Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 04-04-1994MINUTES REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 4, 1994 The regular meeting of the Plymouth City Council was called to order by Mayor Tierney at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the City Center, 3400 Plymouth Blvd., on April 4, 1994. PRESENT: Mayor Tierney, Councilmembers Granath, Edson, Anderson, Morrison, Lymangood, and Helliwell ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Johnson, Assistant Manager Lueckert, Public Works Director Moore, Conununity Development Director Hurlburt, Finance Director Hahn, Park Director Blank, Planning Supv. Senness, Associate Planner Keho, Risk Management Coordinator Pemberton, Public Safety Director Gerdes, City Attorney Barnard, and City Clerk Rauenhorst ITEM 3-A PLYMOUTH FORUM No one appeared for the Plymouth Formas. ITEM 4 APPROVE AGENDA MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember Lymangood, to approve the agenda with the addition of two items from the Council Information Memo as Items 9-D and 9-E: DARE Graduations and Junk Mail Inquiry. Motion carried, seven ayes. ITEM 5 PRESENTATIONS Mayor Tierney presented plaques of appreciation to individuals who have completed their terms on various boards and commissions. She thanked them for their service to the City. ITEM 6 CONSENT AGENDA Items 6-A and 6-K were removed from the Consent Agenda and placed before the public hearings. Item 6-L was removed from the Consent Agenda and placed as Item 9-F. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 2 MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Motion carried, seven ayes. ITEM 6-A APPROVE MINUTES The minutes of the March 7 regular meeting (Item 8-D, Page 13, first paragraph) were amended to add the word "not" with reference to high occupancy vehicle lanes. The minutes of the March 28 study session were amended to add to the last paragraph on Page 4 that proposed lists of Goals and Objectives are to be submitted to the City Manager by April 20. MOTION was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember Edson, to approve the minutes of the February 28 regular meeting, March 7 study session, March 7 regular meeting, March 21 study session, and March 28 study session, with the two changes noted above. Motion carried, seven ayes; with Mayor Tierney abstaining from the vote on the March 28 study session. ITEM 6-B APPROVE DISBURSEMENTS MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-180 APPROVING DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDING MARCH 25, 1994. Motion carried, seven ayes. ITEM 6-C PROCLAMATION OF VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION WEEK Mayor Tierney proclaimed April 17-23 as Volunteer Recognition Week. ITEM 6-D PROCLAMATION OF SHAPE -UP CHALLENGE MONTH Mayor Tierney proclaimed the month of May as Plymouth Shape -Up Challenge Month. ITEM 6-E AWARD CONTRACT FOR REPLACEMENT OF 3 VEHICLES MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-181 AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF THREE STAFF VEHICLES. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 3 Motion carried, seven ayes. ITEM 6-F DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT BOND REDUCTIONS MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-182 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, ROCKFORD ROAD ADDITION (93008). Motion carried, seven ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-183 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, SUGAR HILLS ADDITION (92056). Motion carried, seven ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-184 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, BRIDLEWOOD FARM 2ND ADDITION (92037). Motion carried, seven ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-185 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, BRIDLEWOOD FARM 3RD ADDITION (93021). Motion carried, seven ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-186 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, BRIDLEWOOD FARM 3RD ADDITION (93021). Motion carried, seven ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-187 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, KIMBERLY WOODS ADDITION (93018). Motion carried, seven ayes. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 4 ITEM 6-G CALIBER DEVELOPMENT CORP. PUD FINAL PLAN/PLAT FOR PARKERS LAKE CORPORATE CENTER 6TH ADDITION (94020) MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-188 APPROVING MPUD FINAL PLAT FOR CALIBER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 25TH AVENUE NORTH AND POLARIS LANE NORTH 94020). Motion carried, seven ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-189 SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF THE RELATED MPUD FINAL PLAT FOR CALIBER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 25TH AVENUE NORTH AND POLARIS LANE NORTH 94020). Motion carried, seven ayes. TTEM 6-H UNITED PROPERTIES CORPORATION. MPUD FINAL PLAT FOR PARKERS LAKE CORPORATE CENTER STH ADDITION (94021) MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-190 APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR UNITED PROPERTIES CORPORATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NIAGARA LANE AND 23RD AVENUE NORTH (94021). Motion carried, seven ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-191 SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF THE RELATED MPUD FINAL PLAT FOR UNITED PROPERTIES CORPORATION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NIAGARA LANE AND 23RD AVENUE NORTH (94021). Motion carried, seven ayes. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 5 ITEM 6-I CUSTOM BUILDING CONCEPTS INC. LOT DIVISION/ CONSOLIDATION (94023) MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-192 APPROVING LOT DIVISION/ CONSOLIDATION FOR CUSTOM BUILDING CONCEPTS, INC., FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 44TH AVENUE NORTH AND NORTHWEST BOULEVARD (94023). Motion carried, seven ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-193 SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO LOT DIVISION/ CONSOLIDATION FOR CUSTOM BUILDING CONCEPTS, INC., FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 44TH AVENUE NORTH AND NORTHWEST BOULEVARD (94023). Motion carried, seven ayes. ITEM 64 CHERRY HILL BUILDERS. FINAL PLAT FOR TRENTON PONDS 2ND ADDITION (94025) MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-194 APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR CHERRY HILL BUILDERS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LOTH AVENUE NORTH, ONE BLOCK EAST OF SOUTH SHORE DRIVE (94025). Motion carried, seven ayes. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-195 SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF THE RELATED FINAL PLAT FOR CHERRY HILL BUILDERS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 10TH AVENUE NORTH, ONE BLOCK EAST OF SOUTH SHORE DRIVE (94025). Motion carried, seven ayes. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 6 ITEM 6-K AWARD OF LIFE AND LONG-TERM DISABH3TY INSURANCE COVERAGES Councilmember Morrison asked about the bidding process for life and long-term disability insurance coverages. She asked if the companies are rated, and if the City is getting the best deal. Risk Management Coordinator Pemberton explained that in 1993 the Council selected Grant Nelson as the City's agent of record. He explored the market and obtained quotations for consideration by staff. Coordinator Pemberton stated the recommended company - Fortis Insurance - is rated AA, and the City is saving a considerable amount of money with this award. MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Morrison, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-197 AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR GROUP TERM LIFE INSURANCE, AND RESOLUTION 94-198 AWARDING THE CONTRACT FOR LONG TERM DISABILITY INSURANCE. Motion carried, seven ayes. ITEM 6-L CONTRACTUAL LAW MAINTENANCE OF CITY FACILITIES This item was tabled to April 18, 1994. ITEM 6-M SET PUBLIC HEARING ON 3.2 LIQUOR APPLICATION MOTION was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-196 SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON OFF - SALE 3.2 LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION OF ARKADYS MARKET INC., 3435 HIGHWAY 169 NORTH. Motion carried, seven ayes. ITEM 7-A PUBLIC HEARING ON TAX-EXEMPT AND TAXABLE REVENUE BONDS FOR WEST SUBURBAN AMBULATORY CARE CENTER AND MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PROJECT Community Development Director Hurlburt presented the staff report on the request for tax-exempt and taxable bond financing for the West Suburban Ambulatory Care Center and Medical Office Building project. The tax-exempt bond issue ($16.5 million) would provide construction and permanent financing for Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 7 the 50,000 square foot ambulatory care center providing out-patient medical and surgical services. The taxable bond issue ($17.5 million) would provide construction and permanent financing for the 72,000 square foot medical office building. She stated the financing applicants are HealthSpan, Health Systems Corporation, and North Memorial Medical Center. The project will be owned and operated by a new non-profit corporation to be known as WestHealth, Incorporated. The bonds will be backed by both parent corporations, both of which are considered to be financially strong. The bonds will also be insured, and the City will not be responsible for repayment of the bonds. Director Hurlburt stated that the City Council has adopted policy and procedures relating to applications for industrial development bond financing. The policy specifically addresses non-profit corporations in the guidelines: "while the City may consider such requests, the non-profit corporations shall be reviewed in accordance with the criteria - the applicants' project will a) fulfill strategic development objectives of the City, b) provide a significant number of new jobs for the City, and c) the services rendered by the project shall be of direct benefit to a large segment of the City's population." Director Hurlburt stated the application indicates that there will be 47 new jobs at the project during the first year of operation, and the project will increase accessibility to health care services for Plymouth residents. She recommended adoption of resolutions giving preliminary approval for the bond issues for the WestHealth Campus project. Councilmember Lymangood asked who would be insuring the bonds. Director Hurlburt responded that the insurer is Capitol Guarantee. Mayor Tierney opened the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. No one appeared, and the hearing was closed. MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, seconded by Councilmember Edson, to adopt: RESOLUTION 94-199 GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF HEALTHSPAN HEALTH SYSTEMS CORPORATION AND NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER, OR A SUCCESSOR NON-PROFIT CORPORATION TO BE FORMED, UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT; REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR APPROVAL; AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS; and Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 8 RESOLUTION 94-200 GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF HEALTHSPAN HEALTH SYSTEMS CORPORATION AND NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER, OR A SUCCESSOR NON-PROFIT CORPORATION TO BE FORMED, UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT; REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR APPROVAL; AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. Motion carried, seven ayes. Dan Nelson of the City Attorney's office stated the final closing is scheduled for the end of May, and the Council will consider the final approval of the bonds. ITEM 8-A CARLSON REAL ESTATE COMPANY. PRELIMINARY PLATIFINAL PLAT FOR A COMMERCIAL SUB -DIVISION AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF I-494 AND CARLSON PARKWAY "SAM'S CLUB" 94010 Community Development Director Hurlburt presented the staff report on the request of Carlson Real Estate Company for preliminary plat and final plat approval for Carlson Center 12th addition located at the southeast corner of I-494 and Carlson Parkway (94010). Councilmember Morrison stated that she wished to disclose a situation that may have the appearance of a potential conflict of interest. Her law firm of 55 attorneys has represented subsidiaries of Carlson Companies in franchising matters. She stated this arose after she become a Councihnember, and no conflict exists from the perspective of her firm or the City Attorney which would prevent her from voting on this Carlson Company issue. She stated that since it is not a legal conflict of interest and in the majority opinion of the Council there is not an appearance of impropriety, she intends to vote on Carlson issues because she believes it is part of her job as a Councilmember. Councilmember Lymangood stated that the City Attorney has advised that the role of the City Council in approving or denying this preliminary and final plat application is a ministerial act and one of determining whether or not the applicant has complied with City Code requirements. He asked if Carlson Company has met the City's requirements. Director Hurlburt stated that Carlson Companies have met all City Code requirements. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 9 Councilmember Lymangood stated that the City Attorney further advised that any council member voting against the item should point out where Carlson Company has not met the required City Codes. City Attorney Barnard stated that this is correct. Linda Fisher, 1500 Norwest Financial Center, stated that the record reflects that the applicant has complied with all code requirements. Based on the City Attorney's memo and the Planning Commission and Staff recommendation, she believes approval is warranted. Motion was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Edson, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-201 APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CARLSON REAL ESTATE COMPANY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 1-494 AND CARLSON PARKWAY 94010), RESOLUTION 94-202 APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR CARLSON REAL ESTATE COMPANY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF I-494 AND CARLSON PARKWAY (94010), and RESOLUTION 94-203 SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF THE RELATED FINAL PLAT FOR CARLSON REAL ESTATE COMPANY FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF 1-494 AND CARLSON PARKWAY (94010). Mayor Tierney reiterated that this is a ministerial act of the City Council, and there needs to be a clear record of the reasons for negative votes on this issue. Councilmember Lymangood stated this Council decision is much different that the previous council's decision on rezoning for this parcel. He personally may not like that a Sam's Club will be built for zoning reasons; however, he cannot let that affect his vote on whether the applicant has met City Code requirements. He stated the Planning Commission voted unanimously not to approve the previously considered change in the land use guide plan, and they voted unanimously to approve the action currently being considered. Motion carried: six ayes; Councihnember Helliwell nay. Mayor Tierney asked Councilmember Helliwell to state the reason for her nay vote. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 10 Councilmember Helliwell stated, "no comment". ITEM 8-B DANIEL DEVELOPMENT. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR THE PONDS AT BASS CREEK LOCATED SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 10 AT TRENTON LANE (93106) Associate Planner Keho presented the staff Report on the findings of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Daniel Development Company for "The Ponds at Bass Creek". He recommended that the City Council make the finding that no environmental impact statement will be required consistent with the rules of the Environmental Quality Board. He stated that the application for the Planned Unit Development is not on the agenda for discussion this evening. He explained that on January 3, 1994, the City Council considered an application for a mixed use Planned Unit Development concept plan, preliminary plan/plat, conditional use permit, and thoroughfare guide plan amendment for a 93.7 acre development. The proposal is for 74 single family homes, 110 units of attached housing, 13. 7 acres of retail commercial, and approximately 23 acres of City park. The City Council approved a request for a petitioned Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EWA) to be prepared for the proposed Ponds at Bass Creek. Planner Keho stated the purpose of an EAW is to create a brief document to set out the facts to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required. An EIS is much more lengthy and detailed. The firm of Strgar-Roscoe- Fausch prepared the EAW for the City, and it was submitted to the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board for public review. Notice of the EAW was published in the EOB Monitor on February 14, 1994. The 30 -day comment period for the public agencies notified and for the general public ended on March 16, 1994. The EAW was submitted to 16 reviewing governmental agencies. He stated that the City received comment from the Metropolitan Council; the Department of Natural Resources, the Historical Society, and several citizens. None of the commenting agencies indicated that an EIS would be required on this project, but concerns were expressed about buffers and other issues. The DNR stated a need for additional review time. Staff provided the DNR with additional information, and they no longer require a continuation for consideration of the EAW. Planner Keho stated that comments from citizens included the belief that the project would have a significant effect on the wetland and wildlife. He stated that street widths and setbacks were also addressed, and several citizens felt the EAW was inadequate. Planner Keho stated that the staff recommends that an EIS not be required for this project. He presented a proposed resolution finding that no Environmental Impact Statement would be required, which contains 13 conditions that would mitigate the impacts of this project on the environment. He stated the Council has 4 options: Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 11 1) find that an EIS is not needed; 2) find that additional time is needed to review the EAW; 3) order preparation of a new EAW; or 4) order an EIS. Councilmember Granath asked why only an approving resolution was provided by staff. Director Hurlburt stated that if staff had received comments from any of the agencies or citizens that an EIS is required, staff would have provided a sample resolution for that option. She stated that based on the comments received, only the resolution finding no need for an EIS was prepared. Councilmember Lymangood stated that staff has provided both approving and denying resolutions when there is a split staff or Commission recommendation to the Council. However, he generally agreed that it would be useful for the Council to receive both approving and denying resolutions. Councilmember Lymangood questioned the communications with the DNR. He stated the DNR originally requested certain materials, and in a second letter dated March 14, asked for a 30 -day extension because questions were not yet answered. Following a meeting held with staff and the petitioner, the DNR indicated in a letter dated March 25 that they no longer required the 30 -day extension. Councilmember Lymangood stated concerns that the DNR was provided an avenue to get additional information, and he indicated that he has more questions relating to this issue. He suggested that a separate public meeting be scheduled on this issue to allow the public and Council members to get answers to their questions. Councilmember Helliwell stated that the DNR had indicated they had concerns and questions; however, following the meeting with staff and the petitioner, their questions were answered. She asked if the information they received in that meeting that indicated that the EAW was adequate was provided to residents. Planner Keho stated staff will meet and discuss issues relating to the EAW with anyone requesting information. Councilmember Lymangood stated it is his understanding that the DNR's questions have not all been answered. Planner Keho stated this is correct. They still have concerns about the project, but they feel there is no reason to further delay the EAW process. Councilmember Lymangood stated the DNR letter was received at the City on March 25, while the deadline on commenting was March 16. The DNR's third Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 12 letter came in after the commenting period was complete. He again suggested that this entire issue be handled at a separate meeting. Councilmember Edson stated that he appreciated that there are many questions yet unanswered about this project. However, the purpose of the EAW is to decide whether an EIS is needed - not to consider approval of the development. He stated residents will have an opportunity to comment on the development when the Planning Commission and the Council consider specific design features, setbacks, road aligmnents, etc. He stated it may be appropriate to move forward with the review of the EAW this evening because many of the coimnents may relate to design process which will be considered later. He asked how the DNR's concerns will be resolved and communicated. Planner Keho stated staff will incorporate the DNR concerns in the PUD process. One of the key concerns was about the proposed City trail which is through a park area. Councilmember Morrison asked if the DNR position is that the EAW is complete. Planner Keho stated the DNR has indicated that the EAW is adequate as far as information that has been presented to them, and they are not recommending that an EIS be prepared. Councilmember Lymangood stated that the decision of whether an EIS is needed is not the only reason to consider the findings of the EAW. He cited page 8 from the EAW guidelines which indicate that the Local Government Unit is legally responsible for accuracy and completeness of the EAW. He suggested that this entire issue be set aside for consideration on another evening and that the public be fully notified so the issue can be dealt with in great detail. Councilmember Granath supported this idea, indicating that he too has concerns about the level of detail of the EAW. He believes there are omissions, and a separate meeting will allow full discussion of the issues. After further discussion, the City Council decided to continue with consideration of the issue. Doug Wise, represented Stgar-Roscoe-Fausch, the consultant who prepared the EAW. He stated the EAW is a brief document designed to rapidly assess the environmental effects of the proposed project. He stated that this EAW was not required, but was prepared in response to a petition from citizens in the area. He explained the four criteria considered in the EAW, and stated that based on that Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 13 information, a recommendation is made on whether an EIS is necessary. Mr. Wise reviewed the contents of the EAW. He stated that wetlands are approximately one-third of the site, and the development proposal would impact one of the 33 acres. He stated that a 2:1 ratio of wetland replacement would occur, and a number of permits are required. He stated that any time a site is developed, habitat will be affected. In order to partially mitigate that impact, the wetland habitats will remain in the same acreage amount. Some non -wetland area would become park and some wetland area will be addressed through buffers. Mr. Wise stated that a pond system and design features will address water quality issues. He noted that traffic was also mentioned as an issue relating to the development. Intersections around the development would continue to operate at a good level of service according to a traffic study that was conducted on the development. Traffic noise impacts relate to County Road 10 - not to the development itself. He stated that nothing indicated there were cultural, architectural, or historical resources on the site, but the Historical Society recommended that a field study be done this spring after the ground thaws. Dan Hunt, Daniel Development, stated that the questions raised when the EAW was ordered have been answered. Minimal amount of wetlands will be affected, and the park will be the largest neighborhood park in the city. He stated the commenting agencies have reaffirmed the planning of the site done by McCombs - Frank -Roos. None of the agencies recommended that an EIS is necessary. Greg Frank, McCombs -Frank -Roos Associates, stated that the project was approached as a PUD from the beginning because the site is sensitive. This site is unique as it contains LA -2, LA -3, and commercial land guiding. The project was planned to attempt to meet park needs, wetland issues, tree ordinances, and avoidance of wetland filling where possible. He stated the extension of streets through the project will require filling of some wetland areas. Of the one acre proposed to be filled, a significant portion relates to the street continuation dictated by the location of streets in abutting plats. He described the 22 -foot grading cut required to enter the site, and stated this is necessary because County Road 10 was constructed at a lower grade and the developer is required to provide drainage away from County Road 10. He stated that all street drainage on the site will be directed to one of the three treatment ponds before discharge off the site. A buffer area of ten -foot width is proposed around all wetlands on the site, with the exception of four lots where the developer would like to build up to the wetland area. Councilmember Granath asked if the ten -foot setback would be from the wetland designation or from the edge of the water. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 14 Mr. Frank stated it would be from the wetland designation. He stated that typically, the setback line would be about 30 feet from the water. Mr. Frank stated that water quality issues have been considered during project planning through four means: 1) minimize the impact and avoid wetlands where possible; 2) mitigate and provide additional wetland when it was impacted through a two -to -one mitigation ratio; 3) treat storm water from the site; and 4) provide wildlife habitat through the proposed buffer area and restrictions proposed in the development. He stated that phosphorous from the site before development is estimated at two pounds per year in the commercial area and eight pounds per year in the non-commercial area. Post -development, it is estimated at 29 pounds per year in the commercial area and 19 pounds per year in the non-cominercial area. He stated all water will go through NURP ponds which will reduce the pollutant at a rate of 70 percent. He stated the amount of phosphorous is, therefore, estimated at six pounds per year. It is his opinion that no significant impacts are associated with the proposed development and no EIS is needed. Mayor Tierney asked if Mr. Frank had worked on the previous EAW conducted on this site. Mr. Frank stated that he was involved in the 1988 EAW. Mayor Tierney asked why an EIS should not be conducted on this project. Mr. Frank stated an EIS would take a minimum of six months and cost from 50,000 to $100,000 to prepare. He does not believe it would improve the development and stated that this is probably as low a density as the Council will see proposed for this site. Councilmember Lymangood asked about the rainfall capacity of the NURP ponds. Mr. Frank stated that they are designed for a 2.5 inch rainfall. Public Works Director Moore stated the developer will have to go through computer modeling to show they meet the 70 percent requirement. He stated a NURP pond is not designed for a 100 year storm; it provides a means to pond water over a 24-hour period. Councilmember Lymangood asked what happens if rainfall is at a greater rate than ponds are designed to treat. Director Moore stated that the designed treatment would not be obtained because the water coming into the ponds displaces the water waiting for treatment. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 15 Mr. Frank stated that most of the runoff containing the pollutants occurs with the original start of a rainstorm. In addition, the ponds are designed with baffles and other features to retain the water. Councilmember Lymangood asked how many rainfalls are greater than the 2.5 inches for which the ponds are designed. Mr. Frank stated a rainfall of that amount averages about every two years. Dan Hunt introduced Frank Stroboda of Franklin J. Svoboda and Associates, Inc. Mr. Stroboda, wildlife biologist, provided information on his background. He has examined over 3,000 wetlands, and has been involved in preparation of over 20 EAW and six EIS documents. He stated that he reviewed this EAW at the request of Mr. Hunt. He showed an aerial photo of the 93 -acre site and described the surrounding land uses. He stated this site is surrounded by existing residential and connnercial development, and the site shows evidence of being farmed in the past, particularly the north half. The southerly portion of the site is more wooded and probably about third generation. There is no evidence of trees of substantially large diameters. He stated the wetlands in the north end of the site have generally deteriorated, and the wetlands in the southern portion of the site are in good enough condition to be considered natural wetlands. He agreed with the conclusions of the EAW that there will be some impact on wildlife species on the site. However, he does not believe it will be a significant impact because of the previous surrounding development. He stated many of the species witnessed on the site by residents are fairly adaptable to urban situations. Given the fact that the park area is 25 percent of the site, and wetlands and woodland areas will be maintained, most of the wildlife will be preserved as well. He stated that there will be some impacts to the wildlife species including relocation and disruption during the construction period, but there will be re- establishment of the wildlife comparable to the subdivision west of this site. He believes the delineation of wetlands on this site is thorough and complete. He stated there is little national evidence that discusses the effectiveness of buffers in the urban setting, and there is not a consensus opinion of what is an effective buffer width. He suggested that the City monitor very closely the application of herbicides and fertilizers to all residential lots abutting wetlands. He stated the NURP ponds will result in maintenance of the existing quality of wetlands on the site, and the 2:1 mitigation ratio will increase the wetland base beyond what currently exists. It is his opinion that the impacts of the development are not of sufficient consequence to order an EIS. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 16 Mayor Tierney stated that the City is attempting to establish a wetland buffer and/or setback through adoption of a wetland protection ordinance. Mr. Wise stated his firm assisted the City of Chanhassen in developing an overall comprehensive plan which addressed storm water quality. He stated buffers were one issue addressed, and described the process used in Chanhassen for establishing buffer widths and protection of wetland resources. Councilmember Lymangood asked the difference between the ordinary high-water mark from 1988 compared to today in light of development in the area. Mr. Frank stated that the ordinary high-water mark on the site was much lower in 1988 than it is now. The ordinary high-water mark elevation was never determined but it has significantly increased, particularly resulting from the development to the east. Because it was so significant, the City created a ditch to control the water level which was rising on the site. Peter Bachman, attorney for Daniel Development, was present to answer questions. Mayor Tierney called a five-minute break at 9:15 p.m. Mary Kettler-Curtis, 10645 48th Avenue North, stated her concern is what has not been said in the EAW. The EAW does not have the results of the cultural resources and this cannot be done until the ground has thawed. She believes this makes the findings of the EAW incomplete. Kenneth Wendinger, 5465 Orleans Lane #1, stated the applicant was given approximately one hour for his presentation, and he requested that same time for other speakers. He stated the EAW contains inaccuracies. He thanked the consultant and developer for providing information and making concessions, but stated there are still large areas that have not been addressed. The EAW says the storm water ponds will siphon off only 70-90 percent of the pollutants before runoff drains into the wetlands. The effectiveness of the ponds is the extremely high end of this range and it is unlikely the ponds will actually achieve removal levels this high. Mr. Wendinger stated the DNR indicates plans should always be made for the worst possible scenario. He stated the 1994 EAW only addresses wetlands where single family houses will be built. There is no information on the effects of townhouses and the commercial sites in the northerly portion of the development. It is his understanding that once this EAW is approved, no additional EAW can be ordered. He stated this missing information should be included now. One of the responders asked if fish caught would be safe for human consumption. The response was that it is not known if the fish caught now are Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 17 safe for human consumption. He stated this information is needed because people eat those fish now. Mr. Wendinger said only the best results from the storm water ponds was included. The developer sent a letter to the City indicating that they will provide a plan showing where runoff from the front yards will go to the NURP ponds. His concern is the rear yards from these homes will not be treated. He is concerned because of the effect on water quality of all of Plymouth. Mr. Wendinger stated that residents of Cardinal Ridge were frequently told that the 90 acres east of Cardinal Ridge would never be developed - it would remain City park. He stated that this item required the Council and residents to read a significant amount of information in a few days, and he asked the Council to provide time for further review and responses. He requested that the Council reject the EAW and order a new one. Penny Steele, 10905 55th Avenue North, stated she lives in Harrison Hills. She stated that when previous developments were constructed, care was not taken to protect the environment. She asked the Council to ensure that this is done on this project and to make the decision with reasonable care. She stated that the developer has offered to mitigate wetland at a 2:1 ratio though he is not required to do so. This developer has met the needs of the Harrison Hills neighborhood. She stated Harrison Hills wants a reasonable development that fits with the surrounding neighborhood, and the developer has taken reasonable care of the environment and of the abutting neighborhood. She does not support a delay, and cautioned that another developer may not have the care for the abutting developments as this one does. Mark Scheidhauer, 4860 Union Terrace, asked who will monitor the buffers and setbacks. He stated that Wild Wings Addition has setbacks and buffers; however there is a dock that goes into the water, and sod and swing sets next the water. Allen Rubenstein, 5505 Orleans Lane, represented the Cardinal Ridge Townhomes. He stated that he has lived there for some time and served on the board at Cardinal Ridge, and he and other board members have never heard that this area east of Cardinal Ridge would not be developed. He stated that staff provided the EAW report to 16 agencies, none of whom recommended an EIS. He recommended that the Council move forward with the project. Liz Brannan, 5465 Orleans Lane, stated that the 1994 policy for wetland replacement is a 2:1 ratio, so the developer is doing no more than is required. Mayor Tierney stated that this development has been in the planning process since a 1:1 mitigation ratio was in effect, and the Council voted in December to allow the developer to go forward with that ratio. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 18 Ms. Brannan stated the EAW contains incomplete information. One question she had asked was if the developer could offer any proof that fish in the creek would not be killed by pollutants or construction. Only construction was addressed in the response. She stated that should be addressed before the EAW is accepted. She was told that this area was owned by the City for park purposes and that it would not be developed. Jeffrey Bipes, 10605 52nd Avenue North, stated wildlife will be displaced from the development. This is a natural area and he questioned how many more natural areas are remaining in Plymouth to be retained. He is not opposed to this development per se, but is concerned about what is happening to wetlands and wildlife in general. He stated that there are unanswered questions and inaccuracies in the EAW, and he encouraged the Council to closely review it. He stated that when purchasing his home one year ago, his developer and builder told him that the area south of 55th Avenue would be preserved and part of it would be a large City park. Anne Bipes, 10605 52nd Avenue North, said the State statute defines an EAW as a document to determine whether an EIS should be done. Its purpose is to discuss the potential impacts of the project. She stated the EAW for this project is incomplete and the developer and residents need the missing information to plan the project. She believes there are insufficient wetland descriptions, and she stated she was given inadequate information to her question of how the wetlands related to the site snap. She believes that impacts to wetlands in the commercial and townhome areas should also be addressed. Ms. Bipes said that even with compliance with buffers and other restrictions, wetlands have been damaged on surrounding sites. She stated there is no information in the EAW about sensitive ecological resources, and little effort was taken to determine what wildlife is on the site. She said this EAW used the 1974 Hennepin County Soil Survey which indicates there are no peat soils on the site. The 1988 survey indicates peat soils are present on the site. Ms. Bipes stated an incomplete traffic study was conducted. Traffic volumes were calculated using 74 single family homes and 87, 000 square feet of commercial building. She stated a new traffic study is in progress for that area, and all sources of traffic and all streets should be considered. Ms. Bipes stated that the owner of the property to the east indicated in December that he is land -locked, and no project is proposed for the property. Informal discussions have occurred between the developer of this site and the owner of the adjacent property, and the adjacent site needs to be included in this study. She stated there is unrealistic pollutant removal expectations. The information presented is a high level textbook figure for single family homes - not actual ranges. She stated the Environmental Quality Board indicated that the EAW should address all potential impacts of the proposed Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 19 development that could be constructed. For example, an auto service station could be proposed for the commercial area of the site, and this potential impact should be considered. She stated additional information was provided to the DNR at a meeting with staff and the developer, and was not made available to residents. She concluded that the EAW is missing significant information and either a new EAW or an EIS is needed. Kathy Chowman, 10705 56th Avenue North, stated she has lived in Harrison Hills for nine years. She appreciates the efforts Daniel Hunt has made. Ms. Chowman stated the Council needs to maintain the quality of life in the neighborhood. She stated that a developer who will take care of the environment is far better than what she sees in her area today, and cited poached deer and fox, and dumped junk. Mayor Tierney asked whether the Council can proceed without completion of the cultural resource information in the EAW. Mr. Wise stated the cultural resources survey is not required to be completed before the EAW is acted on. The survey needs to be completed before the development is approved. There are mechanisms to address this later in the process. Mayor Tierney asked whether the fish from the pond and Bass Creek are safe to eat. Mr. Wise stated the EAW is primarily based on existing information that is available. Detailed wildlife assessment and quality of fish is an EIS level of analysis. He stated the information that has been provided is adequate for an EAW. Additional permits will affect this issue, and there will be requirements for any run-off that goes into Bass Creek to meet the NURP requirements as well as the requirements of the three permitting agencies. Mr. Hunt said he met with the DNR Fish and Wildlife Divisions, and their concern is that the construction of the Bass Creek crossing not be constructed until the spawning time is completed. Mayor Tierney asked about the multi -family and commercial areas that will be coming in the future. Mr. Wise stated the EAW included 110 units of multi -family and the commercial area on the property. The level of future commercial development in terms of size would not meet the requirement for an additional EAW in the future. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 20 Mayor Tierney asked why there was no mention of peat soils on the site when it was listed in 1988. Mr. Wise stated that all the soils information in this EAW was taken from the Hennepin County Soils Survey information. He cannot address why it was not included in their information. Mayor Tierney asked if the wetland delineation is of sufficient detail for an EAW. Mr. Wise stated the information was based on the analysis that was done by the consultant who did the mitigation work. He believes the wetland delineation is sufficient from his experience and is typical of other EAWs. Mr. Wise stated the EAW does not contain the entire traffic study, and typically it would not. The EAW summarizes the results and makes assumptions about proposed developments. He stated the traffic volumes for the park and the property to the east are included in the background traffic volumes factored into the traffic study. The traffic study included existing traffic volumes and projected volumes based on the City's comprehensive plan. Mr. Wise stated that the adjacent property was not included in this EAW because it was his understanding that it did not meet the definition of a "connected action" as indicated in the EAW rules. He stated the ponds are designed for maximum removal, and the estimates are on the high end. There are no current plans for how the commercial area would be developed and no way of estimating the results. There would be no way of analyzing every possible commercial development that could be allowed on the site. That analysis is done when the commercial development plan is submitted to the City. He noted that an auto service center would require a conditional use permit which would include a public hearing process. Mayor Tierney asked about the monitoring and enforcement of buffer areas. Mr. Hunt stated it is important that the buffer area and wetland not be encroached on by the property owners. He has proposeds decorative posts every 10 to 20 feet at the edge of the buffers so that it will be clear where the buffer begins. The DNR liked the idea and are recommending it to other developers. Councilmember Edson asked questions about the percentage of pollutants to be siphoned off through the NURP ponds. Mr. Wise stated that one of their engineers did the analysis for this information using the Best Management Practices. Based on the type of design and requirements of the City, the results will be toward the top end of the range. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 21 Mr. Frank stated that in the Best Management Practices manual examples of design criteria using NURP ponds are given. The numbers from this development will be on the high side of those. Councilmember Lymangood stated that on a map in the EAW, 58th Avenue North is shown between Buildings 8 and 9, as well as an indication of additional development to the west. Mr. Frank stated that in the early 1980's, Harrison Hills provided for 19 townhome units along the west wetland area. When the property to the east is developed, a road would have to be stubbed to the 19 units so those units would have alternate access. He stated the 19 units were approved under a prior project and not included in this EAW. They could have been developed with access to the south, but instead were approved with access to the east when this area develops. Councilmember Lymangood stated that specific commercial examples have not been provided on the properties to the east of Trenton Lane. These could be changed at any time. Mr. Frank stated that specific uses would have to go through public hearing processes. Councihnember Lymangood commented on the maps showing the tree markings for the site. He stated that some time ago the trees were on dry ground but because of the development of the site to the east and the absence of storm water treatment, the water level has increased on this site. Mr. Frank stated that the water level has risen on the site because of improper outletting - not lack of treatment. Because the property to the east was allowed to develop, it has caused flooding of some of the trees on this site. Councilmember Lymangood stated the City has installed some piping to alleviate these drainage problems, and he asked if a permit was obtained from the DNR to do so. Director Moore stated that no permit was needed for this work because it was all done above the ordinary high water mark. He stated a portion of the project was installation of piping and a portion was construction of a ditch; however, none of these improvements extended into the wetland. Mr. Hunt stated the run-off water from the site goes a number of directions. The primary problem is the run-off from the streets, and that is why NURP ponds are Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 22 important in order to treat that water. The run-off from a well established turf area in the rear yards has little effect and does not need to be treated. Motion was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Edson, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-204 DECLARING FINDING OF "NO NEED" FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) BASED UPON THE REVIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) DATED APRIL 4, 1994, FOR THE PROJECT PROPOSED BY DANIEL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR "THE PONDS AT BASS CREEK" (93106) Councilmember Lymangood stated condition number three of the proposed resolution designates a minimum ten -foot -wide deed restriction to create a buffer of undisturbed vegetation immediately adjacent to all wetlands. He asked if that provision will exclude decks and patios in that area. Mr. Hunt stated yes that decks and patios would not be allowed in the ten -foot - wide buffer. Councilmember Lymangood asked if this would preclude the City from putting a trail next to the wetland within the ten -foot area. Mr. Frank stated the condition currently restricts only private development next to the wetlands. He stated there may be some benefit to retaining the word "private" because there may be areas of trail or roadway origination that would be located in the ten -foot buffer. Councilmember Lymangood stated he has walked the area and noticed that there is some attempt to control the geese on the path. He stated the City is creating the problem of geese on the path by not providing a buffer area before the trail begins. Community Development Director Hurtburt stated that no park plan has been done for this area but these concerns can certainly be considered when the plan is drafted. Motion was made by Mayor Tierney, seconded by Councilmember Helliwell, to amend the main motion to delete Conditions No. 3 and 4 from the proposed resolution. These items would be considered at the time of the preliminary plat. Director Hurlburt advised that the conditions remain in this resolution. She stated that the Council is making a finding that there is no need for an EIS based on these conditions. The developer has offered to do this mitigation and the conditions should be included so staff can require the developer to comply at the platting Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 23 stage. She stated there is currently not an ordinance to require a buffer, for example, and it is arising as a mitigation effort. Mayor Tierney and Councilmember Helliwell withdrew their motion and second to amend the main motion. MOTION was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember Anderson, to amend the main motion by deleting the word "private" in Condition No. 3. Councilmember Morrison stated her concern with this revision is that it could prevent roads from being built in the development as proposed. Mr. Hunt stated that the DNR specifically directed that they would like to see the trails in a radial manner going into the wetland area. In order to do that there would have to be some trail construction in the buffer area. Mayor Tierney asked if the Council could later prevent public improvements from the buffer. Director Hurlburt stated yes. All plans for development and the park would be subject to Council approval. Councilmember Lymangood stated it is important to have a buffer between the trail and the wetland. Director Hurlburt stated that in discussions with the DNR, staff has agreed to work with the DNR to minimize impacts on the buffers and the wetlands. SUBSTITUTE MOTION TO AMEND was made by Councilmember Edson, seconded by Mayor Tierney, to retain the existing language for Condition No. 3 and to add that any trails built would be in compliance with the DNR request to minimize the impacts on the wetlands and remain outside of the ten -foot buffer to the extent possible, except to provide access to the wetlands. Park Director Blank stated the way to avoid impacts on the wetlands is to not plan trails in sensitive zones through the park planning process. He stated that, technically, this motion may require trails to be set back onto private property of rear yards. Councilmember Morrison asked if the concern could be addressed through some type of variance process. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 24 Attorney Barnard stated that this condition specifies a deed restriction which could be more permanent than a variance action. Councilmember Edson asked about the feeling of the DNR on this issue. Mr. Frank stated the DNR is concerned with the impervious surface being this close to the wetland, but they recognize that the City will be developing a comprehensive plan for the park. They may allow some areas where the trail will be very close or even cross the wetlands through a floating trail, but they want the opportunity to review the proposed trail locations. Vote on the substitute motion to amend failed: Lymangood aye; six nays. Mayor Tierney announced that the substitute motion had failed and she called for the vote on the original amendment. The original motion to amend failed: Lymangood aye; six nays. Mayor Tierney announced that since the motions to amend had failed, Condition No. 3 will remain as proposed in the resolution. The Council discussed proposed Condition No. 4 to require a minimum ten -foot building setback from the buffer zones, with the exception of four lots. No setbacks from buffer zones would be required for decks. Councilmember Lymangood addressed proposed Condition No. 8 relating to construction of on-site basins for storm water treatment. He stated concerns that the City will be approving a storm water pond that only addresses a two-year rain event. He suggested a larger pond in order to provide for maximum rain events. Director Moore stated the on-site basins for storm water treatment must meet the NURP water quality guidelines as well as the PCA's Best Management Practices manual and Shingle Creek's water quality requirements. In only higher frequency events would water be displaced and total treatment not occur. Councilmember Lymangood stated the City does not have all the data about the water fluctuations or proposed five-year rain events. He noted that page 13 of the EAW guidelines deals with the physical impact of water resources to include all actions on frequency and extent of water level fluctuations. Mr. Frank stated the size of the NURP pond will not affect the fluctuation or rate of discharge. The outlet from the area will determine that. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 25 Councilmember Lymangood stated it is his concern that during excessive rains, the 70% threshold will not be met. Mr. Frank stated that the first part of the rainfall will create most of the pollution from street run off. The last part of a storm will be fairly clean water because the contaminants have been washed through the system. Councilmember Lymangood stated it is his feeling that if the City is trying to catch the pollutants, it would be better to have a larger pond. Motion was made by Mayor Tierney to call the question. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Lymangood suggested that Condition No. 14 be added that this finding is not applicable to the connnercial area. Mr. Hunt stated that he does not own the commercial area nor will he own it. Councilmember Edson suggested that this issue remain open and be evaluated at such time as a commercial proposal be made. After further discussion, Manager Johnson suggested that Condition No. 14 state that the City reserves the right to add criteria for the commercial area. Motion to amend the main motion was made by Councilmember Lymangood, seconded by Councilmember Granath, to add Condition No. 14 that the City reserves the right to add criteria for the commercial area. Motion to amend carried, seven ayes. Director Hurlburt noted that this resolution requires a 2:1 mitigation for wetlands. She suggested that if this condition of a 2:1 replacement is kept, the Council should amend Condition No. 12 that 8.2 acres of non -wetland area shall be conveyed to the City for park purposes. Motion to amend the main motion was made by Councilmember Morrison, seconded by Councilmember Edson, to amend Condition No. 12 that the developer shall convey 8.2 acres of non -wetland area to the City for park purposes, with the location of up to one acre mitigation in the park area, subject to City approval. Motion to amend carried, seven ayes. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 26 Councilmember Morrison questioned Condition No. 9 which provides guarantees by the developer for pond maintenance. Director Moore explained the City requirement that the developer is responsible for storm water treatment pond maintenance for three years after completion of the development. After that time, the responsibility reverts to the homeowners, unless the City should at some point take over citywide maintenance of the storm water ponds. Councilmember Morrison asked what guarantees the City has that this will be accomplished. Director Moore stated an agreement is entered into with the developer outlining the maintenance requirements. If the area is not maintained by the homeowners, the City can do the work and assess the cost to the affected parcels. Motion to amend the main motion was made by Councilmember Edson, seconded by Mayor Tierney, to add to Condition No. 9 that the maintenance of storm water treatment ponds shall be "in accordance with standard City policy." Motion to amend carried, seven ayes. Vote on the main motion as amended three times carried: six ayes; Lymangood nay. ITEM 8-C ORDER PLANS AND ACQUIRE RIGHT OF WAY FOR HIGHWAY 55 NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD AND SOUTH SHORE DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT 406 Public Works Director Moore stated staff has met with property owners abutting the proposed Highway 55 north frontage road and South Shore Drive improvements including the owners of the mobile homes. He stated that two concerns were prevalent: 1) noise from cars with loud radios, and 2) the amount of right-of-way needed from the restaurant property for the improvements. He stated that the noise issue will be addressed with the screening fence, and staff will work to further minimize the amount of right of way needed if the Council wishes to proceed with the project. Council Minutes - Regular Meeting April 4, 1994 Page 27 Motion was made by Councilmember Anderson, seconded by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION 94-205 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, NORTH HIGHWAY 55 FRONTAGE ROAD RELOCATION EAST OF SOUTH SHORE DRIVE, CITY PROJECT NUMBER 406. Tom Getty, counsel for Holiday Properties, stated he has been working with the City and views this project as a partnership. Holiday Properties will be able to redevelop the Holiday station on the adjacent Amoco site, and the City can relocate the frontage road in order to create a safer and more attractive area. He stated Holiday Properties supports the resolution. Motion carried, seven ayes. Motion was made by Councilmember Edson, seconded by Councilmember Lymangood to table the remaining items on the agenda to April 18, 1994: Items 6-L, 9 -A -1,9-A-2, 9-13, 9-C, 9-1), and 9-E. Motion carried, seven ayes. Motion was made by Councilmember Edson, seconded by Mayor Tierney, to adjourn the meeting at 11:17 p.m. Motion carried, seven ayes. Clerk