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.