Loading...
Planning Commission - 12/11/2006 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2006 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD MEMBERS: Jon Duckstad, John Kirk, Vicki Koenig, Jerry Pitzrick, Frank Powell, Peter Rocheford, Fred Seymour, Ray Stoelting, Jon Stoltz STAFF MEMBERS: Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources; Al Gray, City Engineer; Mike Franzen, City Planner; Julie Krull, Recording Secretary I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL Chair Stoelting called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Absent: Rocheford and Seymour. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to approve the agenda. Motion carried 7-0. III. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 27, 2006 Kirk had an addition to the first sentence in the first paragraph on page 7 of the minutes. It should read " Kirk stated he strongly supports non-motorized travel both in MCA and residential sections of Eden Prairie." He also had an addition to the third sentence of the same paragraph. It should read, "He pointed out it is an old road and also a dangerous road, however, it is in an area where we are trying to preserve the Prairie Bluff area. Pizrick had some additional changes to the minutes. The first change would be page 5, third paragraph, first sentence. It should read, "Pitzrick asked if the project proponent anticipates additional space for this project in the future and anticipates for future fuel types, such as C & G and hydrogen fuel." The third sentence in the same paragraph should read, "Pitzrick stated he wanted the architects to be creative in their design of the gas pump island area. The next change Pitzrick had was on page 7, paragraph two, first sentence. It should read, "Pitzrick stated he would like to see pedestrian bridges set up in the Singletree/Hwy 212 area, and Singletree/Prairie Center Drive area for pedestrian traffic and to function as land mark signage for downtown Eden Prairie." Pitzrick also added the following information to the end of paragraph three on page 7. It should read, "Pitzrick stated that we need to look at the impact of the power line on the development potential in the high density area of MCA and also the options to regroup the power line." Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 2 MOTION by Pitzrick, seconded by Kirk, to approve the minutes as amended. Motion carried 6-0. Koenig abstained. IV. PUBLIC MEETING V. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS A. ST. ANDREW WOODS INFORMATIONAL MEETING Request for: Informational meeting to present a concept plan for a proposed multiple family use of property currently guided low density residential. The plan includes eight twin home units in four buildings. Location is the northwest corner of Baker Road and St. Andrew Drive. Henry Lazniarz, of St. Andrews Woods, LLC, presented the proposal. He stated they previously proposed a 17 unit building and are coming back this evening with an 8 twin home units in four buildings. He utilized the overhead projector to illustrate this proposal. He stated in regard to Baker Road, it is a highly traveled road and because of it he felt this area would most likely not attract families with children, due to the busyness of the road. Mr. Lazniarz also pointed out at the end of Vervoort Lane there is a play area for kids, including a basketball hoop. He said a good project would keep Vervoort Lane as it is and not expand the street. He stated the four buildings could fit on the site with a private road installed. Mr. Lazniarz also said the home values would be in the range of$550,000 to $600,000. He pointed out in regards to the residents on the hill and their concern of the view, they have changed their design of the buildings to rambler town homes. Mr. Lazniarz said because of the elevation, there would be a much better site line. Mr. Lazniarz also stated they would be putting a pond and a fountain on the property. He said he felt this proposal is the best possible use for this site and also said the best fit for this site would be to make these units senior living housing. Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated this property is designated as low density residential. The proposed plan for tonight is a guide plan change. He stated the Commission should base their decision on which plan is best and would fit with the neighborhood. Franzen also stated the most logical fit is access from Vervoort Lane, and 4 single family homes. In regards to families in the area, he pointed out there are many single family homes in the area on Baker Road has not had an impact on single family homes. Franzen stated there are two options for this area, twin homes and single family homes. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. Jason Anderson, of 7238 Vervoort Lane, whose residence is adjacent to the lot being developed, stated he moved into this area 5 years ago and at that time he had a concern the adjacent lot would be developed. He stated they have three children and plan to raise their children in the area. He pointed out there would be 10 feet between the lot line and the building and their view across the street Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 3 would be another unit. He also said in regards to the trees, most of them would be taken down with the project. Mr. Anderson said he is also concerned with the increased traffic this project would bring to the area. Gamal Eshmawy, who was the previous owner to this property, stated when he sold the property it was agreed there would be built on this lot four single family units; which he was to have one of these units to purchase at a reduced price. Mr. Eshmawy stated this was agreed on before signing the purchase agreement. He gave Chair Stoelting a copy of the agreement for official record. Joan Carroll, of 13764 Fenwick Ct, stated initially she was fine with the proposal but after hearing Mr. Eshmawy speak she has some reservations. Patricia Harris, of 7262 Vervoort Lane, stated she is the original owner of her home. She pointed out Mr. Lazniarz never did meet with all of the neighbors as he stated. She stated the proposed twin homes would be in their area. She is concerned there is only 5 proposed off street parking spaces, which she felt could be an issue. Mrs. Harris stated she would rather see this area developed into single family homes. She pointed out there are many kids in the area and feels the single family homes would be conducive to families. She showed illustrations of Mr. Lazniarz's Sommerset project, utilizing the overhead projector, and pointed out how compact the town homes are in the area. She also read a letter from her husband, who was unable to attend, in which he supports her concerns. Margaret Perry, of 13715 St. Andrew Drive, stated she is also concerned with the parking in the area and pointed out St. Andrew Drive is not very conducive to off street parking. She is also concerned the cottonwood trees would be taken down. Ms. Perry said she has reservations about the driveway that would be put in for this project and stated it is very close to the front of her house and she is concerned with the traffic this would produce and the headlights shining in her front window. She utilized the overhead projector to show where the driveway would be located in proximity to the front of her home. Jess Irmiter, of 7270 Vervoort Lane,pointed out the meeting with the project proponent was very limited. He stated he has numerous concerns for this project and they are as follows; driveway issue, wetland area and drainage issues, and the senior housing issue based on the fact that it is very difficult to segregate an area as senior housing. Mrs. Husby, who lives in the town homes in the area, said she is concerned with looking at the rooftops of this proposed development. Stoelting summarized the following issues: 1. Tree loss in the area 2. Increased traffic 3. Previous owner and contract issues 4. Parking 5. Cottonwood tree loss Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 4 6. New road drive outlet 7. Water run-off 8. Roof lines Mr. Lazniarz addressed the issues of the trees, setbacks, and traffic. He stated if this project were to change to single family homes it would not change any of the setbacks. In regards to the trees,he said the loss would be the same for either the town homes or single family homes. Mr. Lazniarz pointed out when they initially proposed the condos, this project would have saved numerous trees. Also, with the condo development, the building could be kept lower which would require less fill. Mr. Lazniarz said in extending up Vervoort Lane would cause more tree loss. In regards to traffic, he said if Vervoort Lane is not extended, the private drive would be created, which would take traffic off of that area. He also said senior units would create less traffic than 4 single family homes. Mr. Lazniarz said in regards to the contract issue, Mr. Eshmawy had a contract agreement with CRE Construction. He said the purchase agreement was bought by his company and the agreement the past owner gets a single family lot was dismissed from the agreement. Mr. Lazniarz stated they offered Mr. Eshmawy the following: 1. They offered options to commensurate below average compensation for the lot 2. Sell Mr. Eshmawy back the property for$350,000, plus incurred expenses 3. Sell Mr. Eshmawy a unit(8 acres) across the street from the property 4. Or create one single family home on the twin home property Mr. Lazniarz said he came to an agreement with Mr. Eshmawy that he would receive $75,000. Mr. Lazniarz thought they were still under that agreement Leslie Dahlen, a realtor that set up the meetings with the neighbors, stated the reason they could not get all of the neighbors together at once was because they were never in agreement as to time and date. She also stated she could not reach the Harris residence to inform them of the meetings because they have an unlisted phone number. Mr. Lazniarz stated in regards to parking, there are five onsite parking spots but what needs to be considered is the garage space and the two car space outside of each unit, which would give a total of 21 parking spaces. Mr. Lazniarz stated in regards to the neighbor whose home is across the street from the private drive, he said his company looked into this issue and they found the driveway is positioned such that the car headlights would never shine in the homeowner's windows. Pertaining to the issue of water run-off, Mr. Lazniarz stated the architects have assured him they have taken appropriate wetland standards into consideration and they will also be bringing in fill to the site. Mr. Lazniarz said in regards to the rooftops, it would not make a difference if they had rambler-type single family homes or rambler-type town homes. The roof tops would still be the same. He also said there would be a 4 foot high retaining wall in the backside of the property. In regards to Mrs. Husby, Mr. Lazniarz said they would be willing to plant trees in her yard to act as a buffer for the rooftops. Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 5 Stoelting asked Fox to address the issue of cottonwood trees. Fox stated out of the 63 trees in the area, only 9 are significant trees, which would be the cottonwood trees. He said all but two of the cottonwoods would have to be removed. He also pointed out they are looking at an 80% tree loss,but said whatever style of home would go in that area, there would be significant tree loss. Stoelting asked Franzen if he were to go forward with single family homes, would the project proponent have to make an additional presentation at an informational meeting? Franzen stated the project proponent could proceed to the public hearing. Kirk asked Franzen to comment on the senior restrictive housing. Franzen stated if it was low income or affordable housing, and TIF was involved the city could designate what is could be used for. Pitzrick asked if single family homes would be feasible financially. Mr. Lazniarz said 4 lots would not be feasible,but 5 lots would be. Mr. Lazniarz pointed out this area is not a very attractive development site and he does not feel people will spend the money for single family homes. He said $700,000 homes would be hard to sell in that area. Stoltz asked Mr. Lazniarz to put up a picture of the end of Vervoort Lane and asked him to discuss the tree loss. Mr. Lazniarz utilized the overhead projector to show a picture of Vervoort Lane. He said they would save more trees with a private drive rather than extending Vervoort Lane. Stoltz asked if the current residents would be looking at the units. Mr. Lazniarz said the setbacks would be the same for either single family homes or town homes and they would be willing to plant more trees for buffers. He said four single family homes will have the same environmental consequences as town homes. Fox stated houses 10 feet from the property lines would not be able to house trees as buffers because there would be no room. He also said it is difficult to analyze this because there is no grading plan in effect. Franzen reiterated this point by stating with the mass of the building there would not be much room for trees. Koenig asked Franzen about the parking issue. Franzen stated there is adequate parking for this proposal. Koenig asked Mr. Lazniarz if he considered putting up 2 buildings with 4 units each. Mr. Lazniarz said financially it would be very difficult. Koenig said the pricing of the town homes would not be much lower than the single family homes. Mr. Lazniarz stated in looking at the costs, there would be a considerable difference between the two. Koenig asked Franzen how this project could be labeled as senior housing. Franzen stated the City does not need more market rate units but rather affordable housing. Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 6 Mr. Lazniarz stated they originally proposed the condo building to put in affordable units and to save trees but the neighbors did not like this concept because the units were cheaper than the other housing in the neighborhood. Koenig stated the condominiums just did not fit into the area. Kirk stated the town home proposal would have less traffic and would be less intrusive than single family homes. Stoelting pointed out this is an informational meeting and he would like to see a little more detail in regards to the single family homes. Koenig said the Commission should give the developer more direction on the cul-de-sac issue or opening up Vervoort Lane. Powell stated he was surprised that the neighbors on Vervoort Lane opposed a private drive versus going through Vervoort Lane. Powell also said he would want the legal issue resolved in regard to the contract issue. Stoelting asked Franzen to address this issue. Franzen said it was a private party issue. Stoltz stated it would be in the best interest of everyone involved if there was a resolution to the contract before it was approved. Kirk stated the town home proposal would have less traffic and would be less intrusive than single family homes for Vervoort residents. Duckstad said there is not enough information presented tonight to make a decision. He felt the neighbor's concerns should be taken into consideration. "Stoelting summarized by stating the Planning Commission would like to see both proposals more fully developed, especially the single family home plan, and to include several different site plans. The developer agreed to work on the new proposals and to present them at a future meeting with the residents. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. STARING PRESERVE Request for: Preliminary Plat of 1.67 acres into two lots and road right-of-way. Michael Brandvold, of Anderson Engineering, presented the proposal. He stated they have reviewed the staff report and have no questions. He utilized the overhead projector to illustrate the project. Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated the Staff recommends approval based on page 3 of the staff report. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. Koenig asked Fox to address the issue of tree loss due to construction. Fox stated the project proponent will be replacing trees and the project proponent meets the City's requirements for tree replacement. Powell asked if the public notices went out. Franzen stated the notices did go out to the neighbors. Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 7 MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat of 1.67 acres into two lots and road right-of-way based on plans stamped dated November 29, 2006, and the staff report dated December 8, 2006. Motion carried 7-0. B. BLUFF COUNTRY VILLAGE Request for: Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 5.8 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 5.8 acres; Zoning District Amendment in the Neighborhood Zoning District on 2.7 acres; Site Plan Review on 2.7 acres; Preliminary Plat of 5.8 acres into two lots and one outlot. Beth Simonstad presented the proposal and utilized the overhead projector to show illustrations of the project. She gave some history to the project and stated she is here tonight to amend the proposed plan that was granted in 2002. The proposed plan included such items as a 2,300 sq. ft. coffee shop on 7 acres, a 1,200 sq. ft. retail building on 2 acres, and 3.1 acres for future development, which would include 2 buildings on the site. Ms. Simonstad stated they are now making the buildings smaller to give the project a more residential feeling. She illustrated the plan of the two buildings on the lot and also showed an illustration of a landscaping plan. She stated they will be making road improvements to the north side of this site and pointed out they will also be saving the oak trees in the area. Ed Farr, of Ed Farr Architects, illustrated the building design utilizing the overhead projector. He stated it does meet the setback requirements and material requirements. He also showed the different brick types that would be used in the building. He pointed out the architectural design would be carried out on all four sides of the building. He stated in reference to Walgreens, they are trying to coordinate the design of the building to that of the proposed buildings. Mr. Farr stated in regards to the walkways, there would be a generous walkway around the buildings. He said there would be a general landscape buffer along Breezy Way and the developers would also eliminate the service corridor along the backside of the building that would face the residential area. Stoelting asked the project proponent to address the road improvements. Ms. Simonstad illustrated the road improvements utilizing the overhead projector. She pointed out they would be removing the old medians and replacing them with new ones. She stated this is a very expensive project and she will continue to meet with the Staff on this issue. Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated on page 4 of the staff report there are six questions that need to be addressed by the Commission. He also pointed out there are three options for this project and the staff is recommending revisions to architecture, roads and screening. Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 8 Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. Greg Harcus, of 9822 Belmont Lane, stated he would like to see a neighborhood meeting in regard to this project. He stated he liked a lot of the ideas that were presented tonight but has one concern with this project. He stated his concern is the visitor parking for the town home association is located on this property. He stated the project proponent stated they could still park in the area, and he just wants to make sure that is still carried out. Steve Mohn, of 9812 Lee Drive, stated he does like this plan. His only concern is they like the concept of the two small buildings and does not want to see it turned into one building. Rich Feely, of 9878 Lee Drive, seconded Steve Mohn's comments. He stated he supports the project and would like to see it passed. George McNulty, of 9681 Belmont Lane, stated he has some questions in regards to the building roofs, lighting in the parking area, drive entrances, and the guest parking outlot. Stoelting summarized the public's comments. 1. Neighborhood excited about the plan 2. Concern for a neighborhood meeting 3. Outlot A, what is the plan 4. Visitor Parking 5. Sloped roofs 6. Access into the property; will headlights affect the residents Ms. Simonstad stated in regards to parking, she will work with the residents to come to a resolve on this issue. She stated in regards to outlot A, she has not addressed any parking spaces as of yet,but will address this situation. In regards to access and headlights, she said the access into the property would not impact the residents. Mr. Farr stated the market supports a flat roof contemporary design. Stoelting stated the staff report recommends the slope roof design. Mr. Farr stated he appreciates the concept of the sloped roof but they would like to use the flat roof design. Franzen stated typically projects located in a residential area should transition into the area. He stated the architects should capture a few aspects of the Walgreens building and incorporate it into their design. Franzen stated Staff will leave it up to the architects to create a design that is consistent and with a residential character. Pitzrick said in regards to the roof situation, he would like to make sure it is an attractive roof. In regards to the south side of the parking area,he would like to see a rain garden into the area. Mr. Farr pointed out there are two rain gardens in the area. Pitzrick stated when outlot A is developed, the project proponent should Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 9 make sure there is no problem with shared parking. Stoelting asked Franzen to address the issue of shared parking. Franzen stated all of the areas were designed to stand alone in regards to parking. He stated all four parcels will have to enter into an agreement in regards to parking. Koenig stated to Franzen since the Commission approved the previous PUD, the proponent is bound by that one. Franzen stated the city is under no obligation to amend the approved plan and agreement. The commission has the discretion to recommend an amendment to the plan if you believe the plan is acceptable. Koenig asked Franzen for a comparison of tree loss between the approved plan and the proposed plan. Franzen stated the only difference would be the two oak trees that would have to be removed. Stoelting asked Franzen if the two oak trees could be saved by repositioning the coffee shop. Franzen stated they could be saved by repositioning the coffee shop. Fox said the only trees left on this site would be the trees in the land dedicated to the City. Ms Simonstad said they will replace any trees as required by the City. Pitzrick said he would like to see some sloped roof tops. Duckstad said he would like the architect to work with the City in designing the roof. Stoelting reiterated to the Commission the three options that were stated in the staff report and asked for a consensus. The consensus was for a continuation. Stoelting asked the project proponent if they would be willing to come back to the January 8 Commission Meeting. They said yes. Chuck Hausker, of 9836 Belmont, stated he is concerned with the woodland area on the property and would like to see this area preserved. Fox stated those trees are on City owned property. MOTION by Powell, seconded by Kirk, to continue the project to the January 22, 2007 meeting and to revise the development plans according to the staff report and other requirements as identified by the Commission, which would include that the developer meets with City Staff in regards to developing a roof design, a tree replacement plan, grading plan, and cross access shared parking plan. City Staff would discuss additional parking for nearby residents. Motion carried 7-0. C. WINDSOR PLAZA Request for: Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.44 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.44 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural, Commercial Regional Service and Office to Commercial Regional Service on 4.44 acres; Site Plan Review on 4.44 acres; Preliminary Plat of 5.81 acres into two lots and road right-of-way. Jay Scott, of Solomon Real Estate Group,presented the proposal using a computer generated DVD of the project. Ryan Pletz, associate to Jay Scott, stated Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 10 they will be showing a combined presentation of both Windsor Plaza and Randy's Bobby and Steve's Auto World. The presentation showed the layout of the site plan including additional parking spots and the landscaping plan. It also diagramed vehicular traffic around the site as well as pedestrian traffic. Mr. Scott addressed the staff report stating they have compiled with the plan revisions addressed by Staff. David Tupper, landscape architect, showed additional illustrations of the landscaping plan utilizing the overhead projector. Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated the conclusions of the staff report indicates there still needs to be more work done on the store fronts. Franzen pointed out if the store front is not revised now it would be up to the Staff and the architects to come up with a design. Otherwise, the Commission should make recommendations to the plan. Franzen also stated the Commission can give PUD approval to this phase of the project and send that on to the City Council, and the rezoning would be continued. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. There was no public input. Pitzrick stated he had a concern with the Dryvit material and would like to see a solid warranty going along with this project, along with a third party inspection. Bob Dazel, a representative of Dryvit, said all the products used would fall into a 10 year warranty. He stated if there is any type of moisture damage under warranty they will take full responsibility. He pointed out they only warrant faulty materials, the insulator would have to warrant his work. Stoltz asked Franzen if he was comfortable with the use of this project. Franzen stated in addressing this issue, the project proponent is in compliance. He also stated because they are asking for waivers, the Commission does have some flexibility in regards to this issue. Kirk stated it is important to challenge the project proponent,but he does not feel the Commission has the expertise to criticize the product. Duckstad asked the project proponent to address the issue of durability of this product. Mr. Pletz said he is very comfortable with the durability of this product. Duckstad stated as long as the architect and the City Planner are comfortable with this product than the Commission should not micro-manage it. Stoelting stated he does not want the Commission to get bogged down on this issue and to discuss other issues of the project. Franzen summarized the project stating overall it was a very good project. Mr. Scott stated they have addressed specific issues this evening but the only thing they cannot accommodate would be a specific store front, and stated it would need to be flexible. Stoltz asked Franzen if he was comfortable with the store fronts. Franzen stated revising the store fronts is a recommendation from the Staff. The Commission can either agree or modify the recommendation. If the final design is left to the developer and staff, the Commission will have to be comfortable without having input into the final details. Stoltz commented he would feel comfortable with the City Staff in charge of completing the revisions as stated in the report. In regards to the store fronts, Franzen commented he wants Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 11 the architect to be creative but also to be held accountable for work completed. Mr. Scott stated they would be willing to work with the City Staff on any issues, including the store fronts. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Koenig, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION by Duckstad, seconded by Stoltz, to recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.44 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.44 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural, Commercial Regional Service and Office to Commercial Regional Service on 4.44 acres; Site Plan Review on 4.44 acres; Preliminary Plat of 5.81 acres into two lots and road right-of-way,based on the staff report dated December 8, 2006 and based on plans stamped dated December 4, 2006, and the plans presented to the Planning Commission on the computer model DVD shown to the Commission this evening, December 11, 2006. Motion carried 7-0. D. RANDY'S BOBBY & STEVE'S AUTO WORLD Request for: Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.08 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 1.08 acres; Zoning District Change from Highway Commercial and Office to Commercial Regional Service on 1.08 acres; Site Plan Review on 1.08 acres. Ryan Pletz presented the proposal and stated this was a combined presentation of Windsor Plaza. Stoelting asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated staff recommendation was similar to the Windsor Project and after the presentation, Staff would be willing to work with the project proponent to fine tune any details on this project. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. There was no input. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Stoltz, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION by Kirk, seconded by Stoltz, to recommend approval of the Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.08 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 1.08 acres; Zoning District Change from Highway Commercial and Office to Commercial Regional Service on 1.08 acres; Site Plan Review on 1.08 acres,based on the staff report dated December 8, 2006 and based on plans stamped dated December 4, 2006, and the plans presented to the Planning Commission on the computer model DVD shown to the Commission this evening, December 11, 2006. Motion carried 7-0. VII. PLANNERS' REPORT Due to the lateness of the meeting, Franzen postponed the Rain Water Presentation until the January 8, 2006, Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Minutes December 11, 2006 Page 12 Tax Increment Plan for Windsor Plaza and Randy's Bobby & Steve's Auto World. Franzen stated there needs to be an amendment in the motion to change it from Windsor Plaza to Town Center Phase L MOTION by Koenig, seconded by Stoltz, to approve the tax increment plan for Town Center Phase I. Motion carried 7-0. VIII. MEMBERS' REPORT IX. CONTINUING BUSINESS X. NEW BUSINESS Stoelting recognized Jon Duckstad for his work on the Planning Commission and wished him well with the City Council. XI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Stoltz, seconded by Koenig, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 7-0. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 12:56 a.m.