for Pomerleau Lake. There are no floodplain areas or wetlands on the site. Previous Actions The zoning ordinance was amended in September of 2019 at the request of one of the four watershed districts in Plymouth. Prior to that amendment, the surface water area of swimming pools was not included in the calculation for impervious surface coverage. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION: The city’s discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they meet the standards for a variance. ANALYSIS: The applicants are requesting an impervious surface coverage variance in order to allow installation of an in-ground swimming pool. Under the proposal, impervious surface coverage on the lot would be roughly 40.2 percent. 14 2020044 Page 2 Lot size:11,238 sq. ft. Existing coverage (house, driveway, sidewalk, patio): 3,077 sq. ft. Proposed added coverage (pool surface area and related apron/patio surround): 1,448 sq. ft. Proposed coverage: 40.2% Lots that are not located within a shoreland overlay district are not subject to impervious surface coverage regulations. This lot is located at the outer edge of the shoreland overlay district, as it is roughly 900 feet away from the lake. The neighboring lot to the west is not in the shoreland overlay district. To minimize runoff into lakes, lots that are located within 1,000 feet of a lake are subject to the 25 percent maximum imperious surface coverage regulation. In this particular case, however, the practical boundary of the shoreland district is less than 1,000 feet, because there is a grade break between the lot and the lake. As a result, runoff from this lot does not flow into Pomerleau Lake, but rather flows away from the lake. Runoff from the site flows to a series of drainage systems and downstream wetlands, none of which discharge into Pomerleau Lake. The front yard runoff flows to a water quality pond located to the southwest. The rear yard runoff flows to a filtration basin located to the west, which then flows into a wetland that is part of the city’s drainage system. Consequently, installation of the proposed swimming pool would have no effect on the lake that the ordinance is designed to protect. The ordinance specifies that variance requests to the impervious surface coverage regulation must include a BMP (best management practice) to reduce impact on water quality. To offset the increase in impervious surface coverage on the lot, the proposal includes a BMP to collect runoff and allow it to infiltrate. If the variance is approved, staff would work with the applicants regarding the details of the required BMP. This matter is addressed in the attached resolution. FINDINGS: In review of the request, staff finds that all applicable variance standards would be met, as follows: 1) The requested variance and resulting construction would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance, and would be consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan. 2) The applicants have demonstrated that there are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance regulations, because: a. the request is reasonable and the applicants propose to use the property in a reasonable manner; 15 2020044 Page 3 b. the circumstances related to the shoreland district were not created by the landowners; and c. the variance would not alter the essential character of the lot or neighborhood. 3) The requested variance is not based solely upon economic considerations, but rather, is based upon a desire to improve the livability and outdoor recreation opportunities of the property. 4) The requested variance and resulting construction would not be detrimental to the public welfare, nor would it be injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. Runoff from the lot does not flow to the water body (Pomerleau Lake) that the ordinance is designed to protect. Additionally, a BMP would be provided on the site to offset the increase in impervious surface coverage. 5) The requested variance and resulting construction would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, nor would it increase traffic congestion or the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood. 6) The variance requested is the minimum action required to address the practical difficulties. The proposal would meet or exceed all other zoning regulations. RECOMMENDATION: Community Development Department staff recommends approval of the requested variance at 14730 51st Avenue, subject to the findings and conditions listed in the attached resolution. 16 CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION NO. 2020- RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR CHRISTOPHER AND TRACEY BRINGE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14730 51ST AVENUE (2020044) WHEREAS, Christopher and Tracey Bringe have requested approval of a variance to increase the impervious surface coverage to roughly 40.2 percent, where a maximum of 25 percent is specified; and WHEREAS, the variance would allow construction of a residential in-ground swimming pool and related apron/patio surround; and WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as Lot 7, Block 2, Hampton Hills South Plateau, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called public meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Christopher and Tracey Bringe for an impervious surface coverage variance at 14730 51st Avenue, subject to the following findings and conditions: 1. The requested variance is hereby approved, in accordance with the application received by the city on June 1, 2020, except as may be amended by this resolution. 2. The requested variance is approved, based on the finding that all applicable variance standards have been met. Specifically, a. The requested variance and resulting construction would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance, and would be consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan. b. The applicants have demonstrated that there are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance regulations, because: 1. the request is reasonable and the applicants propose to use the property in a reasonable manner; 2. the circumstances related to the shoreland district were not created by the landowners; and 3. the variance would not alter the essential character of the lot or neighborhood. c. The requested variance is not based upon economic considerations, but rather, is based upon a desire to improve the livability and outdoor recreation opportunities of the property. d. The requested variance and resulting construction would not be detrimental to the public welfare, nor would it be injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. Runoff from the lot does not flow to the water body (Pomerleau Lake) that the ordinance is designed to protect. Additionally, a BMP would be provided on the site to offset the increase in impervious surface coverage. 17 Resolution 2020- (2020044) Page 2 e. The requested variance and resulting construction would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, nor would it increase traffic congestion or the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood. f. The variance requested is the minimum action required to address the practical difficulties. The proposal would meet or exceed all other zoning regulations. 3.A building permit is required prior to commencement of the project. 4.Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall provide plans showing the required BMP (best management practice) to reduce impact on water quality, as approved by city staff. The BMP shall be installed at the same time as the swimming pool. 5. The variance shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner or applicant has commenced the authorized improvement or use, or unless the applicant, with the consent of the property owner, has received prior approval from the city to extend the expiration date for up to one additional year, as regulated under section 21030.06 of the Zoning Ordinance. APPROVED by the Plymouth City Council on this ** day of ****, 2020. STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS. The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City Council on _________________, 2020, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this _________ day of _______________________. ____________________________________ City Clerk 18 S IT E 5 1 s t A v e n u e Juneau Lane5 1 s t P la c e 5 0th P lace 2020 044 Christopher Bringe 14730 51st Avenue Variance K150015030075 Feet City of Plymouth, Minnesota 19 51st Ave.SITE 2020-044 -- Aerial Photograph K400408020 Feet City of Plymouth, Minnesota 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34