HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 04-21-20211
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
Approved Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
April 21, 2021
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 April 21, 2021.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Marc Anderson, Commissioners Michael Boo, Julie
Pointner, Justin Markell, Donovan Saba, David Witte and Bryan Oakley.
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Community Development Director Steve Juetten, Senior Planners Kip
Berglund and Lori Sommers, Graduate Engineer Griffin Dempsey, and Engineering Services
Manager Chris McKenzie.
OTHERS PRESENT: Councilmember Ned Carroll
Chair Anderson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Plymouth Forum
Approval of Agenda
Motion was made by Commissioner Saba and seconded by Commissioner Oakley to approve the
agenda. With all Commissioners voting in favor, the motion carried.
Consent Agenda
(4.1) Planning Commission minutes from meeting held on April 7, 2021.
(4.2) Variance Request to the bluff setback by Page Springsteen Vanatta for property
located at 850 Brookton Lane
Motion was made by Commissioner Oakley and seconded by Commissioner Boo to approve the
Consent Agenda. With all Commissioners voting in favor, the motion carried.
Public Hearings
(5.1) Rezoning and Preliminary plat for 13 single-family lots at 5650 Vagabond Lane (Bald
Eagle Builders, Inc. (2021009)
Community Development Director Juetten stated that we need additional time to review plans
received today and request that the Planning Commission open the public hearing and continue
the hearing until May 5, 2021.
2
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
Chair Anderson Opened the Public Hearing
Motion was made by Commissioner Boo and seconded by Commissioner Pointner to continue
the public hearing until May 5, 2021. With all Commissioners voting in favor, the motion
carried.
New Business
(6.1) Review of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for redevelopment of the
Dundee Nursery site, 16800 Highway 55 and Plymouth Presbyterian Church site, 3755
Dunkirk Lane (2020106).
Senior Planner Sommers provided a review of the staff report.
Chair Anderson asked how many residential units would trigger a mandatory EIS.
Senior Planner Sommers responded that the trigger would be 1500 attached units.
Commissioner Markell asked if an overview of the Phase I, Phase II and Response Action Plan
could be provided.
Chair Anderson introduced Tom Lincoln, of Kimley-Horn who responded that a Phase I was
completed for the project with a follow up Phase II which identified some environmental impacts.
He stated that those impacts would be mitigated through the process and provided additional
details on the grant application, voluntary participation in the program for remediation, and a
Response Action Plan has been developed and submitted to the MPCA along with a Construction
Action Plan.
Commissioner Boo asked the current zoning of the property and permitted uses.
Senior Planner Sommers responded that the current zoning for the Dundee site is FRD and the
church site is RSF-2. She stated that the comprehensive plan designated for the Dundee site is
commercial.
Commissioner Boo asked if there is a density of development if the property continues to be guided
as commercial.
Senior Planner Sommers stated that the medical office would be allowed as would grocery stores,
other retail stores and restaurants could occur within commercial districts.
Commissioner Boo commented that this EAW is based upon mixed-use and asked if a different
development proposal would trigger a new EAW.
Senior Planner Sommers responded that the EAW could be modified in terms of traffic analysis as
she would anticipate traffic to increase with a more commercial use.
3
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
Commissioner Witte stated that the EAW identifies three wetlands, two of which would be
proposed to be filled, and asked for clarification on the calculations that do not appear to show an
overall decrease.
Senior Planner Sommers responded that the applicant is proposing to fill .06 acres of wetland
within the area identified as wetland two. She stated that there would be two remaining wetland
basins that would be maintained in their current condition.
Commissioner Witte referenced the mention of a diesel backup generator for one of the buildings
and asked if that would have an impact to the environment or noise.
Senior Planner Sommers responded that staff would ensure that the noise would be compliant to
the city regulations if that element is included in a site plan review.
Commissioner Witte commented that the Tri -State property is not included in this EAW. He asked
that the traffic from that possible development be considered in terms of intersection impacts.
Senior Planner Sommers responded that the redevelopment of the Tri-State property was not part
of the EAW or this project, but the traffic study analysis did include the Tri-State site.
Matt Pacyna, SRF Consulting, responded that the redevelopment of Tri-State site was assumed in
the traffic study to provide a conservative estimate. He stated that they worked with city staff to
determine potential use for that traffic study.
Commissioner Boo stated that this identifies certain issues with traffic, where certain intersections
would be further degraded. He asked if the purpose of the EAW is to find problems and solutions
and whether those problems were sufficiently mitigated from the perspective of staff.
Senior Planner Sommers responded that from a staff perspective, during the traffic study and
review, the recommendations mitigated any of the concern.
Matt Pacyna, SRF Consulting, responded that they did work with MnDOT and Hennepin County
during the process and received notification of approval of the study.
Chair Anderson introduced Mark Jepson, Parkera Plymouth, 3800 American Boulevard West,
Suite 1120, Bloomington, MN 55431, the applicant stated that the EAW was done in anticipation
of 300 units as the maximum. He stated that the unit count has been reduced to 210 and the site
was rearranged to provide further distance from the existing residential. He stated that with the
reduction in units, the EAW was not required but they still felt it provided a benefit in order to
address the other elements that would be a part of development such as wetlands and traffic.
Chair Anderson reiterated that the EAW is measured at 300 units even though the plan was
changed to 210 units. He stated that it seems the applicant decided to complete the EAW, even
though it was not required at 210 units, in order to be transparent.
Mr. Jepson responded that they felt it was a prudent way to approach the process to address the
wetlands and traffic.
4
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
Commissioner Witte asked if Mr. Jepson was surprised to discover the background arsenic in the
soil and whether that presents concern related to removal and disposal.
Mr. Jepson responded that they were not surprised on the arsenic as it is possible that is naturally
occurring because of the limestone in the soil. He stated that the diesel and solvents were
surprising. He stated that they did a series of testing as a follow up, including the Response
Action Plan which provides a series of steps to treat or remove the soils from the site.
Chair Anderson opened the meeting to the public.
Chair Anderson introduced Beth Tank, 16821 39th Avenue N, who stated that she is concerned
with noise as she lives to the north in the townhomes. She stated that she has concern with the
number of people, the noise, and the traffic. She hoped that some of the trees would grow to
create a visual barrier.
Chair Anderson introduced Dr. Milind Sohoni, 16640 39th Place N, who stated that the wetland
calculations do not seem accurate, noting that perhaps the wetland to be filled was added to the
original amount of wetlands rather than subtracted. He stated that there is also an increase in
lawn and landscaping surface and was unsure how that would be an increase after a building and
parking are constructed. He stated that he has lived in his home for 26 years. He felt that the
commission should require an EIS and provided his reasoning. He stated that the current zoning
does not match the proposed use and therefore would require a comprehensive plan amendment
and rezoning. He believed that the council should first make a decision on those factors rather
than wasting time of staff and the commission to go through all this review only to have the
council perhaps decide that it does not support the rezoning or comprehensive plan amendment.
He referenced the environmental issues and asked how confident the commission is that these
could be address without seeing the results of an EIS. He stated that 47% of the site is mapped
with a moderate to severe erosion rating. Contamination, hazardous materials and waste were
also identified. He stated that the EAW maintains these issues could be mitigated and asked how
confident the Planning Commission was of this. He stated that the EAW would make one
believe that since the noise and environmental pollution are below the threshold level, the city
should have no qualms with approving the project. He asked when will we start worrying about
the cumulative ill effects of such projects to the environment? He referenced the statement that
this project would improve the resiliency of the community and the natural resources and was
not sure that was true. He stated the major intersections might see only 1% growth rate in traffic.
This is misleading, to say the least. Apart from pressure on traffic at major intersections, the
segment of Dunkirk Lane between Co Rd 9 and the frontage road is expected to be a traffic
nightmare. Currently, the peak activity at Dundee Nursery equates to approximately 1,700
vehicles per day in the month of May. This proposed development is expected to generate 3,882
daily trips under Phase 1, probably not depended on the time of year. Redevelopment of the Tri-
State site during Phase 2 would result in an additional 436 daily trips. This is an incredible
increase of 250% daily trips, even when compared to just the peak for Dundee Nursery. The
segment of Dunkirk Lane between Rockford Road and the proposed frontage road will need to
be restriped to accommodate westbound and eastbound turn lanes resulting in backups. When,
not, if, an additional lane is needed to mitigate this bottleneck, is there room for curb
modifications? The SRF traffic report, which is part of the EAW, assumes that the Park and Ride
program will remain. This assumption does not give a good vibe for Metro Transit travelers. Will
the program remain or not?
5
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
He further state that the EAW claims that the increase in noise levels, and carbon dioxide
emissions will be under the threshold. As true as that might be, is Plymouth going to wait till we
cross that barrier, and it’s too late, or nip projects like these in the bud? Also, the incremental
pollution will be a setback, albeit small, to the council’s pledge to reduce the carbon footprint by
50% by 2030 and by 100% by 2050? The city’s law makers may not be tired of the ballooning
population, currently at about 80K, but better believe that the residents are. There are no
parks near the proposed project site. Build a park, a restaurant. Anything but more families
when children are being crammed in classrooms.
He further state that he is appealing to the Planning Commission to initiate an EIS, and not
change the comp plan, without pressing needs, as it leaves Plymouth residents wondering what
else might change again soon. It gives the council the appearance of being wishy washy.
Chair Anderson stated that questions asked will be answered in writing as a part of the EAW
process. He stated that the review tonight is simply related to the EAW and not a change in
zoning or any other request. He stated that while it may seem like the wrong order, it is the order
that must be followed.
Chair Anderson introduced Amy Walstien, 16525 39th Place N, who stated she would like the
commission to require an EIS to better develop mitigation strategies for impacts to the
environment and traffic. She stated that the residents of the surrounding neighborhoods believe
that there will be impacts to both traffic and the environment and at least 200 residents have
signed a petition asking for the EIS. She stated we believe there will be significant adverse
traffic impacts from the proposed development on Minnesota Highway 55, Rockford Road,
Dunkirk Lane, and other adjacent and neighboring streets. Those of us that live here disagree
with the traffic study findings. As currently proposed, the redevelopment will further congest a
major intersection already rated LOS-E and downgrade a key intersection at Rockford Road.
The EAW does not adequately address traffic impacts on Dunkirk Lane from both directions,
which will be significant. Restriping is not sufficient mitigation for these traffic concerns.
Dunkirk Lane is not built for the traffic that will be generated. She added it was designed for
neighborhood use, does not have traffic controls or adequate pedestrian controls, it is a 40 mile-
per-hour street, and there is nearly blind intersection at 39th Place where there have been many
accidents. It's a dangerous street for pedestrians and this development will cause additional
safety concerns. Strongly consider a stop sign at Dunkirk Lane and 39th Place. Also consider
lowering speed limit on Dunkirk to 30 mph. The proposed new frontage road intersection does
not sufficiently consider the left turn traffic into the development from Dunkirk - it is not long
enough for peak hours and will cause back-ups onto Rockford Road. Any left-turning traffic will
not be able to turn because there will be backups on the other side of the road. Please have the
engineers review this issue as part of the additional intersection analysis. Rockford Road is the
primary artery for Plymouth Fire Station 3 to access the northwest portion of Plymouth.
Downgrading these intersections has the potential to impact public safety response time to a
significant portion of the City. Neighbors also want to know what happens with the current bus
routes along Dunkirk, including Park and Ride. The MetroLink often stops for several minutes
on Dunkirk right in front of the church garden, that won't work with this plan. She again asked
that the EIS be required to further identify impacts and address mitigation.
6
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
Chair Anderson introduced John Koltonsowski, 3945 Zanzibar Lane N, who stated that Plymouth
is a great place to live and thanked the members of the commission for their service. He stated
that his comments are related to quality of life issue and how the EAW may not address some of
those issues. He asked if there has been a review on the impact of schools in relation to this
development and other developments currently underway. He stated that commercial property
would not have a demand on the schools. He stated that this would seem to be a change in
zoning and asked if this would be congruent with the comprehensive plan. He stated that the
comprehensive plan is intended to be complementary to the existing development and asked how
this development would be congruent with that goal. He stated that there is already a long wait
time at Rockford Road at Highway 55, which is controlled by the State and therefore additional
traffic would increase those wait times and could most likely not be impacted. He recognized
that Chair Anderson earlier stated that the EAW is the first step in the process, but noted that the
developer also referenced a previous meeting with the city council. He asked if it would be
possible for the meeting minutes to be published so that the public can be aware of the activity
that was done thus far. He asked how these studies are funded. He commented that if the
consultants are being paid by developers, they would be bias towards the desire of the developer.
He also requested that an EIS be required.
Chair Anderson stated that many times when a project is first conceived a sketch plan is
reviewed in order to get reaction on the concept. He explained that the applicant presented that
to the council in order to receive input. He noted that type of review is nonbinding and only
intended to provide input. He stated that the EAW is the first official review and step. He stated
that rezoning and reguiding requests would have to come forward later and would follow through
the typical process before the commission and council.
Community Development Director Juetten commented that it sounds like many of the residents
thus far have been reading their written comments. He suggested that those written comments be
provided to the city to provide a more complete picture of the comments from the residents in
addition to the minutes.
Chair Anderson introduced Scott Poellinger, 16415 38th Avenue N, who stated that he echoes the
comments of those before him. He stated he is concerned that the EAW is biased as submitted
by the developer and does not adequately take into consideration the real-world traffic issues that
are going to be caused by having high-density traffic and using Dunkirk Lane as the primary
point of entrance and exit. He stated the distance between Rockford Road and the proposed
frontage road is inadequate to allow for the free flow of traffic. Existing traffic is barely
manageable during peak periods. Pre-Covid, when Highway 55 is backed up to the west, or if
the stoplight at 55 and Peony/101 became backed up, it was not uncommon for people to use Old
Rockford Road and Dunkirk as an alternative to 55. He stated it would be reasonable to look at
growth not just of Plymouth, but also surrounding communities of Medina/Hamel, Maple Grove,
Corcoran, and Loretto to estimate projected traffic on Highway 55 and Rockford Road. One
must think beyond the development itself to predict what traffic will be, you also need to
consider development and population growth within the vicinity to see if a small street like
Dunkirk and the accompanying intersections of Dunkirk//Rockford Road and 55/Rockford Road.
He stated he is concerned about the amount of light pollution that will likely be created by this
facility being illuminated 24 hours a day, seven days a week. To his knowledge, the Twin City
Orthopedic facility will be an urgent care facility opening nights and weekends. Many residents'
backyards will be permanently illuminated beyond present without appropriate mitigating
7
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
barriers. He asked how are potential noise levels measured, especially during evening hours?
Dundee nursery, which was relatively quiet many months of the years, was only open until 8:00
pm at the latest. He stated the proposed urgent care will be opening year-round and during
evening hours and the apartment building will have noise not just from residents, but also people
visiting those residents. He stated he has seen the amount of wildlife around our property and
neighborhood dimmish as there has been an increase in the development of smaller parcels of
land within the area, along with an accompanying increase in traffic, and increase in noise levels.
While he once used to see a wide variety of birds in the wetland area behind our house including
Mergansers, Teal, Heron, and Ring Neck Pheasants, these species are no longer present and
haven't been seen in the past five years. He asked if the EAW considered the impact of wildlife
in your study? He concluded by asking what percentage of this development will consist of
pavement and structures vs. what is there today?
Chair Anderson introduced Mike Ed, 3895 Comstock Lane N, who stated that they chose this
area because it is quiet and a midpoint between the city and country. He stated that traffic from
the development would impact his home. He asked whether or not an EIS was completed in the
past and resulted in the FRD zoning. He stated that he is also concerned with impacts to traffic
and pedestrian traffic. He asked that an EIS be required
Chair Anderson asked if staff could explain the FRD zoning.
Senior Planner Sommers explained that FRD zoning is a placeholder and does not mean it is
restricted to not be rezoned in the future. She stated that it provides the city with more control
over what could happen on the site, but it would be intended to be rezoned in the future.
Chair Anderson agreed that placeholder would be a good term, as most of the parcels that come
forward for development are zoned FRD and require rezoning.
Chair Anderson introduced Wendy Malinsky, 3725 Archer Lane N, who stated that she represents
concerns for both her and her neighbor. She stated that she submitted written comments and
suggestions to staff and hoped the commission was also provided the information to review. She
stated that people make their home to be their most important place and they do not want to look
out and see traffic, see a commercial building, and hear noise. She stated that view would be
directly outside of her bedroom window and deck. She was concerned that despite everything
things will continue to move forward. She asked that the comments submitted in writing be
addressed. She stated that if this moves forward she would not feel that she has a backyard,
sense of security or privacy and therefore would ask that a visual barrier, sound proofing, and
landscaping be added to protect the interest of the existing property owners.
Chair Anderson introduced Christine Durant, 16645 39th Place N, who asked if the traffic from
Hollydale has been considered for the traffic study.
Chair Anderson replied that the development of the Hollydale property was included in the
traffic analysis.
Christine Durant commented that she does not agree with the traffic study.
8
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
Chair Anderson stated that the comments received tonight along with the emails and written
comments will be answered in writing as part of the EAW process.
Commissioner Witte asked if this was an actual traffic study or whether a model was used based
on averages for buildings of this nature and occupancy.
Matt Pacyna, SRF Consulting responded that a traffic study looks at a number of things and
stated that these first look at what traffic an individual site will generate using industry standards.
He further stated that they use a modeling software similar to what other agencies use to simulate
traffic updating calibration. They analyze the existing situation and the project development and
incorporate traffic growth from outside the study area. They use this information to develop
mitigation measures which are tested in the model.
Commissioner Witte commented that the model predictions are tested against actual observations
and noted that actual observations would have been done during the pandemic. He asked how
they could be sure that the models would hold up post-pandemic.
Matt Pacyna, SRF Consulting responded that the traffic data collected was pre-pandemic. He
stated that during the pandemic the peak congestion times have been decreased but the average
daytime traffic has increased. He stated that they based their analysis on the peak pre-pandemic
to provide the worst-case scenario.
Commissioner Witte asked staff to investigate accidents during the past five years at different
intersections on Dunkirk in order to better understand if there are safety concerns at those
intersections. He stated that these buildings will all have furnaces, and one will have a diesel
generator, therefore there would be emissions generated from the site, even though the EAW
stated that there would not be stationary emissions. He stated that at some point the city should
look at the large issue of the collective impact of vehicle emissions on the carbon footprint and
the issue of climate change, noting that would be separate from this issue.
Commissioner Boo stated that this review seems to boil down to whether the traffic information
is adequate, should be supplemented, or would trigger an EIS. He stated that in his opinion this
would not trigger an EIS. He asked what additional traffic information the commission would
find useful for the council to review that is not in place. He commented that one additional detail
would be the question related to future development to the west of site that could impact the
intersection on Highway 55 and what the access to the Tri-State site will be in the future.
Commissioner Oakley stated that the traffic study does not say everything is fine and it will not
get worse, but instead states there are key issues that exist now, and the development will have
some impact and therefore provides a list of things that could be done to mitigate that. He stated
that the traffic engineer hired by the city is good at their job and the list of requirements in the
report is extensive and that they are ahead of the issues. He commented that the left turn into
what would now be the church parking lot access seems that it could be problematic and cause
stacking. He asked the engineer to review the percentages and margin of safety as well as the
probability of stacking issues back into the intersection onto the highway. He stated that he
would recommend approval of the EAW and would not recommend requiring an EIS.
9
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
Commissioner Markell agrees that an EIS is not warranted in this situation. He commented that
an EIS is reserved for projects that would have significant environmental effects. He stated that
there are many steps forward that would provide citizens of the community to continue to
express their comments and opinions. He stated that he is satisfied with the EAW.
Commissioner Pointner agrees with comments made by the commission. She stated that she
agrees that more information needs to be provided related to traffic. She stated that she was
concerned with the materials in the soil, but she felt better after hearing the steps the developer
has taken and steps that would be in place to address that.
Chair Anderson stated that he does not see the need for an EIS. He stated that with some fine
tuning this EAW would provide adequate information related to the impacts. He stated that he
drives across Highway 55 many times throughout the day and on Dunkirk, therefore he is
familiar with the traffic patterns. He stated that he typically makes the turn on the first turn each
day. He stated that his concern with that signal light would be whether a double left turn lane
would be warranted based on this traffic. He stated that currently there is a very short left turn
arrow. He stated that it is his observation, related to Highway 55, that MnDOT synchronized the
signal lights from Minneapolis to Medina, therefore the cross streets do back up and suffer a bit
but that is how the state has decided it should be. He stated that he is not concerned with the
issue of environmental contamination, as that will be cleaned up.
Commissioner Saba asked if the concept of an overhead pass for Highway 55 at any of the main
side roads has been considered. He stated that having an overhead that goes above Highway 55
would be helpful for cross traffic. He recognized the county would need to be involved in that
discussion.
Motion by Commissioner Oakley and second Commissioner Witte to recommend to the
City Council a negative declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the for redevelopment of the Dundee Nursery site, 16800 Highway 55 and
Plymouth Presbyterian Church site, 3755 Dunkirk Lane. With all commissioner voting in
favor of the motion.
(6.2) Sketch plan review of a mixed-use development concept by Enclave Companies for
properties located west of Highway 169 and south of Bass Lake Road at the intersection of
Bass Lake Road and Nathan Lane (2021007).
Senior Planner Berglund provided a review of the staff report.
Commissioner Pointner stated that she makes trips in this area and has witnessed accidents at
Nathan Lane and Bass Lake Road. She believed that the traffic study will be a benefit, related to
this development, along with the existing conditions.
Commissioner Oakley asked if there has been any discussion related to an affordable housing
component.
Senior Planner Berglund responded that the applicant has stated that the proposed housing would
be market rate.
10
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
Chair Anderson stated that the applicant is looking at a PUD and asked whether staff believes that
the give and take is able to be balanced and that the city would receive something in return for
what may be granted to the developer.
Senior Planner Berglund responded that is something staff would review under a formal
application. He stated that if the developer is asking to deviate from the standard, such as a setback,
the city would look at what the applicant would be willing to provide in return above what is
required under conventional zoning requirements.
Community Development Juetten responded that will be part of the overall discussion if this moves
forward. He stated that there would be quite an opportunity for the developer and city to come
away with a win and if the issues related to transportation can be resolved, that would also be a
win for the residents.
Commissioner Witte asked how deeply staff reviewed the fire lanes around the commercial
buildings, particularly the shared lanes near the gas station.
Senior Planner Berglund responded that the Fire Inspector did review the plans and provide
comments as to what would be required under a development proposal. He stated that further
review would be done if this moved forward to ensure all public safety and fire lane requirements
would be met.
Commissioner Witte stated that the apartment building parcel goes to Bass Lake Road in a step
fashion and asked where the property lines would fall.
Community Development Director Juetten responded that the property is currently owned by one
property owner and if an application comes forward the property would be replatted.
Senior Planner Berglund agreed that if this were to move forward and be replatted, the existing
property lines would be removed and identified the lines that would exist in their place.
Commissioner Witte asked how much influence the city could have in the exterior design of the
townhomes and apartment buildings.
Commissioner Boo asked whether staff looked at the development of this property within the
current zoning and its impact on traffic and other related issues to determine whether this proposed
use would be better or worse.
Community Development Director Juetten responded that would be part of any traffic study done.
He stated that if the site were developed as office, it would be similar to residential. He stated that
if developed as retail there would be a substantial difference in terms of traffic.
Chair Anderson introduced Brian Bochman, Enclave Development, 300 23rd Avenue E, Suite 300,
West Fargo, ND 58078, applicant expressed appreciation for the time staff has spent working with
them. He stated that they have been working on this site for the past two years, providing details
on the original plan which was denser with taller buildings. He stated that in working with staff,
they helped guide them through the process and what could be a much better way to look at this.
He stated they added the townhomes and additional buffering. He stated that he does like the
11
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
current layout more than the original layout. He stated that they held a neighborhood meeting in
March which was strongly attended with great questions and comments. He noted that the bulk of
the comments were related to traffic. He recognized that traffic is always an important issue,
explaining that you can build the best building but if people cannot easily enter and exit the site or
cannot easily park, people do not renew their lease. He stated their goal is to be a good neighbor
and look at this from a team approach to mitigate this as best as possible and make the use work
as best they can. He stated that the current zoning would have significantly higher impacts on
traffic, especially during peak times. He stated with multi-family there would be 600 less average
daily trips compared to office or retail. He stated that they do not want to build something that
dominates the landscape and instead want to build something that will blend with what exists in
the area in terms of residential. He stated that they look forward to bringing something to this area
of Plymouth. He highlighted some projects that they have completed or are still working on in
other metro communities.
Commissioner Oakley asked if Mr. Bochman considered affordable housing.
Mr. Bochman responded they are not planning affordable housing with this project. He stated
that the goal is for this to be a market rate project. He noted that while they have done some
affordable housing, when required by a city, they do not traditionally build affordable housing.
Commissioner Oakley asked if the applicant would expect to have variances or need flexibility
from the zoning requirements.
Mr. Bochman responded that he could not think of anything that would guide them towards a
PUD being the only path forward. He stated that the goal is to have as many options as they can
on both sides of the equation in order to mitigate any issues with traffic.
Commissioner Oakley stated a concern with offsets between driveways and other streets.
Chair Anderson opened the meeting to the public.
Chair Anderson introduced Bob Kaiitz, 10115 57th Avenue N, who stated that the issue of traffic
is his largest concern. He stated that there seem to be issues similar to the previous case with
Dunkirk Lane. He stated that in the three years he has been in this area there has been an
explosion of traffic. He noted the problem with large semitrucks moving at fast speeds from
Bass Lake Road onto Nathan Lane. He stated that he does support the development as proposed
by the development and it will be a great addition to the area. He stated that he would express
concern with whether he would be able to take a left turn to get out of his neighborhood.
Chair Anderson introduced Loren Walensky, 10120 56th Avenue N, who stated that he does not
see the need for more housing in the community. He asked if the city has considered the
potential of taking that land and making it a wetland complex or greenspace, rather than
supporting more building in Plymouth. He stated that the traffic situation continues to get worse
in Plymouth and high-density housing is not going to improve that. He stated that he would
prefer a beautiful greenspace for people and the wildlife to enjoy.
Chair Anderson introduced Philip Stone, 5545 Nathan Lane N #3, who stated that he represents
himself and a significant number of residents in his development (Hickory Hills) related to the
12
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
proposed development. He stated that he and his neighbors are concerned with greenspace. He
noted that there are also concerns related to traffic and the increase that high density housing
would bring to the area. He stated that people use Nathan Lane as a way to avoid the traffic on
the highway. He stated that their concern is that when 300 vehicles empty onto 56th Avenue and
they would be aimed to Nathan Lane or heading south to Schmidt Lake Road, which is an issue
for traffic. He commented that there is an issue with safety for the residents in Hickory Hills
along with Cardinal Ridge. He stated that citizens are concerned with the impacts to the
environment, as there is wildlife that use the greenspace and a concern with polluted runoff into
the creek that would impact the wildlife. He stated that he also believes there to be a high water
table in this area. He stated that they do not oppose development of this property but feel there
are alternatives that would better match the existing residential development. He suggested a
traffic study that would evaluate the traffic that would be brought in. He stated that he would
also be interested in an EAW related to runoff into the creek. He stated that a number of written
comments have been submitted by the residents in Hickory Hills.
Chair Anderson stated that all written comments become a part of the record and will be shared
with the developer as well.
Chair Anderson introduced Yvonne Anderson, 10305 56th Avenue N, who stated that she is
speaking on behalf of a few of her neighbors within the Villas of Bass Creek. She thanked the
applicant and his team for hosting the neighborhood meeting. She stated that many of her
neighbors support the plan to develop the property with multi-family housing and the
thoughtfulness that has been put into this to have a lower impact on the existing residents. She
stated that she would prefer multi-family housing over retail. She stated that although she is
concerned about traffic, she believes that the applicant is open to using a team approach to
address the issue. She stated that she is displeased that the city has not taken action on the
existing traffic problems and was excited that the developer is willing to help. She stated that US
Foods could use an alternative route on 49th without coming down Nathan and avoiding
residential neighborhoods. She was unsure why the city has not addressed that issue and
required that alternate route for the semitrucks. She commended Enclave for proposing
underground parking. She appreciated that the applicant spoke more about office condos or
medical clinics for the commercial space and noted that she much prefers that to retail. She
recognized that millennials want rental housing, and this aligns with that market.
Commissioner Witte asked for input related to access of the Superior Ford site if that site is
redeveloped in the future.
Community Development Director Juetten stated that staff is interested in whether cross accesses
could be provided for fire and emergency services between the sites to provide different ways to
get into the property. He stated that they would not be used for local traffic, but for emergency
services purposes currently. He stated that in the future if there is redevelopment of the Superior
Ford site, additional access options could be discussed.
At this point of the meeting Chair Anderson had technical problems and lost his connection to
our Zoom meeting so Vice Chair Markell assumed leadership of the meeting.
Vice Chair Markell asked if any members of the commission have additional comments.
13
Approved Minutes April 21, 2021
Commissioner Saba commented that he likes the development proposal and believes Mr.
Bochman and his team did a great job to match what is in the area. He stated that the large
problem is not because the area is overdeveloped or due to blended use, but because Nathan
Lane does not go through to the south. He stated that most residents from that area then filter to
Nathan Lane and Bass Lake Road, which is ultimately what will need to be looked at. He agreed
with the comment of the resident that trucks should be using the route from 49th to avoid placing
that traffic on Nathan Lane.
Commissioner Boo asked if there is anything else that could be done on Nathan Lake in the
meantime to ease some of the congestion, such as widening or striping. He stated that they
should take the opportunity to address some of these issues with this development, which he
believes is a good development. He stated that he also like the idea to direct businesses to utilize
the industrial roads rather than residential roads.
Community Development Director Juetten responded that the comments from the residents and
commission will be reflected in the minutes and the commission can direct that those minutes
and comments be forwarded to the council as the sketch plan review.
Commissioner Pointner stated that she appreciated the detail, the neighborhood meeting, and the
other discussions the developer has had in relation to this development proposal.
Motion by Commissioner Boo and second Commissioner Witte to forward the minutes of
the meeting as comments to the City Council on the sketch plan of a mixed-use
development concept by Enclave Companies for properties located west of Highway 169
and south of Bass Lake Road at the intersection of Bass Lake Road and Nathan Lane.
With all commissioner voting in favor of the motion.
Chair Anderson Adjourned the meeting at 10:09 p.m.