HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 01-03-1994MINUTES
REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING
JANUARY 3, 1994
Mayor -Elect Tierney announced that under the provisions of the Plymouth City Charter,
this is the first Council meeting at which the new seven -member City Council will take
office.
City Clerk Rauenhorst administered the Oaths of Office to Mayor Joy Tierney, Ward 1
Councilmember David Anderson, Ward 3 Councilmember Nicholas Granath, At -Large
Councilmember Chuck Lymangood, and At -Large Councilmember Carole Helliwell.
The regular meeting of the Plymouth City Council was called to order by Mayor Tierney
at 7:08 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City Center, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, on
January 3, 1994.
PRESENT: Mayor Tierney, Councilmembers Anderson, Lymangood, Helliwell,
Granath, and Edson
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Johnson, Assistant City Manager Lueckert, Park
Director Blank, Public Works Director Moore, Community
Development Director Hurlburt, Public Safety Director Gerdes,
Finance Director Hahn, City Attorney Barnard, and City Clerk
Rauenhorst
ITEM 4 SPECIAL RESOLUTION - PRO -PLYMOUTH PLEDGE
City Manager Johnson stated that during the Council orientation sessions in
December, the new City Council proposed to develop a Pro -Plymouth Pledge
which would be acknowledged by all Councilmembers and the staff. He stated the
pledge has undergone several revisions; however, the essence of the pledge
remains the same: A commitment to ethical actions and behavior, to mutual
servility and respect, to a focus on the present and future, not the past, and to
recognizing the partnership of the City Council with the citizens of Plymouth.
Councilmember Anderson stated that he believes the new City Council was elected
by residents who are tired of bickering among Councilmembers and the negative
perception of the Council. He stated that he and Councilmember Lymangood met
and developed the proposed pledge for consideration by the entire Council.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 2
MOTION was made by Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember
Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-1 APPROVING THE PRO -
PLYMOUTH PLEDGE.
MOTION to amend the main motion was made by Councilmember Anderson,
seconded by Councilmember Granath, to replace Subdivision 2 of the pledge with
the following language, "to focus on the present and future needs of the City, using
the past only if it can enlighten the present in a positive manner," and to add the
following language to Subdivision 3, "we expressly agree not to write letters to the
editor of any publication, nor issue personal press releases."
Councilmember Anderson stated that at times in the past, Councibnembers have
discussed issues through the newspaper and outside of the Council Chambers. He
believes this is inappropriate, and this amendment to the pledge would accomplish
the intent of the Council not to engage in negative press releases or discussion of
issues outside of the Council Chambers.
Mayor Tierney spoke against the proposed amendment relating to press releases.
She stated that she believes residents expect Councilmembers to speak out on
issues and be vocal. She stated that at times it may be appropriate to issue press
releases, however, she strongly supports Councilmembers exercising judicious
restraint when making public pronouncements. She believes that the proposed
amendment would unduly restrict Councilmembers' ability to communicate with
the public.
Councilmember Helliwell stated she supports the pledge, with the exception of the
proposed amendment to prohibit writing letters to the editor and issuing personal
press releases. She stated that she has rarely done this as a Councilmember,
however, she believes it would take away freedom of speech for Councilmembers.
Councilmember Edson stated he would not support adding the provision to
expressly prohibit Councilmembers from writing letters to the editor or issuing
press releases. He believes this would unduly restrict Councilmembers' ability to
communicate with the public. He stated it is important that the pledge be adopted
by all Councilmembers, and he would support the language proposed in a previous
draft.
Councilmember Lymangood stated that he supports the fust proposed amendment
to clarify Subdivision 2 of the pledge. However, he agrees that prohibiting letters
to the editor by Councilmembers may be going too far.
MOTION for division of the vote was made by Councilmember Helliwell,
seconded by Councilmember Lymangood.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 3
Motion carried, six ayes.
Motion carried on the first proposed amendment to Subdivision 2 of the Plymouth
Pledge, six ayes.
Motion failed on the second proposed amendment to Subdivision 3 of the pledge;
Anderson and Granath ayes; Helliwell, Edson, Lymangood, and Tierney nays.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember
Edson, to amend the main motion to replace Subdivision 3 of the pledge with the
following language: "To exercise judicious restraint when making public
pronouncements, whether written or oral, in ways that affirm and respect fellow
City Councilmembers, staff, and the citizens, and to share such communications
with fellow Councilmembers and staff in advance whenever possible."
Motion to amend carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Mayor Tierney,
to replace the second sentence of the pledge to read, "We believe that the public
trust requires mutual trust among ourselves in order to succeed."
Motion to amend carried, six ayes.
Main motion carried as amended three times, six ayes.
ITEM 5 APPROVE AGENDA
MOTION was made by Councilmember Granath, seconded by Councilmember
Edson, to approve the agenda.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6 CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to approve the Consent Agenda.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6-A APPROVE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to approve the City Council minutes of the October 18, 1994 Regular
Council Meeting, November 15, 1993 Study Session, November 15, 1993 Regular
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 4
Council Meeting, November 17, 1993 Special Council Meeting, November 22,
1993 Study Session, and December 13, 1993 Special Council Meeting.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6-B APPROVE DISBURSEMENTS
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-2 APPROVING
DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDING DECEMBER 23, 1993.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6-C ORDER STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-3 . DECLARING ADEQUACY
OF PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF REPORT, STREET
LIGHTING - PARKERS LAKE NORTH 2ND ADDITION
SHENANDOAH LANE).
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-4 RECEIVING REPORT AND
ORDERING PROJECT, STREET LIGHTING - PARKERS LAKE NORTH
2ND ADDITION (SHENANDOAH LANE).
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-5 DECLARING ADEQUACY
OF PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF REPORT, STREET
LIGHTING - PARKERS LAKE NORTH 9TH ADDITION.
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-6 RECEIVING REPORT AND
ORDERING PROJECT, STREET LIGHTING - PARKERS LAKE NORTH
9TH ADDITION.
Motion carried, six ayes.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 5
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-7 DECLARING ADEQUACY
OF PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF REPORT, STREET
LIGHTING - PARKERS LAKE NORTH 10TH ADDITION.
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-8 RECEIVING REPORT AND
ORDERING PROJECT, STREET LIGHTING - PARKERS LAKE NORTH
10TH ADDITION.
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-9 DECLARING ADEQUACY
OF PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF REPORT, STREET
LIGHTING - BASS LAKE BOTTLE SHOP.
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-10 RECEIVING REPORT
AND ORDERING PROJECT, STREET LIGHTING - BASS LAKE
BOTTLE SHOP.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6-1) DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT BOND REDUCTIONS
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-I1 REDUCING
DEVELOPMENT BOND - BOULDER RIDGE 2ND ADDITION (91010).
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-12 REDUCING
DEVELOPMENT BOND - WESTBRANCH ADDITION FKA PLYMOUTH
CREEK HEIGHTS ADDITION (92115).
Motion carried, six ayes.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 6
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-13 REDUCING
DEVELOPMENT BOND - PARKERS LAKE NORTH 10TH ADDITION
93067).
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-14 REDUCING
DEVELOPMENT BOND - EAGLEWOOD ADDITION (92110).
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6-E 1994 MUNICIPAL RECYCLING GRANT APPLICATION
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-15 AUTHORIZING THE
CITY OF PLYMOUTH TO SUBMIT THE 1994 MUNICIPAL
RECYCLING GRANT APPLICATION.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6-F RELEASE OF SITE IMPROVEMENT PERFORMANCE
AGREEMENT (92051)
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-16 AUTHORIZING
RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR NORTHERN
STATES POWER FOR PROPERTY LOCATED NORTH OF MEDINA
ROAD ON EAST SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD 101, SOUTH OF
HIGHWAY 55 (92051).
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6-G RELEASE OF TREE PRESERVATION GUARANTEES
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-17 AUTHORIZING
RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR TREE
PRESERVATION FOR PLYMOUTH CREEK HEIGHTS FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF
DUNKIRK LANE AND OLD ROCKFORD ROAD (92115).
Motion carried, six ayes.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 7
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-18 AUTHORIZING
RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR TREE
PRESERVATION FOR AUTUMN HILLS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
NORTHWEST OF 46TH AVENUE NORTH AND VICKSBURG LANE
92060).
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-19 AUTHORIZING
RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR TREE
PRESERVATION FOR PLYMOUTH OAKS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF FERNBROOK LANE AND
ROCKFORD ROAD (93078).
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6-H SET ASSESSMENT HEARING FOR 1993 WEED ERADICATION
AND DESTRUCTION. ROLL 2
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-20 DECLARING COST TO
BE ASSESSED AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED
ASSESSMENT FOR 1993 WEED ERADICATION AND DESTRUCTION,
ROLL 2.
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-21 FOR PUBLIC HEARING
ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT, 1993 WEED ERADICATION AND
DESTRUCTION, ROLL 2.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 6-I UNITED AUTO EXCHANGE - REQUEST TO CONSIDER ZONING
ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to direct the Planning Commission to develop and hold public
hearings on zoning ordinance amendments that would allow the City to consider
the issuance of permits for the proposed United Auto Exchange, a business
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 8
proposing to locate on the former site of the Minneapolis Auto Auction, 1135
Nathan Lane.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 64 BANNER ENGINEERING CORPORATION - SITE PLAN AND
VARIANCES FOR PROPERTY AT 9714 10TH AVENUE NORTH (93126)
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-22 APPROVING SITE PLAN
AND VARIANCES FOR BANNER ENGINEERING CORPORATION FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 9714 10TH AVENUE NORTH (93126).
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 8-A REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY ON APPLICATION OF
CARLSON COMPANY FOR SAM'S CLUB
City Attorney Barnard explained that the application of Carlson Companies for
rezoning and guide plan amendment was on the December 6 agenda. A motion
was made to deny the application, but it failed to pass. No further action was
taken on the application at that meeting. On December 20, the matter was placed
on the agenda as a clarification of the action taken on December 6. Notice of the
meeting and the agenda was posted and the City called the property owners that
had appeared at the prior meeting and notified them that the matter would be
considered on December 20. At the December 20 meeting, a motion was made to
approve the rezoning and guide plan amendment and it passed by the required
two-thirds of the Council. Some neighboring property owners have objected to
the approval process. They have asked whether the notice of the consideration of
the matter at the December 20 meeting was legal and adequate, and if it was
procedurally improper for the Council to vote on the matter on December 20 when
it was listed on the agenda as a clarification. They have also asked what are the
super majority requirements of the new Council.
Attorney Barnard stated the notice of the item on the December 20 agenda was
legal and adequate. Both the rezoning and reguiding had previously been the
subject of public hearings, and it is not unusual for a City Council to not decide an
issue at the first meeting considered. He believes it was proper for the Council to
vote on the matter on December 20 when it was listed on the agenda as a
clarification. He stated it is possible that the Council could rescind a previous
action; however, it is complicated with a rezoning issue. It is his opinion that in
order to rescind the previous action, the Council should refer the matter to the
Planning Commission to begin the hearing process over again. The matter would
proceed as another rezoning action.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 9
Attorney Barnard addressed the question of the super majority requirement for the
new City Council. He stated that a required 2/3 vote of the current six member
City Council would be four votes. Once the Ward 2 seat is appointed and a
Council of seven is seated, five votes would be needed for a 2/3 requirement.
In response to a question by Councilmember Granath regarding the voting
requirement, Attorney Barnard stated that the state law 2/3 voting requirement
supercedes the City Code voting requirement, and therefore, a 5/7 vote for a seven
member Council is needed.
Councilmember Lymangood stated this issue is again being discussed because
procedures used by the Council on December 6 and 20 may not have been as clear
as this Council would expect. He asked if there are any potential liabilities the City
could face by referring the issue to the Planning Commission to begin a new public
hearing process to consider rescinding the rezoning and reguiding actions taken by
the Council on December 20. He specifically asked if the developer had vested
rights based on the December 20 actions.
Attorney Barnard stated the developer could file a suit for damages, if any,
suffered between December 20 and January 3, if the action is changed. He stated
that if the Council refers this issue to the Planning Commission, the City would put
the developer on notice that Plymouth is reconsidering this matter so that any
further action or expense on the project would be at the developer's risk until the
issue is decided.
Councilmember Lymangood stated he favors referring the matter back to the
Planning Commission.
Mayor Tierney stated that one of the conditions for approval in the December 20
reguiding is that it would have to go to the Metropolitan Council for their review
and approval. She stated she would like to closely look at the impact of the
proposed covenants before it goes to the Metropolitan Council. She previously
thought the Metropolitan Council would review the covenant as part of the
process, but she has learned they will not.
Councilmember Edson stated the Attorney's memorandum discussed the process of
sending this issue back to the Planning Commission for public hearing as being
similar to another rezoning application. He asked if the Council would have to
have appropriate reasons if the zoning was changed following the new public
hearing process.
Attorney Barnard stated "yes".
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 10
Councilmember Granath stated that a motion to reconsider the matter would only
be appropriate on the day of the Council action. Now a full public hearing process
is required if the Council wishes to further consider the matter so that all parties
are afforded due process.
Attorney Barnard stated it requires a majority vote of the Council to refer the item
to the Planning Commission for consideration of the possibility of rescinding the
action taken on December 20. A super majority vote of the Council would be
required if the Council ultimately decided to rescind its previous action following
the hearing.
Councilmember Helliwell stated she did not support the rezoning/reguiding on
December 20 and will support referring it to the Planning Commission. She does
not believe the residents were given an adequate opportunity to speak to the issue
on December 20. She thought the December 20 agenda item was to be only a
clarification of what action had been taken on December 6; instead it became a
reconsideration of the issue.
Councilmember Anderson concurred with her comments and stated he has been
contacted by residents who thought the same thing.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to refer to the Planning Commission the question of whether the
rezoning and reguiding actions taken by the Council on December 20 for Carlson
Company should be rescinded.
Linda Fisher, attorney representing Carlson Company, stated her review of the
record is that a zoning ordinance amendment was adopted on December 20. The
applicant is proceeding on the basis of that action. She stated that about 10
months of consideration of the matter had occurred, and that the action taken on
December 20 should stand. She stated they would like the action taken by the
Council to be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council for review as required by
state law.
Councilmember Helliwell asked if Carlson Company had considered constructing
the Sam's Club on the other side of I-494 where appropriate zoning already exists
and a rezoning would not be necessary.
Ms. Fisher stated they would like to defer that question to the process. She stated
that in looking at the site, they determined there would not be sufficient room on
the portion of the site zoned B-2 for a Walmart or a Sam's Club, and they would
be unable to meet the City Code requirements for parking on that site. The site
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 11
also has wetland constraints, and the same building square footage could not be
proposed on the site.
Dan Blomker, 205 Zinnia Lane North, stated that area residents may also suffer
damages due to the action of the Council.
Richard Steward, 13910 Knollway Drive, Minnetonka, stated the Council's actions
on this matter will impact the Knollway, Northridge, and Southridge areas in
Minnetonka. He stated these areas are directly affected by traffic and water
drainage from this site. He asked what the zoning status of the site will be if the
issue is referred to the Planning Commission.
Attorney Barnard stated the zoning will remain B-2 as approved on December 20
unless the Council rescinds that action in the future following the public hearing
process.
Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that, if so directed, the Planning
Commission would be conducting a public hearing on an action to rezone the
property from B-2 to I-1, as well as to return the comprehensive plan designation
to what existed before the December 20 action.
Attorney Barnard stated it is his opinion that the Council cannot vote to rescind
those actions tonight because of the public hearing requirements. If desired, the
Council could refer the matter to the Planning Commission to conduct a public
hearing to consider rescission of the zoning action.
Councilmember Helliwell stated that whatever funding the developer has put into
the project from December 20 to January 3 could possibly be claimed through a
court action; however, the City should not be held liable for anything expended
before December 20 or after January 3.
Attorney Barnard stated that a claim for damages, if any, would be the strongest
for the developer between December 20 and January 3. He stated the
Metropolitan Council has not considered the reguiding, so there may be no claimed
damages.
Ms. Fisher stated that on December 20 the Council adopted an ordinance rezoning
the property. She stated that was the final legislative action on the rezoning the
City would take. She stated that this referral to the Planning Commission is
subject to state law, due process public notice requirements that would be required
of any zoning matter. Ms. Fisher stated it is their position that the action that
would be noticed and considered by the Planning Commission and Council would
be a rezoning from B-2 to I-1, and the super majority requirements applicable to
zoning ordinance amendments would apply. She stated that they believe the only
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 12
way this issue can go back through the process is that the matter to be considered
would be a rezoning and reguiding of the property.
Dannette Hensersky, 225 Zinnia Lane North, asked what controls the abutting
residents have to prevent any further development of the property. She stated her
home faces a loading dock on property owned by Carlson Company, and the
Council and Carlson have a responsibility to consider the impact of their structures
on the existing residential area.
Councilmember Edson stated that he voted in favor of this reguiding/rezoning on
December 6 and 20, and he still supports it. He stated that he had not been in
favor of a Walmart and Sam's Club on the site because the use was too intense.
One of the advantages of having a Sam's Club on the site is the setback of the
building is as far as possible from the abutting residences.
Kelcia Cannon, 200 Berkshire Lane North, stated residents of the area should have
been more involved when the matter was considered on the agenda on December
20. She stated the residents are trying to understand the process and want to be
informed.
Mayor Tierney stated legal notification will be given of the Planning Commission
public hearing. Residents can also contact the Planning division for information.
Councilmember Granath stated he is the ward councilmember for this area and
invited residents to also contact him.
Motion to refer to Planning Commission carried; Anderson, Lymangood, Helliwell,
Granath, Tierney ayes; Edson nay.
ITEM 8-B CONSIDERATION OF WHETHER TO ORDER AN EAW FOR
DANIEL DEVELOPMENT REQUEST (93106)
Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that on December 17, 1993, a
petition requesting that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be
prepared for the Ponds at Bass Creek was filed with the Minnesota Environmental
Quality Board. Prior to taking any action approving this project, the City must
respond to this petition. The City has 30 days in which to determine whether an
EAW should be required. Preparation of an EAW must be ordered if there is
evidence that the project may have the potential for significant environmental
effects.
Director Hurlburt stated the development proposed now is significantly different
than the project proposed in 1988. In 1988, an EAW was completed for a project
on the site which was called Harrison Hills Ponds. The project included 93 single
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 13
family residences, 282 multi -family units, and 42 twin homes and townhomes, for a
total of 417 dwelling units. The developer indicates that compared to the plan
now under review, the previous project would have had greater potential for
environmental effects.
She stated that the City can order a new EAW if substantial changes have been
made in the proposed project that may affect the potential for significant adverse
environmental effects, if there have been significant changes in the environment on
or around the site, or if new information about the potential for environmental
effects became available. Another reason to do a new EAW would be if the
Council determined that the first EAW was inadequate or inaccurate.
She stated staff has reviewed the 1988 EAW and found that it would probably not
be considered adequate if it was done today. There was an inaccurate table
showing before and after site conditions. The 1988 EAW identified only the 7
acres of DNR protected wetlands. The 1991 Wetland Conservation Act now
requires the protection of all 30.9 acres of wetlands. Certain items of the EAW
would, if prepared today, have identified the need to analyze water quality, as well
as quantity, and to use standards for erosion control. The 1988 EAW could have
done a better job of identifying the number and type of trees impacted by the
development. A detailed tree inventory was submitted with the new project
proposal. No specific changes in the environment of this site have been identified.
Director Hurlburt stated that there has been no material evidence that
demonstrates the potential for significant environmental effects, given that the
project will meet the new standards that have been put in place since the 1988
EAW found that no EIS was required. Some of the inadequacies of the 1988
EAW have been addressed in the plans for the new project. She stated the impact
of the proposed development is substantially less than the project proposed in
1988. She recommended that the Council deny the petition for an EAW on the
proposed Ponds of Bass Creek.
Mayor Tierney asked who would pay for the preparation of an EAW.
Director Hurlburt responded that the City is responsible for its preparation, but the
cost is passed on to the project developer.
Anne Bipes, 10605 52nd Avenue North, stated the developer's plan indicates that
26 trees will be removed. She stated that these trees are all at least 8" in diameter.
The southwest corner of this site is heavily forested, and there is no information
about how many trees of less than 8" in diameter will be removed. She stated an
EAW should be conducted to determine the affect of the project on the wetland
1988 proposal.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 14
Mr. Gimble stated the currently proposed project would result in a significant
reduction in density, but the change in housing types will have effects on the
environment. He noted that oaks are very sensitive to construction, and he is
concerned that they could be lost. He stated that following the Planning
Commission public hearing, he provided a list of birds and animals on the site. Mr.
Gimble also shared Ms. Bipes' concern that trees less than 8" in diameter are not
included in the tree inventory. He stated it is essential that a DNR representative
be involved in development of a new EAW.
Ken Wendinger, 5465 Orleans Lane North #1, stated the Ponds at Bass Creek
Committee met with representatives of Daniel Development to discuss the
development proposal. He stated he is only against development that will severely
impact the water quality and wetlands in the area. He stated that a new EAW
should be ordered because the first EAW was inadequate. A new EAW would
identify protection of 31 acres of wetlands on the site, compared to the 7 acres
identified in the previous EAW. He quoted from a letter from DNR Area
Hydrologist Ceil Strauss indicating that this is a high quality wildlife habitat, that
some of the proposed lots appear to be marginal, and that the DNR "would
strongly prefer to see a greater structure setback from wetlands."
Mr. Wendinger stated that a new EAW would analyze water quality, and the 1988
EAW would not meet current environmental standards that have been established
with heightened environmental awareness. He stated that Plymouth residents want
a better balance between development and preservation of natural resources. He
supported a new EAW that would include DNR involvement.
Greg Frank, McCombs -Frank -Roos, compared the 1988 and the 1994 proposed
developments. He stated that an area of one acre of wetlands would be impacted
out of the total 30 wetland acres on the site. He stated that a substantial amount
of wetlands would have been destroyed under the 1988 plan. Mr. Frank noted
there are only four DNR protected wetland areas on the site. The only DNR
protected wetland to be disrupted is the major intersection proposed across
Plymouth Creek. The plan attempts to preserve trees on the site, and the projected
traffic impacts are minimal. Mr. Frank stated the purpose of an EAW is to
determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is necessary. He
believes the level of in-depth information submitted on this application answers
many of the questions of an EAW and suggests that an EIS is not needed.
Liz Brannan, 5465 Orleans Lane, requested that a new EAW be ordered.
Daniel Hunt, Daniel Development, stated this development proposal is significantly
different than the 1988 plan. He noted that the staff report indicates that the
information required in an EAW has been provided in this application.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 15
Mayor Tierney stated there was discussion at the Planning Commission meeting
about the possible roadway alignments and effects on wetlands.
Mr. Frank stated that the alternate road alignment suggested by the Planning
Commission would have no impact on any wetlands.
Councilmember Lymangood supported the preparation of a new EAW. He stated
that a number of inaccuracies were discovered when the EAW for the Baton
development application was prepared. For example, it was noted that a tennis
court was proposed on a wetland, and that part of the project was in the Shoreland
Management District. He stated an EAW can be beneficial to the entire
development process, and the EAW will address mitigation measures - not only
whether an EIS is warranted. He commended the developer for including
additional environmental information in the development application, but stated he
is concerned about some of the housing pads being proposed too near the
wetlands.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Edson, seconded by Councilmember
Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-23 APPROVING PETITION AND
ORDERING PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET (EAW) FOR THE PROJECT PROPOSED BY DANIAL
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY KNOWN AS "THE PONDS AT BASS
CREEK" (93106).
Councilmember Granath stated a new EAW is needed in order to study the project
against current environmental standards. He doesn't believe the Council will be
prepared to consider the MPUD Concept Plan, Preliminary Plan/Plat, Conditional
Use Permit, Variances, and Thoroughfare Guide Plan Amendment for the
proposed project without an EAW.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, six ayes.
ITEM 8-C MPUD CONCEPT PLAN, PRELIMINARY PLAN/PLAT, CUP
VARIANCES, AND THOROUGHFARE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR
DANIEL DEVELOPMENT (93106)
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Edson, to table consideration of an MPUD Concept Plan, Preliminary Plan/Plat,
Conditional Use Permit, Variances, and Thoroughfare Guide Plan Amendment for
property located south of County Road 10 and Trenton Lane (93106) until the
results of the EAW are available.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 16
Councilmember Edson stated he has received phone calls from residents who are
not necessarily opposed to the proposed development, but they want to ensure that
the environment is protected and all options are considered.
Councilmember Lymangood stated residents will have the opportunity to comment
during the EAW process.
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember
Helliwell, to direct staff to notify all residents who spoke to the Daniel
Development issue on December 20 and January 3, as well as other residents who
request to be notified, when the EAW is received by the City.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 9-A REPORT ON APPLICATIONS FOR BOARDS/COMMISSIONS
Assistant Manager Lueckert stated that applications will remain open for board
and commission appointments through January 15.
The City Council discussed possible dates to conduct interviews with applicants,
and indicated that they would hope to make the Ward 2 Councilmember
appointment on January 24, and the Board and Commission appointments on
February 7.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Edson, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to establish special council meetings on January 13 at 6:30 p.m., and
on January 31 at 6:00 p.m., to interview board and commission applicants.
Motion carried, six ayes.
Councilmember Lymangood requested that staff provide copies of the applications
of existing members of commissions whose terms to not yet expire, so the Council
can ensure a good balance on the various commissions.
ITEM 9-B REPORT ON APPLICATIONS FOR WARD 2 CITY COUNCIL
VACANCY
Assistant Manager Lueckert stated that 10 applications have been received for the
Ward 2 City Council vacancy.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 17
MOTION was made by Councilmember Edson, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to schedule a special council meeting for January 10 at 6:00 p.m. to
conduct interviews with the Ward 2 applicants.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 9-C ESTABLISH OPEN SPACE COMMITTEE AS SUBCOMMITTEE OF
PARK & RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION
Park Director Blank recommended that the Council establish an Open Space
Committee as a subcommittee of Park and Recreation Advisory Commission.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember
Anderson, to establish an Open Space Committee as a subcommittee of the Park
and Recreation Advisory Commission, and to designate the following membership
of the Committee: One City Councilmember, one Planning Commissioner, four
citizens (one from each ward), and four members of the Park and Recreation
Advisory Commission. The Director of Parks and Recreation and the City
Forester will act as staff liaisons to the Committee.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 9-D PROCESS FOR APPOINTMENTS OF COUNCIL COORDINATING
REPRESENTATIVES (CCR)
Assistant Manager Lueckert recommended several options for appointment of
Council Coordinating Representatives (CCRs) and representatives to other
agencies.
MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Lymangood,
that each councilmember submit their preferences for various CCR appointments
to staff, with the appointments to be made on February 7 so that the Ward 2
Councilmember can participate in the appointments.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 9-E ADOPT 1994 CITY COUNCIL MEETING CALENDAR
MOTION was made by Councilmember Granath, seconded by Councilmember
Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-24 APPROVING CITY COUNCIL
MEETING CALENDAR FOR 1994.
Motion carried, six ayes.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 18
ITEM 9-F ORDINANCE REGARDING CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ADJOURNMENT TIME
Assistant Manager Lueckert presented a proposed ordinance regarding City
Council meeting adjournment time. She stated that the existing City Code
language permits one councilmember to invoke the 11:00 p.m. rule, and does not
require a vote of the Council to adjourn. The new ordinance would require a
motion to adjourn based on the 11:00 p.m. rule. If an issue is under discussion at
the time of the motion to adjourn, the majority invoking the rule may unanimously
agree to conclude the matter at hand before adjourning the meeting.
MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Edson, to
adopt an ordinance amending the City Code to provide that a majority of the
Council may vote to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 p.m.
Councilmember Lymangood agreed that the decision to adjourn should be made by
majority vote; however, he stated concern with the wording "at 11:00 p.m." He
also stated that Roberts Rules of Order Revised covers adjournment.
Attorney Barnard stated the ordinance may be useful for the purpose of letting the
public know when the Council intends to adjourn.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION was made by Councilmember Granath, seconded by
Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt ORDINANCE 94-1 AMENDING THE
PLYMOUTH CITY CODE regarding meeting adjournment time to provide
that any member of the Council may move to adjourn the meeting and give
notice that the hour of 11:00 o'clock p.m. is being approached or has been
reached. The meeting would be adjourned by majority vote, unless it is
agreed to permit the matter then under discussion to be concluded.
Motion carried; five ayes; Granath nay.
ITEM 9-G-1 APPOINT DEPUTY MAYOR
MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to
adopt RESOLUTION 94-25 APPOINTING DEPUTY MAYOR FOR 1994,
appointing Carole Helliwell.
Motion carried, five ayes.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 19
ITEM 9-G-2 DESIGNATE OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER
Manager Johnson stated the City Council must designate the official newspaper
each year. The official newspaper is used to publish all legal notices of the City.
He provided proposals received from the Weekly News and the Plymouth Sailor.
Councilmember Lymangood asked if there is a significant cost difference in the
proposals given that the Weekly News has wider column widths.
Manager Johnson stated that the cost difference is not significant. The City spends
between $10,000 and $13,000 per year on legal newspaper expenses.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Granath, seconded by Councilmember
Lymangood, to designate the Weekly News as the City's legal newspaper for 1994.
Councilmember Granath stated both newspapers are qualified to serve as the legal
newspaper; however, the Weekly News has not been designated the official
newspaper since 1990. In the interest of free market competition and a cost
savings to the City, the Weekly should be designated for 1994. He believes
the Weekly News has also done a better job of covering City Council news. Their
distribution of 32,000, with 160 distribution points, meets the needs of the City.
Jennifer McCarty, Weekly News, stated their total circulation is 33,000. She
stated that they don't have target area issues so all issues of the Weekly News
cover Plymouth news.
Councilmember Edson stated that his major concern is distribution. He stated that
most homes in the City receive the Plymouth Sailor at their door; whereas, the
Weekly News only has about 8,800 newspapers distributed and residents have to
pick it up. He stated the Plymouth Sailor's much larger distribution is in keeping
with the Council's goal to better communicate with residents, but he has no
problems with the reporting done by either newspaper.
Mayor Tierney agreed that the Plymouth Sailor should be designated because it
will reach more residents.
Councilmember Helliwell stated the Plymouth Sailor has served as the City's
official newspaper since 1991, but the Weekly News also covers City Council
meetings. She believes residents will seek out the news if they are interested, and
she supported the designation of the Weekly News.
Councilmember Lymangood stated he believes the Weekly News has done a more
positive job of covering City Council news, and cited as an example their refusal to
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 20
publish letters to the editor during the election campaign. He stated the policies of
the Weekly New are more reflective of the Plymouth Pledge.
Motion failed on a 3-3 vote: Lymangood, Helliwell, and Granath ayes; Anderson,
Edson, and Tierney nays.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Edson, seconded by Councilmember
Anderson, to designate the Plymouth Sailor as the official newspaper until
February 7, 1994, at which the time the Council can again consider the designation
of an official newspaper.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 9-G-3 DESIGNATE OFFICIAL DEPOSITORIES
Finance Director Hahn recommended designation of official depositories for
banking and investment purposes for 1994. He stated that in 1993, the Council
designated the First National Bank of Wayzata as the account depository for 1993-
1995, so this appointment has not yet expired.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Edson, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-26 APPOINTING OFFICIAL
DEPOSITORIES FOR CITY FUNDS FOR 1994.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 9-G-4 RATIFY SURETY AND BLANKET BONDS
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember
Edson, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-27 RATIFYING SURETY AND
BLANKET BONDS FOR CITY EMPLOYEES FOR 1994.
Motion carried, six ayes.
ITEM 9-G-5 APPOINT HEALTH OFFICER
MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, to
adopt RESOLUTION 94-28 DESIGNATING CITY HEALTH OFFICER
FOR 1994.
Motion carried, six ayes.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 21
ITEM 9-H STUDY SESSION SCHEDULE
MOTION was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember
Anderson, to schedule a special council meeting for February 14 beginning at 6:00
p.m. to meet with area legislators.
MOTION to amend the main motion was made by Councilmember Anderson,
seconded by Councilmember Lymangood, to direct staff to provide the Council
with a list of areas where state laws or policies affect the City for discussion at the
meeting, and for councilmembers to submit possible discussion ideas to the City
Manager by February 7.
Motion to amend carried, six ayes.
Main motion as once amended carried, six ayes.
The Council discussed a possible work session to establish goals and objectives,
conduct team building, and/or develop a work plan for 1994-5.
Councilmember Helliwell stated she would not support spending any money on a
facilitator, and she is interested in developing a work plan - not team building.
Councilmember Anderson agreed that the Council does not need a facilitator, but
stated the staff could propose options for the session for the Council to consider at
the next meeting.
MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Edson, to
establish a session to develop goals and objectives, a work plan, and/or team
building on Saturday, March 19, and to direct staff to provide options for the
session on January 24. The options are to consider the type of session, times (i.e.
half-day/full-day), and with and without the use of a facilitator.
Motion carried, six ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember
Granath, to establish a special council meeting for January 27 beginning at 6:00
p.m. to discuss issues affecting the City, with the exclusion of discussion of
development in northwest Plymouth.
Councilmember Lymangood stated he would prefer a format where
councilmembers can provide immediate feedback during the presentation.
Motion carried, five ayes; Anderson nay.
Minutes
January 3, 1994
Page 22
The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
City Clerk