Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 05-28-2002Approved Minutes Regular Council Meeting May 28, 2002 A Regular Meeting of the Plymouth City Council was called to order by Mayor Tierney at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, on May 28, 2002. COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Tierney, Councilmembers Harstad, Johnson, Black, Slavik, and Stein. ABSENT: Councilmember Hewitt. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Johnson, Assistant City Manager Ahrens, Fire Chief Kline, Finance Director Hahn, Police Chief Gerdes, Community Development Director Hurlburt, Park and Recreation Director Blank, Public Works Director Faulkner, City Attorney Knutson, City Forester Buck, Housing Manager Barnes, Transit Consultant Bentley, Sr. Planner Drill and Office Support Representative Gulbrand. Plymouth Forum Steve Gardner, 10717 10th Avenue North, expressed his concern about the loss of approximately 1,000 trees in the Glacier Vista Development. He spoke about property rights and noted a couple of areas that have stopped the developers. He indicated that Le Sueur County has ordinances about preserving their land, 40 acres per house and they have discouraged the big developments. He stated that he is interested in preventing the large developments in Plymouth in order to preserve the land and trees. He spoke about the Council meeting that was held on May 14, 2002 and the public hearing that addressed the proposed Stone Creek Village Development. He stated that 75 people had signed a petition and 30 people had spoke against the development, but the development is proceeding. He also spoke about the Plymouth water system and indicated that there is not an adequate water supply in Plymouth for all of these new developments. He stated there have been 2,500 new housing units in the last 18 months. He stated that the City has had to purchase water from Maple Grove. He also stated that his cable show is expanding into St. Paul and most of the suburbs. He would like the City of Plymouth to be known for a city that preserves beautiful forests not as the place where they cut down all of the trees. Mayor Tierney stated that the City has made many attempts to preserve trees. The City has a tree preservation ordinance and has purchased open spaces. She stated that Plymouth is not tearing down forested areas at will. The City would continue to review sensitive areas that are being developed and make sure efforts are made to save trees. She also noted that property owners have a right to develop their property, and the City doesn't have authority to control some of Mr. Gardner's issues. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 2 of 19 Mayor Tierney stated that the City of Plymouth has a reciprocal agreement with the City of Maple Grove concerning water. The City has enough water to meet the demands of the residents. Councilmember Black added that most of the counties in the State of Minnesota have a population of less than 20,000 and that Plymouth, with a 36 square mile area, has more than 66,000 residents. Plymouth is 60% to 70% larger than most of the counties in the state. Therefore, Le Sueur County is an unfair comparison. Presentations and Public Information Announcements 4.01) Announcement of "World leo Tobacco Day" Mayor Tierney proclaimed May 31 as "World No Tobacco Day." 4.02) Presentation of Winning DARE Poster Police Chief Gerdes presented the winning DARE poster that was created by Katie Hubert. He stated she was previously recognized by the Council, and the design of the poster was printed on T-shirts. 4.03) Presentation of American Spirit Garden at Parkers Lake City Forester Buck introduced Abby Glaze and several Birchview Elementary students who have constructed a garden at Parkers Lake. Abby Glaze reported their "American Spirit Garden" has been constructed as a memorial for the September 11, 2001 victims. 4.04) Announcement of "Recycling Drop Off Day" Councilmember Harstad announced that "Recycling Drop Off Day" is scheduled for Saturday, June 1, 9:00 a.m. - 3:30 p.m., at the City's Maintenance Facility. Approval of Agenda City Manager Johnson requested to add the sale of City owned property at 17825 County Road 24 as item No. 6.20 under the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Harstad requested to add a report on dandelions as item 8.3 under General Business. Motion was made by Councilmember Slavik, and seconded by Councilmember Johnson, to approve the amended agenda. With all members voting in favor, the motion carried. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 3 of 19 Consent Agenda Mayor Tierney asked if there were any additions, corrections, or deletions to be made to the Consent Agenda. Motion was made by Councilmember Black, and seconded by Councilmember Johnson, to approve the Consent Agenda which included the following items: 6.01) Regular and Special Council Meeting Minutes of May 14. 6.02) Resolution Approving Disbursements for period ending May 17, 2002 (Res2002-237). 6.03) Resolution Approving Variance to allow construction of a 26 foot by 32 foot detached garage for property located at 211 Saratoga Lane North (2002030 — Res2002-238). 6.04) Resolution Approving execution of a new Hennepin Housing Consortium Joint Cooperation Agreement '(Res2002-239). 6.05) Ordinance Amending Chapters 10 and 11 of the City Code regarding the sale of Fireworks (Ord2002-20). 6.06) Resolution Approving Variance to allow construction of a detached garage, with a front yard setback of 25 feet where 39 feet is required for property located at 840 Terraceview Lane North (2002034 — Res2002-240). 6.07) Resolution Approving Variance to allow development of an undersized lot for property located near 18t' Avenue North and Medicine Lake Boulevard (2002035- Res2002-241). 6.08) Resolution Approving Variances for sideyard setback and impervious surface coverage to allow construction of a screen porch at 2660 East Medicine Lake Boulevard (2002039 — Res2002-242). 6.09) Resolution Approving Site Plan Amendment to allow 2,240 sq. ft. building expansion related to security improvements at the Hennepin County Adult Correctional Facility located at 1145 Shenandoah Lane (2002040 — Res2002-243). 6.10) Resolution Approving Final Plat and Development Contract for Tomcar, LLC for Jordans Ridge" for Property located at 3785 Black Oaks Lane (2002004F — Res2002-244), and a Resolution Adopting Assessments for Sanitary Sewer and Watermain Area in Jordans Ridge 2019 — Res2002-245). 6.11) Resolution Approving Final Plat for "Plum Tree 8t' Addition" for 27 single family lots J located at 46th Avenue and Merrimac Lane North (2002032 — Res2002-246). Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 4 of 19 6.12) Resolution Approving Final Plat for "Silverthome 6t' Addition", for one lot located at the northwest corner of Schmidt Lake Road and Quantico Lane (2002049 — Res2002-247). 6.13) Acceptance of report on drainage issues affecting Boulder Ridge. 6.14) Resolution Approving 2001 NTD Funding Projects and Authorization for an NTD Grant Request to the Metropolitan Council (Res2002-258). 6.15) Resolution Approving Technology Upgrade for Dial -A -Ride (Res2002-248). 6.16) Resolution Awarding bid for the 2002 Seal Coat Project (Res2002-249). 6.17) Resolution Approving Change Order No. 2 for Maintenance Facility Expansion Project (8018 — Res2002-250), and a Resolution Authorizing Payment No. 11 and Final for Maintenance Facility Expansion (8018 — Res2002-251). 6.18) Resolution Authorizing of the 2002 Municipal Recycling Grant Agreement with Hennepin County (Res2002-252). 6.19) Approve Environmental Quality Committee's recommendation regarding curbside recycling collection. 6.20) Resolution Approving Purchase Agreement with Compeer Enterprises, LLC for City Owned Property at 17825 County Road 24, County Road 101 Improvement Project (9005 — Res2002-253). (Subject to fmal review by City Attorney Knutson.) Councilmember Black registered a no vote for item No. 6.08 due to the impervious surface area coverage. She thanked staff for the report on the drainage concerns at Boulder Ridge (item No. 6.13). She stated she has traditionally abstained on approving the Municipal Recycling Grant Agreement (item No. 6.18) because of a conflict of interest relating to her employment. However, there is no longer a conflict of interest, and she would support the item. Councilmember Harstad noted that the installation of GPS equipment (item No. 6.15) would allow the transit services to be more efficient. Motion carried to approve the Consent Agenda. Public Hearings There were no public hearings scheduled.) Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 5 of 19 General Business 8.1) Conditional Use Permit Amendment, Site Plan Amendment, and Lot Consolidation to allow a Parking Lot Expansion for properties located at 17205 County Road 6, 1713014th Avenue and 17140 14th Avenue. St. Philip the Deacon Lutheran Church. (2001006) Community Development Director Hurlburt reported on the history and background of the applications that had been submitted last year by St. Philip the Deacon Lutheran Church. She presented illustrations of the existing site, which included the church parking lots and two homes, as well as the surrounding area and wetlands. On March 21, 2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and unanimously voted to recommend denial of the proposal. The City Council tabled action on April 10, 2001 until May 8, 2001. On May 8, the Council postponed action on this matter to an undetermined future date. The Council conducted a special meeting on June 5, 2001 at the church. No action was taken by the City Council at that time. The applicant has extended the review period several times and the review deadline is June 6, 2002. Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that a discussion had previously occurred on constructing a parking ramp, but the church considered this not to be financially feasible. The church officials also do not plan on relocating. She recommended a modified plan for approval and presented illustrations. The modified plan would: Provide 89 new parking spaces as requested by the church. . Expand the parking on the church property toward County Road 6 without the need for any variances. Eliminate landscape islands within the parking lot. Utilize compact parking stalls (less than 10%, where 20% is allowed). Require that the two single family structures remain. Provide landscaping along the common property line with the adjacent homes. Provide that the church could use the structures as homes, for any church -related activities, or any other use allowed by the zoning ordinance. Community Development Director Hurlburt recommended that the Council adopt the resolutions approving a Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan, and Lot Consolidation, based on the revised plan. Councilmember Johnson asked if the lot consolidation were approved, would the church have one year to implement the plan or would it be effective for an indefmite time. Community Development Director Hurlburt responded that this issue is covered by the standard regulations, and they would have one year. Councilmember Stein asked if the church has commented on the revised proposal. Community Development Director Hurlburt stated the church officials received the proposal this afternoon. She believes that all of the changes proposed in the plan have been previously discussed with the applicant. In response to a question from Councilmember Slavik, Community Development Director Hurlburt stated the revised plan would give the applicant the requested 89 parking spaces without removing the two homes owned by the church on 14th Avenue. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 6 of 19 Councilmember Harstad asked if the church would need a permit to tear down the two homes. City Attorney Knutson stated that if the Council adopts the proposed resolutions, the church would not be allowed to remove the two homes. Any application to do so, would be denied by staff because it would not comply with the conditions adopted by the Council. The church would have to request an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit in order to modify the condition. Mayor Tierney stated that the church is growing and has considered purchasing land elsewhere. However, they have decided not to pursue that option at this time. Steve Bohl, 825 Brown Road South, representing St. Philip the Deacon Lutheran Church, stated that in the past year, the church has reviewed its long-term goals and conducted a strategic planning process. That work resulted in a finding that it is important for the church to remain on this property. He stated the church would continue to grow, although changes in demographics may slow the rate of growth. The church cannot afford to build a parking ramp. The cost is estimated at $2.1 million. He stated the church has been put in a position that they need to explore their property rights as a permitted use in a residential zoning district in Plymouth. He noted that the recent federal law is in their favor. Based on the merits of the application, staff originally recommended approval of the application. The proposal has evolved, partially due to the emotional reaction of the neighborhood at the Planning Commission meeting, which he believes is not correct. The application was brought to the City eight months ago, and he wants assurances that the Minnehaha Watershed Organization would still approve the revised plan. Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that staff was unable to review the revised plan with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District today. However, the church does not currently have approval of the original plan from the watershed district. She stated that based on past experience, it is likely that if the church's plan would have been approved, the revised plan could be approved because no new Variances are created. She also clarified that a church is allowed in a residential zoning district by a Conditional Use Permit — not as a permitted use. Mr. Bohl stated that a retail establishment would have greater impact on a residential neighbor than a church use does. Mayor Tierney asked Mr. Bohl to clarify the church's position on the revised plan. Mr. Bohl indicated that the church is not interested in the revised plan. He requested a vote on the original plan, noting that there would be continued growth of the church. He asked what would have happened if the church had demolished the two homes and then submitted an application for the parking lot. Mayor Tierney stated that such a discussion would be speculation. It is difficult for the City to mandate that a parking ramp be constructed, but the church had previously indicated that they were going to build it. She again asked for comments on the revised plan. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 7 of 19 Mr. Bohl responded that he objects to the conversion of parking spaces for compact car use. He also questioned the accuracy of the plan adding 89 new parking spaces. Councilmember Harstad expressed concern that the revised plan would remove any transition between the church and the residential area, making the properties difficult to sell later. He suggested that the Council consider the church's application and not discuss the staff proposal. Mayor Tierney asked for a motion. Councilmember Stein suggested hearing from everyone first in order to fairly address the issue. Councilmember Black stated that the church is a conditional use and is different than a residential structure, which is a permitted use in a residential zoning district.. She noted that she has received many un -Christian e-mails from individuals related to this issue. She is considering this issue just as any other Conditional Use Permit request and treating the church the same as any other use protruding into a residential area. Councilmember Johnson stated it is important to recognize that the City Council has not yet acted on this issue. She noted that the City Council has had numerous requests from churches relating to land use issues during her term on the Council, and she has never voted against one. Mr. Bohl challenged the three Conditional Use Permit criteria, which the Planning Commission believed were cause for denial. Pastor David Hoffinan, 16729 49th Place North, stated he has been at St. Philip the Deacon since 1985. He believes that communities are best when everyone works together. He stated that churches are needed to provide a place for people to go for safety. Approximately 1,200 families regard St. Philip the Deacon as their church home. Pastor John Hogenson, 16015 4th Avenue North, stated he has been the executive pastor at St. Philip the Deacon for the past 20 months. His role was created to assist with the growth of the church. The church has 4,360 members, with 2,300 attending Sunday worship services. There are 21 full-time staff and 20 part-time staff. The church has provided six services over three days to accommodate for the lack of parking. He spoke of the expanding ministries of the church and noted that a great church impacts lives in a positive way. St. Philip the Deacon is an active facility seven days a week. He urged the Council to vote yes on the application. Pastor Valerie Strand Patterson, 17110 14th Avenue North, explained the servant ministry programs at St. Philip the Deacon. Rob Zahn, 17140 14th Avenue North, stated that he is the Team Leader for Youth Ministry. He explained the youth activities and programs at St. Philip the Deacon. Kathy Hagedorn, Chanhassen, stated she is the Team Leader for Children's Ministry. She explained the numerous children's ministry programs. Mayor Tierney stated that the passion and service of the church is appreciated, but requested that the speakers address the issue of the revised plan, the parking lot, or the neighborhood. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 8 of 19 Attorney Ronald J. Schutz, 2800 LaSalle Plaza, Minneapolis, stated he is a member of St. Philip the Deacon Lutheran Church and an attorney with Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi. He believes that the previous speakers have addressed the issues noted by Mayor Tierney. He stated the Planning Commission recommended denial of the application based on the failure to meet three of the seven ordinance criteria. He feels a lot of regret that he is addressing the Council because it is not the church's preferred way to solve the problem. However, the church feels it has no choice. He stated that at a meeting with City Attorney Knutson last week, the City Attorney stated that the City gets sued all the time and the City has insurance. Mr. Schutz stated that he doesn't believe the City has been sued in federal court on this issue. He referenced the church's draft legal documents and noted copies are available in the room for review. City Attorney Knutson responded that he left the meeting with Mr. Schutz with a different recollection. He stated Mr. Schutz came into the meeting with draft lawsuits and indicated that this was what would occur depending on the Council's actions tonight. In response, he indicated to Mr. Schutz that the City does not respond to threats and that the Council had not made up its mind on the resulting action yet. Councilmember Stein stated he does not want to hear about the proposed lawsuit from Attorney Schutz. He would like to hear the public testimony, and in particular, information about the three Conditional Use Permit standards. Mr. Schutz stated he would like the Council to understand every detail. If the Council votes against the application, a lawsuit would be filed against the City. He does not want to file a lawsuit. Councilmember Black stated she does not like the characterization that the Council makes decisions lightly. She would like to come to a decision that is mutually positive for the church and the neighborhood. Mr. Schutz stated that the lawsuit lays out why the church believes that denial of the Conditional Use Permit would be wrong. He stated the purpose of the lawsuit was so the Council would be aware of the legal case — not to threaten a lawsuit. Councilmember Johnson stated that she did not appreciate the statements in the lawsuit which assumed the Council had made a decision when the issue had not yet been considered by the Council. Councilmember Black added that Mr. Schutz may have only intended to provide information to the Council through the proposed lawsuit, but her reaction was that it was a threat. She also objected to the inference that the City doesn't care about getting sued. Mr. Schutz stated that the lawsuit draft was a demonstration of the church's resolve. He stated the Conditional Use Permit standards are vague and ambiguous. Councilmember Harstad asked that Mr. Schutz address the. criteria regarding loss of privacy and increase in noise levels, which the Planning Commission cited as a concern. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 9 of 19 Mr. Schutz stated the standards are unconstitutional, vague, and ambiguous. There is nothing in the standards about "loss of privacy". That interpretation was made by the Planning Commission. Councilmember Slavik stated that she was shocked when she received the lawsuit, which included a presumption of the Council's action, prior to the Council making a decision on the issue. She believes it was done to intimidate and place fear in the Council. It was also unprofessional. Mr. Schutz stated it is routine practice to let people know what they are getting into. Councilmember Slavik stated that she previously worked for a very large law firm and reiterated that this action was unprofessional. Motion was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Johnson, to adopt a Resolution APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT AND SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ST. PHILIP THE DEACON LUTHERAN CHURCH FOR PROPERTY LOCATED SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 6 AND EAST OF COUNTY ROAD 101 (2002006- Res2002-254) per the revised plan presented by staff and a Resolution APPROVING LOT CONSOLIDATION FOR ST. PHILIP THE DEACON LUTHERAN CHURCH LOCATED SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 6 AND EAST OF COUNTY ROAD 101 (2001006-Res2002- 255), per the revised plan presented by staff. Jim Krantz, 17230 14th Avenue North, stated that he is opposed to both plans. He would like the neighborhood to retain its residential character. Ken Wilson stated he is opposed to the church's application and the City proposed revised plan. He stated trees would be lost, and this is the first step toward the church continuing to move into the abutting neighborhood. He also objected to an increase in traffic. Mr. Wilson stated that churches have found other solutions to parking problems, such as bussing. Robyn Van Horn, 17300 13th Avenue North, stated that she is a resident of neighborhood and a member of the church. She spoke against both plans; however, the City's revised plan would be better than the original application. She was informed by Pastor Hoffinan last year that the project would be years away, and she feels betrayed by the church leaders. She stated that 14th Avenue is currently a closed neighborhood, and this would be changed. Joe Abrahamson, 17301 14th Avenue North, stated that he doesn't mind the church as a neighbor, but does not want an expanded parking lot in the rear of the homes. He feels this will negatively impact resale values of the area homes. Mr. Abrahamson stated that the church has used threats on this issue. He suggested that the church have fundraisers to raise money for a parking deck. He requested that the Council deny the application. Cathy Bruer-Thompson, 14520 45th Place North, stated that she is a member of the church and not a resident of the neighborhood. She feels that the church's original plan would be more beautiful than the revised plan suggested by staff. The berms, fences, and plantings in the Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 10 of 19 original plan would result in a quiet and well-defined area. She believes that St. Philip the Deacon has enhanced the sense of community in this neighborhood. Karen Ploetz, 11510 62"d Avenue North, stated that the purpose of St. Philip the Deacon Church is outreach, community, and meeting the needs of a lot of people. She stated the church decided against purchasing a new organ because the church did not feel it was the best use of the funds. She indicated that the two homes were purchased for expansion purposes. The church is concerned about affordable housing. Jay Dupey, 3645 Black Oaks Lane, stated he is a member of the church. He invited the Council and the neighborhood to attend a service to learn about the church. Larry Schnack, 17210 14th Avenue North, stated that he drove past other church sites in Plymouth and feels this proposed transition would be unnatural and different than any other church. The proposal would change the character of the neighborhood. He asked if snow removal on the parcel has been considered, and requested that the Council vote against the plan. Rod Mandler, 17020 14th Avenue North, stated that he has lived in Plymouth for 30 years and is opposed to both plans. He showed pictures of the view from the rear of the properties and noted that the current tree line provides a buffer between the homes and County Road 6. The trees provide a sound and sight barrier, and these trees would all be removed under the plan. He urged the Council to vote- against the plan. Alex Koukhtanoff, 17211 14th Avenue North, stated that this neighborhood is under threat, and he opposes both plans. He believes the church has displayed a callous and inflexible attitude by threatening legal action. He stated the church would not stop. He asked the Council to send the message that families and neighborhoods are more important than parking lots. Scott Qualle, 17030 13th Avenue North, thanked the Council for their attention and the staff for their counter -proposal. He expressed disappointment that the church has taken an "all or nothing" approach on the issue. He stated the church is a valuable asset in the community, and the church has choices. The church can hold more services, rent space elsewhere, or shuttle members, but the church should not infruige on the rights of its neighbors. Mr. Qualle stated that the church has chosen to purchase homes and threaten litigation, rather than work to find other alternatives. He noted that the City approved the plan for a parking deck at the church in the early 1990s. Two property owners have been shown plans that their homes are slated for acquisition by the church. He stated that the church now owns two lots in the neighborhood, perhaps valued at $500,000. The church can afford to consider other alternatives. Mr. Qualle also suggested that a capital campaign could easily be accomplished to pay for a parking ramp on the site. He opposes both plans, but the City's alternative is better than the original proposal. Cathy Porter, 17211 14th Avenue North, she stated that she is a resident of the neighborhood and is strongly opposed to the original proposal. The alternative plan proposed by the City is better, but it still intrudes into the neighborhood. She is, disappointed that the church is still aggressively pursuing its original plan, rather than working with the neighborhood to consider alternative options. She suggested that a pedestrian walkway from Oakwood School to the church site would add value to community. r—) Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 11 of 19 Community Development Director Hurlburt responded that a pedestrian bridge would be difficult at this location, and existing parking would be lost in order to built it. Mid -block crossings are discouraged on county roads, and the use would also be questionable for the significant cost. Mayor Tierney stated that all speakers have had an opportunity to address the Council. She called a 10 -minute break. Mayor Tierney stated that she supports the motion to approve the staff's suggested alternative plan because she believes that the church has demonstrated a need for more parking. She believes the alternate plan is the best approach for the neighborhood and meets the number of spaces needed by the church. Councilmember Harstad suggested that the Council consider the three criteria that were of concern to the Planning Commission and which were the basis for the recommendation of denial: 1. Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. 2. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use permit will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. 3. The conditional use permit will be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the iimmediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that the motion before the Council would approve the Conditional Use Permit and Lot Consolidation, as shown on the revised plan proposed by staff. Councilmember Harstad stated that he doesn't believe the original plan would increase loss of privacy or quietness. The two homes would be removed, thus reducing traffic on 14th Avenue. Screening and additional berming would be in place, and the character of the neighborhood would not be changed. He stated that quality of life is a subjective issue, and the presence of churches in other neighborhoods have not caused property values to decline. He expressed concern that the church will not have an incentive to maintain the two homes under the revised plan. He stated the original plan would enhance safety, and the Council should act on the original application. Motion to amend was made by Councilmember Harstad to delete condition 3 of the resolution which requires that the two homes be retained. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Johnson noted that the revised plan provides the 89 parking spaces requested by the church and with less impact on the neighborhood. She stated that many elements of the revised plan were discussed with the church in June, 2001. She views the revised plan as a compromise. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 12 of 19 1 Councilmember Slavik stated that the presentation made by the members of St. Philip the Deacon was very good. She noted that the revised plan provides the 89 parking spaces requested by the church. She believes that there is adequate parking available across the street, but it is not as convenient. She stated that removing two homes as a matter of convenience does not make sense. She does not believe that the berming and landscaping outlined in the original plan would be effective, and she believes that noise problems would result from snow plowing operations on the site. She believes residents are primarily concerned about every day quality of life issues. Councilmember Stein stated this is not a religious issue, and it is not about the good deeds of the church. It is a land use issue, and the Council has considered it as such. It is no different than any other Conditional Use Permit request in a residential neighborhood. He expressed disbelief at the tactics used by the church on this issue and stated the threat of a lawsuit was unfortunate. The parking lot issue goes back at least 21 years. The church was built in the 1960s, then the parking lots expansions occurred in 1981 and 1986. The addition to the church was later approved, along with the parking deck. The church later requested that the parking deck be deleted from the plan. In its application, the church indicated that funding would be pursued for the added parking. Councilmember Stein stated that the plan would enhance the public welfare of the church, but not necessarily of the neighborhood. He questions whether the abutting homeowners on 14t' Avenue will be inclined to improve their property since it will be next to a parking lot. He stated that the Conditional Use Permit standards are vague so that they can be appropriately interpreted. The courts recognize that the City Council is not comprised of attorneys. Councils are expected to use best judgment. Councilmember Stein stated that the revised plan is a good compromise; however, the church doesn't want it. He believes that parking spaces for compact vehicles would be used, but he is not sure that 89 spaces are adequate. The church could purchase many more homes in the future. He is not aware of any other church.site with a similar arrangement, where parking expands as a wedge into a residential neighborhood. He stated this could destroy the character of the existing neighborhood. If this were a retail establishment or an office building that wanted to expand, he would not allow the growth on the site. The church is doing wonderful things, but he doesn't believe that is a material factor in this decision. Councilmember Johnson asked if there would be additional steps in this process. Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that no further approvals would be required by the Planning Commission or the City Council. If the application is approved, the applicant can proceed to apply for a building permit, assuming they meet all of the conditions in the resolution. Councilmember Johnson stated that anyone has the right to purchase homes in the City, including the church. She believes the Council should deal with the proposed plans and deal with other issues of anticipated future church expansion in the future. The revised plan provides the church the number of parking spaces requested. Mayor Tierney commented that this is a long-term problem. St. Philip the Deacon Church had considered whether to identify a new location years ago. The church will need to address its long-term growth issue. She supports the revised plan as an interim step toward providing Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 13 of 19 additional parking, and the church will need to consider options for additional parking in the future. The revised plan meets the current parking need and addresses the concerns of the neighborhood such as noise and transition. Councilmember Harstad stated that it is inevitable that the two homes owned by the church will need to be removed, and he does not support the requirement that the homes remain. He stated the 89 parking spaces will not fully accommodate the needs of the church, and he is concerned about the impact on the residents of the two homes due to the parking lot abutting the rear yards. Councilmember Johnson stated that while she appreciates the possible negative impact of the parking lots on the two homes, the other existing homes in the neighborhood should be given the same consideration. The revised plan provides a buffer for the neighborhood. She stated the church has the right to return with an additional request in the future. Councilmember Black stated she feels very bad for this neighborhood. She believes the church's requested plan would be detrimental to the neighborhood. The City has worked hard to try to accommodate the needs of churches in the community. She believes that the staff proposal is the best compromise because it will give the church the needed parking spaces, yet preserves the character of the neighborhood to the extent possible. Councilmember Slavik stated she doesn't like the original or revised plans. She believes the church has adequate parking, and she would be devastated if she resided in this neighborhood. She noted that if the Council denies the request, the church will tear down the homes. She also does not appreciate that the Council was intimidated or threatened by a lawsuit. She feels she has little choice but to approve the request but believes that the City could be ruining a neighborhood. Councilmember Johnson stated that she hasn't felt intimidated or threatened on this issue. The Council has done its job, and this has been emotional for people on all sides of the issue. She is comfortable with the revised plan because many of the elements reflect discussions held with the church last summer. Councilmember Johnson asked if the church would have to meet the lighting ordinance and whether it may be possible for the portion of the parking lot nearest to 14th Avenue to be chained off during times when the church is least busy. Community Development Director Hurlburt responded that the plan would have to meet the lighting ordinance. It would be difficult to chain off the parking lot near 14th Avenue since it is nearer to the church structure than some of the other parking on the lot. Pastor Hoffinan stated that the requirement to retain the homes is a concern to the church, particularly since one of the homes is not in good condition. Councilmember Harstad asked if the church would buy more homes. Pastor Hoffinan responded yes. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 14 of 19 i Councilmember Stein stated that he does not want to force a compromise that the church doesn't want. He doesn't believe that the church's proposal meets the conditional use permit standards and would be injurious to the residential neighborhood. He is concerned that a precedent has been set to allow the parking lot to continue to expand. The church's success has caused the parking problem, and the neighbors should not suffer for it. There may some other things the church could do to accommodate its growth. Motion was made by Councilmember Black, seconded by Councilmember Slavik, to call the question. Motion carried, six ay Vote on the motion to approve the conditional use permit amendment and the lot consolidation based on the revised plan carried; Johnson, Black, Slavik, and Tierney ayes; Stein and Harstad P Mayor Tierney called a ten minute break. 8.2a) Rezoning of the northerly 5.1 acres from RSF-2 (Single Family Detached 2) to RSF-4 Single and Two Family), and Preliminary Plat to allow 14 twinhome units and 8 single- family detached homes for "Sunrise Estates" on the 18.65 acre site located south of 34th Avenue and east of Pilgrim Lane. ZB Construction, Inc. (2002012) 8.2b) Approve Certificate of Exemption, Wetland Conservation Act, Sunrise Estates 20022) Community Development Director Hurlburt reported on the proposed rezoning of a portion of the 18.7 acre site located between 34th Avenue and Sunrise Park west of the Plymouth Oaks Apartments and east of single-family homes on Pilgrim Lane. She provided illustrations of the existing zoning and the requested zoning and explained that the applicant is proposing to rezone the northern 5.11 acres from RSF-2 to RSF-4. The remainder of the site is not proposed for rezoning, but is proposed for a preliminary plat. She stated that there have been several proposals over the last 21/2 years and all have been withdrawn by the applicant, Zachman Homes, prior to the City's action. In February, 2000 the applicant submitted the first proposal to 1) rezone the entire site from RSF-2 to RSF-4, and 2) plat the site with 40 lots for 40 twinhome units. The next version of the plan that was reviewed in July 2000, and it consisted of a combination of twinhomes and single-family detached units. There were 14 twinhome units and 19 single- family detached units for a total of 33 lots. She indicated that all of the site would have been rezoned. This differed quite a bit from the original plan in that the public street ended in a cul- de-sac, with a private drive connecting another public street, which extended from the north through the central portion of the site. The one thing in common to all plans were the twinhomes on 34th Avenue. The council reviewed a third proposal in January 2001 where some of the concepts had continued from the last plan. This proposal was for 10 twinhome units and 18 single-family detached units. This plan only proposed the northerly portion of the site for rezoning. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 15 of 19 She indicated that each of these plans had varying impacts on the wetlands on the site. She illustrated the current proposal of 14 twinhomes and eight single-family detached units. This spring the wetland delineation has been reverified, which was an item that the Planning Commission had recommended to be addressed. She discussed the areas of wetland fill that are being proposed and are being asked to be exempted from the requirements of the wetland act. She stated that the history of the site indicates that these were ditches that were man-made and connected the wetland bodies on the site. She explained the new plan revisions had twinhomes on 34th Avenue and the public cul-de-sac would be extended on 31St Avenue to serve eight single-family home lots. Community Development Director Hurlburt explained the differences between the applicant's earlier proposal and the current proposal. She stated that the number of units decreased from 40 to 22 units. She stated the applicant is under the minimum of the density for this site based on the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed wetland fills earlier plans had 8,185 sq. ft. and this plan has 3,805 sq. ft. She also stated that the tree inches to be preserved are currently at 60.2%. The tree inventory has been redone, and the applicant is still meeting the City's requirements of at least half of the caliper inches significant trees needs to be preserved or there needs to be restitution. The main difference is the length of public streets with the first plan at 90 feet and the current proposal at 500 feet. The private drives have been reduced from 1,500 feet to 0 feet. A Planning Commission public hearing was held on March 20, 2002 'and had recommended approval. There was some public testimony expressing their concerns relating to the public trail that is going through the site, which is a requirement of the Comprehensive Plan. Also addressed at the meeting was concern about the wetland data and the tree survey. She stated that the Planning Commission is recommending approval of this proposed plan. Councilmember Johnson acknowledged that there have been improvements made from the original plan to the proposed plan, which include the length of the private drives and the public streets, and the decrease in the number of units. She voiced her concerns with the proposed trail and stated she is not in support of the trail. She feels trail access is needed off of the southern end of the development to get to the park. Mayor Tierney asked if the staff has reviewed the possibilities of a boardwalk. Park and Recreation Director Blank stated that they have not looked at this option. Community Development Director Hurlburt reported on the existing trail access to the park. A discussion was held on the existing access and the proposed trail. She also discussed the amount of traffic on Pilgrim Lane and the need to eliminate pedestrian traffic off of the street. Councilmember Harstad asked about space on the illustration and asked if this was landlocked. Community Development Director Hurlburt stated this is land owned by the Plymouth Oaks Apartments. Councilmember Harstad asked what the plans were for this space, and Community Development Director stated that there are none. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 16 of 19 Arnie Zachman, 4737 East Coventry Road, Minnetonka, stated they utilized a different engineering firm to get a fresh look at the development. He indicated that the 14 twinhomes would have direct driveway access onto 34th Avenue and the eight single family homes would be connected to 31St Avenue via the proposed Nathan Lane cul-de-sac. The 14 twinhomes would be rambler walkouts with concrete driveways, brick fronts, dormers above the garage area, and would provide maintenance -free living. He stated that the development would have eight non - association single family homes that would be custom built. The price range for those units would be $400,000 to $500,000. He spoke about the sediment ponds and that the water would be treated before going into the wetlands. Councilmember Johnson has asked if the trail could be altered on the south end. Mr. Zachman stated that he would need to confirm this with the engineer. He also stated that the lots are oversized and since the houses are customized, trees would be saved. Emma Becker, 9885 31St Avenue North, stated that their house is the first home on 31St Avenue adjacent to the wetland area. Her concern is the proposed location of the trail and the loss of privacy they would experience, since they have numerous windows on the east side of their home. She had asked if they would consider other options for the location of the trail. Jay Duggan, 3320 Pilgrim Lane, stated his house is located west of the proposed site and the second house south of 34th Avenue. He expressed his concern with the walking path and felt that they would lose trees and wildlife. He also stated that he felt as taxpayers, they would be responsible for the maintenance of this project. He stated that Pilgrim Lane currently accommodates the traffic, there is no overnight parking allowed, and the neighbors use this street for walking. He stated that the neighbor on the corner would have the walking path, streets on two sides, and public parking would be allowed. They have a neighborhood association that does not allow fences to be built. He voiced his opposition to the proposed trail. Marilyn Stalheim, 3210 Pilgrim, stated that she is concerned about the quality of life for herself, grandchildren, neighbors, and their children. She is opposed to the proposed plan and stated that the walking path is a concern. She enjoys the trees, wetland and wildlife that currently exist. John Baranauskas, 3250 Pilgrim Lane, stated that he disagrees with the Planning Commission's decision regarding the incidental wetlands. He stated that he viewed the tape where City Engineer Quanbeck spoke about the exemption areas and how the storm sewers at the north end and the ditch caused the wetlands to occur. He explained the history of the ditch and stated that this was always a wetland area. He stated if it is not incidental, it is not exempt and the avoidance statute applies. Councilmember Johnson stated there are items 8.2a and 8.2b on the agenda and one is conditioned upon the other. Therefore, she asked if the order should be reversed. Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that she does not feel the order of the items is an issue. She stated a motion to approve that they could be moved at the same time. Jon Bolen, 3260 North Pilgrim, had presented an illustration of the benefits between the developer and the City and stated that the proposed development had a negative impact on the residents. He addressed the following items: wildlife, traffic, property values, down stream Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 17 of 19 effects, tax base, tree removal, and the walking path. He stated that he doesn't feel that the tree inventory has been completed. He stated that there would be increased usage of the walking path and suggested that the street be striped. He stated that he personally does not want this developed. Arlowe Becker, 9885 31St Avenue North, stated he is concerned about the trail location and the water drainage from the proposed plan. He stated the elevation on the east side of their home is at 949' and the lowest street elevation of the proposed plan is 950'. He feels that there would be an unintended settling pond outside of their windows. He suggested to have a retaining wall constructed. He addressed his concerns with the proposed trail and the settling ponds. Mayor Tierney asked if there is an official wetland on the site. Public Works Director Faulkner reported on the wetland report that was prepared by the developer's wetland consultant and reviewed by the City's Water Resource Engineer, and they determined the three ditch areas would be exempt because they were created and are not wetlands. Councilmember Johnson asked if Pilgrim Lane could be striped for on -road trails. Public Works Director Faulkner replied that this is possible. Councilmember Stein commented that Pilgrim Lane is a very busy street. Councilmember Johnson asked if the purpose of the trail would be to have pedestrians come off J of Pilgrim Lane. Park and Recreation Director Blank replied that some people would find the interior trail more useful and others would continue to use Pilgrim Lane since it would be the shorter distance. He indicated that most people would like to have a trail for recreational enjoyment. Councilmember Johnson stated that she would not support the trail on the proposed site. She suggested that the trail be relocated away from the existing homes, and Pilgrim Lane should be striped. Councilmember Black asked about the design of storm water ponds and what the retention period is. Public Works Director Faulkner replied that there is a 24-hour retention time for a five-year storm event, which would equate to two inches. Dan Parks, 2630 Zanzibar Lane, stated that he is the primary designer on the project and a civil engineer with MFRA. He reported on the two ponds and explained how the water would flow under the proposed plan. He indicated that the pond meets Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's standards. Councilmember Black asked how water levels would be adjusted and where the outlets would be located. Mr. Parks explained how the system operates based on the fact the wetland rises and falls, and it is discharged out of the ditch to the southern wetland. He stated that they would fill in the ditch that would in effect create two separate basins. He then reported on how the water would flow between the wetlands. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 18 of 19 Councilmember Stein asked if it was possible to redo the southerly retention pond so a trail access between the two new houses could be provided to Sunrise Park. Park and Recreation Director Blank replied that if the City allowed the applicant to reconfigure the pond, then the trail could go through there. A discussion took place on the pond options and the trail location. Mayor Tierney stated that 31St Avenue would need access to the park, but she has concerns of the advantage of running the trail from the cul-de-sac up to 34th Avenue. She would like to know how much is being taken out for the pathway. Mr. Parks stated that the initial plan allowed for the pathway to be eight feet. He also stated that with respect to the trail location, there are issues because of the steep slopes. He stated that the houses meet the buffers and they have some sloping issues going to the wetlands. They have a minimal amount of trees that would be removed. Councilmember Stein asked Park and Recreation Director Blank if he has had requests from residents south of the park requesting a trail to Pilgrim Lane. Park and Recreation Director Blank replied no. Councilmember Stein stated that he supports striping Pilgrim Lane. Mayor Tierney stated that Pilgrim Lane needs to be restructured and felt that striping could help with the safety issues on the road. Motion was made by Councilmember Black, and seconded by Councilmember Johnson, to approve the Certificate of Exemption of the Wetland Conservation Act for this project (20022). With all members voting in favor, the motion carried. Motion was made by Councilmember Black, and seconded by Mavor Tiernev, to adopt an Ordinance Amending Chapter 21 of the City Code to classify certain land located south of 34th Avenue and east of Pilgrim Lane (2002012 -- Ord2002-21), and a Resolution Approving Findines of Fact for Rezoning of Pronertv located south of 34th Avenue and east of Pilarim Lane North (2002012 — Res2002-256). With all members voting in favor, the motion carried. Motion was made by Councilmember Black, and seconded by Councilmember Johnson, to adopt a Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plat for ZB Construction, Inc. for Sunrise Estates for Property located south of 34th Avenue and east of Pilgrim Lane (2002012 — Res2002-257). Motion was made by Councilmember Johnson, and seconded by Councilmember Stein, to amend the main motion to remove the segment of trail locatednorth of 31St Avenue and south of 34th Avenue. In addition, the segment of trail located south of 31St Avenue shall be located between proposed Lots 1 and 2 if it is feasible (if necessary, the developer may place a portion of the southernmost water quality pond on the adjoining City land to help accomplish the relocation of the trail). If relocation of the trail is not feasible, the developer shall install a six-foot high screen fence and plantings on the west side of the trail, together with any necessary retaining walls to maintain drainage, for the existing home located at 9885 -31St Avenue. The applicant shall i provide the City with an easement for the trail. The amendment was approved with Johnson, Stein, Slavik and Tierney yes, and Black and Harstad voting no. Approved Council Minutes Regular Meeting of May 28, 2002 Page 19 of 19 The Council voted on the amended main motion and with all members voting in favor, the motion carried. 8.3) Report on Dandelions There was no discussion on this item. Reports and Staff Recommendations There were no Reports and Staff Recommendations. Adiournment Motion was made by Councilmember Stein, and seconded by Councilmember Slavik, to adjourn the meeting at 12:20 a.m. With all members voting in favor, the motion carried. Sue M. Gulbran, Office Support Representative