HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 11-15-1999 SpecialAgenda
City of Plymouth
Special City Council Meeting
Monday, November 15,1999
7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
A. Call to Order
B. Land Use Plan for 2020 Urban Expansion Area
Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Update
C. Adjourn
Cd\plan\agendas\pc\pcother\ 1115 ccspec.doc
DATE: November 12, 1999
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Summary of Agenda for November 15`h
Land Use Plan for NW Plymouth. The Planning Commission recommended the plan
previously known as Option C. A new alternative was developed by Judy Johnson and
Brad Brown. It would change the LA -2 adjacent to Camelot to LA -1, reduce the LA -4
area, and change the LA -3 southeast of Vicksburg and 47 to LA -2. Maple Grove
residents submitted their own option yesterday, which shows mostly LA -1 and LA -2
along the border area, with the LA -4 and Commercial areas removed near Vicksburg.
A letter was received on Friday from the Mayor and City Administrator of Maple Grove
showing existing densities in Maple Grove (average is 2.7 units per acre) and advocating
the Plymouth generally consider LA -2 guiding. Mayor Tierney, Ginny Black, Tim
Bildsoe, and I are planning to meeting with them at lunch on Monday.
Judy and Brad hosted a meeting of Lake Camelot residents Thursday evening. Tim
Bildsoe was also present. About 25 residents attended the three hour meeting. They
uniformly favored the July (lower density) plan. The main concern with the other higher
density options seemed to be the level of anticipated traffic on County Road 47, with
many residents noting that 47 is their only access to their subdivision. The main specific
objection to the Judy -Brad compromise plan is the LA -4 area just east of Vicksburg along
47. No consensus was reached, but a number of residents seem to realize that some
compromise may be necessary.
The staff report shows the estimated gross density of various options:
July plan: 2.2 units per acre (approximates original forecast in 1998.)
PC (October) recommendation: 3.1 units per acre
Johnson -Brown alternative (Nov. 4h) 2.6 units per acres
Existing density of Plymouth 3.0 units per acre
In any of the scenarios, only 58% of the land would be developed to urban standards with
sewer and water service.
The staff report continues to recommend the Planning Commission approved plan which
is the highest density option discussed. However, staff can generally support any of the
density options that have been developed by staff or council since July.
Agenda Number: 13
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO:
DwieeHurlburt, ht Johnson, City Manager
FROM: ACommunity Development Director
SUBJECT: Land Use Plan for 2020 Urban Expansion Area
Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Update (98025)
DATE: November 9, 1999 for the Special City Council Meeting of November 15, 1999
Continued from October 19, 1999)
1. PROPOSED MOTION
Approve the revised land use guide plan map for the 2020 urban expansion area, as recommended by
the Planning Commission, as the basis for completion of the Comprehensive Plan update.
This matter has been continued from the October 19, 1999 City Council meeting. It was postponed
because of time constraints at the previous meeting and to allow time for citizen input. Letters
providing notice of the November 15 special meeting has been mailed to all directly affected property
owners and other Plymouth property owners within 750 feet. A "Northwest Notes" newsletter
announcing the meeting was also mailed and placed on the City's web site.
The decision may be made by a motion of the City Council. Actions taken at this point in the planning
process are direction to staff and consultants for preparing the draft land use guide plan. No land use
plan changes would become "official" until after the overall Comprehensive Plan has had a public
hearing, been reviewed by the Metropolitan Council, and formally adopted by the City.
2. STAFF REPORT UPDATE
The staff report that follows is identical to the report dated October 14, which was prepared for the
October 19 meeting, except for the following:
November 4,1999 Land Use Plan Option
This alternative land use plan was prepared at the request of Council Member Judy Johnson. It differs
from the Planning Commission recommendation (the October, 1999 plan) as follows: the proposed
densities of the area north of County Road 47 would be reduced by changing the proposed LA -2 area
to LA -1; changing the proposed LA -3 area to LA -2; and changing the proposed LA -4 area to LA -3,
except for about 10 acres of LA -4 located east of the proposed commercial site. The area at the
southeast quadrant of the intersection of Vicksburg Lane and County Road 47 would also be changed
Land Use Plan for 2020 Expansion Area
Page 2
from LA -3 to LA -2. Please see the attached memo to Council Member Johnson dated November 8,
1999 for further information on this alternative.
Other Attachments
In addition to the memo and map illustrating the November 8 Land Use Plan Option described above,
other attachments included with this report which were not part of the October 14 report are:
correspondence received following completion of the previous report, including materials
submitted at the October 19 meeting;
copies of letters and the "Northwest Notes" newsletter announcing the November 15 meeting;
map illustrating the October, 1998 plan for "Partial Urban Expansion to 2020"; and
alternative land use plans A, B and C which were prepared for the August 31 Joint Planning
Commission/City Council meeting. These have been requested by Council members. Alternative
C is identical to the October, 1999 proposed plan recommended by the Planning Commission.
3. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING
At its October 13 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed changes to the
land use guide plan map for the 2020 urban expansion area under consideration as part of the update of
the Comprehensive Plan. A notice of the hearing was mailed to all directly affected landowners as well
as all owners of other property within 750 feet. The September 20 edition of the "Northwest Notes"
newsletter also announced the hearing and included a description and map of the proposed plan
changes.
The Commission voted 5 to 1 (Stulberg voting nay) to recommend approval of the proposed land use
guide plan map changes. Draft minutes of the Planning Commission hearing are attached. There
were nine speakers at the public hearing. Seven speakers supported the proposed land use plan
changes as necessary to create opportunities for construction of additional life -cycle and affordable
housing in the City. One property owner, whose 5 -acre property is proposed to change from LA -1 to
LA -3, was concerned about possible impact on the value of his property, the compatibility of LA -3
guiding with existing single-family development in Maple Grove, and why changes were being
considered at this time given the lengthy process that led to the plan approved on July 27. A
representative of one of the other affected property owners, whose property is proposed to change from
LA -1 to LA -2, indicated that they would prefer LA -3 guiding for their land.
One Planning Commissioner (Berkowitz) could not attend the meeting but submitted a letter indicating
his opposition to the proposed plan changes. Copies of this letter and all other correspondence
commenting on the proposed plan changes received at the time this report was completed. Any other
written comments received prior to the Council meeting will be made available at the meeting.
At their September 16, 1999 meeting, the Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
discussed the proposed land use plan changes, and voted to support them. A letter from HRA Chair
David Crain is attached.
4. BACKGROUND
The City of Plymouth is required by state law to update its Comprehensive Plan every 10 years. The
Plan sets policy governing land use in the city as well as the long-range (2020) plans for other public
Land Use Plan for 2020 Expansion Area
Page 3
facilities and services. Plymouth's plan is underway and is expected to be completed for submission to
the Metropolitan Council for review in March of 2000. The land use plan determines type of
development allowed and the density (number of units per acre) of residential development. Before
the plan can be completed the land use plan must be finalized, as the public facilities elements
including parks and open space, transportation, sewer and water) are all based on future land use.
On July 19, the Planning Commission held a hearing on draft sanitary sewer staging and land use guide
plans for the 2020 urban expansion area. The draft plan was based on preliminary land use plans
discussed in 1998 and given preliminary approval in October of 1998 when the City Council chose the
Partial Urban Expansion Option" for planning the northwest portion of the City. At a joint meeting of
the Planning Commission and City Council on July 27, the Commission and Council gave their
approval to the draft 2020 urban expansion area sewer staging and land use plans. A copy of the land
use plan approved at that meeting is attached.
During the July 27 meeting, some Council and Commission members expressed concern that the land
use plan, particularly the residential densities, had not been thoroughly discussed. At the City Council
meeting on August 3, 1999, the Council voted (4 to 3) to direct staff to provide options for higher
densities for the land use plan in the 2020 urban expansion area. Staff was asked to recommend
locations where density might be increased without major impacts on infrastructure (sewers, roads,
etc.) Several options were prepared and discussed at the August 31 joint Council/ Planning
Commission meeting. At that meeting the Council directed that public input be sought on an
alternative land use plan which would increase allowable residential density in a portion of the
proposed 2020 urban expansion area.
5. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED LAND USE GUIDE PLAN CHANGES
A map showing the proposed land use guide plan changes is attached. Only a part of the 2020 urban
expansion area would be affected by the proposed changes in the land use guide plan. The areas for
which land use plan changes will be considered are generally located east of Vicksburg Lane, west of
the proposed Fembrook/ Cheshire Lane extension and between the C.P. Railroad and the Plymouth/
Maple Grove border. None of the area designated `LAR" on the July 27 plan would be affected.
Generally, all of the affected areas previously designated LA -1 (up to 3 dwelling units per acre) have
been changed to LA -2 (3 to 6 dwelling units per acre) or LA -3 (6 to 12 dwelling units per acre.) The
maximum density of the area previously designated LA -2 would be changed to LA -4 (12 to 20 units
per acre.) The commercial site (area designated "C" on the land use plan) at the northeast corner of
Vicksburg Lane and County Road 47 remains the same as shown on the July plan (between 9 and 10
acres in size.)
The alternative plan was tested to determine whether increasing development density would have a
major impact on infrastructure. Of particular concern was whether or not increasing density would
require expanding the capacity of Vicksburg Lane, future Fernbrook/Cheshire Lane or County Road
47. While higher densities would increase the trips on these roadways, none of the alternatives would
require improvements beyond what would be required based on the July 27 plan.
This alternative land use plan represents the maximum recommended density based on staff's
knowledge of the housing market, surrounding uses, infrastructure capacities, location and the
characteristics of the land. If built according to the plan, this option could accommodate approximately
Land Use Plan for 2020 Expansion Area
Page 4
1,120 more households than assumed by the City's original forecasts (2,690 households in the 2020
urban expansion area compared to an estimated 1,560 households based on the July 27 plan.) The
expected population of the area would increase by approximately 2,000 more people than assumed by
the City's original forecasts (5,300 people compared to an estimated 3,300 people based on the July 27
plan.)
6. DISCUSSION
Increasing planned residential densities in the 2020 urban expansion area would increase opportunities
in the City for higher density housing types and help meet the need for life -cycle housing choices.
Proposals to increase densities on the few remaining residential sites in the existing urban area have
been opposed by surrounding property owners. Designating higher densities on the Land Use Guide
Plan prior to urban development will help manage expectations of surrounding land owners, and
promote planning for good transitions between differing housing styles and densities as development
proceeds.
Increasing density does not automatically increase affordability. However, higher density will tend to
decrease the per unit land cost and therefore increase opportunity to construct affordable units. Given
the high cost of land in Plymouth and increasing construction costs, new affordable for -sale housing
units will almost certainly be attached units (townhouses or apartments.) The LA -2 or LA -3 land use
classifications allow more flexibility for attached units than the LA -1 classification. Designating land
for higher densities will support the goal of encouraging a mix of housing by price and type, as stated
in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Designating some area as LA -4 would allow for apartment -style units (structures with more than 12
units per building.) While rental units are not restricted to LA -4, adding LA -4 density development
would increase the opportunities for new rental housing developments for families. Because this area
is somewhat isolated from shopping and services, the desirability for senior housing is limited.
Allowing more flexibility to attach units may also support the City's environmental goals. In areas
with wetlands or wooded areas, clustering units together on the less sensitive part of the site can
encourage preservation of natural features in larger (public or private) open spaces. The LA -1 guiding
designation, which currently allows only one and two-family structures, does not provide the flexibility
to allow larger structures such as townhomes.
The demand for residential land in Plymouth exceeds the supply. Even if the City plans for higher
densities, there will continue to be a market demand for large, expensive single family homes on
relatively large lots. Landowners may wish to develop their property at densities lower than the plan
allows. In fact, that has already occurred in much of Plymouth, where recent LA -1 projects have been
developed at less than 1.5 units per acre rather than the 3 units per acre allowed by the current plan.
Development at densities significantly lower than planned can result in an inefficient use of land and
the infrastructure built to serve it.
If the City wishes to ensure that development occurs at the planned density, policies to require
minimum densities and/or maximum lot sizes should be incorporated into the Land Use Element of the
Plan. As part of the text of the land use plan, staff will be recommending that the minimum density in
LA -1 be set at 2 units per acre (3 units per acre maximum.) In LA -2 where the planned density is 3 to
6 units per acre, we will recommend that the plan set 3 units per acre as the minimum (and so on for
Land Use Plan for 2020 Expansion Area
Page 5
the LA -3 and LA -4 classifications.) A draft of the land use plan text is tentatively scheduled for
review in November.
Increasing density will increase the amount of traffic on the roads that serve the area. The proposed
plan amendments would likely result in an increase in the amount of traffic expected on Vicksburg
Lane, County Road 47 and Fernbrook/ Cheshire Lane. However, our projections indicate that the
increased traffic would not necessitate adding more lanes to any of the roads, beyond what will already
be required based on the July 27 plan. Higher residential densities will make transit of all types more
feasible. Making more housing available closer to areas of employment may also shorten commutes
and therefore help reduce transportation -related pollution.
Increasing density will also increase the number of people expected to live in the area. The additional
population will demand additional public services. Since the sewer and water systems can be built to
accommodate the anticipated density, there should be no negative impact on the City's utility systems.
The land dedicated for neighborhood parks will be determined at the time of development and sized
appropriate to the anticipated population. Therefore, no negative impact on the City's park system is
anticipated. Previous Plymouth studies have indicated that new development will generally pay its
way in terms of City services.
There may be some concern about the impact on the schools. Part of the area affected is in ISD #279
Osseo) and the remainder is in ISD #284 (Wayzata.) Both of the school districts are experiencing
growth, and are in the early stages of examining their growth projections to determine whether and
when new schools might be required. Increasing the density of development in the relatively small
area affected may have little or no impact on the school districts. Lower density single-family
detached developments (such as that typical in LA -I areas) are likely to house significantly more
school children than higher density developments because housing types expected in the higher -density
areas are more attractive to households without children.
In his letter to the Commission, Planning Commissioner Berkowitz commented on his concerns about
possible impacts on the school districts and requested that the land use plan designate a site for a future
ISD 279 (Osseo) elementary school. The October 1998 concept plan did indicate a possible school
site, and the City provided the school district with information on possible school sites in the area. We
did not include a school site on the proposed land use guide plan map, because the school district has
not expressed an intent to acquire a site soon, and we need to permit private use of the land until such
time as there is intent to purchase the property. Furthermore, the site originally shown on the concept
plan is probably no longer appropriate based on the future alignment of Fernbrook/ Cheshire Lane,
which will likely divide the property. The land use plan as proposed does not preclude a school site,
because all of the City's "LA" land use designations allow elementary schools. It would not be
appropriate to map a site for a school on the Land Use Plan at this time.
7. ALTERNATIVES
The City Council could choose to adopt the revised land use plan as recommended by the Planning
Commission, or it may choose to make no changes to the plan approved on July 27. The Council
could also choose to modify the proposed land use guide plan map in some other manner.
Land Use Plan for 2020 Expansion Area
Page 6
8. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the revised land use guide plan map for the 2020
urban expansion area, as recommended by the Planning Commission, as the basis for completion of
the Comprehensive Plan update.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Draft Minutes
2. Land Use Plan Terms
3. Letters Announcing November 15, 1999 Meeting
4. "Northwest Notes" Issue 17, October 28, 1999
5. Correspondence Received
6. Map, Partial Urban Expansion to 2020, Dated March 27, 1998 as approved October, 1998
7. Memo to Council Member Judy Johnson from Anne Hurlburt dated November 8, 1999
8. Map, Proposed Land Use Guide Plan, 2020 Urban Expansion Area (Approved July 27) O
9. Map, Alternative A, Potential Land Use Plan Changes, August 1999 O
10. Map, Alternative B, Potential Land Use Plan Changes, August 1999 O
11. Map, Alternative C, Potential Land Use Plan Changes, August 1999
12. Map, Proposed Land Use Guide Plan Changes, 2020 Urban Expansion Area, October 1999 O
13. Map, Land Use Plan Option, November 4, 1999
Cd\plan\staffrep\cc\cc99\2020expansiondensitynov 15.doc
2020 Expansion Area Land Use Plan Options
Approximate Area by Proposed Land Use Guide Plan Designation
City of Plymouth, November 8, 1999 T _ _
Sewer Service Area
As Approved July 27 October Proposed (PC) Nov. 4 Alternative
Staging Area
Gross
Land Use IAcres
Net Gross I Net Gross I Net
Wetland** Acres Acres Wetland** IAcres 1Acres ;Wetland** IAcres
1a LA -1 60.25 7 53.251 60.251 71 53.251 60.25; 71 53.25
la* LA -2 68.38 2.3 66.08 68.38 2.3' 66.08 68.381 2.3I 66.08
2a * LA -2 65.77 8.5 57.27 65.77 8.5 57.27 65.771 8.5' 57.27
1b LA -1 13.98 0 13.98, 0 0
lb LA -2 01 13.98 011 13.98 13.98 , 0 13.98
lb LA -3 85.87 4.2 81.67-85.87 4.2 81.67 85.87 4.2 81.67
1 b LA -4 34.02 7.9 26.12 34.021 7.91 26.12 34.02 7.91 26.12
1 b P-1 66.99 11.1 55.891 66.99 11.1 55.89 6_6.991, 1.1.11 55.89
2b
2b
2b
LA -1
LA -2
P-1
58.93
64.38
10.8 48.13
058.93
33.9 30.48 64.38
0
10.81 48.13
33.9 30.48
58.93 10.8;
64.381 33.9'
0
48.13
30.4830.48
2c LA -1 85.94 23.51 62.44 1 0 43.681 15.11 28.58
2c LA -2 42.02 9.6 32.42 43.681 15.11 28.58 42.261 8.4 33.86
2c LA -3 0 42.26 8.41 33.86 31.941 9.31 22.64
2c LA -4 0 42.02 9.6 32.42 10.08' 0.31 9.78
2c C 9.41 0 9.41 9.41 0 9.41 9.41 01 9.41
3 LA -1 88.41 5.8 82.61 00
4 LA -2 0 0 88.41 5.81----8-2.6-1
5 LA -3 0 88.41 5.8 82.61 0
4 LA -1 43.93 2.41 41.53 0 L0
4 LA -2 1 0 43.931 2.41 41.53 43.93 2.4 1 41.53
Subtotal 788.281 1271 661.281 788.28 1271 661.28 788.28; 1271 661.28
Unsewered Area
LAR 171.36 171.361 171.36 171.36 171.361 1 17136
P-1 1 208.67 208.671 208.67 208.67 208.671, 208.67
Subtotal 380.031 1 380.031 380.03 380.031 380.03' 380.03
Total Area 1168.311 1271 1041.311 1168.311 1271 1041.311 1168.31 j 1271 1041.31
Area west of Vicksburg Lane.
Wetlands in sewer staging areas only.
Summary of Land Area by Land Use Guide Plan Classification
City of Plymouth, November 8, 1999
July 27 Adopted Plan
Land Use Gross Acres l Wetland "; Net Acres
C
LA -1
1 9.41 _
351
0
49.5
9.41;
301.94
1%
29%
LA -2 176.17120.4 155.77 15%
LA -3 85.87 4.2 81.67 8%
LA -4 34.02 7.9 26.12 3%
LAR 171.36 171.36 16%
P-1 j 340.041 45 295.04 28%
Grand Total 1168.311 127 1041.31 100%
October Proposed Plan (Planning Commission Recommendation)
Land Use Gross Acresl Wetland *F- Net Acres
C 9.41 0 9.41 1%
LA -1 60.25 7 53.25 50/.
LA -2 294.67 39.1 255.57 25%
LA -3 216.54 18.4 198.14 19%
LA -4 76.04 17.5 58.54 6%
LAR 171.361 171.36 16%
P-1 340.041 451 295.04 28%
Grand Total 1168.31 127 1041.31 100%
November 4 Alternative
Land Use Gross Acres Wetland * Net Acres
C 9.41 0 9.41 1 %
LA -1 103.93 22.1 81.83 8%
LA -2 381.66 38.2 343.46 33%
LA -3 117.81 13.5 104.31 10%
LA -4 44.1 8.2 35.9 3%
LAR 171.36 171.36 16%
P-1 340.04 45 295.04 28%
Grand Total i 1168.31 127 1041.31 1000/- 00%
WetlandsWetlandsin sewer staging areas only
ID 0 Y
OLd
E E
N
C
U
r N le U
m
UOR
Yp
l\?"
Fernbrook Ln N
r. -
TA-
r/
D
N ul neaunr
M
4
snvy Paso oJd
Dunkirk Ln N
Y
m
Vicksburg Ln N
Holly Ln N
Cj
o
Troy Ln N
vsnvv 6ugsix3
L
W
D
I`L
zz
J a
CLW
Za
a_ z
CSO
z
a
C WX
W
Wz
pm
W w
UM
aN
00
w N
IL
U) N
N
C
r N le U
m
M
Fa• -
W
D
I`L
zz
J a
CLW
Za
a_ z
CSO
z
a
C WX
W
Wz
pm
W w
UM
aN
00
w N
IL
T
L
Q
A
I
Z 11o
Q
A --
d
W
LL
0
W
0 r'
LL
CL N
Q
Z
Wa
aWa
a =Z
s WZ
a L a
C
o Ox
v ZW
nz
0 a
ii w W
O=
CLN
OCD
WN
CL
G (Ii C)
mss'- ' '
a°D
3 :3aEE
N N p) -
V G E E v
IN M It
Fembrook Ln N,.2,2
6,
cx
J
DQaaaa 6
D c c c -o).- :aE. -.S.9.9.9ZO>>>>> 3 °
JJUJ JJ_ld 3
Vicksburg Ln N
114
K
Holly Ln
NCO
a
n
A --
d
W
LL
0
W
0 r'
LL
CL N
Q
Z
Wa
aWa
a =Z
s WZ
a L a
C
o Ox
v ZW
nz
0 a
ii w W
O=
CLN
OCD
WN
CL
11-11-99 05:04PM FROM GRAPHIC SERVICES TO 95095060 P001/001
Dear Mayor Tierney and City of Plymouth council members,
I am writing to ask for your support in the construction of more affordable housing inPlymouth. I have called each of you and informpri you of my support for afforJablehousing. In addition to my calls, I am also sending you this hard copy.
Many people: modest to moderate income, older people, ill and disabled people, Widowed, young, single people, and people trying to get back on their feet can notaffordthetypeofhousingtypicallybuiltinPlymouth.
Affordable housing is an issue being faced by many suburban communities. ThererecentlywasanarticleaboutthisveryissueinlastSundayspaper. This article statedthattc;wnhomes are a wave of the future. They are in great demand. This is very truewhereIlive. I live in Cardinal Ridge townhome development. Our units are in highdemandanddonotstayorithemarketverylong. Selling within days to a couple weeks.
There is resistance in suburbia to build higher density, moderate housing hecausesinglefamilyhomeownersfeartheirhomeswilldecreaseinvalue. These owners linkaffordablehousingwithlowincome (undesirable) people, and the crime they bring. I guess if you huy a home in the $300,000$400,000 range, a person with such aninvestmentwouldbeinclinedtoworry. But these fears are uninformed, which is a crimeinitself.
At Cardinal Ridge we have none of the feared problems that single family home ownersareconcernedabout. There is many a decent person who is of moderate income livinghere. We have no crime. Our development is clean and quite. We have a strongassociation. The density may be higher, but because of the way our development wasPlaned, it does not feel like high density. We have small modest units with lots of openspacebetweenbuildings.
Not everyone needs to live in a big single family house and people have a right to beabletofindmoderateaffordablehousinginthesuburbs. (I define affordable. housing asahomethatsellsunder $'100,000. Over $100,000 is not affordable for modest incomeearners), Older people that have sold their single family homes, often times look forsmalleraffordablehousinginthesuburbstheyraisedtheirfamiliesin. My Mom andDadraisedthefamilyinNewHope. Nearing their retirement years they sold their homeandmovedtoatownhomeinPlymouth. When it was time for me (a mudest income, single person) to buy a home, Cardinal Ridge was there and it was affordable. Ten yearsagoourunitsweresellingforunder $100,000.
Affordable housing is good for the community, and for the nation as a whole. I have heard that it makes good economic sense to build affordable housing where thejogsare (as more business locate in the suburbs). This is true, but it is first andforemostamoralobligationtoprovideaffordablehousing. God calls upon uc toprovideforallmembersofthecommunity, not just those with big wallets.
We are living in the greatest peace time economic expansion in history. Yet we are
confronted with rzrany pressing social problems. Help to relieve one of these problemsBysayingYES! to affordable housing in Plymouth.
It is illy Iivpe that you will not give into the unfounded fears associated with affordablehousing.
Sincerely,
Michele Kessler
November 10, 1999
Mr. Tim Bildsoe
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
RE: Proposed Land Use Plan Changes for 2020 Urban Expansion Area
Dear Tim:
I am disappointed and extremely frustrated to find myself having to write to you at this time to express my opposition to
the proposed land use changes for the 2020 Urban Expansion Area scheduled to be considered at the November 15,
1999 City Council meeting. Having regularly attended Northwest Plymouth planning meetings and open houses over
the past several years, and having participated in surveys and other planning efforts throughout the Northwest Plymouth
planning process, 1 believe that the land use plan for the partial urban expansion on which you and the other Council
Members voted last October and this July, fairly reflected the overall interests of the residents of Northwest Plymouth
and the housing needs of the City. The plan represented a reasonable mix of all types of development ranging from
low-density single-family detached homes (LA -1) to higher density attached housing (LA -3 and LA -4). While I
certainly anticipated some "tweaking" to occur before the land use plan was finalized, I was not prepared for, nor do I
support, the radical overall changes towards high-density housing now proposed.
I am particularly opposed to the Planning Commission's recommendation for 50 -some acres of LA -4 housing east of the
intersection of Highway 47 and Vicksburg, as far from city services, shopping, and commercial areas, as you can get.
Staff acknowledges that this location is unsuitable/undesirable for senior citizens, and presumably also for affordable
housing, for these very reasons. Placing a gas station/convenience store next to it won't solve the locational problem
and is also unnecessary and undesirable to me, a current resident of the area.
Plymouths multiple housing stock already exceeds the Metropolitan Council's benchmark for suburban communities
and studies prepared during the planning process showed that operating revenues for the city exceeded operating
expenses for any of the expansion options, including no development at all. It's one thing to allow development to
occur, but why are we considering the extreme densities now proposed? The level of development that is proposed in
the revised land use plan is neither desirable nor necessary. Don't approve it.
Sincerely,
Bruce Rehwaldt
5815 Dunkirk Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55446
Cc: Joy Tierney, Mayor
Kelli Slavik, Councilmember
Brad Brown, Councilmember
Ginny Black, Councilmember
Judy Johnson, Councilmember
Scott Harstad, Councilmember
Brucer/private/Nwplymouth991 110.doc
November 15, 1999
Dear Mayor Tierney, Ann Hurlburt, and City Council Members:
We support the current land use plan approved by the Planning
Commission and supported by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority.
We live at the northeast corner of county rd. 47 and Vicksburg. We have
lived there for 17 years. Before we purchased this property we checked
with the city planning dept. to see if they had any development plans for
this area. At that time, the city said not before the year 2,000. 1 would
say the city is right on track.
This area has changed alot since we've moved here 17 years ago. It
seems that the people who want this area to stay unchanged are the very
people that have already changed this area with the developments that
they live in.
Please vote yes on the current plan.
T ankyou,
A
Jeffan Liz Peaburg
15740 Cty. Rd. 47
Plymouth, Mn. 55446
LL
City of
Mdpje rove
9401 Fernbrook Lane, P.O. Box 1180, Maple Grove, MN 55311-6180 612-494-6000
November 9, 1
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth MN 55447-1448
RECENC
4 HEN i 2
Subject: Proposed Land Use Plan Changes (2020 Urban Expansion Area)
Dear Mayor Tierney and Members of the Council:
Thank you for this opportunity to address the proposed Land Use Plan changes along the
boundary between Plymouth and Maple Grove near the intersection of Vicksburg Lane and
County Road 47.
For convenience of your review, we respectfully request that you consider the attached maps
illustrating the nature and composition of existing development in Maple Grove along the
Plymouth border between I-494 and Vicksburg Lane and our estimation of the range of
residential development that could occur with the subject changes.
As illustrated in the map of Existing Urban Development in Maple Grove, within approximately
a quarter of a mile of our common boundary between I-494 and Vicksburg Lane there exists
approximately 393 residential units on an approximate area of 148 net acres with an overall net
density of 2.7 units per acre.
Additionally, given that our understanding and interpretation of allowable densities and wetland
coverage in the City of Plymouth are reasonably accurate, the Estimated Densities Map indicates
that the potential resulting densities included with the proposed land use change are, at a
minimum, more than double and, at a maximum, more than seven fold that of the existing
abutting development in Maple Grove.
Serving Today, Shaping Tomorrow"
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Printed on Recycled Paper
containing at least 15%
post -consumer paper fibers
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Plymouth
Proposed Land Use Plan Changes (2020 Urban Expansion Area)
November 9, 1999
Page 2
As you have in other matters between our Cities, we hope you will extend due consideration to
adopting land use changes that will reflect the geographic context of the existing urban
development in Maple Grove. To that, end we respectfully request that the final decision for land
use in this portion of the City of Plymouth have a designation of LA -2 along our boundary that
would transition ultimately to other designations along County Road 47.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Burlingame
Mayor
Enclosure
Alan A Madsen
City Administrator
2 w yd\2/\y\«\d
1: .
x7 - 601112
w
vt a
1®®®4W Yg '
eLr
l$t
p®®h®®'S'®/® i
1!l1111 I®I00
E °, , ` p . '®!1111®e • - i *;yc`r/
ygr,
aFs"ss 6 y. ti-o
y-'
r 1111l11111!!l11.. - ".` . ' .,;:--' 7I/ ®® i f
Vit'
Ma
FKP
mt
y
n,
Ilk j i nF
xr
1
1MID
ONE
Jilin is
Mm
Nails
tf
most
1
S
iJ
k
Z
o
C
o
a>;
V
z
U
U
ti
o
U
U
p
O
c
0,
m
c
z
to
V
L°1
r
ld
a I
N
ofo
Z
U
U
IzI
jU
cfl l
UI j
CDc D ai
0 U) w
CF) w>
1f 4)
NO
Co w Y
J
A
Q'
w
0 U) z rn c0 a0 rn 3
v r° N O aQ O CL 0 c U
CO
0 0
U)
N
L p O2
cayNO0Odd
N
U wa0U
Im
C mwO No
dQ++
J c sL32 a U)
Lo rn ddo
Z c N C c N N rn O A— ui c.0 3: v0; o 0
W
C
N
o O 0
E 0 s L O N
o 0 c OO
C14 c oN
o
Z E
O 3
0 4) f to a)tm OO N r
V a) Z YO di cU)
OV
U
a O
QZa
O L6r N U d N
NN
04
c
o
o i oom
cOm
2)
a>
OL
o
0)
o 2a a) m
Q m v
CL
E c m
L m E m a m
a
c>
cV
m
v' V m m o 0 c 0)c c 0 u°iD
OLI.L O
U
U)
U) 0
O.
N
N
a) C. v
U)
0
C
O
N
Y LN 0G. d
N
p
a) c
O v_-
c a N 0
VOmNr
Y Q-
to L c Oc U) i f0 m NL O O C m
a Nc°'
O
tea=
O
ca) a 3 v)R c
m
c v
Qm c3
cv m
cam
CL
CO a
m
E
o
L) FL R OQ
3 o
m
0
wa
0
U
c
o
c o.
Q
0
cc
0
UQZ
0. 0
a -
o m
J
0O
m
C a
U
07 N
r c N
N coo O rr, c
O
a)
E
m
a E
CL
o
0-
Z a
C
CL
c N O 0)
A N
Z c
a
c c
a
rn
c
E
a Uw
0 a U, U E c o
H 2 o
a a C7
m U) U
a 0
Z m m
U!
O c
vo
C N 3
O c N ti a
o
J
C7 E E
72
N rn
O U
a21
O U U a w U
ca N M CO O O O
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: November 12, 1999
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Patricia Izek on behalf of Plymouth Human Rights Commission
SUBJECT: Proposal to Increase Maximum Allowable Density of Some Properties in
the 2020 Urban Expansion Area of the City
The Plymouth Human Rights Commission has had the opportunity to study the issues
surrounding the proposal to increase the maximum allowable density of some of the
properties proposed for residential development in the 2020 urban expansion area of the
City.
The Human Rights Commission strongly supports the revised plan recommended by the
Plymouth Planning Commission. We believe this plan will provide additional options
for affordable housing and life -cycle housing in Plymouth.
Thank you for the opportunity to express our views and for your thoughtful
consideration on this very important issue to the future of Plymouth and its citizens.
City of
Mdple rove
9401 Fernbrook Lane, P.O. Box 1180, Maple Grove, MN 553114180 612494-6000
November 9, 1
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth MN 55447-1448
RECEILI
N H11 1 L 1C J9
9
Subject: Proposed Land Use Plan Changes (2020 Urban Expansion Area)
Dear Mayor Tierney and Members of the Council:
Thank you for this opportunity to address the proposed Land Use Plan changes along the
boundary between Plymouth and Maple Grove near the intersection of Vicksburg Lane and
County Road 47.
For convenience of your review, we respectfully request that you consider the attached maps
illustrating the nature and composition of existing development in Maple Grove along the
Plymouth border between I-494 and Vicksburg Lane and our estimation of the range of
residential development that could occur with the subject changes.
As illustrated in the map of Existing Urban Development in Maple Grove, within approximately
a quarter of a mile of our common boundary between I-494 and Vicksburg Lane there exists
approximately 393 residential units on an approximate area of 148 net acres with an overall net
density of 2.7 units per acre.
Additionally, given that our understanding and interpretation of allowable densities and wetland
coverage in the City of Plymouth are reasonably accurate, the Estimated Densities Map indicates
that the potential resulting densities included with the proposed land use change are, at a
minimum, more than double and, at a maximum, more than seven fold that of the existing
abutting development in Maple Grove.
Serving Today, Shaping Tomorrow"
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Printed on Recycled Paper
containing at least 15%
post -consumer paper fibers
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Plymouth
Proposed Land Use Plan Changes (2020 Urban Expansion Area)
November 9, 1999
Page 2
As you have in other matters between our Cities, we hope you will extend due consideration to
adopting land use changes that will reflect the geographic context of the existing urban
development in Maple Grove. To that end we respectfully request that the final decision for land
use in this portion of the City of Plymouth have a designation of LA -2 along our boundary that
would transition ultimately to other designations along County Road 47.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
i
Robert A. Burlingame
Mayor
Enclosure
Alan A Madsen
City Administrator
i
t
i
r _.?.
t
F ;':"
ty :
6
Q T .
t
FS ,:
r K.
s,4 ,. , - +ec`. tom,'
9
a ero
f
Von
b
esr
ti; tic a g >®i®®®1 ®
NrI LfiN, fez
v t Pi 0 t.
son
st
E 10 goomm"m
AM
OW
Ilk
Sh to
kk
1AA
C 0 1
ir tom --U,11. '
r
MEMO
4,
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: November 12, 1999
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Patricia Izek on behalf of Plymouth Human Rights Commission
SUBJECT: Proposal to Increase Maximum Allowable Density of Some Properties in
the 2020 Urban Expansion Area of the City
The Plymouth Human Rights Commission has had the opportunity to study the issues
surrounding the proposal to increase the maximum allowable density of some of the
properties proposed for residential development in the 2020 urban expansion area of the
City.
The Human Rights Commission strongly supports the revised plan recommended by the
Plymouth Planning Commission. We believe this plan will provide additional options
for affordable housing and life -cycle housing in Plymouth.
Thank you for the opportunity to express our views and for your thoughtful
consideration on this very important issue to the future of Plymouth and its citizens.
11-11-99 05:04PM FROM GRAPHIC SERVICES TO 95095060 P001/001
Dear Mayor Tierney and City of Plymouth council members,
i am writing to ask for your support in the construction of more affordable housing inPlymouth. I have called each of you and informpri you of my support for affordablehousing. in addition to my calls, I am also sending you this hard copy.
Many people: modest to moderate incornp, older people, ill and disabled people, Widowed, young, single people, and people trying to get back on their feet can notaffordthetypeofhousingtypicallybuiltinPlymouth.
Affordable housing is an issue being faced by many suburban communities. Thererecentlywasanarticleaboutthisveryissueinlastsundayspaper. This article statedthatEvwnhomesareawaveofthefuture. They are in great demand. This is very truewhereIlive.'l live in Cardinal Ridge townhome development. Our units are in highdemandanddonotstayonthemarketverylong. Selling within days to a couple weeks.
There is resistance in suburbia to build higher density, moderate housing becausesinglefamilyhomeownersfeartheirhomeswilldecreaseinvalue. These owners linkaffordablehousingwithlowincome (undesirable) people, and the crime they bring. I guess if you huy a home in the $30010004400,000 range, a person with such aninvestmentwouldbeinclinedtoworry. But these fears are uninformed, which is a crimeinitself.
At Cardinal Ridge we have none of the feared problems that single family home ownersareconcernedabout. There 14 many a decent person who is of moderate income livinghere. We have no crime. Our development is clean and quite. We have a strongassociation. The density may be higher, but because of the way our development wasPlaned, it does not feel like high density. We have small modest units with lots of openspacebetweenbuildings.
Not everyone needs to live in a big single family house and people have a right to beabletofindmoderateaffordablehousinginthesuburbs. (I define affordable housing asahomethatsellsunder $100,000. Over $100,000 is not affordable for modest incomeearners), Older people that have sold their single family homes, often times look forsmalleraffordablehousinginthesuburbstheyraisedtheirfamiliesin. My Mom andDadraisedthefamilyinNewHope. Nearing their retirement years they sold their homeandmovedtoatownhomeinPlymouth. When it wastime for me (a mudest income, single person) to buy a home, Cardinal Ridge was there and it was affordable. Ten yearsagoourunitsweresellingforunder $100,000.
Affordable housing is good for the community, and for the nation as a whole. I have heard that it makes good economic sense to built) affordable housing where thejugsare (as more business locate in the suburbs). This is true, but it is first andforemostamoralobligationtoprovideaffordablehousing. God calls upon uc toprovideforallmembersofthecommunity, not just those with big wallets.
We are living in the greatest peace time economic expansion in history. Yet we areconfrontedwithiudnypressingsocialproblems. Help to relieve one of these problemsBysayingYES! to affordable housing in Plymouth.
It is my Dope that you will not give into the unfounded fears associated with affordablehousing.
Sincerely,
Michele Kessler
November 10, 1999
Mr. Tim Bildsoe
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
RE: Proposed Land Use Plan Changes for 2020 Urban Expansion Area
Dear Tim:
I am disappointed and extremely frustrated to find myself having to write to you at this time to express my opposition to
the proposed land use changes for the 2020 Urban Expansion Area scheduled to be considered at the November 15,
1999 City Council meeting. Having regularly attended Northwest Plymouth planning meetings and open houses over
the past several years, and having participated in surveys and other planning efforts throughout the Northwest Plymouth
planning process, 1 believe that the land use plan for the partial urban expansion on which you and the other Council
Members voted last October and this July, fairly reflected the overall interests of the residents of Northwest Plymouth
and the housing needs of the City. The plan represented a reasonable mix of all types of development ranging from
low-density single-family detached homes (LA -1) to higher density attached housing (LA -3 and LA4). While I
certainly anticipated some "tweaking" to occur before the land use plan was finalized, I was not prepared for, nor do I
support, the radical overall changes towards high-density housing now proposed.
I am particularly opposed to the Planning Commission's recommendation for 50 -some acres of LA -4 housing east of the
intersection of Highway 47 and Vicksburg, as far from city services, shopping, and commercial areas, as you can get.
Staff acknowledges that this location is unsuitable/undesirable for senior citizens, and presumably also for affordable
housing, for these very reasons. Placing a gas station/convenience store next to it won't solve the locational problem
and is also unnecessary and undesirable to me, a current resident of the area.
Plymouths multiple housing stock already exceeds the Metropolitan Council's benchmark for suburban communities
and studies prepared during the planning process showed that operating revenues for the city exceeded operating
expenses for any of the expansion options, including no development at all. It's one thing to allow development to
occur, but why are we considering the extreme densities now proposed? The level of development that is proposed in
the revised land use plan is neither desirable nor necessary. Don't approve it.
Sincerely,
7__
Bruce Rehwaldt
5815 Dunkirk Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55446
Cc: Joy Tierney, Mayor
Kelli Slavik, Councilmember
Brad Brown, Councilmember
Ginny Black, Councilmember
Judy Johnson, Councilmember
Scott Harstad, Councilmember
Brucer/private/Nwplymouth991 110.doc
November 15, 1999
Dear Mayor Tierney, Ann Hurlburt, and City Council Members:
We support the current land use plan approved by the Planning
Commission and supported by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority.
We live at the northeast corner of county rd. 47 and Vicksburg. We have
lived there for 17 years. Before we purchased this property we checked
with the city planning dept. to see if they had any development plans for
this area. At that time, the city said not before the year 2,000. 1 would
say the city is right on track.
This area has changed alot since we've moved here 17 years ago. It
seems that the people who want this area to stay unchanged are the very
people that have already changed this area with the developments that
they live in.
Please vote yes on the current plan.
T ankyou,
Jeff an Liz eaburg
15740 Cty. Rd. 47
Plymouth, Mn. 55446
plan, the October plan and the November 4 alternative. Approximately 1,168 acres (not
including rights-of-way) would be added to the MUSA. Only about 58% will be served
with sewer and planned to develop for urban uses; the rest is designated P -I (Public
Institutional) or LAR (Living Area- Rural.)
Forecasts based on the July 27 plan estimated that about 2,550 dwelling units would be
built in the 2020 expansion area, or about 2.2 units per gross acre of land to be added to
the MUSA. Overall density with the November 4 alternative, with about 3,050 new
units, would be about 2.6 units per gross acre. The Planning Commission
recommendation would permit about 3,670 units, or about 3.1 units per gross acre.
Previous land use studies have found the overall density of residential development in
Plymouth to be about 3 units per acre.
Are wetlands taken out of buildable land when considering densities?
Yes. Wetlands and any other land below the 100 -year flood elevation is deducted to
determine the net buildable area. For example: if a 10 -acre site has 2 acres of wetland,
and a maximum density in LA -2 of 6 units per acre, the maximum number of units
would be 6 units X 8 acres, or 48 units.
Under this plan, what could the maximum density be on the LA -3 parcel, considering it
has a large wetland?
The LA -3 parcel lying north of CR 47 on the November 4 alternative map is
approximately 32 acres in size. The wetland appears to be about 9 acres in size. These
numbers could change based on a survey and on field location of wetlands. However,
using these rough numbers, the net acreage would be 23 acres. The density range in LA -
3 is 6 to 12 units per acre. The number of units could range between 138 and 276.
What are the acreages in each of the guiding areas?
See the attached spreadsheets.
What are the new traffic projections based on this scenario?
We have not made any traffic projections based on any of the land use alternatives at this
point in time. We have done some preliminary calculations which determined that the
land use plan recommended by the Planning Commission in October would not require
improvements beyond which would be needed based on the plan approved in July.
When projecting traffic, we count 10 trips per day per dwelling unit for areas designated
LA -1 or LA -2, which are generally single family detached or single family attached type
of development. Multiple family units will generate less traffic (8 trips per day for LA -
3, 6 trips per day for LA -4.)
0
When will road upgrades take place?
Preliminary data for the Transportation Plan shows that CR 47 and Vicksburg Lane will
both require improvements to handle increased traffic volume sometime in the future.
We do not expect the improvements to be needed until later in 20 -year planning period.
The development in Plymouth's 2020 expansion area is only one factor in determining
when the improvements are needed. The growth of surrounding communities will be a
major factor driving the need for road improvements.
The new Fernbrook/ Cheshire Lane, including the railroad overpass, will be included in
the City's CIP for construction in the next 5 years. It is needed to provide access to the
area between the CP Railroad and County Road 47, west of I-494.
What will happen at Vicksburg and the railroad track for safety?
Staff and consultants are still analyzing whether or not a grade -separated crossing will be
needed on Vicksburg Lane at the CP Railroad. We will be making a recommendation as
part of the Transportation element of the plan. We will be able to complete this work
after a decision has been made on the land use plan.
Attachments:
1. Spreadsheets
2. Map—Proposed Sewer Staging Plan
3. Map—Land Use Plan Option, November 4, 1999
3
Agenda
City of Plymouth
Special City Council Meeting
Monday, November 15,1999
7:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
A. Call to Order
B. Land Use Plan for 2020 Urban Expansion Area
Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Update
C. Adjourn
C= '
Your Neighborhood Builder
November 15, 1999
Honorable Mayor Joy Tierney
Member of the Plymouth City Council
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: City Council meeting November 15th
Land Use Guide Plan — 2020 Urban Expansion Area
Dear Mayor Tierney;
This letter is to firstly inform you of Lundgren Bros. Construction Inc.'s very recent
signing of option agreements with Gary and Denise Thompson and with Lowell and
Doris Whiteis. These, along with the recent option of the Albers parcel by the Orrin
Thompson Division, provide U.S. Home Corp. with control of approximately 140
acres of the "urban expansion area" of the 2020 Land Use Guide Plan.
Phone 612.473.1231 Secondly, I am writing to express our concern with the high densities of LA -4 and
Fax 612.473.7401 LA -3 assigned to those areas of the Thompson property north of County Road 47.
935 East Wayzata Boulevard This area backs up to single family residential to the north. We do not believe it is
Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 appropriate to be placing such high densities adjacent to lower densities without
buffering or a density transition. Additionally, there are environmental concerns
Builder License No. 0001413 with the Thompson parcel that would support lower densities.
The Albers site is adjacent to Plymouth's Camelot Estates of low density single
family. Here our objective is to achieve just over 2 units per gross acre. We believe
a LA -1 designation with flexibility in housing types will provide a variety of house
opportunities, yet create a good transition
Finally, we would like to make known our objection to an enforcement of minimum
densities. It is impossible to tell a density and exactly what is best for a site until it
is has been studied and a site plan prepared. We feel the need to maintain flexibility.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns.
Si erely,
Lu dgren Br
t.
onstruction Inc., a division of U.S. Home
f
r°~ L G
by Marc nderson
Vi a President - Land Development
Cc: Anne Hurlburt
f.\plymouth\thompson\ThompsonCityLtrO l .doc
Nov -15-99 02:37pm From -PILLSBURY CO
Q;,f%n,,` ibacil-
I
Plymouth City Council Members
Plymouth Planning Commission
6123304065 T-656 P.02/02 F-302
Kathy and Patrick Boerbon
14235 6e Place North
Plymouth, MN 55446
559-9282
We would like to let you all know that we are very disappointed in the waY thedevelopmentofnorthwestPlymouthisbeinghandled. Last summer the discussion wasaroundwhat, if any part of northwest Plymouth should be developed. Most of the
residents of northwest Plymouth did not want
arealin>ng >e development of the East
at all. But after
much protest and contact with the Council, P
Side of northwest Plymouth was approved. The vast majority of residents weren't happywiththeCouncil's decision, but took some comfort in the Council discussion of keeping
the densities low and trying to allow for as much open space as possible.
Now, one year after this decision was made, we, receive a new map which shows doublethedensityofthearea, and sounds like it will include more commercial development thantheoneconveniencestorethatwasproposedlastyear. It appears that many of the Councilmembersareleaningtoahigherdensityversion. We believe you all have a responsibilitytovoteforwhatthearearesidentswant. After all, it is because of our votes that you are or
the.City Council.
Where are many reason why the higher density in this area should NOT be approved. There is so little land remaining in Plymouth that still has the rural natural beauty ofnorthwestPlymouth. That is one of the features that attracted our family to the area andnow, unless we do something to stop things, this natural beauty will not exist. If the highedensityisapproved, County Road 47 will become a very dangerous area. This road simpl
can not handle 4,000 additional cars on a daily basis. The schools in this area
sehre
oldady
over crowded. The area schools can not accommodate an additional,
s.
My daughter has been at Basswood Elementary just three short years and zones havealreadychangedonce. How do we expect to develop a sense of community within our
t400ls if we keep changing the zones? I realize that school zoning does not involve city
government, but I believe that we have a responsibility to our children to take this into
consideration in this plan.
I ask that each of you to take another look at what this higher density would do to the are; Don't let yourself be pressured by interest groups that are not affected by these changesinfluenceyourvote. They are not the residents that elected you into your position. Pleasvotetokeepthedensitiesastheywereapprovedatoveroneyearago. Please don't let th
residents of Plymouth down.
Sincerely,
Kathy and Patrick Boerbon
Anne Hurlburt
From: dtwomey@toolproducts.com
Sent: Monday, November 15, 1999 12:44 PM
To: ahurlbur@ci.plymouth.mn.us
Subject: November 15th City Council Meeting
Due to a schedule conflict, I cannot attend the special City Council meeting
this evening to discuss the rezoning of the properties along the northern border
of the city of Plymouth. In my absence, please provide a copy of this email to
the Council for their review.
My name is David Twomey, my wife Vanessa and I live in HighPoint Hills, just
north of the proposed "LA -3" zone on .the southernmost border of Maple Grove.
Our street address is 15063 62nd Avenue North, Maple Grove, MN. 55311. We are
also in the Wayata School district and our children attend Kimberly Lane and
Central Middle Schools.
I am opposed to the "Proposed Land Use Plan Changes" issued by the Plymouth
Community Development Department (dated September 13, 1999) for the properties
north of County Road 47. These proposed changes (Commercial, LA4, LA3 and LA2)
are not consistent with the quality and location of these properties. Most
important, the proposed changes are not consistent with the adjacent property
zoning in the City of Maple Grove.
I am opposed to the planning for Commercial property on the corner of Vicksburg
and County Road 47. A retail property of this size and location is not needed -
ample shopping and convenience outlets are available within a 2 miles from this
site. Further, Southerly traffic on Vicksburg in the morning and Northerly
traffic on Vicksburg in the afternoon/evening is already very, very high. I do
not agree that these two, two-lane roads are capable of all the planned traffic
that would result from this development. I think it is ironic that this
proposal is on the table after the last Council meeting that addressed the
traffic issues with highway 101. This proposal will elevate the visibility of
traffic issues on Vicksburg and County Road 47.
1 am in favor of the Rosemary Woods, Camelot and HighPoint Hills
counter -proposal that was presented to the Plymouth City Planning Commission
last week. This proposal fairly considers the adjacent developed properties and
offers a reasonable transition between the community boundary of Maple Grove and
Plymouth. The proposal fairly transitions from higher density zoning along this
corridor, similar to the zoning decisions made elsewhere in the more -central
areas of Plymouth.
1)
a•
3•
6•
7.
0
O•
l•
0
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
Signature Printed Name Address
LTer, n J n L zc;C I` 6/ 70 l (cr n t' Aj
r• ' ni vl LD ti.
J , 'lit , i.v
i ,
A C L 1 G U i t4a f it
y , / G /'-v'/-' - e i'
s`.'+
J %•iii . _.t>_/',f' n
GDerk Vr4 We.'
i3r'_
014 /1/,
el // c..
ll
41-,
I ACV 16N U I-
a?.
a.
aq.
3d.
31.
3a.
33.
3$
35.
X -
37,
A
39
Yf•
ya
J4{.
f S
l(e•
y7.
Aft
11
so
sa
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
Signatuq Printed Name Address
iv,
jzcc ILA_rnc' cA-i-ins i -1'6c , - `t- f
c- 42--
l 7v I J PJi f) rjV ..
c-
J
3 .
I .-u `; C.wci rc• (id1LL 3 ya 5 7L
La r 1' - IV
J is LrN1 f 3 Is-
A t L 647 k t 137 6 meg`.''' Aj--,e- N,
J,1= 13 -7 a
Ali -L'f r ` (,(,Sl r5" 5" 1 J
r
vcAJ
6-0i/L. r i,Fn i 43. S
Mass
l3qz
53-
fie•
57.
60 '
ca.
63.
y.
s
G7.
6T-
61.
70-
71'
7a,
73.
7y
Z
76
77
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
Signature Printed Name Address
Q
so i-.- tv2 jam L,i L-r1z N
Lie U130 k n
LIN . w -s
n i nfYI. Ok5on
LiL G So • S .s /•
l
J C'rl f i" 5-510 iHaea Ln N
e 6 a'e) o o =
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
7q.
Sb.
3'I.
Ia-
vl
W.
X.
lel.
f:
il
50
1!
9a.
53.
q4-_
TS,
4(
72
f01
to
to,
to
E
v
Printed Name
artr
i
04!.
INAMOPIMIJUAWWOMAT
FrWWAOFAMOMANYMOMMM
ON110
v
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
e Printed Name Address
z_ i_Z3 7oS Ty
C.
d b 105
lr0/i
hieAckbe, KiL A),
47Ac-k; k o65- git' • ,j •
Li 4-.: o v V1. t,-70 r 1J
s
1 , , / ,
rte•.- v I U N_r h r 1. n .
Z/? .
Itiochn _IS' =
LL. 'f ej 1= 'Z ALJ
CI -,sem
Oh u2l2 O & 6
0
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
SiguaWre Printed Name Address
14:D5 4JA Fb(OIQ
L Grn 7 , _ a r.Ay
wd eea l --a15 g.1J.
ILL- o• (004h P II
e z\ d lQ c t- P 1
mAAZ U//VNDdRF xw 714 pt-. Aj.
f Cj
t l oris z
OR s S
cx' nes 1S Q tti /1J -
w NVO 60' F, tJ
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
JI .Printed Namer,y
pmwmzKF
i%MI
inch!
r
kf
A/o,
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
Signgare Printed Name Address
e L G '4 6ti41"-tV
0 WA) / sfZI eE.
tom. 4 --Yin, jy '- kI C. Cc, I-;'YM("Z_ 13 5 " i, • Cn
5cln r 1. J G'c S 4/40 % rifShirC
173.
TI,
IIs.
17.
Ra'. t7a'.
7R .
1 a.
61
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
Signature Printed Name Address
ta" Pc4rielzt M i07S Xu ccs
Sac(Sc- loa?o Z) Il
wst
R l'1 r c . C' ' n 37Gd ur%SL%l ".3/ %2
i/Y -/)a A/r'
137
udd
3.
1qq'
rl
l•
168'•
18`1
4a.
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
Signatuye Printed Name Address
fn' PO asGCV 3 S Cie s
1 (L% t f ti l jCC/t' lG, = C i ``r L 1 /V
0
We, the residents of Lake Camelot Estates, City of Plymouth, want to voice
our support for the July 27, 1999 Land Use Plan for Northwest Plymouth
Vicksburg and County Road 47 area). This plan has already been approved
by the City Council. However, there are other plans under consideration that
include high-density layouts. These plans will negatively affect traffic flow
on County Road 47 and will present many safety issues. We, the residents
of Lake Camelot Estates, are asking the City Council to implement the
original Land Use Plan (dated July 27, 1999) for the benefit of all current
and future residents of Northwest Plymouth.
Signature Printed Name Address
S vt
v ` .eo i u c 3 E S .4 ,-e ,,