Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 08-24-1994CITY OF PLYMOUTH PLANNING COMNIISSION MINUTES AUGUST 24, 1994 The regular meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Mike Stulberg. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Mike Stulberg, Commissioners Barb Stimson, Ed Albm, Linda Oja, Allen Ribbe, and Virginia Black arrived at 8:20 p.m.). MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Director Anne Hurlburt, City Engineer Dan Faulkner, Planning Supervisor Barbara Senness, Associate Planner John Kohn, and Planning Secretary Jackie Watson MOTION by Commissioner Stimson, seconded by Commissioner Oja to approve the July 27, 1994 Planning Commission Minutes with the changes made on page 156 to insert the vote on the Motion to Amend Condition No. 9, and to review the vote on Page 157. Vote. 4 Ayes, Commissioner Ribbe abstained. CONSENT AGENDA ITEM EDEN TRACE CORPORATION (94074) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Eden Trace Corporation for a Site Plan and Variance for the construction of a 12,800 square foot building at the northeast comer of Xenium Lane and 10th Avenue North. MOTION by Commissioner Ribbe, seconded by Commissioner Stimson to recommend approval of the request, subject to all conditions listed in the August 16, 1994 staff report. Vote. 5 Ayes. Motion carried on a unanimous vote. 0 Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 1994 Page 172 MCHUNTER COMPANY LLC (94051) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by McHunter Company LLC for a MPUD Preliminary Plan/Plat for Harrison Place on Bass Creek, and a Conditional Use Permit for a 60 -unit townhome project to be located at the southeast intersection of Trenton Lane and County Road 10. Associate Planner Keho reviewed the August 16, 1994 staff report. Commissioner Ribbe asked what the minimum lot size would be. Associate Planner Keho responded that the lot size would be 2,000 square feet, but this just included the land under the footprint. The rest of the site would be included as open space in a common outlot. Chairman. Stulberg introduced Mr. Daniel Hunt, the petitioner. Mr. Hunt stated that he was in agreement with the staff report,. He said that he had just received a letter from the Army Corps of Engineers stating that they approved the modified wetland mitigation plan. Chairman Stulberg opened and closed the Public Hearing as there was no one present to speak on the request. Associate Planner Keho explained the City's tree preservation policy at the request of Commissioner Oja. MOTION by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Albroto recommend approval of the request by McHunter Company LLC for a MPUD Preliminary Plan/Plat for Harrison Place on Bass Creek, and a Conditional Use Permit for a 60 -unit townhome project to be located at the southeast intersection of Trenton Lane and County Road 10, subject to all conditions listed in the August 16, 1994 staff report. Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. Motion carried on a unanimous vote. WAGNER SPRAY TECH CORPORATION (94080) Chairman Stulberg introduced the request by Wagner Spray Tech Corporation for a Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Amendment and Final Plat for a 69,280 square foot addition located at 1770 Fembrook Lane North. Associate Planner Keho reviewed the August 17, 1994 staff report, Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. lireg Frank representing the petitioner, Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 1994 - Page 173 i Mr. Frank stated that they were in agreement with the staff rm r and conditions. Chairman Stulberg opened and closed the Public Hearing as there was no one present to speak on the request. MOTION by Commissioner Stimson, seconded by Commissioner Ribbe to recommend approval of the request by Wagner Spray Tech Corporation for a Preliminary Plat, Site Plan Amendment and Final Plat for a 69,280 square foot addition located at 1770 Fembrook Lane North, subject to all conditions listed in the August 17, 1994 staff report. Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. Motion carried on a unanimous vote. OLYMPIC STEEL TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT Director Hurlbutt reviewed the August 18, 1994 staff report. Commissioner Ribbe asked what the reason was for the Planning Commission reviewing this item. Director Hurlburt stated that it is the City Attorney's opinion that the Planning Commission needs to review these items so that the City Council findings will be backed up by the Planning Commission. MOTION by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Albin to recommend that the TIF Plan for Economic Development District 7-2 (Olympic Steel Project) is found to be in conformance with the general plan for the development and redevelopment of the City of Plymouth as a whole. Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. Motion carried on an unanimous vote.. WETLAND WORKSHOP CONTINUED Planning Supervisor Barbara Senness reviewed the progress of the wetland study. Mr. Shardlow reviewed the progress which included an inventory, input into a data base for digitizing, and a look at the Chanhassen model He said that they are continuing toupdate the information and they have created a draft ordinance. He read a new definition of exceptional quality wetlands. He said that this definition has increased the number of exceptional quality wetlands in the City from 2 to 14 and some changed from low quality to unclassified. a Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 1994 Page 174 He said that the findings showed that on existing lots of record by imposing a 25 -foot setback 3,740 lots would be affected, and 194 existing built upon lots would be nonconforming. He reviewed the handout entitled Affect of Setbacks on Existing Lots. He said that it is difficult to develop performance standards for buffer yards. He said that the standards on Page 9 seem to bethe best from the research they found. Chairman Stulberg asked if all three conditions on Page 9 were required to be met for buffer strips. Mr. Shardlow responded that it is an either/or situation. Chairman Stulberg stated that he would like the words "either/or; or all" included.. Commissioner Albro asked that a letter `(d)" be added under the performance standards on Page 10 to address existing channelized flow. Mr. Peterson stated that where there is existing channelized flow it is negating the condition. He said that in item "(b)" they should add the wording "lacking a layer of organic thatch or duff'. He said that most times channelized flow is an erosion problem and they could add this language in several places. Commissioner Albro stated that he did not aaggree that existing vegetation necessarily makes a buffer work. Mr. Peterson discussed seed mixes and the other 10 items listed for replanted buffer areas. He said that possibly a silt fence on the downslope as well as upslope should be required while a buffer is being planted. He handed out a memo and copy of a study done in Maine that looked at mixed forested buffer zones with varying slopes. He said that after the fast 50 feet a buffer comes to a,point of diminishing return on flat ground. He said he recommends a 50 -foot buffer for the high end wetlands and 75 feet for the exceptional wetlands. Ms. Rabuse discussed the classifications with point values and the adjusted ranges. Director Hurlburt asked how we can be consistent in the future by applying the point values. Commissioner Albro stated that he was troubled that the low quality wetlands have now become unclassified. Planning Commission Minutes August 24, 1994 Page 175 It was explained that the original map had lumped all wetlands not reviewed as low quality and that the Planning Commission at their August 17 meeting had asked that since those wetland had not been reviewed, that they be unclassified. Mr. Shardlow stated that the ordinance requires tae delineation of the wetland before any construction begins and that prior to this ordinance there was no authority to require this. Commissioner Albro asked what is the necessary buffer width needed to protect a wetland. He said we have an obligation to come up with this and we also need to keep in mind the fact that we deny the land owner viable use of his land by imposing a buffer He asked how much of the City would be impacted. Mr. Shardlow stated that they have done enough field work to come up with a rationale for classification and they do not have to look at each individual parcel as each wetland will be classified before development begins. Director Hurlburt stated that the classified wetlands show that 14 out of 161 were exceptional. Commissioner Albro asked what size buffer would be best for the long term Mr. Peterson stated that it takes years to build the vegetation in the buffer. Commissioner Stulberg asked if studies could be simulated with silt fences. He suggested to the Commission that if more information is wanted they need to ask the consultants for it. Commissioner Albro stated that the study passed out did not apply to Plymouth's situation. Mr. Peterson stated that you can install variables to resemble our situation. Commissioner Ribbe stated that the previous studies seemed to indicate 25 -foot buffers, and tonight we are talking about 50 -foot buffers. He said that the State of Maine soils are different from Minnesota. Mr. Petersonrespondedthat there are no other studies out there. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that water quality is not the only issue, there is also wildlife and aesthetics that are a concern, Commissioner Albro stated tl.atat the first meeting the purpose of preserving a wetland was stated as preservation of water quality] not wildlife Habitat. Chairman Stulberg,called a recess at 8:30 p.m.; the meeting reconvened at 8:50 p.m. a Planning :Commission tMonies August 24, 1994 Page 176 Commissioner Stimson asked why a setback is needed in addition to a buffer. Mr. Shardlow stated that impervious surface is the worst polluter and the setback is the area between the structure and the wetland. Commissioner Stimson said that maybe there should be a larger setback and a smaller buffer. Mr. Shardlow stated that a buffer does the best job of prohibiting pollutants. He said that the new requirements for existing lots should be done very carefully. He said that the analysis they did was to illustrate how many developed lots would have problems with these requirements. He discussed the Heritage Woods Estates and Creekwood Heights developments showing examples of problems of where they would not be able to meet the setback examples. He said that 90 percent of the lots of recon' could comply with the proposed setbacks. Commissioner Stimson stated that it looked like the Chanhassenmodel had alarger buffer than a setback. She asked what the importance of the setback would be. She said that if you took the same samples and added a,75-footbuffer you can see how much land would be unuseabie. Mr. Shardlow stated that the buffer area would be considered as part of the lot. Mr. Peterson stated that the importance of the setback is to keep human activity as far away from the wetland as possible. He discussed the percentages of wetlands that fall into the different categories. He said that damage occurring during construction does not just happen during construction but continues after construction is completed. He showed examples of monument markers and said that Chanhassen installs markers at each lot comer abutting the wetland. Chairman Smiberg asked how much habitat the setbacks would protect. Mr. Peterson stated that the setbacks being discussed won't do that much because research shows that a setback to protect habitat would have to be 100 feet or more and this would be unreasonable. He said that a setback does not mean the land owner could not use the setback portion of the land but the setback would induce human encroachment into the buffer. Commissioner Black stated that moving human activity away from the wetland will preserve nesting habitats and it depends on what type of habitat and species you are. trying to protect. She said that the Washington study showed that less than a 50 -foot setback would not protect human encroachment of the wetlands. Mr. Peterson stated that the setback would normally be a part of,a back yard and could be used for a garden and other uses. Planning. Commission Minutes August24,1994 Page 177 Commissioner Albro asked what the chances would be of having a lot of brush between the house and the wetland as a visual separation. Mr. Peterson stated that a visualseparation for exceptional wetlands would exist due to the forested boundaries. Mr. Anderson (from audience) pointed out an error page 8 of the draft resolution in Option 1 indicating that the total for High quality wetlands should be 65 feet. He asked if grading would be allowed in a good functioning buffer area. Mr. Peterson responded that it could be graded but would have to be replanted. Mr. Anderson asked if a 3 percent slope would be better than a 12 percent slope. Mr. Peterson stated that that was not generally the case and it could be worse, unless the lawn was ah eady in place. Mr. Anderson asked how many wetlands changed from medium quality to high quality in the latest projections. Ms. Rabuse discussed the changes and said that the numbers tonight are more accurate because of corrections made to the data base. Commissioner Black stated that there are 9 more high quality wetlands this time, 23 less medium quality and 12 exceptional quality wetlands on this study. Mr. Anderson asked if the base could be done on area percentages rather than the number of wetlands. Mr. Rabuse responded that the calculations done on August 17 were done using acres as a base. Mr. Anderson stated that we need to look at the size of the wetlands as a percentage of acres. Mr. Shardlow stated that they can determine how much land will be affected and they can calculate how much land is occupied by a wetland. Mr. Peterson discussed the reduction of phosphorus on different degrees of the slope. Mr. Anderson asked for information on placing buffers in existing areas. Chairman Stulberg asked the consultants to bring back this information to the Commission. a PlanningComatission Minutes August24,1994 Page 178 Mr. Shardlow stated that the ordinance is drafted to differentiate between existing lots of record and undeveloped auras for creation of the buffer. He asked for thoughts on the options on page 8 and 9. Commissioner Stimson stated that option 3 contained the most considerable changes as compared with the current zoning ordinance. She asked if it was possible to reduce the setbacks to compare with current setbacks and if it was possible to have a buffer with smaller setbacks. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that option I is closest to the present requirements. Commissioner Albro stated that we don't need large setbacks, that the percent of phosphorus from roads and roofs would not add phosphorus to the wetlands. He said that the zoning ordinance should be changed so that all runoff in a wetland area within 10 feet behind a home must drain to the street and this would eliminate the need for a buffer. Director Hurlburt stated that the street would have to be lower than the wetland to accomplish this. Mr. Peterson stated that wetlands depend on surface water flowing into them and this can harm the wetlands if the water quality is poor. Director Hurlburt stated that on lots with special; topography there may be a way to require a smaller buffer. Mr. Peterson stated that water from NURP ponds could impact wetlands. Chairman Stulberg asked if the storm sewers could be overloaded if more water mnoff was forcedinto them. City Engineer Faulkner stated that in most cases land slopes toward the wetland arra. Commissioner Albro asked if the runoff from roads goes into the storm sewer system without NURP ponds in existing developments. Director Hurlburt stated that all new development will have NURP ponds. Chairman Stulberg asked if there would be different setbacks for each zoning district. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that they are looking at uniform setbacks throughout all zoning districts to keep the public away from the buffer zones but it may be different in industrialareas. Chairman Stulberg asked if setbacks and buffer zones will impact the mix of housing types that are the goal of the City. a Planning. Commission Mnutes August24,:1994 Page 179 Planning Supervisor Senness that they are looking at this impact. m% Shardlow stated that there could be a program developed by the city to purchase some land. Director Hurlburt stated that there could be other zoning ordinance changes once the wetland ordinance is completed. Commissioner Ribbe stated that he leaned toward option 1, except for the buffer width around low quality wetlands. Commissioner Black stated that the high and exceptional quality wetlands options do not present what she feels is necessary. She said she prefers option 3 with possibly higher setbacks and buffer areas. Chairman Stulberg stated that maybe the open space committee or the City should look at ways to protect these areas. Commissioner Oja stated that she leans toward option I. She said she felt the low quality wetlands need a minimal type of protection. Commissioner Albro stated that he agreed with Commissioner Black as to the fact that until all land has been field tested we won't know what is actually outthere, He said he wants a full inventory of all wetlands but he was inclined to go with option 1 with a greater level of protection for exceptional wetlands and none on the low quality wetlands. Commissioner Oja stated that the low quality wetlands with M -)RP ponds need a buffer area. Charman Stulberg asked the Commissioners if the meandering buffer was still the best way to go. Commissioner Stimson stated she would like to see some flexibility with minimums. Planning Supervisoz Senness stated that they were looking at minimums and maximums. Commissioner Oja stated that she wanted all wetlands field tested. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that most undeveloped land has been field verified. Commissioner Black asked why field verification in developed areas was not done. a Planning Commission Minutes August 24,1994 Page 180 DirectorHurlburt stated that time and money were a big consideration for this additional information. Chairman Stulberg stated that he favored field verification of the rest of the City. Commissioner Ribbe asked how long it would take and what the cost woulj have been for field verification of the wetlands in the developed portions of the City. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that the total cost would have been $100,000. Director Hurlburt stated that a window of opportunity could be lost for more field verification as we are getting lito fall. Mr. Peterson stated that there could be some loss ofplant species identification which is necessary to determine wetland type. Chairman Stulberg stated that he felt the Commission as a group cannot make an intelligent decision without the additional field verification. Mr. Shardlow stated that if the new Hiles are not applied to the developed area wetlands it would not be worthwhile. Director Hurlburt stated that we will have to do it anyway. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that a discussion with Director Moore indicated that this additional field verification was not needed. Commissioner Albro stated that he wants to know what size was necessary for a buffer area. He said we need the full field inventory to determine the impact. Mr. Shardlow stated that we have the information as it applies to new development with varying buffer areas. Commissioner Albin stated that we should deal with phosphorus contamination on old' and new development. Commissioner Oja stated that she agreed and that we need the total picture. She said there diould be different standards for old and new developments. Commissioner Ribbe stated that it would be a nightmare to go back to existing development to create a buffer area. Mr. Sbardlow stated that the impact on existing development would show that approximately 10 percent would have trouble conforming with new regulations. 0 Planning Commission M mites August24, 1994 - Page 181 i Commissioner Stimson stated that these estimates would increase because they do not include adding a porch or deck to existing homes. Mr. Anderson stEio,' tilat lots of record were a real concern of his. MOTION by Commissioner Black, seconded by Commissioner Stimson to recommend that a further inventory was not necessary to make a decision on a wetland ordinance for the undeveloped arca of the City. Commission Albro and Commissioner Oja stated that they want to include both the undeveloped and developed areas in the new wetland ordinance. Commissioner Black stated that an inventory of the developed portion of the City will not include more than one small area classed as an exceptional wetland and will not assist us. Director Hurlburt stated that the interim ordinance deals just with new development. Roll Call Vote. 2 Ayes, Commissioners Albin, Oja, Ribbe and Chairman Stulberg voted Nay. Motion failed on a 2 to 4 vote. Commissioner Oja stated that she was in favor of no buffers for low quality wetlands in the developed area of the City if she knew they were definitely low quality. MOTION by Commissioner Albro, seconded by Commissioner Oja to recommend that the City Council request the consultants complete a full wetland inventory of the City so that the Planning, Commission can make a more informed decision on the wetland ordinance. Commissioner Ribbe stated that he felt there was already a reasonable sample of the wetlands to make an informed decision. Roll Call Vote. 4 Ayes, Commissioner Black and Ribbe voted Nay. Motion passed on a 4 to 2 vote. Mr. Shardlow asked if the plan for, community meetings would continue as scheduled. Ms. Rabuse asked if the Commission would like yard setbacks set, or varied regardless of the buffersl2e. The consensus was the setbacks be standard in all districts. Commissioner Black stated that what is important is the total setback from the wetland including both the setback and buffer. She said the buffer could be varied: a Planning Couunission Mfnules August 24, 1994 Page 182. j I Director Hurlbutt stated that the numbers will change and that a static setback with variable buffers could be one of the options. Planning Supervisor Senness stated that engineering staff suggested that the last half of the draft ordinance is same as the WCA and could be removed from the ordinance andjustreferenced. Chairman Stulberg stated that the public needs the WCA information. Director Hurlburt stated that this information could be converted intoes handout. Mr. Shardlow said that he will seu that the ordinance incorporates the wCA requirements. Discussion ensued on purpose and intent, definitions, wetland delineators, education, recreation and the City's Best Management Practices handouts. Director Hurlburi stated that procedural issues have not been dealt with yet. The Commisstnaers discussed the Planning Commission calendar for the remainder of the year. Commissioner Stimson stated that she felt it was important to have a new Commissioner appointed for the vacant spot as soon as possible. MOTION by Chairman Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner Oja to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 10;53 p.m, 0 a