Loading...
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.