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