Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 09-22-1998APPROVED CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES SEPTEMBER 22, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Mike Stulberg, Commissioners Allen Ribbe, Kim Koehnen, Jeff Thompson (arrived at 7:04 p.m.), Roger Berkowitz, Bob Stein and John Stoebner MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Director Anne Hurlburt, Planning Supervisor Barbara Senness, Planners Shawn Drill, Kendra Lindahl and John Rask, City Engineer Dan Faulkner, Water Resource Engineer Shane Missaghi, Public Works Director Fred Moore and Clerical Supervisor Denise Hutt 1. CALL TO ORDER: 2. PUBLIC FORUM: 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: MOTION by Commissioner Koehnen, seconded by Commissioner Ribbe to approve the September 8, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. 5. CONSENT AGENDA: A. THOMAS AND JULIA CARPENTER (98160) MOTION by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner recommending approval of a rear yard setback Variance for Thomas and Julia Carpenter for property located at 4835 Wellington Lane North. Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. CITY OF PLYMOUTH (98114) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by the City of Plymouth for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to add the Water Resources Management Plan. APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #194 Planning Supervisor Senness gave an overview of the September 18, 1998 staff report. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mark Lobermeier, consultant from Short, Elliott, Hendrickson. Mr. Lobermeier gave an overview of the Water Resources Management Plan. Mr. Lobermeier stated that the three main purposes of the plan are to (1) update the 1980 Storm Drainage Plan; (2) address water quality management concerns; (3) meet the minimum standards of all agencies (4 watershed districts and the Metropolitan Council). The Water Resources Management Plan results in seven major elements: (1) Ranking of eight major water bodies; (2) Land and water resources inventory; (3) Ten city-wide goal - driven implementation plans; (4) Nine specific water -body driven action plans; (5) Individual treatment capacity analysis for 39 subwatersheds; (6) Preservation of exceptional wetland resources; (7) Prioritization of recommended improvements. Lake Ranking is the first step in watershed assessment. The lake ranking system developed establishes logical methodology to assist in the decision-making process for plan implementation tasks and schedules. A lake atlas was put together based on available data from different agencies. The lake ranking uses high, medium, and low quality to develop implementation for prioritization. The plan philosophy establishes the general approach to the Water Resources Management Plan. The section include includes the overall strategies that ultimately create the foundation for the watershed assessment. There are four watersheds (Elm Creek, Bassett Creek, Minnehaha Creek and Shingle Creek); 39 subwatersheds; 310 drainage areas; and 918 ponds/wetlands. The Subwatershed analysis determines future ponding needs based on: (1) Ranking of receiving lake; (2) Anticipated land use changes; and, (3) Extent of water quality treatment (function of wetland classification, buffer ordinance). Preservation of exceptional wetlands is based on limiting their use for storm water quality treatment. Today most of Plymouth's wetlands receive storm water. High quality wetlands can be adversely impacted by the quantity and quality of storm water runoff. To preserve the highest quality wetlands as they are today, the plan assumes that exceptional wetlands would not be used for treatment. Lesser quality wetlands would be used for treatment to varying degrees, based on the quality of the wetland. Based on the plan, we need about one acre of treatment acreage for every 16 acres of tributary impervious area. The implementation plan is based on goal -driven action plans. The process of developing the action plans is based on four steps: (1) Development of goal statements consistent with 8410 rules and the four WMOs. (2) Identification of issues or problems related to achieving the goal. (3) Identification of corresponding solutions corresponding to each of APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #195 the issues. (4) Development of specific action steps, including identification of resources, measurement, schedule and cost. There are 19 major goals established for the Water Resources Management Plan. For each of the first 10 goals which apply uniformly across the City, corresponding policies have been developed. The waterbody goals are specific activities in the plan. Based on an average expenditure of approximately $780,000 per year, the activities have been distributed throughout a 10 -year implementation plan extending through 2008. Mr. Lobermeier stated that the next steps involve additional review, including: (1) City Council approval to submit to agencies; (2) Agencies review; and, (3) City Council adoption. Chairman Stulberg asked if the plan would come back to the Planning Commission for further review if one of the agencies comes up with something. Director Hurlburt stated that if the change was major then it would need to come back to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Koehnen asked if any revisions would need to be done to the plan based on the Planning Commission's recent recommendation for northwest Plymouth. Mr. Lobermeier answered that the plan is generic in that regard. He stated that additional studies will need to be done and have work done in advance. Director Hurlburt commented that the next step after City Council approval would be to undertake the additional studies. Commissioner Stein commented that it appears that lake status remains the same as it is currently. Mr. Lobermeier stated that some improvements are suggested for Medicine Lake. Mr. Lobermeier explained the lake atlas and stated that the lakes are on a "status" quo. If they fall outside the averages, something will need to be done. Director Hurlburt asked where the lake atlas section is found. Mr. Lobermeier responded that the lake atlas for each lake is located under the watershed district tabs. Commissioner Stein said that Medicine Lake and Parkers Lake are ranked a Class 2 which means that they are not suitable for swimming. Mr. Lobermeier stated that the reason they ranked that high, from a water quality standpoint, is that they are not as good for swimming. He said that the plan recommendation is to look at the level twos, and see what can be more realistic in what we can accomplish. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi said that the Environmental Quality Committee (EQC) is composed of seven citizens from Plymouth - one from each ward and three at large. The EQC addresses water quality and environmental issues. APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #196 Chairman Stulberg opened the public hearing. Chairman Stulberg introduced Terrie Christian of 9910 South Shore Drive. Ms. Christian stated that she is representing the Association of Medicine Lake Citizens (AMLAC). Her lake association has been very involved with the EQC. She stated that AMLAC has taken photographs of Medicine Lake and they are excited that there is hope for improvement. Ms. Christian commented that one of the things that has had a negative impact on Medicine Lake is the new trail on the east side of the lake. She said that they are concerned with the lack of buffer to stop water runoff from the impervious surface. She said that one-fifth of a mile of mature trees were removed for the trail, and what is happening is water is collecting and goes directly into the lake with nothing being done to reduce the sedimentation and pollutants. Ms. Christian stated that development is taking place on the east side of the lake which will create more impervious surface and there isn't any silt fence for protection. The development along 10th Avenue has a drainage pipe that is discharging directly into the storm sewer. Ms. Christian stated that the City can do something different and they have the opportunity for a different outcome for development in northwest Plymouth. Chairman Stulberg introduced Kathy Marshall, of 14905 38th Place North, Ward 1 representative serving on the EQC. Ms. Marshall said that the EQC approved the plan and some of their comments have been included in the staff report. She said that the EQC worked on the plan for over a year. The EQC would like the plan approved and implemented. Ms. Marshall said that one of the main concerns is the development of northwest Plymouth. She stated that impervious surfaces, sediment, and fertilizers from developments can affect the lakes and the wildlife. Ms. Marshall said that northwest Plymouth is an area that we can try some different processes and practices so problems can be prevented. Ms. Marshall gave an overview of the EQC's recommended changes as outlined in the September 10, 1998 letter from David Shea, Ward 2 representative. Chairman Stulberg asked if the EQC is comfortable with staff s consideration of the recommended changes. Ms. Marshall replied affirmatively. She said that all comments will be worked into the final version after all agencies have looked at the plan. Commissioner Thompson stated that the staff report does not include the issue of the transparency, phosphorous and chlorophyll a levels between the 25th to 75th percentile for Ecoregion lakes. Ms. Marshall said she would have to ask for a clarification of that since it is not in the staff report. Commissioner Thompson asked what the EQC envisions the ban on phosphorus to be. Ms. Marshall said that the EQC recognizes that the ban would be difficult to police. The EQC envisions looking at the businesses within Plymouth and asking them to provide phosphorus free fertilizer. She said that an important element of the ban would be to APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #197 educate and inform people. She said she doesn't know how the City will actually enforce the ban. Commissioner Stoebner asked if the EQC looked at other cities' experiences with banning and how their ordinances were structured and how they enforced it. Ms. Marshall said they received some information that had to do with construction and sediment transport, but not an exact way to enforce the policy. Commissioner Stoebner asked if that information is available somewhere. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi replied affirmatively. Commissioner Stoebner said that information would be helpful to pass along to the City Council. Commissioner Koehnen asked if the instream rates language in the staff report is the same language as recommended by the EQC. Ms. Marshall replied affirmatively. Director Hurlburt added the clarification that the limitation would be to stream flows across the watershed, not a specific development. She said that what will go in the plan will be the sentence in bold as indicated in the staff report. Commissioner Thompson suggested that an explanation also go into the plan. Director Hurlburt replied that it could, if necessary. Commissioner Thompson said he would be more comfortable having the explanation in the plan. Commissioner Thompson asked what the definition is of restorable wetlands and what is and is not restorable wetland. Chairman Stulberg introduced Erika Urban of 1541 West Medicine Lake Drive. Ms. Urban stated that she is a member of AMLAC. Ms. Urban said that assault of the land causes the assault of the lakes. Ms. Urban said that the Little Peninsula deal did not go through and was acquired by a developer. Chairman Stulberg introduced James Willis of 16511 26th Avenue North. Mr. Willis stated that he reviewed the plan's executive summary and attended some EQC meetings. Mr. Willis urged the Commission to address the issue of aquatic plants transmitted into ponds behind private residences. He said that their particular pond is infected with duck weed. They have tried to treat it but it comes through with a new supply every time it rains from Dunkirk Lane. Mr. Willis pointed out that the staff report doesn't really say how these improvements will be paid. He commented that the issue of financing should be addressed before adopting the plan. Chairman Stulberg introduced Jim Howard of 1535 Juneau Lane. Mr. Howard stated that he lives on Parkers Lake and is a board member of the Friends of Parkers Lake. He stated that he supports the plan and wants funding in place to clean up the lake. Ms. Marshall stated that pertaining to the policy comment regarding the stream flows that some watersheds go across Plymouth and into other cities which we don't have control APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #198 over. In order to get the predevelopment rates, we also have to coordinate with other cities. She stated that with regards to a city-wide ban on phosphorous, the City of Medina has a ban currently in place. Ms. Marshall said that the City has an inventory of existing wetlands. She said that the EQC wants to identify land that used to be a wetland and restore that wetland. She stated that land is still available to restore an existing drained wetland area. Chairman Stulberg closed the public hearing. Pertaining to the construction of homes on the east side of Medicine Lake, City Engineer Faulkner stated that there are three home sites and they are not filling wetlands to build those homes. He said that he wasn't sure if there was a silt fence in place, but would check out the drainage pattern to see if a silt fence would be required. City Engineer Faulkner stated that the trail project was a joint effort with Hennepin County. A large water treatment pond was provided along 34th Avenue. He said that there is some direct runoff into the lake, as there was before the trail was in place. He commented that it was very difficult to get the trail wedged in between all the existing homes. City Engineer Faulkner said that Water Resource Engineer Missaghi has been involved the issue pertaining to aquatic plants in ponds behind private residences. Chairman Stulberg asked if it is acceptable to convey weeds into a private pond without a drainage easement. City Engineer Faulkner said that it is probably a legal question; although he agrees that it was a good comment that we will need to look at in the plan. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi said to solve that problem we would need to take care of up stream and down stream together. Mr. Lobermeier stated that financing of the plan is addressed in the Goals and Policies as Goal No. 10. He said that the City is likely to use a combination of user funds, general taxes, and grants, which would be discussed on an annual basis through the budget. Mr. Lobermeier said that the financing decision will either come with plan approval or later by the City Council through the budget process. Commissioner Thompson commented that one aspect of financing could be to assess people who live on the lake. Mr. Lobermeier replied that with that type of assessment it is difficult to show "benefit." Chairman Stulberg noted that some of the comments received from citizens state that the plan should not be approved until a funding plan is discussed and approved. Mr. Lobermeier stated that you do need a strong idea where the funding will come from and things have already been planned for in the budget as to where funding will come from. APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #199 He said that if you have no idea where the funds will come from, it is not a good idea to approve the plan. Commissioner Ribbe asked if the figures on the Implementation Plan are adequate, as he's worried that the eight million dollar figure could turn into 16 million dollars. Mr. Lobermeier stated that spending of the funds will be dependent on how rapidly certain elements of the plan are implemented. He said that a number of things that have to be defined in greater detail and a control will be set annually in the city budget. Commissioner Ribbe commented that some numbers don't seem to be realistic such as land acquisition. Mr. Lobermeier stated that funding could come from development fees or conservation easements. Chairman Stulberg asked how staff envisions that the phosphorous ban will be policed. He stated that while he agrees with Ms. Marshall that you need to have a goal, it still needs to be measurable or attainable. Planning Supervisor Senness responded that some goals would be attained over time. She said that it would probably be difficult to achieve the goal until the region gets into looking at that type of ban. Director Hurlburt commented that not all laws are perfectly enforceable but most citizens are law abiding. She said that it will be important to educate residents and to work with distributors. Chairman Stulberg asked if the City is going to go back and change the wetland inventory maps. Commissioner Thompson stated that there needs to be more clear guidelines created for restorable wetlands that were artificially drained. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi stated that you have to define clearly any area that has the potential to go back to their original condition. He said that through aerial photography you can see depression areas that could have been a wetland. He said that the city would not be making the jump that since it is a potential site it will go back to a wetland. Commissioner Thompson asked how you define an occasional wetlands. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi said that if it is inundated long enough for aquatic plants to grow then it is wetland. Commissioner Stein asked if they looked at a cost benefit analysis. Mr. Lobermeier replied they had not, just a sum total of all action items developed by staff. The plan identifies key improvements that would need to be done. Commissioner Thompson asked if there was any discussion on issuing permits for people from other areas to bring their boats and use Plymouth's lakes. Mr. Lobermeier replied that it is certainly an option that could be pursued. Commissioner Koehnen asked if the clarification suggested by the EQC pertaining to the transparency, phosphorous and chlorophyll levels being between the 25th and 75th percentile for the Ecoregion lakes had been decided on. Chairman Stulberg commented that it is not in staff s recommendation. Mr. Lobermeier stated that the necessary clarity APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #200 to properly explain it will be made and along with any adjustments to the plans goals. Director Hurlburt stated that the issue where the lake falls is a matter of the data being presented, rather than representing a goal. It wouldn't make sense to change it; if you did, the data wouldn't be accurate. Mr. Lobermeier stated that it is easier to change a goal for Bass Lake and he will take out that reference. Commissioner Thompson stated he was confused by the bold face statement pertaining to the percentile. Mr. Lobermeier said that it seems that the goal should be that the lakes in Plymouth fall within the Ecoregional range. Commissioner Stoebner noted that there was a letter stating that the lake associations were not contacted about the plan until late in the process. Mr. Lobermeier stated that they met with the Bass Lake Association nine months ago and citizens were invited early on in the process at the environmental fair. He said that there were at least three specific situations that they could have been involved. Commissioner Koehnen asked if Mr. Shea's comments would be included in the plan. Water Resouce Engineer Missaghi stated that reporting is being mixed with goal setting. The Ecoregion is not part of goal setting, but rather a frame of reference. Commissioner Thompson commented that defecation from geese causes problems to lakes also, and asked how that can be balanced. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi commented that geese and nuisance weeds are the biggest problems. He said that buffers around a wetland are the best way to handle geese. Commissioner Thompson asked what legal barriers would the city face if they now try to require a buffer around an existing wetland. Mr. Lobermeier said that it would be an issue for the city attorney. Director Hurlburt commented that the City found that out through the wetland ordinance process that you can go back and require something to be done. Commissioner Thompson commented that people that live on the lakes should put in buffers. Commissioner Stein asked if the city has looked at a property tax incentive to put in buffers. Director Hurlburt replied negatively. Mr. Lobermeier said that they have looked at conservation easements, but not to create lake buffers. Commissioner Stein asked if they looked at the City of Minneapolis and what they are doing. He asked what alternative landscaping would include. Mr. Lobermeier commented that the improvements made by the City of Minneapolis are having a positive affect already. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi stated that alternative landscaping can include tall grasses, native grasses, wildflowers, and the like to allow water to go into ground instead of running off. Commissioner Thompson said that he would like more time to look at the plan, as he doesn't feel prepared to vote on it yet. APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #201 Chairman Stulberg asked if the Commissioners need any additional information. Commissioner Thompson replied negatively. Commissioner Stoebner stated that he would like more time to review the plan. Commissioner Ribbe concurred. Commissioner Berkowitz stated that he would like more information on the financing scenarios for the 10 -year plan and what can be done with a certain amount of money budgeted each year. Director Hurlburt asked if the Commission is suggesting a cost benefit analysis to achieve the different levels of compliance. Commissioner Berkowitz said that it would be helpful to know this as we pass the plan along to the City Council. Commissioner Ribbe asked if staff and the consultant can put recommendations in print for the way that it should be financed to carry out the plan. He asked how the education program will be funded. Mr. Lobermeier stated that a number of alternatives for funding are outlined in Goal #10 under Goals and Policies and Implementation in the plan. Chairman Stulberg asked what specifically is being earmarked to restore the water quality in Plymouth for the 86% of the land area that is already developed. Mr. Lobermeier replied that not much has been earmarked toward northwest Plymouth. He said that it is lot less expensive to do improvements before development occurs. Chairman Stulberg said that it should be called out more in the report. Commissioner Thompson commented that you have to look at costs being a burden on northwest Plymouth to benefit people living on Medicine Lake. He said that the option of assessing people living on the lakes should be pursued, as the problems are being caused by them and they would benefit from the clean up. Commissioner Koehnen said it would be beneficial to have more time to understand the plan more thoroughly. Chairman Stulberg agreed that more time wouldn't hurt, but noted that the he would never be up to the technical level of the EQC. He said that he would like to receive the additional information at least one week in advance of the Planning Commission Meeting. MOTION by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner to table the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to adopt the Water Resources Management Plan to a future Planning Commission Meeting and to have the revisions at least one week in advance. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION carried unanimously. Chairman Stulberg called a recess at 9:00 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:13 p.m. B. CALIBER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (98146) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Caliber Development Corporation for a Planned Unit Development General Plan for a 22,600 square foot office/showroom APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #202 building with up to 80 percent office use for property located at the northwest corner of Polaris Lane and 25th Avenue North. Planner Lindahl gave an overview of the September 18, 1998 staff report. She presented imaging of the proposed development. Chairman Stulberg introduced Greg DuMonceaux, the petitioner. Mr. DuMonceaux stated that Caliber has been a good citizen in Plymouth for the last 12 years. He agreed with staff that the landscaping is a significant issue and has agreed to landscape the United Properties land. He said that they also agreed to add 10 -foot evergreen trees. He anticipates that adding 10 -foot evergreen trees and continuing the landscape coverage on the back of the building will improve the site. Mr. DuMonceaux said that he concurs with the staff report and the conditions. Chairman Stulberg opened the public hearing. Chairman Stulberg introduced a letter dated September 22, 1998 from Ellen Weise at 15635-A 24th Avenue North requesting that the loading docks do not face her property and that no activity be allowed at the docks between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Chairman Stulberg introduced Karen Nevin of 15605-C 24th Avenue North. Ms. Nevin said that she takes issue with the comment in the staff report that the Suncourt Villas are the most affected. She said that her development consists of three story buildings with decks on the second and third floors. She presented pictures taken from her deck. Ms. Nevin said that she was told that no development would go in behind the wetland. She commented that she paid a lot premium to face that direction. Ms. Nevin also presented pictures of the back end of other Caliber buildings depicting trash dumpsters outside, vehicles left on site, and various equipment trailers in the parking lot. Ms. Nevin said that a berm and 10 -foot trees will not camouflage everything. She said that the proposed development will negatively affect her property value. Ms. Nevin suggested that the loading docks should be moved to the front of the building. Chairman Stulberg introduced Bev Lafferty of 15600-D 24th Avenue North. Ms. Lafferty said that she serves as the vice president of the Ashburne Homeowners Association and is organizing a petition to give to the City Council requesting that the loading docks be moved to the front of the building. Chairman Stulberg introduced Pamela Schreier of 15645-E 24th Avenue North. Ms. Schreier stated that she was told that no development would occur when she purchased her home. She said that she is concerned with a decrease in property values. She presented pictures from her deck looking toward the development and pictures of other Caliber developments. She said that she accepts the fact that there will be a development APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #203 but is not pleased with courtesy buffers or landscaping. She stated that she was told by a planning staff member Caliber has recently been sold and there will be new management. Ms. Schreier said that she would like the dock changed to face a different way. She asked what enclosed trash means. She said that she doesn't want trucks parked on site 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and doesn't want glare from the lighting. She said that the developer should be made to follow through with commitments. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mary Burgess of 2250 Ranchview Lane North. Ms. Burgess said that she is still waiting for Caliber to finish up the landscaping in back of her home and presented a picture from her property. She asked when the landscaping is going to be done. Ms. Schreier commented that the unfinished landscaping is on the Polaris project which is also Caliber's development. Chairman Stulberg closed the public hearing. Mr. DuMonceaux said that they looked at alternative areas for the loading docks, but couldn't put them anywhere else because of design parameters, site constraints and fire lane issues. He said the proposed layout is the best for circulation and ability to move in that area. Mr. DuMonceaux said that they do manage a lot of properties in Plymouth and they do have tenants that don't take care of property as they should. He said that they are constantly in the process of trying to address this. They do contact the police department to report vehicles left in the parking lot after the allotted time and they are then towed. Director Hurlburt commented that the City will follow up with code enforcement. Mr. DuMonceaux said that they went through enormous issues with the landscaping on the Polaris project and every tree that was asked for and approved is on the site. The area that is unfinished has been seeded three times this year but there just hasn't been enough rain to make it grow. Planning Supervisor Senness said that concerns were raised by adjacent homeowners about the Polaris Business Centre I project. She said that staff did inspect the site; some trees were replaced, and the Site Improvement Performance Agreement funds were released as the developer fully complied with what was in the plan. Planner Lindahl commented that is was not her intent to slight Ashburne residents, but the loading docks are screened from the Ashburne units by the intervening building. She said that Caliber has met the intent of the ordinance requirement for screening from Ashburne and Pintail Villas, but that Suncourt has to look directly at the loading areas. She explained that the trash will be inside the building, and that no trash dumpsters are to be stored outside which is a condition in the resolution. She stated that the resolution also includes a condition requiring site lighting to comply with ordinance standards. APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #204 Chairman Stulberg asked what the ordinance states pertaining to service vehicles on site. Director Hurlburt explained that vehicles can be parked in the parking lot, but if a vehicle is left over 96 hours it is considered outdoor storage. Vehicles that leave everyday and park on site at night are okay. Commissioner Thompson asked what the difference is in feet for the loading dock setback requirement and how does the undevelopable land fit into the flexibility. Planner Lindahl answered that it is considered an outlot. Commissioner Koehnen asked if the hours of operation should be limited as suggested by Ms. Weise's letter. Planner Lindahl commented that a condition was attached to the Lakepoint development to prohibit truck traffic between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. on the four westerly doors. The City Council limited loading dock activity on Polaris Business Centre I to between 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Director Hurlburt stated that it is not a condition at this point and would need to be added if desired. Commissioner Thompson stated that he didn't see the 300 foot loading dock issue in the resolution. Director Hurlburt stated that it is an ordinance requirement, and is in the PUD General Plan. MOTION by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Ribbe recommending approval of an Ordinance amending Chapter 21 of the City Code to amend PUD 83-1 for property located at the northwest quadrant of Polaris Lane North and 25th Avenue North and Findings of Fact for amending the Zoning Ordinance text for property located at the northwest quadrant of Polaris Lane North and 25th Avenue North. Commissioner Thompson questioned where the flexibility comes in. Director Hurlburt stated that it would be in the resolution that approves the PUD General Plan. Planner Lindahl said that the Zoning Ordinance contains the language for the PUD. Director Hurlburt added that if there are changes in the plan, it is added to the PUD resolution that is adopted into the ordinance. MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Koehnen to add recommending approval of the PUD General Plan Amendment for Caliber Development Corporation for property located at the northwest quadrant of Polaris Lane North and 25th Avenue North to the main motion. MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Koehnen to limit the hours of activity to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Roll Call Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #205 Commissioner Thompson said he is troubled by not enforcing the 300 foot setback for the loading docks, so will not vote for approval. Roll Call Vote on MOTION to Amend. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. Commissioner Koehnen asked about the relocation of the loading docks. Director Hurlburt said that she wouldn't recommend that the Commission deny it, but instead approve only if the plan is modified to change it in a way that it is acceptable. Chairman Stulberg commented that the resolution could be denied with a finding that the loading dock is not appropriate with the way it faces. Director Hurlburt said that it is much better to approve something with conditions rather than deny it without reasons for an ordinance requirement. Chairman Stulberg commented that he will vote in favor of it, but if someone recommends that the loading dock be moved, he is not sure he would vote in favor of that not knowing where it would go for sure. Commissioner Thompson stated that the ordinance should be enforced for the 300 foot setback. Commissioner Stein said that he doesn't want to redesign the building. He said that just because there is a wetland doesn't mean it meets the 300 feet, and will not support the motion. Roll Call Vote on Main MOTION. 3 Ayes. MOTION failed on a 3-4 Vote. Commissioners Thompson, Koehnen, Ribbe and Stein voted Nay.) MOTION by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Ribbe recommending denial of the Ordinance amending Chapter 21 of the City Code to amend PUD 83-1 for property located at the northwest quadrant of Polaris Lane North and 25th Avenue North and Findings of Fact for amending the Zoning Ordinance text for property located at the northwest quadrant of Polaris Lane North and 25th Avenue North and PUD General Plan Amendment for Caliber Development Corporation for property located at the northwest quadrant of Polaris Lane North and 25th Avenue North. Roll Call Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION carried on a 4-3 Vote. (Commissioners Stoebner, Berkowitz and Chairman Stulberg voted Nay.) C. OPUS NORTHWEST L.L.C. (98152) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Opus Northwest, L.L.C. for a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permits for a new office building at Bass Creek Business Park. Planner Drill gave an overview of the September 16, 1998 staff report. Chairman Stulberg introduced Michelle Foster, representing the petitioner. Ms. Foster stated that she concurs with the staff report and is available for questions. APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #206 Commissioner Ribbe asked if the trees on the east side of the site will remain. Planner Drill replied affirmatively. Chairman Stulberg opened the public hearing. Chairman Stulberg introduced a letter dated September 21, 1998 from Jim and Mary Horstmann of 6037 Hillsboro Avenue North. Chairman Stulberg closed the public hearing. MOTION by Commissioner Stoebner, seconded by Commissioner Thompson recommending approval of a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permits for Opus Northwest, LLC for property located north of Bass Lake Road and East of Nathan Lane. Roll Call Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. 7. NEW BUSINESS A. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. (98150) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd. for a minor PUD Amendment to add three parking stalls and two loading dock bays to the existing building located at 2600 Campus Drive. Planner Rask gave an overview of the September 17, 1998 staff report. Chairman Stulberg introduced Tom Alexander, representing the petitioner. Mr. Alexander stated that he concurs with the staff report. He stated that they need additional loading docks to avoid the stacking of trucks on site. MOTION by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Thompson recommending approval of a minor PUD General Plan Amendment for Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, LTD. to allow the construction of two additional dock bays and related site improvements on property located east of Campus Drive and north of 26th Avenue North. Commissioner Thompson stated that he is troubled that the request is increasing the impervious surface coverage. Commissioner Stein asked if any alternative landscaping options had been discussed with the applicant. Planner Rask stated that they discussed cost effective improvements to the storm sewer, but it would be difficult to redirect the stormwater to any other place. He added that staff could work with the applicant concerning minor alterations that could be done. Director Hurlburt asked if there are areas that are now sodded and mowed that could be left more natural. Planner Rask stated that there may be some parking stalls that could be drained back into the yard area. Director Hurlburt what is in the area between the curb and trail. Planner Rask answered that the area is currently left natural. Director Hurlburt stated that short of not mowing the front yard, there really isn't anything else left to be done. Commissioner Stein asked if draining the parking stalls the other way is a possibility. Planner Rask commented that the APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #207 possibility could be explored. City Engineer Faulkner commented that an existing catch basin could be retrofitted with a sediment trap, but they have to be maintained. He said that they could replace their existing catch basin, but staff didn't recommend that because of the small amount of impervious coverage. MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Stein, seconded by Commissioner Koehnen to add a condition that the new parking stalls drain toward the grassy area. Commissioner Thompson asked how would that affect the existing property owners. Mr. Alexander commented that the amendment should state to explore the possibilities of the drainage pattern. Commissioner Koehnen stated the motion should state that the applicant work with staff on the drainage issues to help the impervious surface runoff. Chairman Stulberg suggested that instead of making it a condition, it should be a recommendation to staff that the petitioner and staff come up with something if possible to reroute the drainage. Commissioner Stein asked how hard is it to change out the catch basin. City Engineer Faulkner stated that it would most likely cost a few thousand dollars. Mr. Alexander asked if the recommendation is to correct something that wasn't done originally or because their request would increase the increase the impervious surface. Commissioner Thompson commented that he would not be voting to correct some mistake of the past only, but because of the increase of impervious surface. Commissioner Koehnen withdrew her second from the MOTION to Amend. MOTION to Amend died for lack of a second. Commissioner Berkowitz commented that catch basins should be explored for future developments. Commissioner Koehnen stated that the hours of operation have not been limited. Director Hurlburt stated that the reason to limit hours in previous applications was because of the setback requirements, and this application meets the ordinance requirements. MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Koehnen, seconded by Commissioner Stein to include a condition that the applicant and staff work together to address the issue of the increase of impervious surface coverage. Commissioner Ribbe stated that he can't support the motion as it is such a small amount and he doesn't want to burden the applicant. Commissioner Stein stated that it would be something simple to drain three parking spaces. Roll Call Vote on MOTION to Amend. 3 Ayes. MOTION to Amend failed on a 3-4 Vote. (Commissioners Stoebner, Ribbe, Berkowitz and Chairman Stulberg voted Nay.) APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #208 Roll Call Vote on Main MOTION. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. 8. OLD BUSINESS A. TODD & LESLIE FOSTER (98145) AND SCOTT & ROXANNE BERGLAND (98149) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Todd & Leslie Foster and Scott & Roxanne Bergland for variances to reduce the width of the required wetland buffer strip. Planner Drill provided an update of the item since it was tabled at the September 8, 1998, Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Berkowitz asked of the 700 bodies of water in Plymouth, how many may have partial wetland buffering under fully developed conditions. Planner Drill said that there has been no in-depth analysis of that. Director Hurlburt stated that the majority of existing wetlands have development around them, as the wetland ordinance is relatively new. She added that more of the new subdivisions will have buffers. Commissioner Thompson asked how large the buffer is on Mr. Heitkamp's property. Planner Drill replied that Mr. Heitkamp could respond to that question. Commissioner Stoebner asked if any study or analysis has been done of this wetland to determine if it is medium or low quality. Planner Drill responded that it is a medium quality wetland, based in the study conducted by Peterson Environmental in 1994. Commissioner Stoebner asked if this were a low quality wetland, would if affect the size of the buffering. Director Hurlburt stated that the buffer is based on the quality of the wetland at the time of plat approval. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that the wetland probably hasn't degraded that much from what was originally there. Chairman Stulberg introduced Todd Foster, the applicant. Mr. Foster stated that the hardship is that they don't have enough room for the kids to play. He said there is enough room for a regular "A -frame" swingset, however, there is not enough room for a Rainbow swingset and he has always wanted one. He commented that he is to blame for not looking into the ordinance and anything else pertaining to the property. Ms. Foster stated that he believes his lot is unique because it is a single family home surrounded by other single family homes. The request is merely to have a space for the kids to play, and they are not interested in selling the property. Mr. Foster said that he doesn't know of anyone that wants to buy the property right now just because he's asking for a variance. He said that Mr. Hovey of the DNR indicated that what they are asking for is relatively insignificant compared to what the others have on the other side of the wetland. Mr. Foster said he feels that the 20 -foot buffer is adequate. He stated that there is a APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #209 recommended six-foot area around the Rainbow playset for safety reasons, and even with the variance they would be squeezing it in. Mr. Foster said that Mr. Hovey commented that if everyone around the pond would move back even one foot, which is voluntary, it would be a tremendous help. Mr. Foster stated that the voluntary wetland buffer setback on the other side of the pond ranges from one to five feet. Commissioner Stoebner asked how far is it from the back of the Foster house to the required buffer line. Mr. Foster replied just under 30 feet. He said that they had their deck and patio put in before we they knew about the wetland buffer requirement. Planner Drill scaled the plans and noted that there is about 35 feet between the east corner of the home and the required buffer, and 30 feet between the west corner of the home and the required buffer. Commissioner Stoebner asked if there are any properties on the north side of the pond that do not have a voluntary buffer. Mr. Foster stated that some didn't have a buffer when he first moved in, but now all have some type of buffer, either long sod or some with vegetation. Chairman Stulberg introduced Roxanne Bergland, the applicant. Ms. Bergland stated that they are requesting an additional 10 feet for the back yard. She said that she would like "reasonable use of land" defined. Ms. Bergland stated that their lot is unique to those around them as four of the nine homes have the buffer, and they shouldn't have to compensate for the homes on the other side of the wetland. Ms. Bergland said that they just want to be able to entertain at home and have their kids stick around. Ms. Bergland stated that she doesn't think the variance will increase the property values. Ms. Bergland commented that when they moved, they were too busy taking care of other things to think that they needed to check with the City about their property. She stated that she believes they are like most people that don't check things out. Ms. Bergland stated that while she agrees that pollutants and sediments need to be kept out of the water, she doesn't see how an additional 10-20 feet from two properties will impact the water that much. She said that if she thought it would have an impact, she would pull her application. Ms. Bergland commented that any additional space would be a bonus for them. She stated that the homes that are opposing the request have a situation with the City and the developer where the road comes in and where the homes were placed. She said that she doesn't believe it's a wetland buffer issue, but rather a privacy issue for them. Ms. Bergland said that the buffer stakes would be put back in because they now understand what they are used for. Mr. Foster presented photographs of the area. Ms. Bergland stated that when Mr. Hovey looked at their properties, he said that more buffer width is better. She said she asked him if she would shorten up the area by 10 feet and plant City approved plantings, would it be better. She said Mr. Hovey stated that he couldn't comment on that. Mr. Foster stated that he would have to dig up some sod, but would be working with Water Resource Engineer Shane Missaghi. APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #210 Chairman Stulberg introduced Darvin Bauer of 16720 40th Avenue North. Mr. Bauer said he owns the lot east of Mr. Foster. Mr. Bauer stated that he doesn't think that the Foster's have caused any of the pond problems, as his property is not sodded yet nor is the Berglands. Mr. Bauer said that he is not against the applicants' requests. He stated that the applicants need a little bit more room for their kids. Chairman Stulberg introduced Mark Heitkamp of 16725 40th Place North and a letter dated September 22, 1998 from Mr. Heitkamp. Mr. Heitkamp stated that there hasn't been any mention of the hardship to the residents across the wetland or downstream. Mr. Heitkamp presented a picture of the wetland, and commented that everyone is to blame for the pond and they are contributing to the algae blooms. He said that if it continues the life of the wetland will be shortened. Mr. Heitkamp wondered what the quality of the wetland would be in the future if the variances are approved. Mr. Heitkamp commented that water quality starts upstream. Mr. Heitkamp presented a petition dated September 22, 1998 of residents who oppose the variance request. Mr. Foster presented a petition from residents not opposed to the variance request. Commissioner Ribbe asked what Ms. Bergland is proposing for some other kind of use for the buffer space. Ms. Bergland stated that if some type of a compromise could be reached, it would be better than what they have now. She said the ideal solution would be if everyone would agree to have a buffer around the entire area. Commissioner Stoebner commented that it sounds like Ms. Bergland is suggesting a concept of planting thicker plantings in the buffer zone. Commissioner Stein asked if there is something such as more dense plants or plants that are suited for a buffer. Director Hurlburt replied that the one constant that is known is that a wider buffer is better. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that the consultant came up with what is the best distance for each quality of wetland and plantings for all buffers which is a standard in the ordinance. Commissioner Stein asked if the extraordinary measures were due to the construction of the development. Director Hurlburt answered that construction was one piece, but there are other things such as erosion control during construction. She said that an open site with no sod does the biggest damage. She said that conditions have been written into development approvals that will go on forever. Commissioner Thompson asked if leaving the grass long along the north side is considered a buffer. Water Resource Engineer Missaghi responded negatively, noting that regular sod does not have deep enough roots to be effective. Commissioner Stein asked if there is any benefit for the applicant to plant native grasses elsewhere on their property to make up for the variance from the wetland buffer. Director APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #211 Hurlburt replied that it would then be a maintenance issue and it would be hard to create little spots for native grasses. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that is why there is an ordinance maximum and minimum. MOTION by Commissioner Stoebner, seconded by Commissioner Thompson recommending approval of a variance for Todd & Leslie Foster for property located at 16740 -40th Avenue North, and a variance to reduce the wetland buffer width and denying a request to eliminate the buffer monuments for Scott & Roxanne Bergland for property located at 16800 -40th Avenue North. Commissioner Stoebner stated he feels all standards have been met except for possibly Condition #4. He said that a recent court case cites that a self-created hardship is not a reason to deny an application in itself. Due to the physical surroundings and shape of the lot, the hardship has been established and the request in the minimum amount in order to use the back yard. Commissioner Stoebner commented that he is troubled by the concerns raised by neighbors when they have done nothing to buffer their own property. Commissioner Stoebner stated that he wasn't sure that shortening the buffer would be injurious. Commissioner Thompson concurred with Commissioner Stoebner and added that he doesn't see any evidence that it will be injurious. Commissioner Koehnen commented that she wouldn't support the motion. While she feels sorry for the applicants, she feels that we need to start somewhere, especially as we all learn more about water quality issues. Commissioner Stein concurred. He stated that the wetland buffers are in place for a reason. Chairman Stulberg stated he couldn't support the motion because he doesn't think the application meets Standard #1 as they could have a regular swingset; #2, it is not unique as there are other platted properties that are the same; and #3 and #5, the request might be detrimental. Commissioner Thompson stated that he doesn't find it to be a hardship because of the swingset, but rather a smaller yard for the kids to play in. Chairman Stulberg commented that he doesn't disagree, but the hardship was created because of that. Commissioner Stoebner stated that when you look at uniqueness look at each individual lot, these lots have extremely small back yards. Commissioner Berkowitz stated that he would support the motion as the standards have been met. He said that the situation is unique because it is very rare that wetlands have half that are subject to a buffer and half that aren't. He said that the difficulty is caused by the chapter - if there wasn't a wetland ordinance, the applicants wouldn't need a variance. He stated that the applicants would still be maintaining a 20 -foot buffer. APPROVED Planning Commission Minutes September 22, 1998 Page #212 Commissioner Ribbe said he would be supporting the motion. He commented that the application is for only two lots. He said that a unique situation was created when the site was platted and it is a detriment to these two families. He said that while he agrees that the City needs to start somewhere; the City created this bizarre configuration. Roll Call Vote. 4 Ayes. MOTION approved on a 4-3 Vote. (Commissioners Koehnen and Stein and Chairman Stulberg voted Nay.) Chairman Stulberg commented that there are two other lots that have the same situation that perhaps should be addressed. Commissioner Thompson stated that it wouldn't be appropriate since an application has not been submitted. Chairman Stulberg commented that if the proposed two applications are unique, what's different from the others. Director Hurlburt stated that there isn't a way to revisit the plat approval without a request by the individual landowners. MOTION by Commissioner Thompson, seconded by Commissioner Stoebner to adjourn. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 12:01 a.m.