HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 05-31-2006 SpecialAgenda
City of Plymouth
Special City Council Meeting
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
7:00 p.m.
Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Discuss Comprehensive Plan Update
Part 1 Part 2 (Public comments) Part 3 Part 4
Maps:
Neighboring City Land Uses
Planning Commission Recommendation
Sample Plan 1 Sample Plan 2 Sample Plan 3
City Council Options
3. Adj ourn
Agenda Number: 2 s
TO: Laurie Ahrens, City Manager
FROM: Anne Hurlburt, Community Development Director (763-509-5401)
Barbara Senness, Planning Manager (763-509-54542)
SUBJECT: Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Update: Preliminary Land Use Plan for
Northwest Plymouth. (2005050)
DATE: May 26, 2006 for the Special City Council Meeting of May 31, 2006
1. PROPOSED ACTION:
Receive and discuss the Planning Commission's recommendations on the preliminary land use
plan for northwest Plymouth. Provide direction to staff on what additional information, if any,
is needed for the Council to make a decision on the preliminary land use plan at the June 13,
2006 regular Council meeting.
2. BACKGROUND:
As background for the Council's discussion, attached is the staff report prepared for the May
17, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, which contains the following information:
Review of the planning process to date
Description of rural -to -urban transition development concept
Proposed land use guide plan designations
Description and summary data on three sample land use plans
Public comments on concept and sample plans
Background on regional policy issues (affordable housing need allocation, forecasts and
development density in area served by Elm Creek interceptor)
Suggested discussion questions
In addition to this report, staff has attached the following:
Updated listing and copies of public comments received since May 1 & 2 neighborhood
information meetings, including written comments submitted at the May 17 Planning
Commission meeting
Minutes of May 3 & May 17, 2006 Planning Commission meetings
Map showing Plymouth's existing Land Use Guide Plan and that of surrounding
communities
0 Three sample land use plan maps
Land use plan recommended by the Planning Commission
Summary tables and graphs comparing the four land use plan maps
3. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETINGS:
The Planning Commission discussed the sample land use plans for northwest Plymouth at their
meetings on May 3 and May 17, 2006.
At the May 3 meeting, four individuals wished to speak. All four supported greater density in
the northwest area. One resident also opposed the 100 -foot setback along Vicksburg Lane and
the push to save more trees in areas where tree disease is a large problem today. Another
speaker stated that the sample plans severely limit the options for affordable housing. He
further indicated that he was puzzled by the addition of another set of rules that scale back
density. He stated that clustering could be used to allow greater density while at the same time
protecting important natural amenities.
The Planning Commission asked for additional information on 1) what land uses are planned in
adjoining communities and 2) the Metropolitan Council's affordable housing goals for
Plymouth.
At the May 17 meeting, six individuals wished to speak, three of whom had spoken at the May
3 meeting. The repeat speakers reiterated 1) opposition to the 100 -foot setback on arterials and
2) the need for greater density to allow the opportunity for additional affordable, workforce
housing. One speaker also noted that the City would be receiving a petition from 70 percent of
the landowners in Area 1 who support sample plan 3. Of the other speakers, one supported
greater density than provided for in any of the sample plans. Another supported plan 3 as it
would allow more workforce housing and help address the problem of global warming. The
final speaker indicated that neighborhoods adjacent to Hollydale Golf Course want to be
involved early on in discussions about potential residential development of the golf course.
4. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
As the City Council discusses the Planning Commission recommendation, they may want to
consider the following items addressed by the Commission:
Need for Overlay and Transition
Two of the Commissioners suggested that the City could achieve a rural to urban transition
without new land use guiding designations. They indicated that many of the comments received
have supported urban development and higher densities, in part to help achieve more affordable
housing, in part just to allow urbanization.
Change in Transition Boundary
The Commission's recommendation would remove all the land north of County Road 47 from
the transition area. This would significantly raise the allowable density of the affected
properties.
G
The Commission recommendation would expand the transition boundary in Planning Area 1 by
adding the properties that the City guided for urban development in the 2000 Comprehensive
Plan. This change would have the effect of reducing the allowable density on three of the
parcels.
Change for Parcels Planned for Urban Development in 2000 Plan
The Planning Commission recommendation would change the guiding on nine parcels guided
LA -2 and LA -3 in the current Comprehensive Plan. These parcels are located south of County
Road 47 and west of the proposed Cheshire Lane (five parcels) and east of Vicksburg Lane (four
parcels). The proposed guiding would be LA -R3, which allows 4-6 units per acre. This would
represent a slight increase in density for the six parcels now guided LA -2 (3-6 units per acre).
On the other hand, for three parcels along Vicksburg Lane, now guided LA -3, this change
represents a significant reduction in density (from 6-12 units to 4-6 units per acre). For the past
six years, the affected property owners have based their expectations on the higher density.
Amount of Land in LA -4
The Planning Commission significantly expanded the amount of land guided LA -4. In the
current urban area, roughly five percent of the residentially guided land is guided LA -4.
With the Planning Commission's recommendation, 24 percent of the residential land in the
northwest area would be guided LA -4. In Plymouth today, the balance between single family
and apartments, and between owner and rental housing, is about the average of the entire
Metropolitan area. Consequently, it may be safe to say that the five percent figure is in
relative balance with market demand. Plymouth has never been criticized for having too little
land in the highest density classification. While land owners may perceive higher densities to
be advantageous, if there is not enough market demand for apartment sites, LA -4 guiding may
not enhance the value of their land.
To achieve the LA -4 densities of 12-20 units per acre typically requires apartment -style
housing. This type of housing is not consistent with the objective of maintaining some of the
rural character of northwest Plymouth. Further, the Comprehensive Plan states that LA -4
properties should abut or have reasonably direct access to arterial roadways, be near large
parks or open spaces, be near shopping facilities and have close proximity to jobs. While
some of the proposed LA -4 sites can meet these criteria, notably those just south and east of
Hamel, the remainder fails to meet some or all of the criteria.
Public Requests not Addressed
The City received several specific land use requests from property owners. These requests are
included in this report and were included in the Planning Commission report. The Planning
Commission chose not to address them individually. The City Council, however, may choose
to do so.
Setbacks along Arterial Roadways
The City has received numerous comments opposing the increased setback along Peony Lane,
County Road 47 and Vicksburg Lane. The intent of the increased setback is to help preserve
the rural "feel" along these roadways, by maintaining the existing larger setback.
Two Planning Commissioners stated specifically that they supported the 100 -foot setback,
especially for the area north of County Road 47 that they recommended for LA -4 guiding.
They indicated that the higher density would be tempered with the increased setback.
In further considering the increased setback standard, staff finds that existing and planned
urban development on Vicksburg Lane and on County Road 47 east of Vicksburg has altered
or will alter the setback pattern in these areas. The Council may want to treat these two areas
differently from the western portion of County Road 47 and Peony Lane.
5. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Council receive and discuss the Planning Commission's
recommendations on the preliminary land use plan for Northwest Plymouth and provide
direction on what additional information, if any, is needed for the Council to make a decision
on the preliminary land use plan at the June 13, 2006 regular Council meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Staff report to Planning Commission dated May 12 for May 17, 2006 meeting
2. Public comments received through May 26, 2006
3. May 3 (approved) and May 17, 2006 (draft) Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
4. Existing Land Use Guide Plan, with Surrounding Communities Land Use Plans
5. Sample Land Use Plan Maps
6. Planning Commission Recommended Land Use Plan
7. Tables/ Charts Comparing Four Land Use Plan Maps
9
Agenda Number • 0
TO: Plymouth Planning Commission
FROM: Anne Hurlburt, Community Development Director (763 509-5401)
Barbara Senness, Planning Manager (763 509-5452)
SUBJECT: Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Update-- Preliminary Land Use Plan for
Northwest Plymouth. (2005050)
DATE: May 12, 2006 for the Planning Commission Meeting of May 17, 2006
1. INTRODUCTION
At the May 17, 2006 meeting, the Planning Commission will be discussing the three sample land
use plans for northwest Plymouth that were presented at neighborhood information meetings on
May 1 and 2, and to the Commission at its May 3 meeting. This report summarizes this
information and the comments received on the sample plans, and provides discussion questions
that the Commission may use to formulate recommendations to the City Council. The City
Council is expecting to receive the Planning Commission's recommendations on the preliminary
land use plan at its meeting on May 31, 2006.
2. BACKGROUND
Planning Process to Date
The City began the process of preparing a land use plan for northwest Plymouth roughly eight
months ago. In addition to workshops, open houses and meetings, the City has communicated to
residents, property owners and other stakeholders about the planning process through mailed
notices, the City website, the City newsletter and news releases to the local press.
The City initiated the work on the land use plan in Fall 2005 with two open houses followed by
two meetings where residents and landowners identified neighborhood issues and provided input
for the sample land use plans now under review. These meetings were followed by two joint
Planning Commission/City Council workshops to review the input from the previous public
meetings and provide direction to staff on land use alternatives. Following these workshops, the
City Council hosted a listening session to offer participants an open forum to present their
concerns about and ideas for the future of northwest Plymouth.
With all of the Council, Commission and stakeholder input, staff spent the next three months
developing alternative land use concepts, which the Planning Commission and Council discussed
at two meetings in March. Following these meetings, staff went on to more fully develop a rural
to urban transition development concept and three sample land use plans. In mid-April, the
Commission and Council took a bus tour of northwest Plymouth. The concept and sample land
use plans were the subject of two neighborhood information meetings on May 1 and 2. On May
3, the Planning Commission had their initial discussion on the concept and sample plans and
entertained comments from residents and stakeholders.
Why is the plan for Northwest Plymouth "preliminary"?
A comprehensive plan is a long-range vision and guide for the entire community. The
Comprehensive Plan Update the City is now preparing will provide guidance for City decision
makers to the year 2030. The land use plan for northwest Plymouth is only one piece of this plan
update. The overall plan will not only include a land use plan for northwest Plymouth, but the
rest of the City as well. In addition, once the City has approved a preliminary land use plan,
work will start on updating other parts of the Comprehensive Planplans for sewer, water
supply, surface water, transportation, parks, housing, pubic facilities. Since each one of these
individual plans must work together, we can expect some course corrections in one or more parts.
of the overall plan as we move toward final plan completion.
3. RURAL -TO -URBAN TRANSITION DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT
At the March 9 and 21 workshop meetings, the Planning Commission and City Council
discussed the overall approach to land use planning and extending services to the northwest
planning area. Four basic strategies (referred to as "Marginal Urban Expansion", "Sequential
Urbanization", "Rural Islands" and "Rural -to -Urban Transition") were considered. The
direction received was to base the plan on the "Rural -to -Urban Transition" approach, which is
described as follows:
The Plan would allow for the entire area to make a gradual transition to urban uses.
The City would plan for the logical and efficient expansion of public utilities (sewer and
water) to the entire area, but allow for non -sequential construction of infrastructure if
developers pay for down -stream improvements (off-site work) and obtain easements.
There would be no assessments until landowners are ready to subdivide.
The land use plan would designate a "Northwest Plymouth Overlay" area, with special
development standards to recognize and help preserve the unique characteristics of the area.
The special standards would include:
o Increased setbacks along major roadways (County Road 47, Vicksburg and Peony)—for
example, 100 feet instead of the current 50 feet
o Site design to protect natural features and vistas, and clustering to minimize grading
o Additional tree preservation and landscaping—increase required replacement/restitution,
increased plantings in transition areas
o Architectural standards to encourage variety in building design and enhanced
architectural features
2
o Assessment policies to require payment for over sizing and non -sequential infrastructure
extensions
Within the overlay area, a "Transition Area" would help preserve rural character for residents
in existing large (5-10 acre) lot areas. Land use designations in the Transition Area would
permit lower densities, larger setbacks and wider lots than in the rest of the Overlay area and
in the rest of Plymouth.
The current "Living Area- Rural" (LAR) guiding (20 -acre minimum lot size) would be
replaced with "Living Area -Rural Transition" (LA -RT), to allow re -subdivision of lots to as
small as 1 acre, with public utilities.
The density of all urban land use designations in the Transition Area would be lower than the
comparable designations for the rest of the city. For example: LA -R1 is 1 to 2 units per acre,
LA -R2 is 2 to 4 units per acre and LA -R3 is 4 to 6 units per acre.
The existing land use designations would be used in the areas where a transition is not
required (for example, larger undeveloped parcels without significant natural areas), and/or in
locations where more intense development would be appropriate. On the sample plans that
were prepared for public review, this included:
o The area previously planned for urban development by the 2000 Comprehensive Plan
o
I The area south of Highway 55, which does not have the same rural character as the rest of
the northwest area
o Some areas immediately abutting more intense development or at major intersections
o Future institutional uses planned along County Road 101.
4. LAND USE GUIDE PLAN CLASSIFICATIONS
The following chart illustrates the Land Use Guide Plan classifications that would be used for the
Comprehensive Plan update, based on the concept described above. Within the Northwest
Plymouth Overlay, there would be two sets of land use guide plan designations—the rural -to -
urban transition categories, with reduced densities, and the current set. The current set of land
use guide plan designations would be used in the rest of the City and retain their current
standards.
Increasing the number of sets of land use plan designations from the current one to three distinct
sets could be complicated to implement and may be confusing to the public. This number could
be reduced to two, if the increased development standards proposed for the overlay area were
applied to the entire community. With the possible exception of the increased setbacks from the
major roads (which were introduced to help maintain the existing rural character of CR 47 and
other arterial roads in the northwest area), it may be desirable to apply the new standards to the
relatively few remaining undeveloped properties in the existing urban area. The Planning
Commission and Council should discuss this issue when giving direction for the preliminary land
use plan.
Land Use Guide Plan Designations
Residential Uses Only)
LA -1
2 to 3/acre
LA -2
3 to 6/acre
Northwest Plymouth Overlay
Current Land Use New Rural -to -Urban
Designations Within Transition Land Use
NW Overlay Designations
X/11.120. LA,.RTno=sewer
or up to /.acre with
LA -R1
j1 to 2/acre
LA -1
2 to 3/acre LA -R2
2 to 4/acre
3 to 6/ LIR3acre
4 to 6,Cacr
LA =3
6 o 12/acre
12: to 201acre ;.
Overlay Development Standards
Apply to current and rural -to -urban designations within NW overlay)
Increased setbacks along major roadways (CR47,
Vicksburg & Peony)
Site design to protect natural features and vistas,.
clustering to minimize grading
Additional tree preservation & landscaping --
increase required replacement/restitution,
increased plantings in transition areas
Architectural standards to encourage variety in
building design and enhanced architectural
features
Assessment policies to require payment for over
sizing & non -sequential infrastructure extensions
4
5. SAMPLE LAND USE PLANS
Staff prepared three sample land use plans for public review and comment at the May 1 and 2
neighborhood information
meetings. They are attached to
this report. The plans illustrate
three levels of development
intensity, using the same
Northwest Plymouth Overlay"
and "Transition Area"
boundaries, as shown on the
map to the right, and the land
use guide plan designations
shown on the chart.
The following table summarizes
the land uses and development
intensity represented by the
three sample plans.
Land. Area by Land Use Guide Plan Designation
Sample Land Use Plans, Northwest Plymouth Overlay Area
May 1, 2006
Sample Plan 1 Sample Plan 2 Sample Plan 3
Land Use Guide Plan Designation Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent
C (Commercial) 27.71 1.65% 27.71 1.65% 9.93
g*o0g
P-1 (PublictInstitutional) 205.21
stair, D
205.21 12.19% 205.21 12.19%
IP (Planned Industrial)
isRjIMF
VOW
i%
1.51% 0.00
K
1 0.00 0.00%
258.34 15.35% 232.92 13.84% 215.14 12.78%
LA -1 (2 to 3 Units/Acre) 101.84
PA
0.00. 0.00% 0.00 0.00%
LA -2 (3 to 6 Units/Acre) 148.92 8.85% 250.76 14.90% 110.66 6.58%
LA -3 (6 to 12 Units/Acre) 118.49 7.04% 118.49 7.04% 276.37 16.42%
LA -4 (12 to 20 Units/Acre) 0.00 0.00% 25.42 1.51% 25.42 1.51%
Subtotal, Urban Residential 369.25 21.94% 394.67 23.45% 412.45 24.51%
Land. Area by Land Use Guide Plan Designation
Sample Land Use Plans, Northwest Plymouth Overlay Area
May 1, 2006
Sample Plan 1 Sample Plan 2 Sample Plan 3
Land Use Guide Plan Designation Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent
C (Commercial) 27.71 1.65% 27.71 1.65% 9.93 0.59%
P-1 (PublictInstitutional) 205.21 12.19% 205.21 12.19% 205.21 12.19%
IP (Planned Industrial) 25.42 1.51% 0.00 0.00% 1 0.00 0.00%
Subtotal, Non -Residential 258.34 15.35% 232.92 13.84% 215.14 12.78%
LA -1 (2 to 3 Units/Acre) 101.84 6.05% 0.00. 0.00% 0.00 0.00%
LA -2 (3 to 6 Units/Acre) 148.92 8.85% 250.76 14.90% 110.66 6.58%
LA -3 (6 to 12 Units/Acre) 118.49 7.04% 118.49 7.04% 276.37 16.42%
LA -4 (12 to 20 Units/Acre) 0.00 0.00% 25.42 1.51% 25.42 1.51%
Subtotal, Urban Residential 369.25 21.94% 394.67 23.45% 412.45 24.51%
LA -RT (20 Acres/ 1/Acre with Sgwer) 349.30 20.76% 258.54 15.36% 214.41 12.74%
LA -R1 (1 to 2 Units/Acre) 435.40 25.87% 390.12 23.18% 202.56 12.04%
LA -R2 (2 to 4 Units/Acre) 270.63 16.08% 406.67 24.16% 471.22 28.00%
LA -R3 (4 to 6 Units/Acre) 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 167.15 9.93%
Subtotal, Residential Transition Area 1,055.33 62.71% 1,055.33 62.71% 1,055.33 62.71%
Total, Developable Land Area (less wetlands
and floodplain) 1,682.92 100.00% 1,682.92 100.00% 1,682.92 100.00%
Potential New Dwellings, All Residential Designations Except LA -RT
Sample Plan 1 Sample Plan 2 Sample Plan 3
Number Units/Acre Number Units/Acre Number Units/Acre
Minimum of Density Range 2,338 2.17 2,972 2.49 4,109 3.28
Maximum of Density Range 4,574 4.25 5,842 4.90 7,782 6.21
Key differences among the three samples are as follows:
With the exception of the parcels along County Road 47, the LA -RT areas east of Troy and
east of Dunkirk remain the same through each of the sample plans. The area north of
Pomerleau Lake is the only LA -RT area that significantly reduces in size from the first to the
third sample plan.
Elm Creek Golf Course increases in density from LA -1 to LA -2 to LA -3.
The parcels south of Hamel Road are shown as industrial in sample plan 1 and LA -4 in
samples 2 and 3. This area has good access and is close to a variety of services and therefore
provides an opportunity for higher density housing that could also complement new and
planned development in Hamel.
The area north of County Road 47 increases from a combination of LA -R1 and LA -R2 in
sample plan 1 to LA -R3 in,sample 3. This area abuts Maple Grove where urban densities
already. exist.
The lots immediately south of County Road 47 increase in intensity from the first to the third
sample plan, based on their proximity to a higher -order roadway.
Hampton Hills moves from LA -R1 in the first two samples to LA -R2 in the third.
The properties on the east side of Vicksburg north of the railroad tracks change from LA -RT
in sample plan 1 to LA -R3 in sample 3.
6. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CONCEPT AND SAMPLE LAND USE PLANS
As of May 12, 29 comment forms and letters have been received from 28 individuals who
attended the May neighborhood information meetings. Approximately 125 people attended the
meetings. Any additional written comments received prior to the Planning Commission meeting
will be shared at the meeting, and any later comments received prior to the Council meeting on
May 31 will be shared at that time. A tabulation of the comments, and the responses sent to
those requesting them, is attached to this report.
The comments can be categorized as follows:
Comment
Preferred Sample Plan
Number
15
Preference for sample plan 1 5
Preference for sample plan 2 1
Preference for sample plan 3 9
Suggestion for specific land use plan designations 12
Comments on need for road improvements 8
County Road 47 5
Cheshire Lane 2
Vicksburg Lane 1
Opposition to increased setbacks from major roadways 6
Concerns about assessments 4
Timing of development 4
Need for higher densities 3
Concern about preserving golf courses 2
Need for greenways/ trails connections 2
0
The specific changes requested to land use designations are listed in the discussion questions
appearing later in this report.
7. INFORMATION REQUESTED BY PLANNING COMMISSION
At the May 3 meeting, the Planning Commission requested information on the land use plans for
the other cities that border northwest Plymouth. This information is presented in a map in the
attachments. The Commission also asked for information on how the Metropolitan Council .
allocated affordable housing needs to Plymouth.
What is Plymouth's allocation of the region's affordable housing needs? How did the
Metropolitan Council arrive at this figure?
The Metropolitan Council has developed a forecast of the affordable housing need in the
Metropolitan Area for the period from 2011 - 2020. This forecast addresses only the need for
new construction, not that portion of need that can be accommodated through the existing
housing stock.
The Metropolitan Council has indicated that the City of Plymouth's affordable housing
need allocation between 2011 and 2020 is 1,045 units. This figure represents just under 42%
of the 2,500 housing units the Metropolitan Council is forecasting for Plymouth during this
period. They arrived at this figure by first determining an overall regional need for 51,000 units
nearly one-third of the forecasted growth in sewer -serviced households) and then allocating that
need to individual communities. To determine individual community allocations, the
Metropolitan Council:
a. Multiplied the forecasted household growth in a community by a uniform factor of
30.6% --the assumed need for new affordable units in the region as a whole.
b. Proportionally increased a community's share if the community is a net importer of
low wage jobs and decreased it if the community is a net exporter.
C. For communities where more than 30% of existing housing is affordable, the
Metropolitan Council reduced the community need proportionally. For communities
such as Plymouth, where the current percentage is less than 30%, the Metropolitan
Council proportionally increased the need share number.
d. For communities with regular, frequent transit service, the Metropolitan Council
increased the communities' housing share. For communities such as Plymouth with
little service, there was no adjustment. For communities without regular transit
service, the Metropolitan Council decreased their share.
8. REGIONAL PLANNING ISSUES
The State Legislature has determined that it is critical to the functioning of the region that each
city's long-range plan is in conformity with regional plans. Therefore, although the City is
developing its own long-range vision and guide for the future, as Plymouth considers its land use
plan for the northwest area the City must also consider:
7
Growth forecasts
Density of development in the area to be served by the Elm Creek interceptor
Opportunities for affordable housing.
Staff has already calculated that there is enough land in the existing urban service area to
accommodate regionally forecasted growth to 2010. The issue is whether the plan adopted for
the northwest area can accommodate the additional 4,500 units forecast between 2010 and 2030.
The range of potential new dwellings permitted by sample plans 2 and 3 would accommodate the
4,500 units forecast within that time period. However, sample plan 1 would not allow that
number of units unless the entire area developed at the maximum of the density range, which is
unlikely.
The "Systems Statement" issued by the Metropolitan Council to the City of Plymouth indicates
that the City must plan for overall minimum standard of three to five units per acre in the area
served by the Elm Creek interceptor in order to conform with the regional sewer system plan.
The Metropolitan Council has the authority to require a city to modify its plan if it substantially
departs from the regional systems plan. Their authority to do so was confirmed by the Minnesota
Supreme Court when the Metropolitan Council successfully challenged the City of Lake Elmo
for not accommodating their share of regional growth.
Only sample plan 3 would provide for an minimum overall residential density exceeding 3 units
per acre within the area served by the Elm Creek interceptor. (This assumes that the proposed
LA -RT land areas are considered to be already developed at their minimum density range and not
included in the calculation.) If Plymouth would propose to substantially depart from regional
expectations at this stage in the planning process, the City should bring its case to the
Metropolitan Council before spending significant time or money on updating infrastructure
plans.
The Metropolitan Council will also review a community's land use plan to determine whether or
not there are sufficient opportunities to develop at a density at which affordable housing may be
feasible. It is not clear from the Metropolitan Council's adopted policies and other guidance
given to the cities on preparation of plans what that minimum density would be. We do have
preliminary indications from staff that the planned density would need to be at least 6 units per
acre to be considered potentially affordable. Therefore, on the sample plans only areas guided
LA -3 and higher might be counted as potentially "affordable." To further complicate the issue,
the regional "need allocation", described above, is for a 10 -year period, while the overall plan
must deal with a 20 -year period.
Consequently, until there is a development staging plan to accompany the land use plan, it is
difficult to determine whether the sample plans would meet the regional goal for affordable
housing opportunities. Because very little land on sample plan 1 is shown in the higher density
classifications, it is unlikely to meet the goal. The other sample plans might meet the goal
depending upon the staging plan and how the Metropolitan Council views the density ranges
permitted by the plan.
It is important to note that the regional policy concerning affordable housing opportunities is not
a "regional system issue. The Metropolitan Council does not have the authority to require a
plan modification if the policy goal is not met. Furthermore, the affordable housing need
allocation and the relationship to the land use plan is only one of the issues surrounding
affordable housing that the City will need to address in the Comprehensive Plan. The Housing
chapter of the plan, which will be updated over the next year, will address the full range of
housing needs in Plymouth.
9. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Staff has prepared the following discussion questions, which the Commission may wish to use to
help formulate your recommendation to the City Council for the preliminary land use plan for the
northwest area:
a. Are there any general concerns or comments about the "rural -to -urban transition"
approach to development?
b. Are there concerns or comments on the "Northwest Plymouth Overlay" concept, such
as the proposal for increased development standards? Should these standards also be
increased for the rest of the City? (This could allow the number of sets of land use
guide plan designations to be reduced from three to two.)
c. Should there be any changes in the land use guide plan designations proposed for the
Overlay and/or Transition areas?
d. Should the boundaries of the "Transition" area within the Overlay be reduced or
expanded?
e. Which one of the three "sample" plans most closely represents your preference for a
future land use plan for the northwest area?
f. How should this sample plan be modified so that it represents a consensus of the
Planning Commission?
g. Should any of the specific requests for changes to land use designations be
incorporated into the Commission's recommended plan? Those requests were:
Location: Requested Land Use Designation: ,
1; 23 Elm Creek Golf Course LA -1; LA -1 or LA -2
6 County Road 47 & 101 Sample plan 3-- suggested boundary
between C and LA -3 (sample plan 3)
should be moved to creek
7,24 Southwest corner of Troy and Sample plan 3-- suggest moving
County Road 47 boundary of LA -R2 area abutting
County Road 47 to include two parcels
to the south on Troy Lane
12 Planning area 1 (all area east of Sample plan 3-- all should be LA -R3
Vicksburg Lane)
14 5620 Ranier Lane (PID 06-42-0004) All sample plans-- change from LA -R1
to LA -R2
15 79 acres at Peony Lane & Schmidt All sample plans—change to LA -4
Lake Road, across from Wayzata HS
E
Location: Requested Land Use Designation:
21 Lots on both sides of the road at the All sample plans-- LA -RT should be
south end of Dunkirk Lane changed to LA-Rl, and possibly LA -R2
or LA -R3 as a transition to existing
townhome development
22 5739 Juneau (PID 04-31-0006) Sample plan 2—change LA -RT to LA -
R1
27,28 North County Road 47/ west of Sample plan 3—change LA -R3 to LA-
Lawndale Lane (Luedke property) 3 (remove from Transition area)
10. CONCLUSIONS/ RECOMMENDATION
Staff will present the information in this report and answer questions at the May 17 meeting. We
recommend that the Commission use the discussion questions listed above as a guide, to assist
with making your recommendation to the City Council. If there is any additional information
that we can provide, please contact us in advance of the meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Sample Land Use Plan Maps
2. Public Comments—May 1 & 2 Neighborhood Meetings
3. Existing Land Use Guide Plan, with Surrounding Communities Land Use Plans
4. Planning Process Milestones and Tentative Dates for 2006
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
May 3, 2006
Page 11
Commissioner Anderson stated that she feels that in order to determine whether it is part of
the Plymouth plan and whether this is the route to go, she needs to have those other pieces
of the puzzle put in place. She said she would rather wait until they hear back from the
other entities before moving forward with this.
MOTION by Commissioner Murdock, seconded by Commissioner Weir, to approve the
TIF Plan for the Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Authority's (HRA) Tax Increment
Financing Housing District 1-2 (Vicksburg Commons). Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes.
MOTION approved. Commissioner Anderson voting Nay.
The Planning Commission recessed at 8:35 p.m. and reconvened at 8:44 p.m.
B. CITY OF PLYMOUTH (2005050)
Chair Holmes introduced the request by the City of Plymouth to discuss the
Comprehensive Plan Update and the sample land use plans for Northwest Plymouth.
Community Development Director Hurlburt gave an overview of the April 28, 2006 staff
report.
Commissioner Clyman asked that on the Elm Creek interceptor, did the Met Council state
that three units/acre is needed to really utilize it. Community Development Director
Hurlburt said that is correct. Commission Clyman asked if one part of northwest is more
dense and then there's less density on the other part, if sewer can handle more density on
one end that is maybe higher than three units, as long as there's lower density on the other
end or is Met Council saying they are looking for three units evenly spread out.
Community Development Director Hurlburt said the land use plan is up to the City. She
said they build a regional system expecting a certain amount of utilization and expecting
that these investments will provide opportunities for a certain amount of development so
they don't have to build more sewer some place else. She said there is that regional policy,
however, what happens within the City boundaries is up to the City. She said this is an
average because not all property is going to be suitable for the same amount of
development. She said they give us the volume they expect in the sewer and we need to be
consistent with that. She said the volume and density policy are important because they do
have some legal authority, but there is a lot of negotiation.
Commissioner Clyman asked if in sample plan number one, if the lower end minimum of
2,300 units was selected, would there be enough capacity in the existing urban area to
make up the other 2,100. Community Development Director Hurlburt said the 4,500 was
based on absorbing our forecast to 2010 in the existing urban area. She said the 4,500 units
is the Met Council's forecast for development between 2010 and 2030. Commissioner
Clyman asked if there has been any feedback from the Met Council. Community
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
May 3, 2006
Page 12
Development Director Hurlburt said that before we can get any feedback from the Met
Council, the City has to have some kind of a plan by our governing body.
Commissioner Clyman asked what was going on in sample plan number one along
Vicksburg Lane where there is a jutting out of LA -1. Community Development Director
Hurlburt said that staff tried to keep parcel boundaries in tact. She said the idea is that in
order to develop this LA1 area, there is going to have to be some sort of road connection
over to Vicksburg Lane and that is why it is shown that way.
Chair Holmes took comments from residents wishing to speak.
Chair Holmes introduced Edward Svetc, 5330 Vicksburg Lane North. Mr. Svetc said the
area is not a lot of land if you subtract what Lundgren has already built. He said Plymouth
is proposing to have a 100 foot setback on about four properties north of the railroad tracks
and on the east. He said everyone else along Vicksburg still has 50 feet. He said he would
like someone to explain that. He said everyone is trying to protect the trees and that's
great. He said last year, City of Plymouth forestry sent letters stating that they had 1,500
oak wilt trees and they were sending out inspectors to look. He said that last year alone, he
had 59 they had to have cut down. He said he has been digging them out with backhoes so
the root systems don't spread. He said the only thing to stop it was to dig a deep trench.
He said they should be clear -cutting and have the developments plant disease resistance
trees. He said in the long run, it will look better. He said they like northwest Plymouth to
be developed just like the rest of Plymouth that has water and sewer. He said they should
not be treated any different. He said they talked about allowing people to pick and choose
who gets water and sewer and that is not the way to develop a community.
Chair Holmes introduced Len Luedke, 17910 County Road 47. Mr. Luedke said there are
many meetings about this comprehensive plan where it has been stated that this is our last
chance to save open space for the future. He said that if we look at reality and the needs
for the future, we are going to need additional housing units every time a comprehensive
plan comes up. He said that once expensive homes are built on large lots, they will remain
for many comprehensive plans and each time a comprehensive plan comes up, the only
way to squeeze in more units will be to tear down truly affordable houses where people are
living without public assistance. He said he is aware the 55446 zip code in Plymouth is the
third highest income in the metro area but is that justification to force less fortunate
residents out of our City.
Chair Holmes introduced Kim Vohs, Interfaith Outreach & Community Partners, 110
Grand Avenue, Wayzata. Mr. Vohs said their feelings about the comprehensive plan is that
the options proposed so far are really not positive. He said their interest for the clients they
serve is in providing and promoting affordable housing. He said any one of these three
options severely limit that. He said that for Vicksburg Commons, which is 50 units on
seven acres, the density of seven units/acre would only be allowed on the LA -3 and LA -4
areas. He said this is a 2,000 acre parcel and the opportunity here is huge. He said in
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
May 3, 2006
Page 13
future years in the developing of this land, we need to look ahead now. He said we are
talking about preserving and making a transition. He said they have already transitioned in
Maple Grove and traffic is coming here from there and cramping our road system. He said
we need to plan for allowing density. He said that in talking about affordable housing and
workforce housing, you have to look ahead at the comprehensive plan and look at fuel cost.
He said people need to live where they work. He said we need affordable housing to allow
that. He said we have lots of employment opportunities in Plymouth and there is an
opportunity to create more residential opportunities as well. He said there are a lot of
natural amenities in this area that need to be preserved. He said we don't want to create
affordable housing at the expense of losing nature. He said we have clustering models that
allow greater density around natural amenities. He said we need to look at those and none
of the three proposals allow that creativity to occur. He said he is puzzled by adding
another whole set of rules for this area that scale back density. He said we need to look
further ahead and that every community that is developed on the fringe struggles with these
issues. He said we need to be aware of the need for affordable housing and for it to be
where people work. He said the Met Council concerns have been raised and we don't
know what they will say to this. He said we need to run some different scenarios per Met
Council requirements of how many affordable units will the different three plans allow to
be created. He said we know about land costs and our struggle with density to deal with
that. He said that if you allow opportunities for that, it gives developers the opportunity to
be creative. He said he is pleased to hear support for their project and hopes the
Commission will look at this through the affordable housing lens and make some strong
recommendations to the City Council to reconsider this to allow greater density along the
main corridors and to look at affordable housing. He said their group is concerned about
this as well as other groups.
Chair Holmes introduced Judy Luedke, 17910 County Road 47. Ms. Luedke said she has
been accused for years of wanting to develop her property and take the money and run.
She said that if this plan would have gone in the last comprehensive plan, it would not have
gone through. She said we would have had cheaper housing and we could have had more
affordable housing. She said this is the comprehensive plan that is out now and she fears
the City Council wouldn't be looking at affordable housing as much as they should this
time either. She said they have 54 acres and one acre has an old school house on it that
was converted to a home and no one has lived there for more than two years. She said they
sure would like that developed also. She said that if they change their classification from
LA -R3 to LA -3, she can have more units. She said the more people that can go on this
land, it does save the housing in other parts of the City. She said she circulated the petition
and went into parts of City and talked to people. She said they are very concerned because
they would like to continue to live in areas where people have started buying, tearing down
and building new homes. She said it doesn't fit and they would like to stay in their homes.
She said we live in the City, we don't live in the country. She said Hillstone Meadows
adjoins her property and why couldn't she be an LA -2 and have more housing on her land.
She said she agrees we should have even more than Met Council gives us. She said at the
time of the last comprehensive plan, Plymouth didn't take all the people that the Met
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
May 3, 2006
Page 14
Council wanted them to. She said she wonders why we don't volunteer to take people so
that the people can live on this land and can be in the City and enjoy the amenities.
Community Development Director Hurlburt said that staff is preparing a report for the next
meeting which will include a summary of all the comments received in the meetings this
week. She said to let staff know in advance of any additional information requested.
Commissioner Clyman asked about the Peony Lane alignment and how the property
owners plan to develop that area after the road alignment is done. Community
Development Director Hurlburt said that roads are developed as surrounding land is
developed.
Commissioner Clyman said the majority of voices that have spoken at these meetings have
been concerned for the preservation of the rural, natural character. He said that based on
the feedback, he likes sample land use plan number one and would like more information
from the City about changing the I -P area in the southwest corner to LA -4 and increasing
the density north of State Highway 55 from LA -1 to LA -3 or LA -4. He said affordable
options should be along the main corridors and he doesn't see County Road 47 or
Vicksburg being improved over the next 15 to 20 years. He said the density shouldn't be
added into that area and should be addressed 20 years from now. He said there should not
be affordable housing in that area where there is not accessibility by public transit. He said
the density should be more towards the State Highway 55 area.
Commissioner Murdock said she appreciates all the maps and information as it helps make
it more concrete in her mind after all the multiple meetings and conversations held. She
said she is not entirely sure that the rural to urban overlay piece makes the most sense. She
said that maybe some higher density or pockets of higher density in some areas make more
sense. She said she appreciates all the comments. She said she is less likely to go in the
direction of sample plan number one as it is the least dense. She said there are probably
some more options that would have some more dense development within that planning
area. She said she would be interested in more information for what is planned for the
northern boundary of Maple Grove area and what type of developments they have in the
works. Community Development Director Hurlburt said that will be in the next packet as
well.
Commissioner Murdock said there have been several discussions about the golf course
issue and asked if they are looking at a separate land use for them. Community
Development Director Hurlburt said that at the March 9 and March 21 meetings, there had
been discussion whether or not the existing operating golf courses should continue as
public institutional or if they needed to reflect some development potential. She said it was
suggested to look at a land use guide plan classification that could look at preserving some
of the open space benefits of those golf courses but still recognize the fact that they are
privately owned. She said the City Council asked to reflect the Elm Creek Golf Course as
Approved
Planning Commission Minutes
May 3, 2006
Page 15
if the use had changed and after the June decision to come back and look at other golf
courses.
Commissioner Murdock asked for a document that lays out housing unit targets from the
Met Council. Community Development Director Hurlburt said that will be included in the
report.
Commissioner Murdock asked about information received from Speak the Word Church.
Community Development Director Hurlburt said that at the March meetings, City Council
members asked about the Church's intent for the 80 acre parcel they own along County
Road 101. She said Speak the Word Church has purchased additional land to the north.
She said their intent is to use the entire 80 acres for a large facility to be their world
headquarters and retain the land to the north and not sell to anyone to develop for some
other use.
Chair Holmes thanked the residents for staying to this late hour. He said it is gratifying to
see their concern and that their comments are being heard.
8. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION by Chair Holmes without objection to adj ourn the meeting at 9:5 5 p.m.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 2
D' ector Hurlburt said that is the opposite of what we usually hear people requesting.
Dire or Hurlburt said the owner should talk to the developer and can discuss the tree issue.
Commiss ner Anderson asked about the hours of operation for construction.
Planning Man er Senness stated that construction hours are from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
weekdays, and on aturdays 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Mr. Campion said Ne demo of the existing houses and the installation of site
improvements could accN from either Vicksburg or Old County Road 9.
Commissioner Murdock said is proposal raises the issue of density. She said this is a
two -acre site, and LA -2 allows 12 units per acre. Commissioner Murdock asked if the
site characteristics make it impossi e to meet that density. She commented these are very
big houses and big lots, and asked if a igher density was looked at.
Senior Planner Darling said staff encourag the applicant and several other developers to
come forward with a single family developm t consistent with the RSF-2 zoning district
to make a seamless fit into this neighborhood. She pointed out that all access is from
Weston Lane which goes through a single family ighborhood, so this proposal would be
a better blend into the existing neighborhood.
Commissioner Clyman said he is curious if the sanitary linbk are PVC.
Public Works Director Doran Cote stated the pipes are PV , and added it is standard
procedure to blow abandoned lines with sand. He said that is ore typical than fully
removing them.
Commissioner Clyman thanked staff and the applicant for improving Ike safety of the
intersection and future improvements of the turn lane onto Vicksburg Lane.
MOTION by Commissioner Weir, seconded by Commissioner Neset, to ap ove the
request by CBR Development, LLC. for a rezoning and preliminary plat for "Four Po' is of
Plymouth" to create four lots on property located at 15910 and 16000 Old Rockford ad
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. PLYMOUTH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
Chair Holmes introduced the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Update for discussion.
Director Hurlburt gave an overview of the May 12, 2006 staff report.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 3
The Planning Commission recessed at 8:48 p.m. and reconvened at 8:58 p.m.
Chair Holmes introduced Edward Svetc, 5330 Vicksburg Lane N. Mr. Svetc said he has
lived here for 30 years. Mr. Svetc said a petition will be presented next week which
supports Plan 3 and represents about 70% of the landowners in Area 1 who want to
develop their land. Mr. Svetc said he thinks they should have some say in what happens in
their area and likes that the process allows this. Mr. Svetc said he is against the 100 -foot
setback. He said the transitional water and sewer does not make sense when the majority
want development. Mr. Svetc said it is nice to preserve trees, but oak wilt is a major
problem. He said you have to dig down 32 feet to put in sanitary sewer and the disturbing
of trees will cause them to die anyway.
Chair Holmes introduced Kim Vohs, Housing Director for Interfaith Outreach and
Community Partners (IOCP), 110 Grand Avenue S., Wayzata MN. Mr. Vohs said in the
fiscal year ending 3-31-06, IOCP served 730 families with affordable housing needs. He
stated the need continues to grow and IOCP turns people away every month. Mr. Vohs
said the majority of the clients are at or below 60% of median income. Mr. Vohs said the
long term solution is to develop more affordable units and IOCP would like to see the land
guided to higher a density. Mr. Vohs said the Met Council set the affordable housing unit
goal at 1,045 by the year 2020 for City of Plymouth, and asked how many affordable units
could be developed under Sample Plans 1, 2 and 3. Mr. Vohs said Vicksburg Crossing has
7 units per acre, and Common Bond purchased it for $100,000 an acre and made it
affordable. Today land prices are double in that area. He said the standard of affordable
units would be six units per acre, but not up to six. He said many times a project is
proposed at a higher density, and all too often the City scales it back. Mr. Vohs said he
was pleased to see Director Hurlburt's presentation of affordability with the density
guidelines. He said LA -3 and LA -4 truly allow affordable housing to be developed. Mr.
Vohs said 3-6 units per acre density probably would not be developed at the 6 -unit level.
Mr. Vohs said to suggest those land use designations to allow affordable housing down the
line is a stretch and cautioned the Commission to look at this carefully. Mr. Vohs said he
is pleased residents are calling for Plan 3 and said that is a reasonable starting point. Mr.
Vohs asked how we can add more areas of LA -3 and LA -4. He said we have a city staff
very capable and very trained to do that. Mr. Vohs said the open land cleared for farming
could be an area where affordability could be developed. Nobody wants to knock down
trees and disturb wetlands. Mr. Vohs said the rising fuel prices are not going away and
there is a lot of development pressure because people are not going to want to live far out
anymore. Mr. Vohs stated more people come to Plymouth to work than go out of
Plymouth to work. Mr. Vohs concluded that the opportunity with the land is present, and
said he hopes the City can respond with greater density and greater affordability.
Commissioner Clyman said in the last 1.5 years, Vicksburg Crossing is the only project
that has had a significant amount of affordable housing. He said there seems to be a lot of
funding sources, yet there seems to be a restriction on the amount of funds that can make
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 4
affordable housing a reality. Commissioner Clyman asked for feedback about limitations
on affordability housing projects.
Mr. Vohs said there is a challenge of funding these projects, and said he worked with an
experienced developer, Common Bond. Mr. Vohs said this northwest area has not been
served by sewer and water, and now by creating the opportunity with open land, there is an
opportunity to attract developers. Mr. Vohs said when it is allowed and encouraged, and
supported by local policies, developers will come forward with projects. Mr. Vohs said he
knows of other non-profit developers who want to work in the area. Mr. Vohs reiterated
this is Step 1 -- if maximum density is not allowed, projects are stopped before you even
open the door.
Chair Holmes introduced Sandy Steiner, 5160 Trenton Lane. Ms. Steiner said she
represents the Open Space and Housing For All Coalition. Ms. Steiner said the Met
Council predicts a net growth of 2500 people in Plymouth between 2010 and 2020. She
said the current land use proposal of Sample Plan 3 will make it difficult to meet the
housing requirement the Met Council has put in place. Ms. Steiner said we need more
LA -4 land use designation. She said three specific areas to change from LA -3 to LAR -4
would be 1) on the north side of Co. Rd. 47 between Vicksburg and Co. Rd. 101, 2) the
east side of Co. Rd. 101 south of Co. Rd. 47 and north of Medina Rd. and 3) the east side
of Vicksburg south of Co. Rd. 47 and north of the railroad. Ms. Steiner said the Coalition
needs land for life cycle housing, and wants to make sure housing provides open space
with emphasis on preserving natural resources.
Chair Holmes introduced Victor Sandler, 3010 E. Medicine Lake Blvd. Mr. Sandler said
he is very concerned about global warming and said it is a reality that glaciers are melting.
He said the cause of global warming is greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels, which
in Plymouth is gasoline and oil. Mr. Sandler said 70% of the oil we use is for
transportation and urban sprawl which promotes more driving, which is bad. Mr. Sandler
said as a community, we have a responsibility to our children to develop the northwest area
to promote mass transit and shorten commuter distance, and providing workforce and
affordable housing, which are good ideas. He asked the Planning Commission if his
concerns are also their concerns and said we have a responsibility to decrease urban sprawl
and promote the decrease of global warming.
Commissioner Musliner said she could relate to Mr. Sandler's global warming concerns,
and asked which plan he considered the most responsible.
Mr. Sandler responded that Plan 3 allowed more work force housing which would promote
more mass transit and shorter commutes. Mr. Sandler said Plan 1 encouraged
McMansions" and urban sprawl which promotes longer commuting times and would be
bad for the environment. Mr. Sandler said the Federal Government has done very little
across the country, but more and more communities are taking action to improve mass
transit and cut down on commuting times and he would like to see Plymouth do the same.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 5
Commissioner Musliner said she agreed with the global warming issue but said an increase
in density promotes an increase in the number of people driving cars so that contributes to
the problem on the other side. She agreed mass transit is a great alternative.
Chair Holmes introduced Len Luedke, 17910 Co. Rd. 47. Mr. Luedke said he would like
the Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council to remove the 100 -foot
setback along Co. Rd. 47, Lawndale Lane and Vicksburg Lane. Mr. Luedke said he is
presenting a petition opposing the 100 -foot setback which is signed by the majority of
landowners along these highways.
Chair Holmes introduced Mark Kraemer, 4715 Yuma Lane N. Mr. Kraemer said he lives
in the Autumn Hills neighborhood. Mr. Kraemer said he and neighbors in Nanterre have
organized and are concerned about the potential residential development of Hollydale Golf
Course. He said at the May 3, 2006 meeting, it seemed evident that potential development
of land outside of that area is being brought in to meet certain housing quotas. Mr.
Kraemer said these neighborhoods want to be involved in the process early if Hollydale is
being factored in.
Commissioner Neset suggested a straw poll on the Commissioners' positions on sample
plan uses.
Commissioner Anderson recommended 1) Sample Plan 3 east of Vicksburg Lane, but
would flip the LA -3 and LA -2 areas at the northwest corner, 2) Sample Plan 2 change the
land east of Peony, north of Schmidt Lake Road from LA -2 to LA -3 or LA -4, 3) and on
Sample Plan 1 change the land west of the Elm Creek Golf Course to LA -3 or LA -4.
Commissioner Anderson said the area south of Highway 55 should all be LA -4. She said
the commercial and industrial zoning should remain as is.
Commissioner Weir recommended Sample Plan 3 with some modifications.
Commissioner Murdock said she liked Plan 3, modified to increase density closer to major
thoroughfares. She said some LA- 4 designation makes sense.
Commissioner Clyman supported Plan 2 with modifications to push more density to the
south, such as LA -4 land around the Elm Creek Golf Course. Commissioner Clyman said
he appreciates Mr. Vohs' comments about using existing open spaces. Commissioner
Clyman said he has concerns about density along Vicksburg Lane and Co. Rd. 47 with the
traffic volume and 50 mph. speeds. He asked if it could take 20 years to get the speed limit
reduced. Commissioner Clyman said when the roads have not been improved, he is
concerned about pushing density. Commissioner Clyman said the I -P zone south of State
Highway 55 would be more compatible zoned LA -4, looking to the west with Medina.
Commissioner Musliner said she supported Plans 2 and 3.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 6
Commissioner Neset endorsed Plan 3 primarily because it has higher density, and is more
in keeping with the regional plan at the Met Council level. Commissioner Neset said they
have heard about concerns to increase density even further from affordable housing
advocates. Commissioner Neset said he agrees there is some opportunity with Sample Plan
3 to increase density. He specified the two areas in the southwest corner north and south of
Highway 55. Commissioner Neset suggested LA -4 north of Highway 55 and LA -3 south
of Highway 55. He added that since this area is right on Highway 55, potentially a small
transit center could locate there. Commissioner Neset said the Commission has heard from
residents from all but 70 acres in an entire area who are pushing for Sample Plan 3, and
said he is starting to rethink whether new guiding designations are needed to make the rural
to urban transition. Commissioner Neset said possibly the new zoning classification, i.e.
LAR -3, may not be needed. Commissioner Neset said in short, the City could continue
using normal procedures and processes.
Chair Holmes commended staff on an excellent job on a task that without staff's help and
guidance, would be extremely difficult to move forward. Chair Holmes said he is
supporting Sample Plan 3 as we don't have enough density for affordable housing. He said
folks don't want to be forced out today by being taxed off their land. Chair Holmes said
we need to look at increasing density and add LAR -4 so can have some greater density
particularly in light of the need to have transition. Chair Holmes said he is concerned
about the lack of commercial space to provide services to buy a gallon of milk and those
quick trips to the Cub store increase traffic. Chair Holmes said we need balance on the
density issue — if zoning is dense enough, it will reduce the number of cars on the road.
Chair Holmes said if the necessary infrastructure is in place, you don't have to drive a car
to get essential services.
Commissioner Anderson said she had recommended the LA -4 property on Plan 3, south of
Elm Creek, could remain industrial because if you are putting people in higher density they
need some place to work. She said she agreed with Chair Holmes regarding commercial
space and places for residents to work. She said the small area to the north should remain
commercial.
Commissioner Weir said there is a need to have an area that is more dense for the
possibility of moderately priced housing. Commissioner Weir recommended the following
areas be LAR -4, 1) the large area in the northwest corner would blend in better with the
Maple Grove properties, and 2) the LA -3 area along Co. Rd 101 north of Highway 55.
Commissioner Murdock agreed with Commissioner Neset and said she thinks we could
handle achieving rural to urban transition without new land use guidings, and use the same
processes we have used in past. In addition, Commissioner Murdock said she supports
Commissioner Weir's and Commissioner Anderson's recommendation for commercial and
industrial properties next to Co. Rd. 101. She referenced Ms. Steiner's map and said she
supported LA -3 be changed to LA -4 for all green shaded areas.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 7
Commissioner Clyman said LA -4 south of Highway 55 is a good area for higher density.
Commissioner Clyman said he respects the theory behind Commissioners Anderson and
Murdock to add commercial, but noted there is a lot of commercial space one mile down
Highway 55 and there is industrial space open in the City. Commissioner Clyman said
adding more commercial is not necessarily right when we could put in more density.
Commissioner Clyman concurred with Commissioner Anderson that the LA -3 area by
Schmidt Lake Road and Peony Lane could be a higher density. He added this area is built
to handle traffic and it is manageable. Commissioner Clyman said he has questions about
putting more traffic and density on Co. Rd. 47 and Vicksburg Lane. He complimented Mr.
Svetc and property owners in that area who want more density.
Commissioner Musliner said she agrees with the LA -4 designation for the properties on the
west side, and to keep the southern portion LA -4. Commissioner Musliner recommended
keeping the LA -4 designation, and agreed with Commissioner Clyman about already
having commercial property in the City; she recommended keeping density. Commissioner
Musliner asked about the northwest corner property owned by the David Lee funeral home
and asked if this would be kept commercial.
Commissioner Neset said he likes the direction the discussion is going, and recommended
LA -4 guiding for areas north and south of Highway 55 which border Hamel. He said we
do need to be cognizant of the fact that industrial zoning is important for jobs, but there is
industrial space just down the road and immediately west. Commissioner Neset said as a
guy who works in beautiful, downtown Hamel, there are some older businesses and the
potential for redevelopment along Highway 55. He said with people's proximity to their
jobs, corner stores will come up, like the Super Target in Medina. Commissioner Neset
said he believes there are opportunities to increase density without causing traffic issues
along the northern part, now LA -3, along Co. Rd. 47. He asked what MnDOT might think
about the level of density on the roads. Commissioner Neset said the rural to urban
transition, and changing land use designations may be taking more time, money and
energy, and maybe we should stick with our well-developed processes which we know
best.
Chair Holmes agreed with the LA -3 and the additions of LA -4. He said it is interesting to
move away from the overlay concept. He said we don't have guiding in northwest
Plymouth that is appropriate for today, and they have to start somewhere. Chair Holmes
said he didn't know how using existing guiding would fit.
Commissioner Neset clarified the guiding could be as simple as LAR -1 can be LA -1,
LAR -3 can be LA -3, using the same designations for simplicity's sake.
Director Hurlburt gave an overview of the public comments for specific areas as detailed in
her May 12, 2006 memo.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 8
Director Hurlburt said the LA -2 and LA -3 land use designations on the two properties on
the northwest corner, east of Vicksburg Lane were maintained from the current
Comprehensive Plan. She said the LA -2 property is part of the Taryn Hills property and all
of the greenway strip was LA -2, with higher density to the south.
Commissioner Clyman inquired about projected staging.
Director Hurlburt said we need a sewer and water plan to see what would make sense.
Commissioner Clyman asked about "clustering" and other standards in the overlay.
Director Hurlburt said on the architectural side, suggestions included standards that
discourage monotonous design in buildings, or large expanses of townhomes that look like
barracks. Clustering would discourage mass grading of sites. She said density is one
factor, and to leave half the land as open space but cluster buildings would have less
impact on sites and trees. Director Hurlburt said from major roads the site may look more
rural and would preserve the character of the property. She said the concept we are looking
for would maintain this rural feel with more variety and more interest in architecture.
Commissioner Clyman said clustering might be a good way to preserve the natural
characteristics along Co. Rd. 47.
Director Hurlburt said each development would have to be reviewed to meet the standards,
goals and principles in the plan.
Commissioner Clyman asked how density affects the improvements along roads.
Director Hurlburt stated more people means more traffic. She noted that density in our
City is not the only thing affecting traffic. Director Hurlburt said even without urban
development in Plymouth, we are hearing that Lawndale and Co. Rd. 47 are already
experiencing congestion at times. Director Hurlburt said traffic is happening around us in
addition to our own traffic. She added that development may mean more people would be
able to help pay for those roads, whereas if the land is not developed at all it would be hard
for us to improve roads. Director Hurlburt said the City can acquire right-of-ways as
property is developed. She clarified that the speed limit is set by MnDot and is based on
the flow of traffic and reasonable speeds for traffic. Director Hurlburt said the
development of an area, adding more driveways and traffic may eventually justify lowering
the traffic speed.
Public Works Director Doran Cote noted that controlling the speeding and the speed limit
are two different things.
Director Hurlburt explained the overlay is where all the standards are suggested and the
transition is for the density.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 9
MOTION by Commissioner Murdock, seconded by Commissioner Neset, recommending
approval of Sample Plan 3 with the following modifications: 1) all of Planning Area 1 east
of Vicksburg be LAR -3, 2) west of Vicksburg Lane and north of Co. Rd. 47, except the P -I,
would be LA -4. 3) east of 101, south of Co. Rd. 47 would be LA -3 or LA -4 4) the LA -3
area east of the Elm Creek Golf Course would be LA -4, and 4) south of Highway 55 would
be LA -4.
Commissioner Neset said while this plan is more dense than he considered, he feels it is an
adequate recommendation to the City Council.
Commissioner Weir said he supported the motion.
MOTION by Commissioner Clyman for a friendly amendment for the property north of
Co. Rd. 47 bordering Maple Grove to be LA -3 rather than LA -4. He said he supported the
LA -3 guiding of the Elm Creek Golf Course.
Planning Manager Senness addressed the commercial at the northwest corner. She said the
line will be placed at the creek with commercial to the west and residential to the east.
Commissioner Anderson asked if the northwest corner could be a funeral home and a
corner grocery.
Chair Holmes said he supports LA -3 for the area north of Co. Rd. 47. He said Co. Rd. 47
could become a four -lane if necessary and the 100 -foot setback would allow for the orderly
growth in the area.
Director Hurlburt clarified that the intent of the additional 100 feet is not to expand roads,
but rather that the structures would be set back and allow more common open space,
thereby allowing the road to have a more rural character and landscaping.
Chair Holmes said with the setback, the higher density offsets the larger setback
requirement.
Commissioner Anderson said she is concerned about the need for commercial as there will
be more people to service, potential school impacts, and increased traffic. Commissioner
Anderson made a friendly amendment to change the parcel at the northeast corner of Co.
Rd. 47 and Peony to commercial. She said it would be better safe than sorry, and it can be
changed later.
Commissioner Clyman said he liked Chair Holmes' reasoning for the LA -4 designation
north of Co. Rd. 47. He said LA -4 zoning and 100 -foot setbacks might encourage an
increase in density and keep open space around it.
Draft
Planning Commission Minutes
May 17, 2006
Page 10
Chair Holmes said with higher density without the development coming up to the road, you
still can gain a higher density without building to the edge of things.
Commissioner Clyman withdrew the friendly amendment.
Commissioner Murdock said she accepted Commissioner Anderson's friendly amendment
for commercial zoning at the northeast corner of Co. Rd. 47 and Peony Lane.
Commissioner Musliner said she is not wholeheartedly in support of Sample Plan 3. She
said she is in favor of less density south Highway 55. She said she doesn't want Plymouth
to turn into development after development as Maple Grove did, for example along
Lawndale Lane north to Wal-Mart. Commissioner Musliner said she is not in support of
the motion.
Commissioner Anderson said she shares Commissioner Musliner's concerns regarding
density. Commissioner Anderson said she lives in a townhome complex and knows open
space and elbow room make a better environment for everyone involved. She said she is
definitely in favor or moving something forward and though she is not happy with Plan 3,
she will support it to help move this along to the City Council.
Roll call vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved. Musliner voting Nay.
Commissioner Clyman stated that the inclusion of the 100 -foot setback is why he voted
yes; without the 100 -foot setback he said he would have pushed for LA -3.
without objection to adjourn the meeting at 10:36 p.m.
Land Area by Land Use Guide Plan Designation
Sample Land Use Plans, Northwest Plymouth Overlay Area
May 17, 2006
Planning Commission
Sample Plan 1 Sample Plan 2 Sample Plan 3 Recommendation
Land Use Guide Plan Designation Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent Acres Percent
C (Commercial) 27.71 1.65% 27.71 1.65% 9.93 0.59% 15.61 0.93%
P-1 (Public/institutional) 205.21 12.19% 205.21 12.19% 205.21 12.19% 205.21 12.19%
IP (Planned Industrial) 25.42 1.51% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00%
Subtotal, Non -Residential 258.34 15.35% 232.92 13.84% 215.14 12.78% 220.82 13.12%
LA -1 (2 to 3 Units/Acre) 101.84 6.05% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00% 0.00 0.00%
LA -2 (3 to 6 Units/Acre) 148.92 8.85% 250.76 14.90% 110.66 6.58% 52.48 3.12%
LA -3 (6 to 12 Units/Acre) 118.49 7.04% 118.49 7.04% 276.37 16.42% 102.09 6.07%
LA -4 (12 to 20 Units/Acre) 0.00 0.00% 25.42 1.51% 25.42 1.51% 301.21 17.90%
Subtotal, Urban Residential 369.25 21.94% 394.67 23.45% 412.45 24.51% 455.78 27.08%
LA -RT (20 Acres/ 1 /Acre with Sewer) 349.30
LA -R1 (1 to 2 Units/Acre) 435.40
LA -R2 (2 to 4 Units/Acre) 270.63
LA -R3 (4 to 6 Units/Acre) 0.00
Subtotal, Residential Transition Area 1,055.33
20.76% 258.54
25.87% 390.12
16.08% 406.67
0.00% 0.00
62.71% 1,055.33
15.36% 214.41 12.74% 189.85 11.28%
23.18% 202.56 12.04% 168.17 9.99%
24.16% 471.22 28.00% 296.03 17.59%
0.00% 167.15 9.93% 352.27 20.93%
62.71% 1,055.33 62.71% 1,006.32 59.80%
Total, Developable Land Area (less wetlands and
floodplain) 1,682.92 100.00% 1,682.92 100.00% 1,682.92 100.00% 1,682.92 100.00%
Potential New Dwellings, All Residential Designations Except LA -RT
Planning Commission
Sample Plan 1 Sample Plan 2 Sample Plan 3 Recommendation
Number Units/Acre Number Units/Acre Number Units/Acre Number Units/Acre
Minimum of Density Range 2,338 2.17 2,972 2.49 4,109 3.28 6,554 5.15
Maximum of Density Range 4,574 4.25 5,842 4.90 7,782 6.21 11,198 8.80
Potential New Dwellings at "Affordable Density"
All land use guide designations permitting up to 6 units per Planning Commission
acre or greater. Sample Plan 1 Sample Plan 2 Sample Plan 3 Recommendation
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Minimum of Density Range 1,158 49.5% 1,768 59.5% 2,964 72.1% 5,794 88.4%
Maximum of Density Range 2,315 50.6% 3,435 58.8% 5,492 70.6% 9,678 86.4%
Comparison of Sample Plans
Potential New Dwelling Units*
Number to meet
12,000 1
Metro Council
forecasts
10,000-,
8,000-
0006,000
z
6,000-- E Minimum
Maximum
4,000-
0002,0002,000-1
0
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 PC Rec.
Excludes LA -RT Area
1
Comparison of Sample Plans
of Potential Residential Units at "Affordable Density"*
10,000 Metro Council
9,000
r
Allocation,
2011-2020,
All
8,000 9,045 units
7,000
6,000--
50.0-1
1.
5,000-
M Minimum
Minimum
4' '
4,000
E
Maximum
3,000
2000-,
1,000
0
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 PC Rec.
Excludes LA -RT Area
Comparison of Sample Plans
of Potential Residential Units at "Affordable Density"
Metro Council
r
All
202
approx. 42%
50.0-1
1. M Minimum
4' ' I , E Maximum
1 Sample 2 Sample 3 PC Rec.
ExcludesSample
LA-RTArea
2
Urban Residential Land Use
Designations
18°
Existing Urban Area*
5%
In/
8%
Northwest Area
PC Recommendation*
32%
16%
Excludes LAR & LA-RTArea
Urban Residential Land Use
Designations
18°
Existing Urban Area*
5%
L O/
14
Sample Plan I*
0%
11%
Excludes LAR & LA -RT Area
Urban Residential Land Use
Designations
21%
Sample Plan 2*
2%
9 n o%
Sample Plan 3*
2%
54%
Excludes LAR & LA -RT Area
w
PUD2
UP TO
2
101
o1!
Ci LI I Y LANI]
OCIATFD DEQ
I AI[•
mill
WTI ki I INIL"i 0 so
J'
ALTI i1M-IMMM INIMMELVMM
MAMIA I ON I = WJA 0 1 Is I M a w wi
City of Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Update
Public Comments on Sample Land Use Plans
Received through May 25, 2006
No. Comments
1 Request that area circled on sample land use plan 1 (Elm Creek Golf Course) be designated LA -1 to be
Name/ Address
Rick Edin
consistent with property immediately to the west. This would be a reasonable transition from Plymouth to Medina 3840 Linden Dr. E.,
Medina 55340
redin@_atcorp.com2Mypreferencewouldbeoption1inordertomaintainasmuchoftheruralcharacteroftheareaaspossible. Vivian Starr
Please retain more of the existing trees instead of clear cutting as was just done north of 47 and east of 6060 Annapolis Ln N.
Vicksburg. County Road 47 needs to become a major artery—like Bass Lake Rd. This is more likely to happen if Plymouth 55446
the city takes control of it. dvstarr@aol.com
Lake Camelot estates will have serious traffic problems as a result of the development. Co. Rd. 47 must be
improved.
3 What assessments will be placed on existing subdivision residents? Cameron Gross
How will CR 47 be expanded to handle the current development east of Vicksburg? Future development 6030 Annapolis Lane
including Cheshire extension? CR 47 is becoming extremely crowded east of Vicksburg. There are blind curves Plymouth 55446
and no traffic controls near Lake Camelot. Dangerous for kids getting to the park on Lake Camelot and difficult Cam gross(a)_yahoo.com
to merge into traffic during AM rush (response requested, sent 5/2/06)
4 Major concern—hwy 47 traffic auto/pedestrian/bike Larry Hink
Strong interest: 6160 Dallas Lane N.
3 Rivers path connections across Hwy 47 Plymouth 55447
Insuring greenway connections across entire new development ljhink@comcast.net
Completion of Cheshire to Hwy 47
A divided Vicksburg
5 1. Dev. Standards: not increase setbacks along major roads. Stay consistent like Seven Greens- Swanson Anonymous
Development
2. Add more commercial development
6 Plan 3 is what we were thinking for the northwest corner. Think the divide should be on the natural creak area Michael Hayes
note on sample plan 3 indicated reference to boundary between C and LA -3 at corner of CR 47 & CSAH 909)
7 Move line down 2 properties on reverse plan. Overall good Plan #3 (note on sample plan 3 indicated reference Craig Scherber
to boundary between LA -R2 and LA -RT at southwest quadrant of Troy & CR 47) (Response requested, sent 1006 Wildhurst Tr
5/3/06) Orono 55364
8 1) She would like higher densities than proposed in the three sample maps for northwest Plymouth. Judy Luedke
2) She would like her property to be able to develop immediately upon plan approval.
3) She doesn't support the larger setbacks on County Road 47. (Comment transmitted via Councilmember
Hewiitt. Additional comments submitted later, see # 28)
9 My concern or desire is to have the update go in one single phase to the west end of the Village, that is to Vernon Peterson
Highway 101. Sample land use plan 3 is my choice because the area around Col Rd. 47 & Lawndale is planned
for LA -R2. Construct Peony Lane to Co. Rd. 47 as soon as possible to ease the mess we now have on Troy &
Peony to service the high school.
No. Comments Ni me/ Address
10 We have reviewed your preliminary sample land use plans for the Northwest portion of Plymouth. It is our Ronald Dotseth
understanding that the City is contemplating establishing an additional one hundred foot easement on all of the 5400 Vicksburg Lane
properties that are in the Northwest quadrant and border Vicksburg Lane. This is a major land value loss to Plymouth 55446
those landowners that border Vicksburg Lane. This land becomes non -buildable and the landowners should in
someway be compensated. One of the ways to compensate those landowners is to provide them with a higher
density land sue. In most cases, land value is determined by land use zoning and in this case land density. This
position would spread the hurt to many of the landowners in Plymouth, rather than to a few parcels. For the
above reasons, we are supporting the Sample Plan 3 as the plans have been presented. Also we would like to
develop our land as promptly as possible.
11 We have reviewed your preliminary sample land use plans for the Northwest portion of Plymouth. It is our Edward Dotseth
understanding that the City is contemplating establishing an additional one hundred foot easement on all of the Edward & Nadine Svetc
properties that are in the Northwest quadrant and border Vicksburg Lane. This is a major land value loss to 5330 Vicksburg Lane
those landowners that border Vicksburg Lane. This land becomes non -buildable and the landowners should in
someway be compensated. One of the ways to compensate those landowners is to provide them with a higher
density land sue. In most cases, land value is determined by land use zoning and in this case land density. This
position would spread the hurt to many of the landowners in Plymouth, rather than to a few parcels. For the
above reasons, we are supporting the Sample Plan 3 as the plans have been presented. Also we would like to
develop our land as promptly as possible.
Develop the Northwest area the same as the rest of Plymouth that has water & sewer.
12 We have reviewed your preliminary sample land use plans for the Northwest portion of Plymouth. It is our Bruce Banister
understanding that the City is contemplating establishing an additional one hundred foot easement on all of the 5340 Vicksburg Lane
properties that are in the Northwest quadrant and border Vicksburg Lane. This is a major land value loss to bl<banister@aol.com
those landowners that border Vicksburg Lane. This land becomes non -buildable and the landowners should in
someway be compensated. One of the ways to compensate those landowners is to provide them with a higher
density land sue. In most cases, land value is determined by land use zoning and in this case land density. This
position would spread the hurt to many of the landowners in Plymouth, rather than to a few parcels. For the
above reasons, we are supporting the Sample Plan 3 as the plans have been presented. Also we would like to
develop our land as promptly as possible.
I am in favor of developing the area highlighted in yellow on plan 3 (map indicated all of Planning Area 1, east of
Vicksburg Lane) all as LA -R3. The concept of maintaining anything remotely considered rural should be
discarded as there seems no point in having a very small pocket area zoned rural. Let the development happen.
Make the decision soon and let us all get on with our lives.
13 1 appreciate the direction the plan is taking us, specifically the lower density in the transition concept of no Anonymous
assessments until owners are ready (plus allowing for non -sequential construction.) I hope that the unique
natural resources of this area continue to be a priority. In the former planning area 1 please strongly consider
adopting a low-density plan such as sample plan 1. One change would be to change the area designated as LA -
R1 along Vicksburg (see plan 1) to LA -RT- the golf course developer could still acquire the land, but he
development would not be visible along Vicksburg.
14 My land is LA -R1. My neighbors are LA -R2. What are the benefits &/or limitations of each in terms of potential
development. If it seems beneficial, may I request LA -R2? Clustering sounds like an excellent option. When will
Dorothy Welch
2502 Banta's Pt. Ln.
assessments begin? (PID 06-42-0004, 5620 Ranier Lane) (Response requested, sent 5/3/06) Wayzata, MN 55391
No. CommentsAddress
15 Thank you for the sample plans. I have attached comments. (Requested LA -4 designation for 79 -acre site east Camilla Reiersgord for Peony Lane
of Wayzata High School PID 07-11-0001. Response requested, sent 5/3/06) Properties
4500 W. 44th St.
Edina, MN 55424
16 Plan #1- No sewer Stan Dotseth
14815 CR 47
Plymouth 55446
17 Desire Plan #1 "Rural" No sewer Lenore Dotseth
14815 CR 47
Plymouth 55446 .
18 1 prefer the least development- so Plan 1! We already have too much multiple housing in Plymouth & Vicksburg Mona Domaaas
is already too busy. Too many people in small area!! More need for 22kg etc. Plymouth will be another 1591046 th Ave. N
Brooklyn Park in 20 yrs if you allow all this multiple housing to continue & plus it is ugly!! Specifically all row Plymouth 55446
houses & townhouse on Vicksburg & Schmidt Lake Rd. I would prefer to see a lot less of that. Also plowing monaidoma@sCcDaol.com
down of all trees east & north 47 & Vicksburg—very poor way to develop. I've been very disappointed with the
growth I've seen allowed in Plymouth. My property backs up to the new development area & we have zero water
pressure.
19 On behalf of myself and other Autumn Hills homeowners, I am concerned about the potential reguiding of Mark Kraemer
Hollydale Golf Course from "Public/ Semi -Public/ Institutional" to a residential are at any point in the future, and mdkraemer anearthlink.net
how the current Northwest Quadrant proposal may affect any discussions of such. As the term "Public/ Semi -
Public/ Institutional" implies, this is area designation as available for community use and "open space" and there
has already been rapid and substantial high-density residential growth in the area, such that streets are more
crowded, ant it's getting more difficult to get around and the aesthetics of our city are declining in this area. I
would think the last thing the city would want to do is give up open space in an area that needs it, which is
designation "Public" in the land use plan, and which it has already expressed and interest in obtaining (vs golf
course) for public space. Please communicate with me via e-mail regarding any new developments or decision
or process in this regard.
20 The 100 -foot setback from the edge of Vicksburg is too much! We are in favor of land use plan 3. Vern and Judy Dotseth
5460 Vicksburg Lane
Plymouth 55446
21 The logic of the LA -RT fails me. The rural lifestyle so to speak has already been diminished considerably. At a Brad Hoffman
minimum LA -RT should be LA -R1 with utilities. All that is being accomplished is the eventual rezoning and George Hoffman
amending of the comp plan. Only a few people believe that their present lifestyle can be preserved. The area 5225 Dunkirk Ln
south of Dunkirk is currently being developed as townhomes. The east side of Dunkirk is LA -R1 while the west is georgehoffman7834(@..msn.com
LA -RT. Why? There should be more of a buffer from the townhomes to 1 -acre lots as the plan currently bhoffman(o-),ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us
suggests. LA -R2 or even LA -R3 makes better sense as a transition for the southern -most parcels on Dunkirk.
Map indicated eight parcels on the east and west side of Dunkirk) (Response requested, e-mail sent 5/5/06)
No. Comments N mel Address
22 Since. 1982, we have lived on the same five acres in the northwest area of Plymouth that is in the proposed Jim & Connie. Schweigert
comprehensive plan. We are pleased with the proposed "concept description" of gradual transition from rural to 5739 Juneau Lane
urban with no assessments until land owners are ready to subdivide. Also, we like the "lower densities to help Plymouth 55446
preserve rural character for residents in existing larger (5-10 acre) lot areas". This area (Planning Area 1) is irs(a,!rcoinc.com
unique with the rolling terrain of trees, wetlands, and abundant wildlife. We feel it has been a privilege to live
here. When developing this area we would like to see these characteristics be preserved as much as possible
for the future residents of Plymouth to enjoy. We appreciate that you are offering several land use plans for
consideration. We plan to remain in our present home for a good number of years; however, when we do sell
our property, it will most likely be for development. Since our property (see yellow marking on maps) borders the
Hampton Hills property, we would prefer to have the same land use designation. However, we do not want to
pay assessments or hook-up to sewer until we sell. Is this possible? If so, we would prefer the LA -R1
designation for the golf course property in Plan 2. Thank you! (Map indicated PID 04-118-22-31-0006)
Response requested, letter sent May 10, 2006.))
23 As residents of Medina, we are grateful for your willingness to include us in the Land Use/Comprehensive Plan Charles & Joyce Gauck
process inasmuch as our location abutting the Elm Creek Golf Course puts us closer to this potential area of 3820 Linden Dr. E.
redevelopment than any residents of Plymouth. We trust you can appreciate the concern of those of us who Medina, MN 55340-9812
purchased "golf course view" lots in Medina Highlands, only to find out that the golf course property may be claauck(a_)mchsi.com
redeveloped into housing units. With Hampton Hills already history, and Hollydale's owners having indicated a
desire to redevelop their property in Planning Are 1, we had been hopeful that the City of Plymouth would
undertake to retain at least one 18 -hole golf course within its boundaries. We understand that the City is
considering restriction on golf course redevelopment that would require retention of at least a 9 -hole golf course
or 50% of the property as permanent open space. This may be an acceptable compromise for the City and the
developer, but it raises concerns unless the nature and location of the development consider the concerns and
interests of adjoining property owners. If Elm Creek Golf Course is a potential redevelopment site, we would
strongly encourage that it be assigned a land use designation that would allow development at al level no more
dense than the adjoining Medina Highlands and Belle Terra developments, which we assume would be a
designation of LA -1 or LA -2. (Response requested, letter sent May 10, 2006)
24 See attached letter to Anne Hurlburt dated May 4, 2006. Favored Sample Plan 3, with request to designate two Lee and Jodi Brandl
parcels (06-118-22-24-0003 & 0006) as LA -R2. Response requested, letter sent May 9, 2006) 5945 Troy Lane
Plymouth, MN 55446
25 As a Plymouth resident, I am very concerned about exploring all options for preserving our most valuable natural Sandy Steiner
open spaces and not losing them to sprawling low density development. Please approve higher development 5160 Trenton Lane
densities, including incentives for open space preservation & affordable housing options. it is important that we Plymouth
continue to plan for urban development & zoning that will allow for an influx of over 1,000,000 new residents in sandysteiner(c rogerfazenden.com
the next 15 years.
26 Please delay sewer/water on Lawndale as long as possible—assessments will force me to leave my "retirement": Mary E. Titus
home, especially as my valuation and hence taxes continue going up far faster than social security. What is the 5830 Lawndale Ln N
future for the former schoolhouse, now an unoccupied dwelling at the corner of Lawndale and County 47? What Plymouth 55446
is the status of the Baer "Living Farm"? (Response requested, letter sent May 10, 2006.)
No. Comments Name/ Address
27 Sample 3 makes the most sense, but I believe the lot sizes are still too large. We should plan and build for the Leonard Luedke
future not the past. Every comprehensive plan in the future is going to require additional units. Once expensive 17910 Co. Rd. 47
homes are built on large lots the only way to squeeze in more units later is to completely tear down
neighborhoods of affordable housing in other parts of the city. Re: property circled on maps. I want to see the
circled property re -designated as LA -3. There is no need for any transition, as the property directly behind it will
be urban by 2010, and is plotted small lots, (See enclosed Maple Gove Map) and most of the surrounding
property is for sale for development. (Area circled on maps are three parcels owned by Leonard & Judy Luedke
in Section 6 at the northwest quadrant of Lawndale Lane and County Road 47. Map enclosed of Maple Grove
development plan also attached.)
28 1 want my land developed I". I've been asking for years! Before the last land use plan I asked about it. I've Judy Luedke
asked before and during this land use plan. Plymouth has had about 25 years to prepare for the development of 17910 Co. Rd. 47
this area. You should be ready. We had good years in the past 25 years. Withholding land makes the price go
higher. I'm hoping you will allow quick development. Labor and materials for homes cost more as time passes.
Plymouth has been putting smaller setbacks in the rest of Plymouth developments- city has allowed a home to
be built on 47 west of the dog park which I'm guessing does not have a 100 ft. setback. Majority of Plymouth
citizens do not have a 100 ft. setback. N.W. Area is in Plymouth. If the 100 ft. setback is for the roads be honest
say so. There are lots that value will go down because of the extra setback. It will not matter what the setback is
used for the value of the property goes down to the owner. We do not want a 100 ft setback on any of our
property. City already changed their assessment policy so they could assess us for county road improvements.
New rule made in late 2005. We want our property to be LA -3. We are on a county road and city road.
Fieldstone Meadows in Maple Grove is on our back property line. All the landowners in Plymouth between 101
and Lawndale on 47 want to have their property developed. It all has development behind it. We have the Met
Sewer Line on our property with 2 manholes. Maple Grove has said we could use their water. Plymouth/Maple
Grove have a common water connection scheduled for emergency on Lawndale. See Maple Grove Fieldstone
Meadows map. 1. Peony has been in land use plan since 1972. 2. Sewer planned on a map in 1992 -
Plymouth knew in July 1996. 3. Sewer ready to use on my property in May 2004. 4. Maple Grove water
available if you allow us to use it. 5. No transition between Maple Grove and Plymouth just the property line.
Response requested, letter sent 5/11/06. Map enclosed of Maple Grove development plan also attached.)
29 E-mail (including staff response, attached) favoring sample plan 1. Mike Villifana
mvillafana@comcast.net
30 Letter dated May 8, 2006 (attached) Edward Svetc
5330 Vicksburg Ln
PI mouth, MN 55446
31 Letter dated May 10, 2006 (attached) Edward Svetc
5330 Vicksburg Ln
PI mouth, MN 55446
32 Letter dated May 15, 2006 from attorney representing Craig Scherber and Elm Creek Golf Course (attached) Gregory E. Korstad,
Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd.
33 E-mail dated May 16, 2006 concerning Hollydale Golf Course area (attached) Maureen Modrack
4950 Comstock Ln
Plymouth, MN 55446
No. CommentsAddress
34 Overall we are pleased with all three of the sample plans presented because in each one, our property would be Mike and Tami Janousek
developable. We are for the development of our property. One concern we have is the timing of the 5630 Dunkirk Lane North
development of our property. We want to be able to develop our property as soon as possible. Therefore, it is m.r.ianouseka_att.net
important to continue to push this process forward at an even faster pace and to provide the infrastructure
support (water, sewer, etc) to our area. We would be in favor of our land being designated as LA-R2 property.
We have spoken to many of our neighbors and they are also in favor of the LA-R2 designation. We realize that
in order to meet some of the Met Council requirements, it is necessary for Plymouth to increase the density in all
three of the plans. This would be an area where you would receive little or no opposition. (Response requested;
e-mail sent 5/17/06)
35 Letter dated May 10, 2006 received May 17, 2006 (attached) Shawn Taylor
5550 Vicksburg Lane N
PI mouth, MN 55446
36 Letter dated May 17, 2006 presented to the Planning Commission at its May 17, 2006 meeting (attached) Kim Vohs
Interfaith Outreach and Community
Partners
37 Exhibit (map showing areas proposed for higher density housing development) submitted as part of testimony to Sandy Steiner
Planning Commission at May 17, 2006 meeting (attached)
38 Letter dated May 16, 2006 to Planning Commission et al from Maureen Modrack submitted at May 17, 2006 Gerald Westby
Planning Commission meeting public forum, concerning planning for Hollydale Golf Course area (attached) 4952 Comstock Lane N.
39 Petition with 48 signatures stating: "We the undersigned petition the Plymouth city council as landowners along Submitted with testimony at May 17
Co. Rd. 47 and or Lawndale Lane and Vicksburg to remove the plan for the one hundred foot setback, and revert Plannign Commission meeting by
to the fifty foot setback." (attached) Leonard Luedke
17910 Co. Rd. 47
40 Letter (with sketch plan) dated May 17, 2006 concerning former Powers property (01-118-22-44-000 1) (attached) Bruce Nedegaard
Benchmark Companies
4200 Central Avenue NE
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
41 E-mail supporting Sample Plan 2 (see attached.) Larry Hink
11hink comcast.net
42 E-mail supporting Sample Plan 1 (see attached) Kim and Alex Feldman
6055 Annapolis Lane N.
PMymouth
kimfeldman comcast.net
43 E-mail supporting Planning Commission recommendations (see attached) Joy Leslie Gordon
4645 Balsam Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55442
0 0 ofstor tellin .com
44 E-mail concerning traffic on County Road 47 (see attached) Patrick Boerbon
14235 60th Place N.
P6ymouth, MN 55446
Patrick. bourbon holida com anies.com
No. CommentsAddress
45 E-mail supporting Sample Plan 1 (see attached) Mike Brutling
6080 Dallas Lane
Plymouth, MN 55446
mbrutla brutlaw.com
46 E-mail concerning design of Dunkirk Lane (see attached) Steve Roell
5915 Dunkirk Lane
roellco aol.com
47 E-mail supporting Sample Plan 1 or 2 (see attached) Vivian Starr
6060 Annapolis Lane
dvstarr aol.com
48 E-mail concerning County Road 47 traffic and affordable housing (see attached) Irene Barbour
Annapolis Ln. N.
barbourei msn.com
49 E-mail concerning proposed guiding of 5205 Dunkirk Ln (see attached) Sherryl Joos
5205 Dunkirk Lane
Plymouth, MN 55446
Joos2star mn.rr.com
50 Letter concerning planning for Elm Creek Golf Course property (see attached) Medina Highlands Home Owner's
Association
PO Box 20
Medina, MN 55340
Page 1 of 1
Anne Hurlburt
From: Anne Hurlburt
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 2:26 PM
To: 'Cam_gross@yahoo.com'
Subject: Response to your comments, Northwest Areas Comprehensive Plan Update
Dear Mr. Gross:
Thank you for attending our meeting on May 1, and commenting on the sample land use plans for northwest Plymouth. Your
comments will be shared with the Planning Commission and City Council.
You indicated that you wanted a response to your comments, which were as follows:
What assessments will be placed on existing subdivision residents? How will CR 47 be expanded to handle the current
development east of Vicksburg? Future development including Cheshire extension? CR 47 is becoming extremely crowded east
of Vicksburg. There are blind curves and no traffic controls near Lake Camelot. Dangerous for kids getting to the park on Lake
Camelot and difficult to merge into traffic during AM rush"
Regarding assessments: It is highly unlikely, unless your property would directly benefit from a public improvement, that there
would be any assessments on your property relating to utility and road extensions for new development.
Regarding improvements to CR 47 and Cheshire: The City's transportation plan will be updated to reflect the changes in the land
use plan, but the current pian already recognizes the need for improvements to CR 47 as traffic increases and surrounding areas
develop. There is no timing determined as of yet for major reconstruction, but there will be improvements for safety, and right-of-
way acquisitions, as the adjacent areas develop. You will see some of this starting to_ occur with the Taryn Hills development.
The current plan also includes an extension of Cheshire to connect with CR 47. This will occur when the adjacent land south of
CR 47 develops.
I hope than helps answer your questions. We look forward to your continued participation and input as the planning process goes
forward.
Sincerely,
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Phone: 763 509-5401
Fax: 763 509-5407
Cel: 763 238-3949
www.ci.plymouth.mn.us
City of
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
May 3, 2006
Craig Scherber
1006 Wildhurst Tr.
Orono, MN 55364
Dear Mr. S erber:
Thank you for attending ounmeeting on May 1, and commenting on the sample
land use plans for northwest Plymouth. Your comments will be shared with the
Planning Commission and City Council.
You indicated that you wanted a response to your comments, which were as
follows:
Move line down 2 properties on reverse plan. Overall good Plan 93 "
Your note indicated that this referenced the boundary between LA -R2 and LA -RT
near the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Troy Land and County Road 47.
Your comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission when they
consider their recommendation to the City Council on May 17, and to the City
Council for their meeting on May 31, 2006. We will collect all of the specific
suggestions for changes to the sample maps so that they may consider them before
they approve the preliminary land use plan.
Please contact me at 763 509-5401, or by e-mail. (ahurlbur(@ci.plymouth.mn.us) if
you have further questions or comments. We look forward to your continued
participation and input as the planning process goes forward.
Sincerely,
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 • Tel: 763-509-5000 - www.ci.plymouth.mn.us ,b4i
City of
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
May 3, 2006
Dorothy Welch
2502 Banta's Pt. Ln.
Wayzata, MN 55391
Dear Ms. Welch:
Thank you for attending our meeting on May 2, and commenting on the sample land use plans for
northwest Plymouth. Your comments will be shared with the Planning Commission and City
Council.
You indicated that you wanted a response to your comments, which were as follows:
My land is LA -R1. My neighbors are LA -R2. What are the benefits &/or limitations of each in
terms of potential development. If it seems beneficial, may I request LA -R2? Clustering sounds
like an excellent option. When will assessments begin?
You did not indicate the specific property of concern. However, our records indicate that you own
the property at 5620 Ranier Lane.
The difference between LA -R1 and LA -R2 is the density permitted. LA -R1 would allow one to
two dwelling units per acre. LA -R2 would allow two to four dwelling units per acre. Your.
property is shown as LA -R1 on all three sample plans, as are all the immediately adjacent parcels.
The area across the street, to the west, is LA -RT on all three sample plans. It is unlikely that your
property would be designated differently than all the abutting properties, but if there are other
abutting landowners who are interested in a change, the boundary between LA -R1 and LA -R2 could
move if that is what is decided by the City Council.
Assessments would only occur if public improvements (such as sewer, water and streets) built
which benefit your property, and you choose to develop your land. The timing of improvements
will depend on the utility plans, which will be updated over the next year, and the phasing of
development which is yet to be determined.
Please contact me at 763 509-5401, or by e-mail (ahurlbur ct ci.plymouth.mn.us) if you have further
questions or comments. We look forward to your continued -participation and input as the planning
process goes forward.
Sincerely,
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd a Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 Tel 763-509-5000 a www.ci.plymouth.mn.us ,s
r P,
City
Adding Quality to Life
May 3, 2006
Camilla Reiersgord
for Peony Lane Properties
4500 W. 44" St.
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Ms. Reiersgord:
15_
Thank you for attending our meeting on May 1 concerning land use planing for northwest
Plymouth. The letter you attached to the comment form will be shared with the Planning
Commission and City Council.
You noted a number of different development possibilities for your property at the NE
corner of Peony and Schmidt Lake Road, and asked that the City consider the possibility
of LA -4 designation for the site. You indicated that you wanted a response to your
comments.
Your letter will be forwarded to the Planning Commission when they consider their
recommendation to the City Council on May 17, and to the City Council for their meeting
on May 31, 2006. We will collect all of the specific suggestions for changes to the sample
maps so that they may consider them before they approve the preliminary land use plan.
Please contact me at 763 509-5401, or by e-mail (ahurlbur(@,ci.-plyn-loLith.mn.us if you
have further questions or comments. We look forward to your continued participation and
input as the planning process goes forward.
Sincerely,
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 • Tel: 763-509-5000 • www.ci.plymouth.mn.us ,,i
I attended the Neighborhood Information Meeting on Monday, May 1, 2006.
My parcel of interest is at the NE corner of Peony and Schmidt Lake Road.
It is about 79 acres in total and about half is wetland.
The tax identification number is 07-118-22-11-0001.
This parcel is unique in many respects:
1. It is just across Peony Lane from the new high school. It can provide housing for
staff and students and this will cut back on busing and parking lot congestion and
even the need to have a car as a student or staff person. This will appeal to
persons of more modest income.
2. It is served by two major roads: Peony and Schmidt Lake Road. There will be a
bus shelter at the corner of Peony and Schmidt Lake Road and an express bus
taking homeowners to their employment in the metro area. This will make the
homes more affordable.
I It has an abundance of natural beauty and views across the wetlands to the east
and these vistas will be permanent because no construction will take place in the
wetland. Residents can enjoy a constantly changing panorama of the seasons.
4. It will be close to or immediately next to the proposed trail system and this will
provide a kind of vacation or cabin quality for the residents..
5. In a way, it is isolated, or encapsulated by the roads and the wetland and greater
density will not impinge on adjacent parcels.
Over the years there have been many suggested uses:
Perhaps 6-7 five acre parcels of 5-6 private homes with well and septic. This could easily
have happened. We have that stack of 10 acre homesteads to the east.
Or maybe 55 to 60 individual homes.
Or maybe 262 attached row houses.
Or maybe 5 or more condominium buildings, each on a kind of island.of land and having
units ranging in size from a one bedroom 750 sq ft. unit to a three bedroom 2,100 sq ft
unit.
In the past I, have been concentrating on surveys, wetland delineations, setbacks, etc.
This meeting has shifted my thinking to the unique opportunity we have to develop an
earth friendly, people friendly planned development that will blend in well with its
surroundings and the areas of reasonable density to the south and east. We need some
flexibility to be able to embrace a creative planned development for this parcel.
I hope the planners and councilpersons will support a reasonably high density for this
unique parcel.
C4 rn ll4 Ure Ysq: c`r`
Page 1 of 1
To: Igeorgehoffman7834@msn.com'; 'bhoffman@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us'
Subject: Response to your comments, Northwest Areas Comprehensive Plan Update (2)
Dear Mr. Hoffman:
Thank you for attending one of our our meetings on May 1 and 2 concerning land use planning for northwest Plymouth, and
submitting a comment form.
You requested a response to your comments, which were as follows:
The logic of the LA -RT fails me. The rural lifestyle so to speak has already been diminished considerably. At a minimum LA -RT
should be LA -R1 with utilities. All that is being accomplished is the eventual rezoning and amending of the comp plan. Only a few
people believe that their present lifestyle can be preserved. The area south of Dunkirk is currently being developed as
townhomes. The east side of Dunkirk is LA -R1 while the west is LA -RT. Why? There should be more of a buffer from the
townhomes to 1 -acre lots as the plan currently suggests. LA -R3 or even LA -R2 makes better sense as a transition for the
southern -most parcels on Dunkirk."
Your comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission when they consider their recommendation to the City Council on
May 17, and to the City Council for their meeting on May 31, 2006. We will collect all of the specific suggestions for changes to
the sample maps so that they may consider them before they approve the preliminary land use plan. The extent of the LA -RT
areas, and whether a higher density land -use should be planned near the Timber Creek Crossing development will be
discussed. The lower density classifications were shown in this area on the sample plans prepared by staff because of the lack of
paved road access, the size of the existing parcels and the existing tree cover (particularly on the west side of Dunkirk), amongotherfactors.
Please contact me if you have further questions or comments. We look forward to your continued participation and input as the
planning process goes forward.
Sincerely, -
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Phone: 763 509-5401
Fax: 763 509-5407
Cel: 763 238-3949
www.ci.plymouth.mn.us
5/5/2006
City of
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
May 10, 2006
Jim and Connie Schweigert
5739 Juneau Lane
Plymouth, IVIN 55446
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Schweigert:
Thank you for attending our May meeting concerning land use planning for northwest
Plymouth.
In your comments received May 8, 2006, you indicated your support for preserving the
rural character of existing large lot areas and deferring assessments until you sell your
property. You also indicated you would prefer the same LA -R1 land use designation as
shown on Hampton Hills in Sample Plan 2. You indicated that you wanted a response to
your comments.
Your comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission when they consider their
recommendation to the City Council on May 17, and to the City Council for their meeting
on May 31, 2006. We will collect all of the specific suggestions for changes to the sample
maps so that they may consider them before they approve the preliminary land use plan.
Please contact me at 763 509-5401, or by e-mail (ahurlbur@ci.plymouth.mn.us) if you
have further questions or comments. We.look forward to your continued participation and
input as the planning process goes forward.
Sincerely,
AJ -
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 • Tel: 763-509-5000 • www.ci.plymouth.mn.us ,,i
3
City of
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
May 10, 2006
Charles and Joyce Gauck
3820 Linden Drive E.
Medina, MN 55340
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gauck:
Thank you for attending our May meeting concerning land use planning for northwest
Plymouth.
In your comments received May 8, 2006, you.indicated your concern about the future
redevelopment of Elm Creek Golf Course. You stated that you strongly encourage the
City to assign the golf course a designation that would allow development no more dense
than the adjoining Medina Highlands andBelleTerra developments (LA -1 or LA -2). You
indicated that you wanted a response to your comments.
Your comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission when they consider their
recommendation to the City Council on May 17, and to the City Council for their meeting
on May 31, 2006. We will collect all. of the specific suggestions for changes to the sample
maps so that they may consider them before they approve the preliminary land use plan.
Please contact me at 763 509-5401, or by e-mail (ahurlburpci.plymouth.mn.us) if you
have further questions or comments. We look forward to your continued participation and
input as the planning process goes forward.
Sincerely,
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 • Tel: 763-509^5000 • www.ci.plymouth.mn.us
ak+a
Wffllnk
Adding Quality to Life
City of
Plymouth
May 10, 2006
Lee and Jodi Bradel
5945 Troy Lane
Plymouth, MN 55446
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Brandel:
Thank you for attending our meeting on May 2 concerning land use planning for
northwest Plymouth.
In your letter dated May 4, 2006, you indicated your support for Sample Plan 3, and
requested that the designation of your property, and the adjoining site owned by Mr.
James Brennan, be changed to LA -R2 instead of the LA -RT designation shown on the
sample plan. You indicated that you wanted a response to your comments.
Your letter will be forwarded to the Planning Commission when they consider their
recommendation to the City Council on May 17, and to the City Council for their meeting
on May 31, 2006. We will collect all of the specific suggestions for changes to the sample
maps so that they may consider them. before they approve the preliminary land use plan.
Please contact me -at 763 509-5401, or by e-mail (ahurlbur@ci.plymouth.mn.usci.plymouth.mn.us) if you
have further questions or comments. We look forward to your continued participation and
input as the planning process goes forward.
Sincerely,
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 • Tel: 763-509-5000 • www.ci.plymouth.mn.us ,,
Lee and Jodi Brandel
5945 Troy Lane
Plymouth, MN 55446
PID# 06-118-22-24-0006
May 4, 2006
Ms. Anne Hurlburt
City of Plymouth
Community Development Department
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Ms. Hurlburt:
1
MAY 0 8 2006
n l r r i alUUl n
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTME4J
Thank you for taking the time following Tuesday's meeting to briefly discuss my
comments and concerns.
My specific comments center around our property located at 5945 Troy Lane. We own
10+ acres that is just south of the LA -R2 classification. We are in support of the "Sample
Land.Use Plan #3" with the following changes:
Moving the LA -R2 Classification to our south property line
o This accommodates a development that could be incorporated with
the 3-5 acre lots along Cty Rd 47; as there is a lot of rolling
topography in this area—to compliment the City's Rural Transition
Approach
o The age and style of our home is similar to the homes that are
directly adjacent to Cty Rd 47
It should also be considered to move the LA -R2 Classification to the
South Border of Mr. James Brennan's property line (PID#06-118-22-24-
0003) due to his narrow entrance easement and the small creek, which
would prohibit a development access
I have enclosed a copy of the Sample Land Use Plan #3 with my recommended changes.
Please respond regarding the above mentioned comments by mail. Please also feel.free.to
call my_ cell phone at 612.741.9016 with any questions or comments.
Sincer ly, ---
LeeLee Brandel
City of
p I ymouth
11___-__--__ -
Adding Quality to Life
May 10, 2006
Mary E. Titus
5830 Lawndale Lane N.
Plymouth, MN 55446
Dear Miss Titus:
Thank you for attending our May meeting concerning land use planning for northwest
Plymouth.
In your comments received May 8, 2006, you indicated your support for delaying sewer
and water on Lawndale as long as possible as assessments would require you to move
from your retirement home. You indicated that you wanted a response to your comments.
The rural -to -urban transition development concept under discussion would avoid
assessments on property owners until they are ready to develop their land. We do
understand that increases in property values will also have a significant impact on the
homeowners in this area. Your comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission
when they consider their recommendation to the City Council on May 17, and to the City
Council for their meeting on May 31, 2006.
You also asked about the schoolhouse on the corner of Lawndale and County Road 47 and
status of the living. farm. We are unsure of the future of the schoolhouse as it is in private
ownership and may or not qualify for any historic designations. The City will be
considering the concept of a living farm on the Baer site when we review and update the
Parks section of the Comprehensive Plan. That work will probably occur over the next
year.
Please contact me at 763 509-5401, or by e-mail (ahurlbur('ci.plymouth.mn.us) if you
have further questions or comments. We look forward to your continued participation and
input as the planning process goes forward.
Sincerely,
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 • Tel 763-509-5000 • www.ci.plymouth.mn.us
SITE MAP 9
NOT 70 v"r
1) \j -< %.
II. PRELIMINARY LMLJTY PLAN
m PRELMNARY UTIUTY PLAN
13. PHASING PLAN
14. DETAILS & NOTES
15. DETAILS & NOTES
r(
L. IIW
1H
Il T,IgI; SIS
SCALE IN FEET
sm
12,
RE
C,
205WWWWWAKZ==
t k, . 200 1.1
PRO
20:
F) C
I III-MAg Foy v a r r- -rr-j)r. r t. r 0 r. r'c
a Q\0
m/ t
City of
Plymouth
Adding Quality to Life
May 12, 2006
Judy Luedke
17910 County Road 47
Plymouth, NIN 55446
Dear Ms., -L-- edke:
r
Thank you for attending our meetings on May 1, 2 and 3 concerning. land use planning for
northwest Plymouth.
In your comments received May 10, 2006, you indicated your opposition to the proposed
100 -foot setback along major roadways. You also stated that you wish your property to
be guided LA -3 and placed in the first stage of development. You indicated that you
wanted a response to your comments.
Your comments will be forwarded to the Planning Commission when they consider their
recommendation to the City Council on May 17, and to the City Council for their meeting
on May 31, 2006. We will collect all of the specific suggestions for changes to the sample
maps and development standards so that they may consider them before they approve the
preliminary land use plan.
Please contact me at 763 509-5401, or by e-mail (ahurlbur@ci.plymouth.mn.us) if you
have further questions or comments. We look forward to your continued participation and
input as the planning process goes forward.
Sincerely,
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd • Plymouth, Minnesota 55447-1482 • Tel 763-509-5000 • www.ci.plymouth.mn.us
t:
Page i of 3
Anne Hurlburt
From: Anne Hurlburt
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:00 AM
To: Sandy Hewitt
Cc: 'mvillafana@comcast.net'
Subject: RE: Northwest Plymouth
I have added this to the other comments received.
I would like to clarify one thing about item #3 in Mr. Villifana's e-mail, which concerns the relationship between the
sample plans and Metro Council forecasts.
Staff has already calculated that there is enough land in the existing urban service area to accommodate regionally
forecasted growth to 2010. The issue is whether the plan adopted for the northwest area can accommodate the
additional 4,500 units forecast between 2010 and 2030. The range of potential new dwellings permitted by sample
plans 2 and 3 would accommodate the 4,500 units forecast within that time period. However, sample plan 1 would not
allow that number of units unless the entire area developed at the maximum of the density range which is unlikely, and
unlikely to be accepted by the Metro Council. There are also other regional issues that the City will need to consider.
I am sorry if there was any misunderstanding at the meetings last week. We'll try to make sure it's very clearly
explained in the information we present to the Planning Commission at their meeting next week (5/17 at 7:00 pm.)
Please give me a call if you have any questions about this.
r
Anne W. Hurlburt, A1CP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Phone: 763 509-5401
Fax: 763 509-5407
Cel: 763 238-3949
www.ci.plymouth.mn.us
Original Message -----
From: Sandy Hewitt
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 9:47 AM
To: Anne Huriburt
Subject: FW: Northwest Plymouth
Anne,
Can you add this to the list of comments on Northwest Plymouth. Thanks.
Sandy Hewitt
Original Message -----
From: mvillafana@comcast.net [mailto:mvillafana@comcast.net]
Sent: Tue 5/9/2006 8:41 AM
To: Sandy Hewitt
Cc: mvillafana@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Northwest Plymouth
5/11/2006
Page 2 of 3
Dear Sandy:
Thank you very much for your email.
I did go to the event last Tuesday, and I am sorry I could not talk to you that night about the three options
explained to us by Anne Hurlburt. I was able to talk at length with Mayor Johnson, and also I talked to
Ginny Black.
Sandy, here are my thoughts.
First, based on the previous meetings in March, Anne's department did what the Council asked, and made
the "new" classifications (for NW Plymouth) at a lower density than the current classifications.
Based on this, three plans were then created to "reflect" three different density options that the City
Council would consider, tweak, and then vote on.
It is my opinion and hope that the City Council vote for Plan 1 (lowest density) or something even less
dense than this. I will give you four reasons here, just to keep my email short.
1. CR47. Lake Camelot Estates is still going to bear the brunt of whatever the City Council decides. This
road (which is only two lanes now, and is going to stay that way for quite some time) is going to have to
handle a sizeable amount of the traffic that future development in NW Plymouth will bring. Our whole
development will still have to "get out to civilization" from Dallas Lane, Annapolis Lane, and Yucca Lane .
from a dead stop, making left- or right-hand turns onto a 50MPH road that will be holding all of the
increased traffic, 12 months a year, good weather or bad weather (including snow/ice!!).
2. We have a beautiful City park (Lake Camelot Park) that is already treacherous to walk across CR 47 at
Dallas Lane with the current traffic levels driving at 50 MPH (or faster!). With the increased traffic, it will
be even more difficult, and safety will be even more of an issue than it is even right now.
2. If the Mayor and City Council and staff really want to do as they have stated, and make this last portion
of NW Plymouth be unique, beautiful, and unlike other areas of already-developed.Plymouth and Maple
Grove, then it needs to choose Plan 41 (lowest density), in order to keep NW Plymouth look as beautiful
and unique as it is right now.
3. Sandy, here is the "icing on the cake." Based on Anne Hurlburt's slides from the meeting, it shows
that even with the lowest density from Plan #1, the City will meet the Met Council's minimum density
requirement that Plymouth has been struggling/strivin to meet and make the Met Council happy. Please
review this part of her presentation. I told Mayor Johnson after the presentation, that with the Met
Council's requirements being met from Option #1, how could you NOT be in favor of Option 1? This was
the "happy medium" that the City was looking for all along, wasn't it?
Sandy, I hope I and all of the Lake Camelot Estates residents can steer you and at least three others
Council Members to push for Option 1. You and Tim Bildsoe have lived in our Ward, and know what NW
Plymouth has been like and why it should be kept as close to the same as possible. Mayor Johnson told me
her goal before she left was to make sure the final plan for NW Plymouth is a good one, and she said Plan
3 (highest density) is definitely too dense. Also, Kelli Slavik has usually voted for the best interests of
Lake Camelot Estates and NW Plymouth.
I am going to try and get as many people as possible to show up for the May 31 st meeting to ask the City
Council to vote for Plan #1. I know that our turnout will probably be less than those who want Plan #3. I
Page 3 of 3
know that even the Planning Commission will (based on past votes) probably vote for Plan #3. I know
that you have probably heard from many more who want Plan #3. Please remember Lake Camelot Estates
residents who must get out onto CR47 each morning. Please remember all of the traffic that will be
created JUST BECAUSE OF THE TARYN HILLS DEVELOPMENT. If you haven't driven up here
lately, please make a visit before May 31 st.
Sandy, thank you very much for your time and effort for our neighborhood. Please call me with any
questions, and/or I will see you on the 31 st.
Best regards,
Mike Villafana
763) 557-8616 home
mvillafana(,comcast.net
PS Please forward this email if you would like.
Original message --------------
From: "Sandy Hewitt" <SHewitt@ci.plymouth.mn.us>
Mike,
I was unable to make it to the meeting on May 2nd, so I am not sure if you were there, but there is
3 suggested land use plans that we are taking comments on right now. It does not mean that that
council will pick 1 of the plans specifically, it could be a combination of any of the plans.
You can get a copy of the land use guidings at the city website at ci.plymouth.mn.us and look
under the comprehensive plan and the power point presentation. You can make comments and
send them in, and so I hope you will.
Hope everything is going well for you and your family.
If you have any questions, give me a call at 763-550-9623 (home)
Sandy Hewitt
Plymouth City Councilmember - Ward 1
5/11/2006
6
May 8, 2006
City of Plymouth
Judy Johnson, Mayor
Plymouth City Council,
Plymouth Planning Cor
urg Lane • Plymouth, Minnesota 55446
763.551.4844 FAX•763.551.2515
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT
The following are some of the major issues facing Plymouth in developing their 2030
Northwest Area Comprehensive Plan as I see them.
Heavy Road Traffic and Noise.
Bridge over the railroad tracks at -53 rd and Vicksburg Lane.
Trying to save the forested areas when we have major oak wilt in this section
of the. City.
Trying to maintain some type of country atmosphere in the area when we do
not have this atmosphere in the rest of Plymouth that has water and server.
Trying to provide some type of affordable housing in this part of Plymouth
where land is so expensive.
City attempting to increase our assessed real estate values to rvhat developers
are willing to pay if they could develop the land, but not supporting the
development of our properties.
There is a major difference between those who.want to develop their land
and those who do not want to change the rural setting. Those -that want to
develop their land in Area I, equal somewhat more than sixty-five percent of
the landowners and own about eighty percent of the land.
You are currently attempting to adopt a plan that favors the minority rather
than the majority of the landowners. You need to adopt a plan for the
common good of the whole and not for a few.
It has been recommended that the City require an additional one hundred
foot setback on the property along Vicksburg Lane and County Road 47. I
do not know of any of the property owners along these two major streets that
support such a setback. So lets reject this idea.
I hope we have a Mayor, City Councilman, and Planning Commission
Members that support the resident landowners rather than those from areas
other than Area I.
We did not have the opportunity to talk to all of the landowner's prior to
Tradition Homes submitting their map to the City. We are planning to
discuss the 2030 Plymouth Comprehensive Plan with the landowners in Area
1. We want to see if any of the remaining landowners want to have the
opportunity of developing their land.
I am attaching a map that shows the landowners that we have talked to and
who have signed a statement that they want their properties included on this
map, as property to be developed.
Some of the issues regarding saving our forested areas, affordable housing and country
atmosphere require longer memos, so I will address those areas later in a separate
correspondence. I will also furnish some of my background, which may or may not help
you in considering the validity of my points of view.
I have stated this in previous conmiunications, that my wife and I have really enjoyed
living in Plymouth and for this reason I ani taking the time to express some of our
concerns in this correspondence.
Sincerely, -J 2
Edward and Nadine Svetc
Firr
L4
y.
Planning Area 1
Ownership Map
Plymouth, Minnesota
N
400 13 400 800 F -.t A
Planning Area 1 463 ac
Those property owners
wanting to plan for development* 377 ac
Parcels
3/
May 10, 2006 5330 North Vicksburg Lane • Plymouth, Minnesota 55446
763.551.4844 FAX 763.551.2515
City of Plymouth
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNT__ANT
Judy Johnson, Mayor
Plymouth City Council
Plymouth Planning Commission
Regarding Oak Wilt and 2030 City of Plymouth Comprehensive Plan
Some of the citizens of Plymouth want the development of Northwest Plymouth to
preserve as many large trees as possible. This is a worthy goal, but it is also froth with
problems.
Areas of Plymouth have major oak wilt tree disease. Most of the normal 'Hardwood trees
that are native to Plymouth are oaks and some maple. We have a lot of popular, some
pine and spruce, the latter, which are not native to our area. In 2005, the Plymouth
forester sent landowners a letter stating that they had over 1500 oak trees die the previous
year from oak wilt. In that letter, the Plymouth Forester informed us that he would be
conducting an inspection of our trees.
Since the roots and flying insects spread the disease, it is almost impossible to stop.
I have been able to slow it down, but could not eliminate it all together. I basically cut the
diseased trees down when the growing season was over and with a crawler backhoe dug
out the stumps and the infected roots. Also, I had to dig a trench from North to South on
my property to stop the diseased trees from infecting the good trees. This was still only a
temporary fix, and very costly.
The basic policy of Plymouth is that when they find oak wilt they tag the trees and allow
the landowner twenty days to cut the trees down and get rid of the wood. If the owner
does not remove the trees, then Plymouth will remove the trees at a substantial cost to the
landowner. When I asked for help from the City forester, sure enough, they agreed that I
had oak wilt and tagged my trees. I had twenty days to remove them. Once you
experience this type of response from the City, a lando i r'_?r would have to be out of his
mind to inform the City or ask them for help with the disease. So guess how correct their
oak wilt numbers are?
In many cases, at the time the trees are tagged is absolutely the worst time to remove the
diseased trees. If the trees are cut down during their normal growing season and branches
are broken off healthy trees in the process, this spreads the disease. There is no good way
to stop oak wilt. It is similar to Dutch elm disease. " I wonder where the elms went ".
Most of the large tree areas that people wish to preserve consist of oak. In most cases, it
would be better to allow developers to clear-cut and then have strict City rules as to
replacement trees. It may look bad in the short run, but developers then can plant more
disease resistant trees, which can look better in the long term.
As an aside, I live on heavily wooded land a lot of which I have planted myself.
City of Plymouth 2030 Comprehensive Plan
With water and sewer coming to the northern boundary of the City, I look at this as a
plus. Most of the land in the Northwestern quadrant of Plymouth is heavy clay soil. As a
result, many of the septic systems do not work properly. While I sympathize with the
Cities lack of funds, everything possible should be done to expedite the arrival of City
sewer and water. At the present time, I consider this a big health issue.
Due to the lack of City funding, I do not know how the City will be able to provide the
necessary services to this area. Maybe you should share any major funding problems with
the Citizens of Plymouth. You might be surprised at how many would be willing to step
up -to the box.
Roads and Public Transportation:
There is no meaningful public transportation in the Northwest part of Plymouth. The City
of Plymouth wants to develop low cost housing in this area with the high price of gas and
land, and no public transportation. Seems like a good idea to me!!!!!!!!!
Edward D. Svete good, bad or indifferent
Orphaned at the age of five. As a result, I was raised for six years at Father Flanagan's
Boystown, Nebraska. This was one of the best things that happened to me. From
Boystown, I enlisted in the U. S. Marine Corps. After the Marine Corps,. I attended and
graduated from Creighton University with the help of the Korean Veteran Bill of Rights.
During this period, I was married and had one daughter. Upon graduation from college, I
joined Arthur Anderson International, Certified Public Accountant firm. After the normal
three-year training period, 1 spent another three years with the Federal Department of
Health, Education and Welfare (HEW). At HEW, I was involved in cost allocation plans
and auditing governmental agencies in a seven state area. I audited construction of
sanitary sewer systems, hospital and medical facilities; educational institutes and local
governments.
While -auditing Hennepin County, I was offered the job of Supervisor of Accounting, and
became the first accountant with an accounting degree to work for the County. At the
time I was hired, Hennepin County was experiencing large peaks and valleys in their
budget. My job was to eliminate the budget peaks and valleys and to provide a more
stable cash flow from one year to the next. History speaks for itself. I spent a great
twenty-five years working for Hennepin County, which I will never regret. One of my
functions was to serve as the Controller for the Bureau of Social Services.
While I was with the County, I was allowed to operate various businesses that I did
through absentee ownership, and was able to control them through my private accounting
firm. As of this date, I am still active in my certified public accounting firm.
I have been retired or at least in a semi -retired status for some fifteen years. In 1979,
when we built our home in Plymouth, I anticipated spending my last days at this address.
However, with the many things that have occurred in Plymouth, along with other issues, I
have decided it is time to move on with my life.
I sincerely hope this provides you with some helpful information. I do not consider
myself a dissident but I do like to see things flow in an orderly manner.
Sincerely,
Edward D. Svetc
3..-r`•-„-4 —.'. v ,. Vit- v'Y - ^'r"lr''} _-``,`,"sem., $- a.'' ""'' {,, °.: h'"-,e:'ti' i,*^ s '"- 0tom.
7.v• aY,3f r
LaAdn
HOJjman
ATTORNEYS
May 15, 2006
Mayor Judy Johnson
City Councilmembers
Planning Commission Members
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447-1448
Re: Northwest Areas 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update
Dear Mayor, Councilmembers and Planning Commission:
Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd.
1500 Wells Fargo Plaza
7900 Xerxes Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431-1194
GENERAL: 952-835-3800
FAX: 952-896-3333
WEB: www.larkinhoffman.com
DELIVERED
VIA
MESSENGER
I write on behalf of our clients Craig Scherber and Elm Creek Golf Course to provide comments
on the proposed 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update as it affects Mr. Scherber's interests and the
properties he controls in the Northwest Areas planning area within the City of Plymouth,
Mr. Scherber's view is that the designations described in Sample Land Use Plan 3 dated May 1,
2006 are generally appropriate with the exception of the property on Troy Lane discussed below.
The value of Plan 3 as opposed to the lower density plans is that it helps obtain the "critical
mass" of development necessary to enable the infrastructure necessary for development to occur.
With the significant natural areas, extended roadway setbacks, open space, trails, greenway and
parks, this segment of the City carries with it development challenges that can be mitigated by
the higher densities of. Plan 3. At the same time, densities in Plan 3 are compatible with high
quality development in the area. Our client is firmly in support of Plan 3.
Craig has control of the property at 5945 Troy Lane (on the west side of Troy Lane and south of
County Road 47) which has been identified as retaining the LA -RT guiding, in the Transition
Area Overlay District. This property (PID No. 06-118-22-24-0006) and the adjacent parcel to
the northwest together comprise approximately 15 acres which is proposed to be bounded on
three sides by property guided for higher densities. To the north, are large lots proposed to be
guided for higher density LA -R2. These large lots to the immediate north will quite likely be
redeveloped as development occurs in this area because they are currently under used for that
guiding designation. All three plans would have LA -3 or commercial guiding to the west. Plan
3 would have LA -R2 to the north and LA -RI across Troy Lane to the east. Accordingly, it
makes sense to extend the LA -R2 designation in Plan 3 farther south. This will also facilitate
replatting of the LA -R2 property to the north.
With the land to the west outside the Transition Area Overlay and having LA -3 guiding, it would
be expected to develop earlier and at the allowable higher densities. Guiding the 5945 Troy
Lane property LA -R2 would match up the southern boundary of the LA -R2 area with the
3-
Mayor Judy Johnson
City Councilmembers
Planning Commission
May 15, 2006
Page 2
southern corner of the LA -3 to the immediate west and avoid conflict with the early developing
areas. In addition, this parcel will be fronted upon and accessed from Troy Lane to the East of
which is LA -R1. Having similar guiding on both sides of the street would be indicated.
We have not fully evaluated all of the effects of establishing the Transition Area Overlay District
boundary at its current location; however we support this concept and understand the importance
of accommodations to both current occupancy and future development. The Elm Creek Golf
Course site should remain outside the Transition Area Overlay District.
Very )41y yours
l"952-896-3292
stad, for
f mn Daly & Lindgren Ltd.
al:
Direct Fax: 952-842-1722
Email Qkorstad@larkinhoffman.com
1073714.1
3
Anne Hurlburt
From: Maureen Modrack [modrax@msn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 3:29 PM
To: Laurie Ahrens; Anne Huriburt
Subject: Hollydale
Dear Laurie & Anne,
Thank you for your time today. I found it to be very informative and
helpful. I look forward to working with you again in the future. Below you
will find my new request. Again, thank you.
Maureen Modrack
May 16, 2006
TO: Plymouth Planning Commission
Anne Hurlburt, Community Development Director (763-509-5401)
Barbara Senness, Planning Manager (763-509-5452
Plymouth City Attorney, Roger Knutson (651-452-5000)
City Manager, Laurie Ahrens (763-509-5051)
Concerned Homeowners
FROM: Maureen Modrack
4950 Comstock Ln. N.
Plymouth, MN. 55446 (763-383-2925)
SUBJECT: Request for a special meeting concerning Hollydale Golf Course and
the City of Plymouth's Comprehensive Plan.
I, Maureen Modrack, formally request that City of Plymouth's Planning
Commission set a date for a special meeting where citizens that are
concerned may ask questions and get some answers concerning the Hollydale
area.
There are policies put into our Comprehensive Plans that help to maintain a
balance between the needs of one individual and those of another. We want,
to be reassured that the City is not abandoning its Comprehensive Plan when
we, the community need it the most. Many people have built a life around
the Comprehensive Plan and how the city has supported it in the past.
I hope, that in a timely manner, the Planning Commission meets with
concerned homeowners in the Hollydale area, so we can begin gathering
information, sharing concerns and are able to be a part of the planning
process.
Sincerely,
Maureen Modrack
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
31
Anne Hurlburt
From: Anne Hurlburt
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 10:33 AM
To: 'm.r.janousek@att.net'
Subject: RE: NW Areas Comp Plan Feedback
Dear Mike and Tami--
I have received your feedback form. It will be shared with the Planning Commission at tonight's meeting, and added to the other
comments we have received on the sample land use plans when the Planning Commission's recommendations are forwarded to
the City Council for their meeting on May 31.
You suggested that your property should be designated "LA -R2" on the plan. Your suggestion will be reviewed with the Planning
Commission tonight when they discuss all of the specific comments made on land use classifications.
Thanks for your comments,
Anne
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Phone: 763 509-5401
Fax: 763 509-5407
Cel: 763 238-3949
www.ci.plymouth.mn.us
Original Message -----
From: m.r.janousek@att.net [mailto:m.r.janousek@att.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 7:25 PM
To: Anne Hurlburt
Subject: RE: NW Areas Comp Plan Feedback
Thank you for the information. I have attached our feedback related to the Comprehensive Plan presentations.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback.
Mike and Tami Janousek
Original message from "Anne Hurlburt" <ahurlburt@ci.plymouth.mn.us>:
Any input we receive prior to the Planning Commission meeting tomorrow will be provided to them at the meeting,
and included in the materials that are prepared for the City Council meeting on May 31. So it's not too late! Feel
free to send an e-mail directly to me at ahurlbur(o).ci.pllymouth.mn.us
Thanks,
Anne
Anne W. Hurlburt, AICP
5/17/2006
Page 2 of 2
Community Development Director
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Phone: 763 509-5401
Fax: 763 509-5407
Cel: 763 238-3949
www.ci.plymouth.mn.us
From: m.r.janousek@att.net[SMTP:M.R.JANOUSEK@ATT.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 2:46:23 PM
To: Web Contact Planning
Subject: NW Areas Comp Plan Feedback
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Would it be okay if we e-mail you our feedback related to the 2030 Comp Plan meetings held May
1, 2, and 3?
I noticed there is a Planning Commission meeting tomorrow, May 17th. This is the same date the
forms were to be returned. If we email you our information tomorrow will it be included for the
Planning Commission meeting?
Thank you,
Mike and Tami Janousek
5630 Dunkirk Lane North
5/17/2006
City of Plymouth
Ms. Judy Johnson, Mayor
Plymouth City Council
Plymouth Planning Commission
Re: Northwest Area Comprehensive Plan
Good Morning:
There seems to be some confusion regarding property owners in Area 1 of the
Northwest portion of Plymouth. As you will note from the petitions you have received
and the map attached to this letter, the majority of property owners want development.
Everyone is aware that development is coming. It is just how and when.
We have attended the Council meetings and the Planning Commission meetings.
We have several concerns regarding the zoning of our area.
1. The hundred foot set back on County Road 47 and Vicksburg Lane
does not make sense. Will you please revisit that issue?
2. We realize there are some landowners who may want to wait a few
years for development and therefore, want to take advantage of the l
to 2 homes on a five -acre lot. While that seems to be a
compromise for those people, the results will be terrible.
What you will get is a patchwork look across the area.
While a patchwork is wonderful in a quilt, somehow I
do not think it would be appropriate for a comprehensive
plan. Eventually, those homes would have to be destroyed
to make way for development at some point.
Please revisit this issue. r. '
3. The Land owners in the Plan 1 area have been working
with John Uban of DSU on a comprehensive plan that
we feel would benefit the owners, developers, and
future citizens of Plymouth, and would be -something the City Council
would approve. As you know Mr. Uban is very well respected in
Plymouth and with developers. We truly believe the city should take a
good look at his plan. It incorporates a lot of good ideas for the land
use.
4. We request the Counsel accept LA -R 3 proposal for this area.
Please work with the landowners and developers to make Plymouth a
wonderful place to want to reside.
Sincerely,
Jack a ` rrY
Steve J. Taylor
Shawn Taylor
V.
iL
r
f -ltilEJ
OACOIAY —JCpiM6
I I.
I LYMICA-BI RR-fAHSTHID 7
i DJKYRRW'EL ia W
7, I
PYWMDELLaP
I _ YNRLYN J aseR
WEN asJ CHENEY I`•.-
RDNAlp YL1.ER
r'; :_;
LOHODNENRRORCONsf IHc
ODNIIFMaLE FlRIFM
IH FMFMa OD —T
kI
u
WAKPARKER
I --- -- J P.a E REDW TROSIEEa
D RHAOEL
J a c afJME1DERT
ALOWWa J OORLIRSCHITAI
CNMO stJf91DER. a Aa9OC VIC
NMKI WEBER
JHOOREXaRD35oNST IHC it -
RCaJ YMADEL Ia) 1/IL i i 1
i x
JOHN EN -
a } j JON D BEllagl J i r
i
l
r
t
rt II ,
y ...
jilt -
J, '---
rr -
Planning Area 1
Ownership Map Planning Area 1 463 ac
Plymouth, Minnesota =,_-- Those property owners
wanting to plan for development* 377 ac
Parcels
N
400 0 400 000 Feet A
A"
a Mme
H—^17.'Note: This is based on those property owners we were able to reach as of April 28, 2006. s"„.,byby
Testimony — Plymouth Planning Commission Meeting — May 17, 2006
SEEN,
100-M
i •
IOCP Served 730 families with affordable housing needs in the last fiscal year ended March 31,
2006.
Our concern is that this need continues to grow and already exceeds the ability of our agency to
provide assistance. We turn away people every month, because of lack of funds to provide temporary
assistance. The majority of our clients are at or below 60% of the area median income.
The long term solution is to develop more affordable units, but with rising land costs, developing
affordable housing requires density. If the land use designations we are talking about right now do
not allow more density it will not be allowed in the zoning codes developed later. This is why we are
here at this stage of the discussion.
Using the 50 unit Vicksburg Commons project now under construction as an example, the density is
7 units per acre. However, that same land would cost at least double today what it did when we
bought it 5 years ago. 6 units/acre, which is also being verbally suggested by the Met Council, is a
minimum standard for affordability.
The Met Council has set an affordable housing need allocation of 1,045 affordable units for the City
of Plymouth by the year 2020. These units are targeted to households earning 60% of the area
median income. Won't some of these units need to be developed in this area? Yet no one is asking
the question, "how many affordable units?" can be developed under Sample Plans 1, 2, or 3. Clearly,
such a calculation could be made. So we, as advocates, need to ask that question.
Can the Plan accommodate the additional 4,500 units forecasted by the Met Council between 2010-
2030? To look at the maximum density allowed as a determinate of the land's ability to meet that
need is not generally the way development occurs in the real world. While developers may request
the maximum density, Cities rarely grant these wishes and lower density is required of the
developers. The projects should reflect what really happens.
Based on what really happens, perhaps the City should be more concerned about definitely meeting
the development anticipated by development of the Elm Creek interceptor, since there are penalties
associated with this. I've attached an article about Minnetrista's experience here.
Overall, Sample Plan 3 ssems the only reasonable starting point and that more areas of LA -3 and LA -
4 need to be added along the corridors and on open land that has already been cleared for farming.
Of course, we should leave the wooded areas and wetlands alone.
Some of the creative mechanisms suggested by City staff to encourage affordable housing
development need to revisited. Cluster housing allows the opportunity to both preserve nature and
develop affordable units. But the density must be allowed for this to work. I've attached another
article about how the City of Afton is looking at this approach.
110 Grand Avenue South, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391-1872 952/473-2436 Fax 952/473-4337
Also in question is the whole concept of rural to urban land use designations. Areas beyond this land
have already lost their rural character as other cities have allowed greater density. High fuel prices
are here to stay and as that trend continues, people will want to live in this area in the metro ratherthandrivelongdistancestowork.
Already more people come in to Plymouth to work in the day than leave here to work elsewhere.
These people need affordable housing opportunities in Plymouth so they can live where they work
and not strain our transportation systems. Again rising fuel prices will be a factor here.
The need is clear. The opportunity (with this land) is staring us in the face. We're hoping the City ofPlymouthcanrespondtothisopportunityasithasinthepastandallowgreaterdensitytoallowgreateraffordability. Thank you.
Submitted by Kim Vohs, Interfaith Outreach & Community Partners Housing Director
Met Council: Minnetrista
must allow more Towth
a The rural city might add denser housing at the behest of the
planning agency, which it says is necessary for sewer service.
By BEN STEVERMAN
bsteverman@startribune.com
Minnetrista, a mostly rural com-
munity on the western border of
Hennepin County; is considering a
plan to add some denser housing
developments.
The possible change in policy, up
for discussion at a public hearing set
for Monday, isn't exactly voluntary.
Minnetrista is being forced to ac-
commodate more of the region's
growth by the Metropolitan Coun-
cil, -the regional planning agency,
that, among other things, runs the
metro area's sewer system.
With a population of 5,234,
Minnetrista is a combination of
farms and residential lots, most of
them in the range of 10 to 40 acres.
Residents generally travel to
Mound or St. Bo -T facius to shop
and do other business.
For years, Minnetrista and the
Met Council have been haggling
over how much growth the city
must allow.
Housing continues: Density is, ie
quiredtopayfor sewer link: W13 o
Citymight build d-ere se.hosn ..housing.
Jt
t
a.H0i75TNr FRnTvf W7. L„ :hadn't iviaryiintcyrfMiq-'rPniiirPrl ;- haari _cin thas`_r,rn„ncnl.-`nf
a certain. density ofhousing - the city near
about 2.2 units per acre m the Hwy. 7 and near
parts of town with sewer, ser- — where more_,
vice — to pay for Muinetrista's be most appropz
link to the sewer system.. The city's ;P]
Minnetrista has been told it mission will l
near tle'Muiretnsta's tiff with theid
onifacius Met Council. The Met_ Council
ity might 'staff has signed off ori the plan,
Fischer said.
ng Com=
a public •-Ben Steverman • 612-673-7168
Meetings in Ston
tonight to talze up
proposal allowing
cluster' housing
A much -debated proposal to allow
cluster" housing in Afton, a rural city
of 3,000 in southern Washington Coun-
ty, ounty, could be -decided at a City Council
meeting tonight
The ordinance would allow neigh-
borhoods of six to 12 houses on 20 -acre
sites. For every cluster 'of that size, the
ordinance would require another 20
acres to be preserved as open space.
Mayor David Engstrom, who
supports -the.. ordinance,:,_ said it will
ensure that Afton isn t overriln byhous-
ing like Woodbw.y, Afton's neighbor to
the west
The area.under.consideration, Eng-
strom
ng
strom said, is about4,000. acres of ag-
ricultural land about 1 mile wide and 6.
miles long thattborders Woodbury.
However, many residents .think the
five -member council is moving too fast
infavor of developersand has failed to
n , define opespace; Jane Paul said. Near- ly half of Afton's 2,007 registered:vot-
ers_,signed appetition asking -the issue
be placed ori the November ballot, said
Paul, ;one of tfiepetitioners r
Engstrom_said Monday that some. - es
people who' signed petitions were
dupedinto signing' andhadaskedhim
how.to remove.theirnames. He saidhe -
opposes areferendum on.theproposed
ordinancebecausehe do6iftwantvot
ors to confuseit vsnth an open space ref
merenduthat. Washington County will ;
put to voters in November.
Paul said an ordinance would con-
tradictAfton's rural, independent char-
acter.
The proposal goes to the city s Plan-
ning Commission at 6 pxn today at
Afton City Hall, 3033 St. Croix Trail S. -
The council meeting is at 7 p.m. Resi-
dents can testify at both, Engstrom said.
ICEVIN GILES
Ad -,!& V el
23
May 16, 2006
TO: Plymouth Planning Commission
Anne Hurlburt, Community Development Director (763-509-5401)
Barbara Senness, Planning Manager (763-509-5452
Plymouth City Attorney, Roger Knutson (651-452-5000)
City Manager, Laurie Ahrens (763-509-5051)
Concerned Homeowners
FROM: Maureen Modrack
4950 -Comstock Ln. N.
Plymouth, MN. 55446 (763-383-2925)
SUBJECT: Request for a special meeting concerning Hollydale Golf Course and
the City of Plymouth's Comprehensive Plan.
I, Maureen Modrack, formally request that City of Plymouth's Planning
Commission set a date for a special meeting where citizens that are concerned may
ask questions and get some answers concerning the Hollydale area.
There are policies put into our Comprehensive Plans that help to maintain a balance
between the needs of one individual and those of another. We want to be reassured
that the City is not abandoning its Comprehensive Plan when we, the community
need it the most. Many people have built a life around the Comprehensive Plan and
how the city has supported it in the past.
I hope, that in a timely manner, the Planning Commission meets with concerned
homeowners in the Hollydale area, so we can begin gathering information, sharing
concerns and are able to be a part of the planning process.
Sincerely
Maureen Modrack
Yn
We the undersigned petition the Plymouth city council, as landowners
along Co. Rd. 47 and or Lawndale Lane, to
remot
atl a plan for the one .
hundred foot setback, and revert to the fifty foot setback.
name address
I71
F------ --- --
2,)6
I
A.
Fi c?" • Vit'`-_"__
fIv
We the undersigned petition the Plymouth city council, as landowners
along Co. Rd. 47 and or Lawndale Lane, to remove the plan for the one
hundred foot setback, and revert to the fifty foot setback.
name address
L1q 6WJ D -4 Lp-
Z61-
Ae-(LFk-- "*-TP Y-
CA
9 10 CIO
We the undersigned petition the Plymouth city council, as landowners
along Co. Rd. 47 and or Lawndale Lane, to remove the plan for the one
hundred foot setback, and revert to the fifty foot setback.
name address
RJ 4- f7
I ri 0o 6o
ss — cc, V 7
BENCHMARK 40
COMPANIES
F R-10. fl V 0.
MAY 18 zu
May 17, 2006
r MUUIn
City of Plymouth
Marie Darling
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Attn: Marie Darling
This letter is in response to the letter Nedegaard Construction Co. received for the land
use plan for the Northwest area of Plymouth. I would like to say that I was very
surprised by this as I own 70 acres of land and only 16.3 acres is buildable. I had Sathre
Berquist do a ghost plat when I purchased the property four years ago (see attached) and
as you can see we were able to save the existing home plus develop approx. 24 additional
lots.
The way your proposed land use shows it would wipe out all my lots plus the existing
home. I would like to suggest that we start working together on a road alinement. When
the interceptor sewer line came thru on Lawndale down to my property I got the Met
Council to move the line 20' further east so my lots would meet City standards and now I
see we are looking for 100' front yard set back which would mean all my lot to the East
will not meet your standards.
I do suggest that we need to work together as I have an appraisal that is somewhere
between $5,500,000 and $6,000,000 worth of useable land. Hook forward to meeting
with you and the City staff on this issue as soon as possible.
Yours Truly,
Bruce Nedegaard
4200 Central Avenue N.E.
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
Phone: 763/789-9070 or 763/757-2926
Fax: 763/757-0649
U g
z
Fro
cv
C7 1
W
R!
I
as
x
aEyp0.
rb3 iry
ISN] 9ESO
z0
a oma:
W N EaW
O m
14 z
F a U
0 a
OMWNRSY
R.
RBvf.40ER B. ]001
AS SH-
VOWNBOGS-011
SNEEi
OF ' SHEErs
Page 1 of 1
1
Anne Hurlburt
From: Sandy Hewitt
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 7:52 AM
To: larry
Cc: Anne Hurlburt
Subject: RE: Land Use Plan
Larry,
Thank you for your email. I will be forwarding it to Anne Hurlburt, to add to the public record regarding the
Comprehensive Plan update.
I appreciate your input on this.
Sincerely,
Sandy Hewitt
Plymouth City Councilmember - Ward 1
Original Message -----
From: larry [mailto:ljhiiik@comcast.net]
Sent: Sun 5/21/2006 9:03 PM
To: Judy Johnson
Cc: Sandy Hewitt; tbilsoe@ci.plymouth.mn.us
Subject: Land Use Plan
I attended one of the sessions where there was discussion of land use as part of the Comp. plan update. The session
was well run and informative. Plan #2 seemed to be the best proposal for our area Lake Camelot development and the
surrounding area.
Now it seems that the Planning Commission has seen fit to recommend much higher density than even plan #3 called for
which must certainly be a surprise to most of us who attended this information session. Indeed most seemed to be in favor,
as I was, of Plan #2.
1 would submit that acceptance of this recommendation would put a great strain on not only the traffic through our
neighbor hood on Hwy 47 but would also create a problem for those wishing to continue to make use of the excellent Lake
Camelot Park that the city has in place. Its future expansion to Lake Pomadeau would also be a problem. How could the
users of this facility feel safe trying to enter and exit the small parking lot let alone trying to cross Hwy 47. It is a hard and
dangerous task now.
I believe that if higher density is the ONLY way to go that this take place closer to Vicksburg and the future residents be
encouraged to use Vicksburg for their daily commuting. Increasing density East of Vicksburg until such time that Hwy 47 is
improved would not be a good idea.
Please vote for Plan #2 as orginally presented.
Larry Hink
553-2983
Protected by a Spain Blocker Miht-7.
Click here to protect your inbox from Spam.
5/22/2006
From: Sandy Hewitt
Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2006 8:02 AM
To: Anne Hurlburt
Subject: FW: Development in Northwest Plymouth
Original Message -----
From: Kim Feldman [mailto:kimfeldman@comcast.net]
Sent: Fri 5/19/2006 8:18 PM
To: Sandy Hewitt
Cc:
Subject: Development in Northwest Plymouth
Ms. Hewitt,
We live in the Lake Camelot Estates development along CR47 which is downstream from most of the proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan in Northwest Plymouth.
It is disappointing to see the direction in which the Northwest comer of our City is heading. However, our main concern is currant and future traffic along CR47 and our ability to
safely navigate it Of the Land Use Plan proposals, our preference would be Option #1 which would maintain more of the rural character of the area as well as help to keep CR47
safe and accessible to our neighborhood.
In recent years, it seems that moreand more development in North Plymouth has become high-density. We understand the need for providing different types of housing stock within
a City, but it is getting to the point where the look and feel of our City is being compromised. It was definitely alarming to see the density maps that were voted in favor of at the
recent Planning Commission meeting.
The 100 yard setbacks may help the aesthetics of the area along CR47 in Northwest Plymouth, but there is still no infrastructure to move the traffic. CR47 is becoming an
increasingly dangerous road to navigate and the outlook for improvements is grim. Please do not support the Land Use Plan being proposed or the increased development densities.
Thank you
Kim and Alex Feldman
6055 Annapolis Lane N
5/22/2006
Page 1 of -1
Anne Hurlburt 43
From: Sandy Hewitt
Sent: Saturday, May 20, 2006 8:03 AM
To: Anne Hurlburt
Subject: FW: Planning Commission Recommendations
Original Message -----
From: Joy Leslie Gordon [mailto:joy@joyofstorytelling.com]
Sent: Fri 5/19/2006 8:28 PM
To: Sandy Hewitt
Cc:
Subject: Planning Commission Recommendations
Dear Councilwoman Hewitt,
I support the Planning Commission's Comp Plan recommendations to the City Council for Planning Areas 1 and 2. They
are important for our city.
Joy Leslie Gordon
4645 Balsam Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55442
763-559-7029
5/22/2006
Land use Northwest Plymouth
Anne Hurlburt
From: Sandy Hewitt
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 4:41 PM
To: Patrick Boerbon
Cc: Anne Hurlburt
Subject: RE: Land use Northwest Plymouth
Page 1 of 1
M
Patrick,
Thank you for your email. I will forward it to Anne Hurlburt, our Community Development Director, who can add it to
the public record that we are taking for the Comprehensive Plan update.
I agree that we need to look at infrastructure issues and concerns and take them into account as we look at what we
want for Northwest Plymouth.
Thanks again for your input.
Sincerely,
Sandy Hewitt
Plymouth City Councilmember - Ward 1
Original Message -----
From: Patrick Boerbon [mailto:patrick.boerbon@holidaycompanies.com]
Sent: Mon 5/22/2006 11:47 AM
To: Sandy Hewitt
Cc:
Subject: Land use Northwest Plymouth
Sandy,
I live in the Lake Camelot Estates development. I'm writing this email to bring to your attention issues with traffic density on
country road 47. 1 currently have problems in the morning trying to get out of my neighborhood on to country road 47
because of traffic volume. I can't image what it would be like if the city adopts land use plan 3 for the northwest
development, adding thousands of additional cars to an already busy road. As you know the city developed the Lake
Camelot Park across from our neighborhood, the city did a wonderful job incorporating the park and trail in the area around
Lake Camelot. One of the neighborhood concerns today is the traffic on country road 47 when our children cross it to get
to the park. Last summer there were several near misses when cars would use the right turn lane to go around cars
making a left turn. Unless the infrastructure (roads, stoplights, etc.) are address in the Comprehensive Plan and a lower
density land use plan is adopted there will be major issues. Hopefully it won't take several fatal traffic accidents before you
react to this problem.
Thank you for being a city official who is concerned for the people of Plymouth.
Patrick
Patrick Boerbon
14235 60th Place North
Plymouth, MN 55446
Work (952) 820-1321
Home (763) 559-9282
Email: patrick.boerbon@holidaycompanies.com
5/23/2006
Page 1 of 2
Anne Hurlburt
From: Mike Brutlag [mbrutlag@brutlaw.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:08 AM
To: Judy Johnson; Sandy Hewitt; Tim Bildsoe; jwillis@ci.ply mouth. mn.u; Kelli Slavik; Ginny Black; Bob Stein
Cc: Anne Hurlburt; Vivian Starr; 'Mark Kulda'; 'Brian Junk'; 'Hal Galloway'
Subject: Development in Northwest Plymouth
Mayor Johnson and Council Members
I have resided in Northwest Plymouth (Lake Camelot Estates) since 1990. I am currently a Board member for our
Homeowner's Association and as such, many of my neighbors have voiced concerns to me about the ongoing
development in Taryn Hills and future development along County Road 47 to the west of our development. Like me,
the neighbors are generally not opposed to development per se, but are opposed to the level of density that is being
discussed for future development and the effect this will have upon local traffic levels. County Road 47 simply cannot
handle the level of development that has been recommended by the Planning Commission. Conditions have already
become dangerous for residents of our area attempting to cross County Road 47 to use Lake Camelot Park. Our daily
travels to and from home on County Road 47 have also become much more challenging, especially in the course of
negotiating turns from and into our subdivision entrances, which have limited sight lines at Annapolis and Dallas
Lanes. Conditions will only get worse, as we have not yet felt the effect of the many additional residents who will be
moving into Taryn Hills. It is inconceivable to me that you would seriously consider the level of density that is
currently under consideration for further development in the area to the west of us given that County Road 47 cannot be
widened without reconstructing the underpass under Interstate 494, something that I understand will not happen, if at
all, until some date long in the future. In my opinion, such action would be irresponsible given the clear health and
safety issues associated with unsupportable levels of traffic on County Road 47.
I would also like to note that by and large, our neighborhood is very upset with the wasteland that has been made of
what were once very attractive woods and fields in the Taryn Hills area. As one who occasionally represents
developers, I am flabbergasted that the City didn't require the preservation of more of the natural vegetation in the area
as a condition of approving the Taryn Hills project. I would hope that this mistake will not be repeated when
approving future development along County Road 47.
I anticipate that you are being lobbied by representatives of the land owners who stand to profit from the sale or
development of their land and who would like to see the densest possible zoning so that they can maximize the value
they receive for their land. I encourage you to ignore any such lobbying. The landowners will be handsomely
rewarded regardless of the level of density you approve. Similarly, I anticipate you are being lobbied by affordable
housing advocates. Their goals are more laudable, but if approval of such projects in our area means a level of density
that is beyond that which can be supported by the existing infrastructure, then I respectfully suggest that any such
approval would be very short sighted and unwise. You should not sacrifice the health and safety of the current
residents in the area in the course of approving new development. The level of density under consideration will make
matters worse for both old and new residents if the infrastructure is insufficient to handle the population increase. The
current recommendation of the Planning Commission is simply not reasonable. The preference my neighbors and I
have expressed is for the staff's "Option 1," a plan that allows growth in a manner that is most consistent with existing
development and infrastructure. This option is also the only option that in my view is consistent with the comments
and promises of City staff and council members as made to our residents in many past meetings concerning
development in our area.
I encourage you to support "Option 1," the least dense option considered by the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission's endorsement of "Option 3," which would allow for the densest level of development, is an extremely
5/24/2006
Page 2 of 2
poor choice for our area, and should be rejected.
Michael L. Brutlag
6080 Dallas Lane, Plymouth)
Attorney at Law
Brutlag, Hartmann & Okoneski, P.A.
1100 U.S. Bank Plaza
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
phone: (612) 630-3203
fax: (612) 630-3201
mbrutlag@brutlaw.com
This transmission is intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee
or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately.
5/24/2006
Page 1 of 2
Doran Cote
From: Karen Holm
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 9:28 AM
To: Ross Beckwith
Cc: Doran Cote; Web Contact Engineering
Subject: FW: Dunkirk Lane and County Road 47
am not sure who to give this one to ........ copy web contact engineering with your response.
From: Web Contact Engineering
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 8:18 AM
To: Karen Holm
Subject: FW: Dunkirk Lane and County Road 47
V b
0'
From: Denise Hutt
hi I
V ,
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 8:17:49 AM " -/
To: Web Contact Engineering 14)
Subject: FW: Dunkirk Lane and County Road 47
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Original Message -----
From: Web Contact Planning
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 4:20 PM
To: Denise Hutt
Subject: FW: Dunkirk Lane and County Road 47
From: Roe]Ico@aol.com[SMTP:ROELLCO@AOL.COM]
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 4:19:36 PM
To: Web Contact Planning
Subject: Dunkirk Lane and County Road 47
Auto forwarded by a Rule
I am the property owner at 5915 Dunkirk Lane North. Could sonyeone calls if it would be possible
to realign Dunkirk Lane as the roads are all re-evaluate Burin the northwest Plymouth plannin The hill at
the start of Dunkirk is very steep. I am afraid that if Dunkirk is graded to Code an e e n, I would
have about a 8 foot drop at the end of my driveway. I am wondering if the first 400 feet of Dunkirk could be
moved to the east into the field across from my property.
Thanks
Page 2 of 2
Steve Roell
763-553-1687
5/22/2006
Anne Hurlburt
From: Sandy Hewitt
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 4:40 PM
To: DVStarr@aol.com
Cc: Anne Hurlburt
Subject: RE: Northwest Plymouth development
Page 1 of 2
Vivian,
Thank you very much for your email. I will forward it to Anne Hurlburt to add to the public record regarding the comprehensive
plan update for Northwest Plymouth.
I know that Cty. Rd. 47 and traffic is a huge issue, and I have continually brought this up with the County to update this road.
I really appreciate your input on this issue.
Sincerely,
Sandy Hewitt
Plymouth City Councilmember- Ward 1
Original Message -----
From: DVStarr@aol.com [mailto:DVStarr@aol.com]
Sent: Tue 5/23/2006 9:45 PM
To: Sandy Hewitt
Cc:
Subject: Northwest Plymouth development
Dear Sandy:
As a resident of Plymouth and Lake Camelot Estates since 1988, I have been closely involved with numerous
issues involving our neighborhood that have come before City Council. My experience has been that Council
Members and Mayor have always seriously considered concerns we have presented.
The Planning Commission recommendation to increase density in the Northwest Plymouth area west of Lake
Camelot is a most undesirable conclusion. This was not what had been expected after the meetings we had
previously attended regarding the new development. From staff's presentation, we were led to expect that the
new development area would be a transition area that maintained a significant amount of green space and rural
character. The preference we expressed was for staff's "Option 1."
After the City created Lake Camelot Park and playground, residents of our neighborhood soon discovered that
heavy traffic on Co. Rd. 47 made access by pedestrians to this park very dangerous. We have repeatedly raised
concerns about this with the city staff. As time has passed, traffic had increased significantly. This also creates a
dangerous situation for drivers trying to exit our neighborhood onto Co. Rd. 47.
If very high density development (as recommended by the Planning Commission) is allowed to happen, the
dangerous highway situation will escalate rapidly. The whole character of the northwest corner of Plymouth will
be totally different from what had been discussed at length in numerous public hearings and planning sessions.
We moved to Plymouth because it was a beautiful city and strongly oppose turning it into a high density, over-
developed area that loses its identity.
Please support density no greater than staff's Plan 2.
Respectfully,
Vivian Starr
6060 Annapolis Lane N
5/25/2006
Page 1 of 1
LIO
Anne Hurlburt
From: Eric and Irene Barbour [barbourei@msn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 8:33 PM
To: Judy Johnson; Sandy Hewitt; Tim Bildsoe; Jim Willis; Anne Hurlburt
Subject: Comments for Development of NW Plymouth
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I am writing to let you know how concerned I am regarding the increase in development along CR47. I am a new resident of
Minnesota and chose Plymouth and Lake Camelot Estates because of the beauty of the city and of the neighborhood. I have
been impressed by the accessibility of the park system and the character of the city. I am pleased that the City is planning the
development of NW Plymouth in an open and thoughtful manner, however, I want to be sure that my concerns are also weighed
carefully.
I am not hopeful that I will be able to continue to enjoy Lake Camelot Park with my young children through biking or walking over
due to the increased traffic that will arrive once the areas west are developed. I have already thought that a pedestrian bridge
across the highway would be necessary to make it safe enough for us and others to use once the houses currently planned are
occupied. Already, the park does not have sufficient parking during peak times, which will only be more congested as others are
forced to drive when they could otherwise walk. I would not want the park'to go to waste, because fewer and fewer people can
get to the park safely.
I understand the need for affordable housing, but in my view, the best way to provide truly affordable housing is to keep well
maintained older homes where young families and people moving up the income ladder are able to provide sweat equity into
neighborhoods that they can care about and settle roots into for a few years. I have never found that large blocks of rental
housing provide the stability and character that really add to a city. Perhaps the city can support affordable housing through home
ownership and home fix -up projects for homes that already exist. Also, in my experience the homes closest to the center of a
major metropolitan area are never really affordable due to the high demand to avoid high commuting times unless the
neighborhood is not very safe. Plymouth may have to accept the fact that truly affordable is not really attainable given it's
geographic location inside of growing outer suburbs.
Finally, the current CR47 can not handle the current traffic, let alone the added traffic that will come with development. Something
should be done soon to address the road needs here. Traffic is congested due to the construction at the currently developing
areas at the corner of Vicksburg, and I regularly use the highway only during "preschool hours".
I will be unable to attend the meeting on Wednesday, May 31, due to an out-of-town trip, but please consider my concerns.
Thank you.
Irene Barbour and family
Annapolis Ln N
5/25/2006
Barb Senness
From: Barb Senness
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 8:21 AM
To: JOOS1STAR@MN.RR.COM'
Cc: Web Contact Planning; Anne Hurlburt
Subject: Question on Comp Plan Update
Dear Ms. Joos,
Page 1 of 2
PA,
On May 17, the Planning Commission recommended a land use plan to the City Council that combines parts of
Sample Plan 3 (refer to the City's website at www.ci.plymouth.mn.us) with a number of alterations. The
alterations did not affect the proposed land use designation of LA -RT for your five -acre parcel. This
recommendation will be considered by the City Council at a special meeting on May 31, 2006 and at their regular
meeting on June 13, 2006. We anticipate that the Council will preliminarily approve a land use plan for northwest
Plymouth at the June 13 meeting.
All of the sample plans staff prepared show your property guided LA -RT. LA -RT would allow up to 1 unit per acre
if the property is served with sewer and water. Without sewer and water, no additional development would be
possible. You should be aware that the Council still could change this designation.
If you are unable to attend the future meetings, you can check on the status of the plan by contacting me or by
going to the City's website. If you click on Comprehensive Plan Update and scroll down to the bottom of the
page, you can sign up to receive updates on the plan.
If you have any further questions, please contact me again.
Sincerely,
Barbara G. Senness, AICP
Planning Manager
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Phone: 763 509-5452
Fax: 763 509-5407
From: Sherryl Joos[SMTP:JOOS1STAR@MN.RR.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 11:35:45 AM
To: Web Contact Planning
Subject: Question on Comp Plan Update
Auto forwarded by a Rule
Good morning -
I am a Plymouth resident and have attended many of the comp plan
5/25/2006
Page 2 of 2
meetings, but missed the 5/17 meeting. I live at 5205 Dunkirk Lane.
We are currently zoned as LA -RT and own 5 acres. What can we expect.
Will our area be available for purchase by developers?
Thank you for explaining what we may expect in the upcoming months,
years as the plan is developed.
Sherryl
Sherryl Joos
5205 Dunkirk Lane N.
Plymouth, MN 55446
Phone: 763.559.9262
joosl star@mn.rr.com
5/25/2006
4410 i
6"'
Medina Highlands Home dwnersAssodation
p
May 23, 2006 MAY -25 2006
Plymouth City Council ODMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
c/o Anne Hurlburt, Corn?nunity Development Director
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Our association represents the 68 homeowners who reside in Medina Highlands, a twin -
home development in Medina that abuts the Elm Creek Golf Course in Plymouth. We
appreciate the fact that the City of Plymouth has invited some of our residents to
participate in Plymouth's Comprehensive Plan update process and the related
consideration of a preliminary land use plan for northwest Plymouth.
In that connection, we understand that the Plymouth Planning Commission, at its meeting
on May 17, 2006, approved a preliminary land use plan that designates the Elm Creek
Golf Course as LA -3 property, which would permit development at a density of 6 to 12
units per acre. We also understand that in March the City Council considered adopting
special land use planning designations for golf courses, and expressed concern about
considering any change in the current planning for golf courses without input from
surrounding property owners. Inasmuch as most, if not all, of the homeowners who live
adjacent to Elm Creek Golf Course are in Medina, and we represent a significant portion
of those residents, we wish to take this opportunity to provide input to you as you
undertake your consideration of a land use designation for the Elm Creek Golf Course.
First, we were surprised that the Planning Commission did not recommend retaining the
Elm Creek Golf Course as permanent open space so as to eliminate the need to create
new open space to serve the undeveloped area of northwest Plymouth as it is developed.
Perhaps this is because the Planning Cormnission expects the City Council to pursue the
adoption of special land use planning designations for golf courses that will supersede the
designation contained in the Planning Commission's recommended preliminary land use
plan.
In any event, we are concerned that the possible development of the Elm Creek Golf
Course is being viewed as an issue that doesn't affect the residents of Plymouth because
the golf course's Plymouth neighbors are P -I properties, such as Wayzata High School
Medina Highlands Home Owners Association
P. O. BOX 20
Medina, Minnesota 55340
Page 1
it? Nome owners Associntlon
and the proposed Speak The Word Church, and the only homeowners affected are in
Medina.
If the City Council adopts the recommendation of the Planning Conunission that the Elm
Creek Golf Course be assigned a land use designation that will permit redevelopment, we
respectfully appeal to the Council to pursue the concept of special land use planning
designations for golf courses, and recognize that this property on the periphery of
Plymouth is a neighbor to the Medina Highlands and Belle Terra housing developments
in Medina. As a result, we would urge that the Elm Creek Golf Course be assigned a
land use designation that would permit development to an extent no more dense than the
adjacent Medina Highlands and Belle Terra developments, so as to provide a compatible
transition from Medina to Plymouth. A lower density designation would also help
minimize potential traffic issues in the likely event that access to any Elm Creek Golf
Course development must be via Medina neighborhood streets serving Medina Highlands
and Belle Terra.
We sincerely thank you for your consideration of these comments.
Very truly yours,
p,4 ,r/ 1. 3 n/cs • J -C
cc: Medina City Council
c/o Rose Lorsung, City Planner
2052 County Road 24
Medina, MN 55340
Medina Highlands Home Owners Association
P. O. BOX 20
Medina, Minnesota 55340
Page 2