Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 04-13-1994CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 13, 1994 The regular meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00p.m. by Acting Chairperson Barb Stimson. MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Barb Stimson, Ed Albro, Jack Hill, Virginia Black,; Linda Oja and Allen Ribbe. MEMBERS ABSENT: Chairman Mike Stulberg. STAFF PRESENT: Director Anne Hurlburt, City Engineer Dan Faulkner, Planning, Supervisor Barbara Senness, Associate Planner John Keho, and Planning Secretary Jackie Watson MINUTES: MOTION by Commissioner Albro, seconded by Commissioner Oja to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of March 23, 1994. Vote. 6 Ayes. Motion carried. TOLL COMPANY (93133) Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced the request by Toll Company for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Amendment for outside storage and the construction of a roof section to cover the loading dock at 3005 Niagara Lane North. i Associate Planner Keho reviewed the April 4, 1994 staff report. t Commissioner Black questioned whether therewere conflicting responses in the engineering report items #14 and 1122 regarding site drainage, She asked if the sediment pond in the northeast was "optional" as shown on one of the graphic sheets. City Engineer Faulkner stated the responses in the engineer's memo were not conflicting and that the sediment pond was not optional and would be required as shown on the drainage graphic sheet, Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Thomas Muehlberg representing the petitioner. 0 Planning Commission Minutes April 13,1994 Page 45 Mr. Muehlberg described the business. He stated that the company sites at other locations in the area are well maintained as this site will be. He said that the screening will be used for security purposes. Acting Chairperson Stimson opened the Public Hearing. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Jerry Lavin of 2915 Niagara Lane. Mr. Lavin stated that he owned the building south of the site and his only concern was the drainage from the site. He stated he had no objection to the new occupants and said he felt they would be a benefit to the area. Acting Chairperson Stimson closed the Public Hearing, Commissioner Hill asked if the sediment pond would be in the northwest corner of the site, with no, excavation at the southern portion of the site. City Engineer Faulkner responded that there would be no excavation at south and the drainage pond would be at northwest portion of the site. Commissioner Oja asked if the additional parking proposed was needed for the business. Mr. Muehlberg stated the additional parking would comply with the City requirements for parking which is based on the amount of lot coverage. Commission Oja asked if the parking on the north could be shown as proof -of -parking rathor than blaektopped as it would be nice not to have so much blacktop in the City. Mr. Muehlberg stated that the new parking would be used for staff and wholesale customers and would also aid in the movement of traffic and the maneuvering of trucks. He stated that this area will also be the firelane. He said that the northwest corner parking is not needed but meets City requirements. Commissioner Oja asked if additional screening could be placed on the north side. Mr, Muehlberg stated that a berm would be placed at this spot but it would not be heavily landscaped. He said it was important not to hide the company signage in this area. Commissioner Oja asked if additional lighting would be placed outside and whether the fence would be painted or left natural. , Planning Commission Minutes April 13, 1994 Page 46 Mr. Muehlberg stated that there would only be a light just under the roof extension andthefencewouldbeleftnatural, Commissioner Oja asked why this type Of fencing was selected. Mr- Muehlberg responded that this was recommended by City staff. MOTION by Commissioner Hill, seconded by Commissioner Black, to recommendapprovaloftheinquestbyTollCompanyforaConditionalUsePermitandSitePlanAmendmentforoutsidestorageat3005NiagaraLaneNorth. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. Motion carried on an unanimous vote. PLYMOUTH PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (93141) Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced the inquest by the Plymouth PresbyterianChurchforaPreliminaryPlatandFinalPlat, Site Plan, Conditional Use Permitn Rezoning for a church located northwest of the future intersection al Dunkirk lane and and County Road 9. Associate Planner Keho reviewed the April 5, 1994 staff report. Associate Planner Keho stated that staff had added two conditions to the resolutionsaftertheyweredistributedtothePlanningCommissionersregardingthefollowing; Add to the Preliminary Plat resolution Conditions 10 and 11; 10. TheFinal Plat shall include provisions for the Dunkirk Court cul-de-sac. 11. The Final Plat shall not be submitted to the City Council until the sanitary sewerhasbeenextendedtothissiteandacontractisawardedforCountyRoad9; and, Add the following to the resolution for the Final SitePlan Condition 13; 11 Submittal of fire flow calculations. Commissioner Hill asked if the cul-de-sac at Dunkirk -Court 'would go through toHighway55, Associate Planner Keho stated that the design of the cul-de-sac would be modifiedbeforeitgoesbeforetheCityCouncilanditwouldonlyprovideaccesstoDundeeNursery] and not to Highway 55. Commissioner Black asked when County Road 9 would be extended. Planning Commission Minutes April 13,.1994 Page 47 City Engineer Faullmer responded that it would be done, this: summer, although the sewer installation was not part of the City plan. He said that sewer would be extended from the West Branch Development and would be done by Orrin Thompson Homes which is adjacent to County Road 9. Commission Ribbe asked if this plan was contingent on the sewer connection from the adjacent property. City Engineer Faulkner responded that it was. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Greg Frank representingthe petitioner. Mr. Frank stated that Orrin Thompson Homes had assured them that they would be installing the sewer connection so they could go ahead with the pians for the church. Acting Chairperson Stimson opened the Public Hearing. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Jerry Theis of Dundee Nursery, 16800 Highway 55. Mr. Theis stated that Dundee Nursery would need the access from the west side of the church site and would be willing to deal with the church to come up with an acceptable street plan, He said he would like to avoid the construction of a City street, but just have some access to the nursery from County Road 9. He said he had no objection to the church plan and the staff report was agreeable to him. Acting: Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. David Morem of 2220 Xene Lane, Mr. Morena stated that he was a representative of the church and asked wiry staff felt that the County Road 9 contract stipulation had to be a part of the staff report. He said he had submitted four alternatives for access to Dundee Nursery to Director Fred Moore and that staff had decided that the Dunkirk Court cul-de-sac was the best altemative. He said the church would continue to work with Mr. Theis. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr, Rich Deziel of 16100 46th Avenue North, Mr. Deziel stated that he was concerned with drainage from the site going into Plymouth Creek, Acting Chairperson Stimson closed the Public Hearing, a Planning Commission N inutu April 13, 1994 Page 48 City Engineer Faulkner stated that the storm sewer at the upper northwest comer of this site needs to be in place before this site is developed. He said that the drainage would not go into Plymouth Creek as was the concern of Mr. Deziel. Associate Planner Keho stated that staff selected the alternative for the Dunkirk Court cul-de-sac and brought the plan forward because the Church and Dundee Nursery had not come to terms with what should be done for access. CommissionerHill asked why Dundee Nursery would not have access onto Highway 55. Associate Planner Keho stated State has limited the access onto Highway 55. Commissimaer Oja asked what the church would do if the steeple height was not approved. Mr. Ray Geiger, church architect, stated that the steeple would not actually be 70 feet, but that the church including the steeple would be less than 70 feet, He said lie ;did not know what the church would do if the height was not approved. Commissioner Oja stated that she thought that there should be. an additional exit from the parking lot onto Dunkirk Court, to avoid a bottleneck to Dunkirk Lane from the parking lot. Associate Planner Keho stated the exit onto Dunkirk Lane was the applicant's plan, and because the applicant was not sure of the outcome of Dunkirk Court no exit was planned at this location. Mr. Frank stated that if traffic were to exit from Dunkirk Court it would be difficult because of the stop signs, and it would be. better for traffic flow to force traffic onto Dunkirk Lane. Commissioner Oja asked for a description of the landscaping planned along Dunkirk Lane. Mr. Geiger described the landscape plan and stated there would also be a berm along Aunkirk Iane. Commissioner Oja asked what would be the purpose of a beim. Associate Planner Keho responded that a berm would provide screening of car headlights from the parking lot at night to adjacent property. Planning Commission Minutes April 13, 1994 Page 49 Commissioner Albro stated that the access, for Dundee Nursery from Dunkirk Court did not allow a lot of access to Dundee Nursery, since there was no connection to County Road 9 either. City Engineer Faulker stated that County Road 9 connects with Highway 55 fromDunkirklaneandtheStatewouldnotallowanotherintersectionontoHighway55. Commissioner Albro asked if we should have an obligation to an existing business. DirectorHurlbutt stated that was why staff selected the plan for Dunkirk Court which would give access to the nursery. Commissioner Albro stated that if access to the nursery cannot be from Highway 55 that the Dunkirk Court plan was a must. Director Hurlburt stated that the Commission was dealing with a Conditional Use Permit to allow the increased height of the building, not a variance. She said that if the Commission denied the increased height they must indicate what Conditional Use criteria were not met for the height request. MOTION by Commissioner Albro, seconded by Acting Chairperson Stimson to recommend approval of the request by the Plymouth Presbyterian Church for a Preliminary Plat and Final Plat, Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Rezoning for achurchlocatednorthwestofthefutureintersectionofDunkirkLaneandCountyRoad 9, subject to all conditions, to including the new conditions discussed by Associate Planner Keho. Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes. A-1 TRUCK REPAIR, INC. (94022) Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced the request by A-1 Truck Repair, In.. for aConditionalUsePermitAmendmenttoincreasetheuseandeliminatescreeningfor the site at 1135 Nathan Lane North. Associate Planner Keho reviewed the April 4, 1994 staff report. Commissioner bja asked if the applicant would be required to submit a landscape plan. Associate Planner Keho stated that if the landscape plan: was modified; it would be reviewed avid approved by staff and would not need to come back to the Planning Commission. a Planning Conunission Minutes April 13 1994 Page 50 Commissioner Black asked if the landscaping would provide total: screening of the site for the residential area to the west. Associate Planner Keho responded that the intent of landscape screening was to provide enough screen to be reasonable, not to completely eliminate the view. He said that a landscape screen was more pleasant to look at than a fence. Commissioner Ribbe asked if a bean was considered in addition to trees. Associate Planner Keho stated that aberm was not discussed as there was no place to place a berm because of the wetlands and the paved parking lot. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Bob Smith, representing the petitioner. Mr. Smith stated that this site wks over 600 feet from Nathan Lane and that the Trenton Ponds development which is in the early stages of development was 1200 feet away. He said there was also existing vegetation of shrubs and trees at the southwest comer v uch'provides screening. Mr. Smith discussed the west side screening, stating that this existing use should not be required to install additional screening for a new development. He said that a berm would have to be installed outside the site on the wetland, which would be violation. He said that there was a large setback on the east side; the south was screened by the Minter Wiseman building; and, the north was screened by Hedberg Aggregates through the use of a wood fence. He said he felt the 645 -foot setback from Nathan Lane was more than sufficient since the elevation of the site was lower than Nathan lane and can't be seen from the street. Mr. Smith stated that the east side of this site was similar to the site of the City's Public Works garage area except that the Public Works garage was closer to the street than this building. Acting Chairperson Stimson opened the Public Hearing. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Dave Rostrum of 7004 Knoll Street North. Mr. Rostrum stated that he would be a new resident to Trenton Ponds and was concerned with any reduced screening. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Daryl Tesch of 2540 Lamplighter Lane. Mr. Tesch, a representative for Zachmart Builders working with the Trenton Ponds developers, stated his concerns that any allowed additional repair work would add to the industrial blight of this area. He said that he could look across the wetlands from a Planning Commission Minutes April 13, 1993 Page sl Trenton Ponds and count the number of trucks in the parking lot. The existing vegetation was not what he would consider substantial. He said they have lost sales because of the view of the A-1 Truck Repair site. Mr. Tesch stated the City should require an 8 -foot berm topped with trees 6 -foot on center for screen to be. installed on the A-1 Truck Repair site. He said the existing trees and shrubs on west side are scrub trees and wild shrubs and were not barrier for the visual blight. He said that the landscape berm behind the Hedberg property did not provide adequate screening to the property across from this site. He said that an earth berm was needed and the ::SP substation berm along South Shore drive was a good example of what he wanted. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Bob Maddus of 1304 West Medicine Lake Drive, #129. Mr. Maddus stated he wanted to maintain the peace of the wethmds and not have a business such as A-1 Track Repair disturbing the peace in the area. He showed the Commissioners pictures he had taken from his lot, and said he could see inside the A-1 Truck site from his home and could see clear through the A-1 site into Trenton Ponds from Nathan Lane. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Jim Windey, soon to be a homeowner in the Trenton Ponds development. Mr. Windey stated that he supported what was said by Mr. Tesch and Mr. Maddus. He said he was also concemed with lighting emitting from the site at night. He said he favored the installation of a berm with plants. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Monte Dassburg of 11905 50th Avenue North. Mr. Dassburg stated he would be a new resident of Trenton Ponds. He said he would wait to purchase a home in phase II of the development because he did not like visibility of the industrial area to the east, the A-1 Truck Repair site.. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Chuck Aycock, 10500 10th Avenue North. Mr. Aycock stated there was incompatibility between the industrial site and the residential development and the way to solve this would be with a berm with trees on top. He said this would solve the problem with the view and the light at night. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Ms. Carole Willson of 8400 Golden ValleyRoad. 0 Planning Commission Minutes April 13, 1994 Page52 Ms. Willson stated she was concerned with the view of A-1 Trucking from Trenton Ponds. She said a compatible existence could be created with a berm and landscaping. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Harley Greenberg of 3630 GeorgiaAvenueNorth. Mr. Greenberg stated he would be purchasing the model home in Trenton Ponds. He said that his concern was the scrub vegetation between the two sites. He said he was opposed to increasing the types of vehicles which could be repaired because it would create more traffic in the area. He asked where the traffic would flow and if it couldberestrictedintothefacility. Acting Chairperson Stimson introduced Mr. Greg Rutherford, owner of A-1 TruckRepair, Inc. Mr. Rutherford stated that he does not own the pvperty that his business occupies. He said that this site has been industrialfor many years and was there long before TrentonPondswasproposed. He said he agreed that something needed to be done with the view, but he did not own the site and cost would be prohibitive for him and the owners of the site do not want to incur the expense. He ;aid he was not opposed to additional landscaping but felt that the developers of Trenton Ponds could do some screening iftheyfeltitwasnecessary. Mr. Rutherford stated that the developers of Trenton Ponds knew the industrial district was located to the east when tiiey purchased the property. Ue said he was in business and the Trenton Ponds people are also in business and the Trenton Ponds people couldhaveputuptreesforscreeningpriortodevelopment. Mr. Maddus stated that approval had; been given in 1987 to a developer to build inTrentonPonds. Acting Chairperson ,Stimson closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Rutherford stated that them =would not be more traffic coming into the site from South Shore Drive. He said that he gives customers directions to the site usinghighway169to13thStreettoNathanLaneandthiswasalreadyahightraffictrucktrafficarra. Commission Albro asked staff to review the original Conditional Use Permit, Associate Planner Keho stated that the repair of automobiles was prohibited in the previously approved resolution but that fleet vehicles were not discussed at that time. He said that six-foot fence with slats was approved to be reviewed for screening inoneyear. 0 Planning. Commission Minutes April 13,1994 Page 53 Director Hurlburt stated that any changes to the Conditional Use Permit should relate to those items requested by petitioner and that the Commission should be careful not to change the original Conditional Use Permit. She said that the ordinance does not state bow soon after approval screening should be completed and the Commission might consider stating a specific time, possibly stating that six months might be considered reasonable. Director Hurlburt stated that staff would need to wait until the year is up and can't evaluate the effectiveness of the landscaping approved in the previous resolution until that time. Commissioner Albro stated that he was comfortable with staff recommendations including the repair of fleet vehicles. Commissioner Oja stated that plants used for screening sometimes become bad after years and look worse than other types of screening. Commissioner Oja stated she felt the Commission should review any revisions to landscape plans before they are approved. Director Hurlburt stated that applicant had not requested any revisions to the landscape screening only to eliminate some of the screening. if the applicant refused to provide the screening approved by the previous resolution the Planning Commission could deny the request. Commissioner Oja stated that the outside storage area was used this past winter for snow storage not storage of vehicles. Commissioner Hill stated that he felt the petitioner was trying to develop a profitable bus•.ness and he said that it exceeds bounds to require him to tear up the parking lot to create a berm. He said that if this requ,,tt for elimination of some screening is denied then the fence would still be required. He said that he felt the Commission needed to come to terms now with a landscape plan which would be reviewed in a ;dear, rather than require the previously approved fence and then in a year change the requirements for screening which would be more costly to the proprietor of A-1 Truck Repair. Commissioner Ribbe asked Mr. Rutherford if he would be agreeable to planting trees for screening rather than the fence. Mr. Rutherford stated that he felt that planting trees would be better than a fence. He said that if the Trenton Ponds residents wanted more trees then they could put up the additional trees they want. Planning Commission tvHnutes April 13, 1994 Page 54 Mr. Tesch stated that plans for Trenton Ponds started some years ago. He asked who establishes the height of trees to be planted and how do you get trees tall enough to provide adequate scr',. vng. He said that $75,000 was required by the City for Trenton Ponds to cover lancrrrdping requirements. Associate Planner Keho stated that trees required for landscaping are not less than six feet in height. He said that screening tall objects has always been a problem and that usually a six-foot fence along with a six-foot mixture of trees, some fast growing and some slower growing, are required. He said that screening was not intended to screen 100 percent. Mr. Smith said that A-1 Truck Repair would be willing to work with the City Forester, rather than returning to Planning Commission, to come up with an acceptable landscape plan. Commissioner Oja stated she would like to see a small berm as part of the plan. Mr. Smith stated tient the creation of a berm would be a problem as had been noted by the Department of Natural Resources because of the water level and flood plain. A berm would also reduce the size of their parking lot. Commissioner Oja stated thatshe would like to make sure that lights from the site would not shine into the residential area. Director Hurlburt stated that no change in lighting had been proposed. She said that staff was not aware of a lighting problem but that they could check it out. MOTION by Commissioner Albro, seconded by Commissioner Oja to recommend denial of the request by A-1 Truck Repair, Inc. to increase the use and eliminate screening for the site at 1135 Nathan lane North. Commissioner Albro stated that he felt the petitioner should install the fence as j previously approved for screening and it should be reviewed in August. The applicant would have time to build fence and possibly work with neighbors for a future alternative. Acting Chairperson Stimson stated that she felt this was a good time to ask for the natural screening rather than the construction of the fence that nobody wants. Commissioner Oja stated that she wished to withdraw her second of the motion. Motion failed for lack of a second Planning Commission IN nutes. April 13, 1994 Page 55 MOTION by Commissioner Hill, seconded by Commissioner Ribbe to recommend approval of the request by A-1 Truck Repair as recommended by staff and subject to all conditions contained in the April 4, 1994 staff report. Commissioner Black stated that she agreed with staff's recommendations. Commissioner Albro stated that he was not in favor of the motion because he felt the screening would not be adequate to the new Trenton Ponds purchasers. Commissioner Hill stated that he felt that because the applicant did not own the property he was caught in the middy between the two sides, and was in a no win situation. Director Hurlburt stated that City could revoke the Conditional Use Permit in the future if the applicant failed to comply with the conditions. Commissioner Albro asked if the Planning Commission had the authority to request additional screening. Commission Djt. stated that conditions in the neighborhood have changed which would make the requirenrbntsfor additional screening allowed. Commissioner Black stated that the conditions of the two resolutions seem to meet the concerns of the prospective residents except for the berm. Acting Chairperson Stimson stated she was not in favor of a berm and hr:avy landscaping. She said that the industrial zoning had been in place for &' long long time and that the burden should not be solely on the industrial area for screening. She said a nice landscape screening, not a forest, should be required. i Commission Hill stated that long-term landscaping would be best. Commissioner Black stated that she was against a berm because it would cause more disturbance of the wetland arra. She said that the planting of trees would be more beneficial. Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes, Commissioner Albro voted Nay, Motion carried on 5-1 vote. Acting Chairperson Sdmson called a recess at 9:20 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 9:33 p.m. 0 Planning Commission Minutes April 13,1994 Page 56 METROPOLYfAN COUNCIL REGIONAL BLUEPRINT Planning Supervisor Senness discussed the Metropolitan Council Regional Blueprint and the draft of staffs response told -a Metro Council. Commissioner Black if the Metropolitan Council were given the authority to approve City plans rather than review them, what would staff glean from the change. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that she did not think it was the writer's intent to make this change, but that the editors inserted the language which was not necessarily the staff view. Commissioner Black asked if the language was to remain as "approve what impact would it have on the City. She asked if the City receives money from. Met Council. Planning Supervisor Senness said that the State Legislature would have to approve any changes. She explained the functions of Met Council. Director Hurlburt stated that cities must have Met Council approval for sewer extensions. H sewer extensions are not approved, it would impact city planning. Commissioner Albro stated that he thought staff did a good job of raising the issues in the staff report. WETLAND ORDINANCE Planning Supervisor Senness discussed the revised Welland Ordinance schedule which would be discussed with the City Council on Monday, April 18, 1994. Commissioner Black asked about an interim plan that could be implemented between now and ordinance adoption. She asked what could be done that would not involve legal issues regarding definition, and whether staff and the Commission could agree to some sort of buffer or back yard setback as a fairly simple approach to move new buildings away from the wetlands, with a limited buffer as an interim step. She asked what this would involve, or are there other ways to approach this. Associate Planner Keho stated that a way of measuring where we measure rear yard setbacks could be implemented if the ordinance were changed so that measurement would begin from the delineated wetland. Director Hurlburt questioned how staff would, implement this without some of the same problems as creating the final ordinance. She said there could be implications regarding variances, grandfathering, and existing homes and all issues arts complicated. Planning Commission Minutes. April 1, 1994 Page 57 Commissioner Black stated that she had a problem with the extended schedule which was warranted, but would allow land use for an entire year under the existing ordinanceandthelossofmorewetlands. Director Hurlbut stated that developers were very aware of the anticipated changes to the ordinance and staff have been advising them that they ought to plun for a buffer. Staff has had a positive response and are working on designs and incorporating as muchbufferastheycanwithdevelopers. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that many changes are being made in plans bydevelopers. Commissioner Hill asked what would be done regarding the issue of grandfatheringexistingsites. Director Huribud responded that we do not know how many lots are out there that do not comply and we do not have an inventory to see how many existing homes will beimpacted. Commissioner Black asked how this impact could be ,handled. Director Hurlburt:stated that staff would need to write an ordinance which would eliminate variances if they suspect there would be many. She said stab hoped to have some type of survey. Commission Hill stated he liked the voluntary approach. Commissioner Oja asked if a new submitted plan could be tabled if apotential problemisseen. Director Hurlburt stated that staff was working with the City Attorney on what can bedone. Commissioner Black suggested that a redefinition of rear yard Setbacks would be a safe way to protect wetlands in the interim for new plats. Commissioner Oia said we could apply rules to those existing homes that protect the wetland. She stated that she did not feel we needed an interim ordinance, just get thisordinancedoneasfastaspossible, Acting Chairperson Stimson agreed, Commissioner Albin stated that if it was possible to do something that would not prolong developing the ordinance it would be nice to have, but if it would deter the process then staff should continue on with the ordinance. Planning Commission Minutes April 13,1994 Page 58 Director Hurlburt stated that staff could do a simple ordinance change for rear yard setbacks but reminded Commissioners that it would not affect houses being built this year. Those approved this year will not be built until next year (1995).. She said that some lots being b'tilt today were platted 2 to 3 years ago. MOT10N by Commissioner Black, seconded by Commissioner Albro to direct staff to develop an ordinance which would apply to brand new developments for a back yard setback at the delineated wetland and, grandfather in existing housing and developments already through the process. Vote. 4 Ayes, Commissioners Stimson and Oia voted Nay. Director Hurlburt asked the Commission what approach they wanted staff to take in regards to the two models for wetland ordinances by Maple Grove and Chanhassen. Acting Chairperson Stimson stated she leaned toward the Maple Grove model. Commissioner Oja stated she leaned towards the Chanhassen model. Commissioner Albin stated he liked the Maple Grove model; that the Chanhassen model was not a good analogy because they did not have as many wetlands as Plymouth and can afford to be more liberal. He said he would like do more than just grandfather all existing property; do something somewhere in the middle. Commissioner Hill stated he was also looking for something in the middle. He said that if a building was raised then the owner would be forced to comply with the ordinance, even though this may happen 50 years down the road. Commissioner Albin stated that he felt the right way to do an ordinance would be like Chanhassen but he did not think this could be done by September. Commissioner Ribbe stated he leaned toward the Chanhassen model but thought it would be difficult to do. He said he felt they had total control of the wetlands. Commissioner Oja stated that the City needed to control the wetlands in the developed areas, Commissioner Black staled she was somewhere in the middle, but if forced to choose she would choose the Chanhassen model'. Director Hurlburt stated that she would draft an ordinance and set up a public hearing fora draft ordinance for rear yard setbacks at the May 11; 1994 Planning Commission meeting. a Planning CgriimissicmMinutes - April 13, 199E page 59 MOTION to adjourn by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Oja. The meeting adjourned at 10:17 p.m. I ii