HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 06-17-2020Planning Commission 1 of 2 June 17, 2020
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
AGENDA
Regular Planning Commission
June 17, 2020, 7:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1.1 Instructions to participate in the Virtual Planning Commission Meeting
2. PUBLIC FORUM
3. APPROVE AGENDA
4. CONSENT AGENDA
4.1 4.1 Planning Commission Minutes May 20, 2020
May 20 Minutes
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
5.1 Rezoning, PUD general plan, and preliminary plat for a townhome development to be
called “Perl Gardens” for property located at 3735 and 3855 County Road 101
(Rachel Development, Inc. -- 2020-026)
Planning Commission Report Information
Draft Ordinance Approving Rezoning
Draft Resolution Approving Findings of Fact for Rezoning
Draft Resolution Approving PUD General Plan & Preliminary Plat
Location Map
Aerial Photo
Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map
Approved 2005 Preliminary Plat
Approved 2007 Final Plat
Approved 2008 Sunrise Plan
Previous Sketch by Roers Companies (File 2019024)
Previous Sketch by R&R Construction (File 2019059)
LA-2 Excerpt from Comprehensive Plan
Project Narrative
Parking/Fire Truck Turning Exhibit
Building Elevation Drawings and Floor Plans
Site Graphics 1
Planning Commission 2 of 2 June 17, 2020
6. NEW BUSINESS
7. ADJOURNMENT
2
Regular
Planning
Commission
June 17, 2020
Agenda
Number:1.1
To:Dave Callister, City Manager
Prepared by:Steve Juetten
Reviewed by:Steve Juetten, Community Development Director
Item:Instructions to participate in the Virtual Planning Commission
Meeting
1. Action Requested:
The Chair provides instructions for the public to participate in the meeting by phone or online.
2. Background:
Planning Commission meetings will be conducted virtually (via Zoom webinar/conference call) due
to the state of local emergency for the COVID 19 pandemic. Members of the Planning Commission
and staff will participate in this meeting via telephone/video conference
To Watch the Meeting:
- Online at https://ccxmedia.org/ccx-cities/plymouth
- Cable Channel 16 (CCX Media)
Written comments may be submitted for inclusion in the Planning Commission packet by emailing
planning@plymouthmn.gov. You may also request that comments of up to one page be read into
the record by the Planning Manager.
You may speak during the meeting via telephone or via Zoom Conferencing Service at no cost.
Please notify the Planning Staff at planning@plymouthmn.gov if you wish to speak to an item at the
meeting or if you have questions about connecting to speak during the meeting. We ask that you
provide notification at least one hour prior to the meeting time to ensure your message is received.
The password to the meeting will be provided to you at that time.
To Call In to the Meeting: (312) 626-6799
Using Zoom to Participate: https://zoom.us/join
• Meeting ID: 848 3250 9238
• Password will be needed - obtain from staff a least one hour prior to the meeting.
3. Budget Impact:
N/A
4. Attachments:
3
4
Regular
Planning
Commission
June 17, 2020
Agenda
Number:4.1
To:Planning Commission
Prepared by:Barb Thomson, Planning Manager
Reviewed by:Steve Juetten, Community Development Director
File No:
1. Applicant:
2. Proposal:
3. Location:
4. Guiding:
5. Zoning:
6. School District:
7. Review Deadline:
June 17, 2020
8. Brief Description:
9. Attachments:5
May 20 Minutes
6
Proposed Minutes 1 of 9 Meeting of May 20 2020
Proposed Minutes
Planning Commission Meeting
May 20, 2020
Chair Anderson called a Meeting of the Plymouth Planning Commission to order at 7:00 p.m. in
the Council Chambers of City Hall, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, on May 20, 2020.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Marc Anderson, Commissioners Bryan Oakley, Donovan
Saba, David Witte, Justin Markell, Michael Boo and Julie Jones
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barbara Thomson, Senior Planner Kip Berglund, Senior
Planner Lori Sommers, Community Development Director Steve Juetten, Community
Development Coordinator Matt Lupini
OTHERS PRESENT: Councilmember Ned Carroll
Chair Anderson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Plymouth Forum
Approval of Agenda
Motion was made by Commissioner Witte, and seconded by Commissioner Oakley, to approve
the agenda. With Oakley, Saba, Witte, Markell, Boo, Jones and Anderson voting in favor, the
motion carried.
Consent Agenda
Motion was made by Commissioner Jones, and seconded by Commissioner Saba, to adopt the
Consent Agenda that included the following item:
(4.01) Planning Commission minutes as amended from meeting held on April 15, 2020.
With Oakley, Saba, Witte, Markell, Boo, Jones and Anderson voting in favor, the motion carried.
Public Hearings
(5.01) Public hearing on rezoning, PUD general plan and preliminary plat for Rachel
Development, Inc. for a townhome development to be called “Perl Gardens” on property
7
Proposed Minutes 2 of 9 Meeting of May 20 2020
located at 3735 and 3855 County Road 101 (northwest corner of Medina Road and County
Road 101). (2020026)
Planning Manager Thomson stated that additional time is needed to address the engineering
design aspects of the proposed plan and consequently, staff is asking that the Chair open the
public hearing and continue it to Wednesday, June 17, 2020 at which time staff will give a
complete report on the proposal. Planning Manager Thomson stated that staff will do another
mailed notice prior to that meeting.
Chair Anderson opened the public hearing and continued it to Wednesday, June 17, 2020.
(5.02) Public hearing on zoning ordinance text amendment to allow commercial use
accessory to a brewery in the I-1, I-2 and I-3 zoning districts for Hops Craft Brewing
Company, LLC. (2020018)
Senior Planner Berglund reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Witte asked who is making the request.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that Hops Craft Brewing Company LLC made the application
and would operate under the name of Luce Line Brewing.
Commissioner Oakley asked staff to share a zoning map that would identify the I-1, I-2, and I-3
zoning districts within the city. He stated that there are a lot of different areas with that zoning,
and he said he wanted to have a visual of the potential impacts of the change. He asked if it is
necessary to take action on this request prior to considering the next item on the agenda, or
whether the details of the next item could be shared prior to the commission making a decision.
Senior Planner Berglund recommended that this action occur prior to the conditional use permit
request.
Chair Anderson stated it is his understanding that the applicant came forward with the desire for
a brewery and taproom at this location, and it was the determination of staff that a zoning text
amendment would be needed; therefore, the commission would need to approve this action prior
to consideration of the next request.
Senior Planner Berglund replied that a brewery and taproom would be a permitted use, but
because of the associated commercial use (bike shop), staff determined that a text amendment
would be needed. He confirmed that the text amendment would be needed to allow the multiple
uses proposed.
Commissioner Witte asked if the City has considered the state statutes governing this type of
activity. He asked if state law would allow the business to operate a brewery, taproom, and bike
shop within the same premises. He stated that grocers have to have separate entrances and parts
of their building for food and liquor sales.
8
Proposed Minutes 3 of 9 Meeting of May 20 2020
Senior Planner Berglund explained that the applicant would need to go through the state process
to obtain the necessary licensing.
Chair Anderson provided details on the changes that were enacted through what is known as the
Surly law.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that the bike shop would be an associated use, but was unsure if
the bike shop would be included as a component of the liquor license.
Commissioner Boo stated that he understands the existing zoning would allow the taproom and
brewery uses to exist, and the consideration is whether a commercial use could also consume the
space available under the taproom use within the conditional use permit. He stated that as
proposed, 80 percent of the space could be used for a bike shop, with the remaining space
allocated for a taproom. He stated that this seems to allow for any commercial use to use the
majority of the space as long as there is a taproom component.
Senior Planner Berglund replied that as proposed, the commercial use would have to have a
lesser square footage than the combined brewery and taproom area. He stated that would protect
against the scenario Commissioner Boo provided.
Planning Manager Thomson stated that the main idea is the commercial use would be an
accessory use to the brewery and taproom, not the principal use.
Commissioner Markell asked for clarification on the last clause within the proposed amendment.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that the commercial uses would normally fall under the
commercial zoning district, and therefore if the brewery/taproom goes away, the commercial use
would need to go away as well. He stated that if the taproom left but the brewery remained, the
commercial use could remain as well.
Chair Anderson stated that typically a bike shop would be found in a retail location rather than an
industrial location, and therefore if the taproom and brewery were no longer in operation, the
retail component would not be allowed to remain.
Commissioner Markell asked if the retail component should go away if the taproom goes away,
rather than allowing the retail component to remain with only the brewery element.
Senior Planner Berglund confirmed that language could be amended as desired.
Chair Anderson stated that in his opinion the brewery and taproom would not be separated as the
brewery would not work without the taproom.
Chair Anderson introduced Tim Naumann, the applicant, who stated that the two components of
brewery and taproom would not be separable. He stated that he could not see a scenario where a
brewery would exist without the taproom. He stated that the reason for the change is to facilitate
the opportunity for a brewery to create a theme or concept around the brewery and taproom. He
9
Proposed Minutes 4 of 9 Meeting of May 20 2020
stated that they chose a bicycle/fitness theme. He stated that this concept is occurring across the
industry to create a uniqueness for breweries.
Chair Anderson commented that he has seen many breweries attempt to bring in certain clientele,
and he said he believed that this concept would be appropriate in attempting to cater to biking
and walking in the area.
Chair Anderson opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing as there was no one who
wished to speak on this item.
Commissioner Boo stated it is his understanding that the commercial use would never exceed 50
percent of the space. He stated that the commercial use would be a conditional use and
therefore, it is his understanding that if the bike tenant went away, the applicant would need to
come back to the City if they wanted to add a different commercial use in the future.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that the brewery and taproom is a permitted use. He explained
that the conditional use permit would be required for the commercial/retail use. He confirmed
that any changes once adopted would need to come back before the City for consideration. He
stated that the commercial use would have a lesser floor area than the combined brewery and
taproom, but was unsure that translated to 50 percent.
Commissioner Boo stated that perhaps the language could be clarified to make it clear that the
total commercial space would never exceed the floor area for the combined brewery and taproom
areas.
Commissioner Markell stated that he has heard the terms commercial and retail and asked for
clarification as to the proposed amendment.
Senior Planner Berglund confirmed that the amendment uses the term “commercial.”
Commissioner Witte asked if the conditional use permit would be specific to the bike shop itself
or the bike use.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that if a new bike shop came in and did not request to expand the
current use, staff did not believe that a new conditional use permit would be necessary. He
clarified that the conditional use permit is for the use, not the specific business.
Commissioner Witte stated that it appears this amendment was drafted narrowly for this
applicant and asked if the City should step back to view the topic more broadly.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that the intent of the amendment is to be general. He explained
that this would allow a permitted use within the industrial district to have a commercial
component.
Commissioner Jones commented that she believes the amendment is fine as written. She stated
that the concern with commercial uses within the industrial zone would be parking, but noted
that the conditional use permit would allow the City to ensure that component is provided for. 10
Proposed Minutes 5 of 9 Meeting of May 20 2020
Motion was made by Commissioner Oakley, and seconded by Commissioner Witte, to
recommend approval of a zoning ordinance text amendment to allow commercial use accessory
to a brewery in the I-1, I-2, and I-3 zoning districts. With Oakley, Saba, Witte, Markell, Boo,
Jones and Anderson voting in favor, the motion carried.
(5.03) Conditional use permit for Hops Craft Brewing Company, LLC for a bike shop
accessory to a brewery at 12901 16th Avenue. (2020019)
Senior Planner Berglund reviewed the staff report.
Commissioner Saba asked how staff would envision access from the Luce Line Trail to the
brewery or bike shop.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that at this time there is not a dedicated route from the Luce Line
Trail to the subject property. He noted that the applicant can provide details on the process that
would be necessary with Three Rivers Park District to obtain formal access. He noted that
alternate access could also be provided. He stated that currently there is an informal route from
the trail to the property.
Planning Manager Thomson confirmed that there is an informal route.
Commissioner Witte referenced parking and asked if staff reviewed other similar uses and their
parking requirements and demand to determine if the calculation the applicant provided is
adequate. He commented that this is a unique idea and asked the applicant to discuss trailhead
parking. He noted that some people may choose this as a meeting place to go out and ride and
then return to the site to enjoy the business following their ride. He asked the type of signage the
business would be able to have to attract people from the street and the trail.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that staff did not specifically call and request the parking demand
for Surly Brewing Company. He stated that staff looked at different brewery and taproom
requirements throughout the state. He stated that the applicant could speak to anticipated
parking for the trailhead, noting there is a condition that requires additional parking. He stated
that the property is in the general industrial zoning district and reviewed the signage standards
for the property related to wall and pylon signage. He stated that typically off-site signage is not
permitted under the zoning ordinance and he said he did not believe this property would qualify
for off-site signage.
Planning Manager Thomson stated when reviewing breweries in other communities, Minnetonka
as a suburban community that has a brewery would be a better comparison than Surly, which is
located in Minneapolis.
Commissioner Boo stated that in his research, it appears parking can be strained for this type of
use during prime hours. He asked if there are parking restrictions for on-street parking.
11
Proposed Minutes 6 of 9 Meeting of May 20 2020
Senior Planner Berglund stated that currently the street this property is located on is signed for
no parking on both sides. He noted that the applicant has inquired about the possibility of on-
street parking and advised that staff could look into that further.
Chair Anderson introduced Tim Naumann, the applicant, who provided details on how
pedestrians could access the site. He stated that they have also been in discussions with Three
Rivers Park District related to additional connections. He provided details on signage plans,
including a pylon sign. He stated that initially he believed there were 53 parking stalls on-site,
but noted that with some modifications to the existing parking they may be able to accommodate
all 64 stalls on-site. He stated that they are taking steps to ensure there is parking available for
those that need it. He noted that they will also have bike racks available to allow for bike
parking. He stated that in this concept they are attempting to leverage or build off the idea of
healthy lifestyles and the Luce Line Trail. He stated that they also reviewed a variety of other
ideas, including running, and settled on biking as it would cater to more people. He stated that
they looked for a biking business that has a large outreach and would lead patrons on rides and
could branch out to other clubs, such as yoga and walking the trails. He stated they will create a
separate space for the bicycle shop immediately adjacent to the brewery. He explained there
would be a way for patrons to pass through during shared hours and the theme would be carried
through, noting that perhaps a bicycle would be hung on the wall in the brewery.
Commissioner Markell asked the status of the negotiations for shared parking.
Mr. Naumann replied there are three neighbors that could provide shared parking and provided
an update on those discussions. He stated that because of the lack of interest from two of the
property owners, they decided to review the ability to provide the required parking on-site.
Commissioner Markell asked if the applicant would be in agreement with making the building
permit contingent upon obtaining shared parking.
Mr. Naumann stated he would prefer that the approval be made contingent on his ability to
provide the parking, whether that is done on-site, through shared parking, or with the addition of
on-street parking.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that in the draft resolution there is a condition requiring a written
parking agreement to be submitted that provides the minimum number of stalls required prior to
issuance of a building permit. He stated that the applicant can also provide the required parking
on-site. He stated that on-street parking is not an option at this time, but that could change
throughout this process and further review.
Planning Manager Thomson stated that staff could look into whether on-street parking is an
option, but the condition in the resolution should not list that as an existing option.
Chair Anderson stated there is another industrial area that allows on-street parking on one side of
the street.
Mr. Naumann noted that if on-street parking is allowed, their demand time would be outside of
the time truck traffic would be accessing the other industrial parcels. 12
Proposed Minutes 7 of 9 Meeting of May 20 2020
Commissioner Jones stated that she has driven and biked to the site. She stated that she was
surprised there was not truck traffic and mostly empty parking lots, but recognized that could be
related to the recent change in the economy. She referenced an adjacent parcel with a large
parking lot and hoped that a shared parking agreement could be worked out. She noted that one
of the connections from the trails is marked for emergency use only and therefore would
discourage people from using that connection.
Mr. Naumann stated that connection was provided by the City of Plymouth and is not ADA-
compliant and therefore is marked for limited use.
Commissioner Jones stated that she would recommend removal of the buckthorn and garlic
mustard in the back of the lot to make the trail more visible. She stated that she noticed signage
for a townhome along the trail and therefore believed that signage should be allowed for the
business. She said she believed that this business would be a great fit for the community and
could be a huge draw for the area, noting that she would ride her bike to the business to have a
beverage and then bike back home. She also encouraged the business to keep bike security in
mind. She commented that having a bike repair shop along the trail would be a great amenity as
well.
Chair Anderson asked for details on the portions of the building that would be occupied by each
use and whether there would be space for another tenant.
Mr. Naumann replied that the brewery and taproom would be in the front/far left of the building,
the bike shop would occupy the area marked in grey immediately adjacent, and the white area on
the right would currently be open. He stated they are actively recruiting another
tenant/manufacturer.
Chair Anderson asked how another tenant would impact the parking.
Mr. Naumann replied that potential is contemplated in the existing parking count.
Chair Anderson asked if it is possible to accommodate additional parking in the area marked
‘truck court,’ which may not be in use during times of higher demand for the brewery/taproom.
Mr. Naumann stated that truck deliveries would be very limited. He stated from a practical
perspective that could be used for parking, but would default to the opinion of staff.
Senior Planner Berglund stated that the possible conflict would be that the applicant would still
need to meet the requirements for drive aisle, fire, and setbacks from the building.
Commissioner Witte asked if the applicant considered pushing the parking area to the south,
closer to the property line.
Mr. Naumann stated there is a grade in that location that would make that cost prohibitive to
construct.
13
Proposed Minutes 8 of 9 Meeting of May 20 2020
Chair Anderson opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing as there was no one who
wished to speak on this item.
Commissioner Oakley stated that he has concerns with access to the trail, encouraging the
applicant to talk extensively with the park district to obtain a trail connection. He said he
believed that the businesses would be more successful if visible from the trail and with access.
He stated that Trailhead Cycle is the business he uses for his bikes and travels further than other
shops to get to it. He stated that he will support this request as the cycle business is a great
business and the brewery taproom would be a good addition to the community.
Chair Anderson agreed that a brewery is long overdue for the city. He acknowledged that the
plan needs additional details,, but commented that sometimes an applicant needs some direction
toward approval before investing additional time and resources into other elements of the plan.
He stated that the need for parking is clear and if the applicant does not find the needed spaces,
the building permit would not be issued. He noted there are multiple options the applicant could
pursue to obtain the additional parking. He stated that he will also be supporting this request.
Senior Planner Berglund provided a proposed change to the language related to the required
parking.
Motion was made by Commissioner Oakley, and seconded by Commissioner Jones, to
recommend approval of a conditional use permit for Hops Craft Brewing Company, LLC for a
bike shop accessory to a brewery at 12901 16th Avenue with an amendment to condition 3,
subpart 2 that the applicant submit a plan that provides a minimum of 64 parking spaces (this can
be accommodated on-site, on an adjacent parcel through a shared parking agreement and/or on-
street if approved by the City, or any combination thereof. With Oakley, Saba, Witte, Markell,
Boo, Jones and Anderson voting in favor, the motion carried.
New Business
(6.01) Public meeting on site plan amendment for Anderson-Johnson Associates, Inc. for
parking upgrades at Kimberly Lane Elementary School located at 17405 Old Rockford
Road. (2020027)
Senior Planner Sommers reviewed the staff report.
Chair Anderson asked for details on the bus route.
Senior Planner Sommers stated that from her understanding the bus route is not going to change.
Chair Anderson introduced Jon Deutsch, representing the applicant, who stated that the morning
drop off and afternoon pickup are currently different. He stated that the school’s principal is
comfortable with the existing drop off and pick up and therefore that is not proposed to change.
Chair Anderson referenced the south side, noting that curve appears tighter under the proposed
plan compared to the existing conditions. He noted that could be a problem for the buses. 14
Proposed Minutes 9 of 9 Meeting of May 20 2020
Mr. Deutsch stated that he assumed the project engineer has reviewed that element, noting that
corner has gone through a few renditions. He identified a location that would be controlled with
a stop sign.
Chair Anderson introduced Mike Tierney, representing the applicant, who provided details on the
changes that were made to the area in question in order for the buses and fire department
vehicles to be able to make that turn.
Chair Anderson welcomed any comments from the public.
There were none.
Chair Anderson commented that it is nice to see the school bettering its circulation.
Motion was made by Commissioner Witte, and seconded by Commissioner Markell to
recommend approval of site plan amendment for Anderson-Johnson Associates, Inc. for parking
upgrades at Kimberly Lane Elementary School located at 17405 Old Rockford Road. With
Oakley, Saba, Witte, Markell, Boo, Jones and Anderson voting in favor, the motion carried.
Adjournment
Chair Anderson adjourned the meeting at 9:14 p.m.
15
Regular
Planning
Commission
June 17, 2020
Agenda
Number:5.1
To:Planning Commission
Prepared by:Shawn Drill, Senior Planner
Reviewed by:Steve Juetten, Community Development Director
File No:2020026
1. Applicant:
Rachel Development, Inc.
2. Proposal:
Rezoning, PUD general plan, and preliminary plat for a 43-unit townhome development to be called
“Perl Gardens”.
3. Location:
3735 and 3855 County Road 101 (northwest corner of Medina Road and County Road 101)
4. Guiding:
LA-2 (living area 2)
5. Zoning:
RMF-1 (multiple-family 1)
6. School District:
ISD 284 (Wayzata)
7. Review Deadline:
August 20, 2020
8. Brief Description:
See attached Planning Commision Report Information.
16
9. Attachments:
Planning Commission Report Information
Draft Ordinance Approving Rezoning
Draft Resolution Approving Findings of Fact for Rezoning
Draft Resolution Approving PUD General Plan & Preliminary Plat
Location Map
Aerial Photo
Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map
Approved 2005 Preliminary Plat
Approved 2007 Final Plat
Approved 2008 Sunrise Plan
Previous Sketch by Roers Companies (File 2019024)
Previous Sketch by R&R Construction (File 2019059)
LA-2 Excerpt from Comprehensive Plan
Project Narrative
Parking/Fire Truck Turning Exhibit
Building Elevation Drawings and Floor Plans
Site Graphics
17
PERL GARDENS – RACHEL DEVELOPMENT, INC. (2020-026)
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT INFORMATION – CONTINUED FROM MAY 20, 2020
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting approval of the following items for the roughly 9.5-acre site:
1) Rezoning from RMF-1 to PUD (planned unit development); and
2) PUD general plan and preliminary plat for 42 two-family dwellings and 1 detached (single-
family) dwelling.
The applicant states that the townhomes would be designed for empty-nesters, and would have an
association for exterior maintenance. The homes would have main floor living with no basement,
and the option of a bonus room over the attached garage (within the roof truss system so there
would be no additional building height).
Notice of the Planning Commission’s public hearing was published in the city’s official
newspaper, and was mailed to all property owners within 750 feet of the site. Notice was mailed
upon receipt of the proposal and again in advance of both the May 20 and June 17 hearing dates.
A copy of the Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map is attached. Development signage has also
been posted on the site.
CONTEXT:
Surrounding Land Uses
Adjacent Land Use Guiding Zoning
North Two-family townhomes in
“Orchards of Plymouth”LA-2 RSF-4
(one- & two-family)
West
North: One- and two-family townhomes
in “Walnut Grove Pond”
---
South: Parks’ Place Memory Care Home
LA-2
---
LA-2
RSF-4
---
RMF-1
East (across
Co. Rd. 101)
Townhomes in “Cornerstone Commons”LA-3
(living area 3)PUD
South (across
Medina Road)
Peace Lutheran Church
---
Greenwood Elementary School
LA-1
(living area 1)
---
P-I
(public/institutional)
RSF-1
(single-family 1)
---
RSF-1
Natural Characteristics
The site is located in the Elm Creek drainage district. It does not contain any land within a flood
plain or shoreland overlay district. There are no wetlands on the site.18
2020026
Page 2
Previous Actions Affecting Site
The north portion of the site has been used as a landscape nursery, and the south portion contains
a single-family home that was constructed circa 1950’s. Under the plan, that home would be
removed from the site.
In 2005, the City Council approved a preliminary plat for a townhome development showing 43
units on the site. The City Council approved the final plat for this development in 2007. The
number of units shown on the final plat was reduced to 36 by the developer. This townhome
project was never constructed. A copy of the 2005 preliminary plat and 2007 final plat is attached.
In 2008, the City Council approved an application by Sunrise Development, Inc. for an assisted-
living nursing care home in the north portion of the site. That nursing home was approved for 75
total care rooms within three one-story buildings. Shortly after approval, Sunrise abandoned the
project due to the economic recession. A copy of the 2008 Sunrise plan is attached.
Earlier in 2019, a sketch was submitted for a three- and four-story high, 120-unit senior apartment
building in the south portion of the site; and 21 villa-style single-family detached townhomes in
the north portion of the site. That sketch would have required a reguiding of the site from LA-2
to LA-4 (living area 4) in order to allow a density of roughly 14.8 dwelling units per acre. The
developer for that proposal withdrew their sketch request after the Planning Commission meeting.
A copy of that previous sketch by Roers Companies is attached.
Later in 2019, a sketch was submitted for a 34-unit detached villa-style townhome development
on the site. The developer for that proposal decided not to proceed. A copy of that previous sketch
by R&R Construction is attached.
LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING:
The city has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying a rezoning application.
This is because the rezoning of land is a “quasi-legislative” action (enactment of policy). The
zoning ordinance and map are the enforcement tools used to implement the goals and standards
set by the comprehensive plan. The proposed zoning for a property must be consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
The city has a relatively high level of discretion in approving or denying a PUD general plan. This
is because PUD approval is a “quasi-legislative” action (enactment of policy). The city may
impose reasonable requirements in a PUD not otherwise required if deemed necessary to protect
and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. The proposal must be
consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The city’s discretion in approving or denying a preliminary plat is limited to whether or not the
proposed plat meets the standards outlined in the subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance.
This is because preliminary plat review is a “quasi-judicial” action (enforcement of established
policy). If a preliminary plat application meets the standards, the city must approve the preliminary
plat.19
2020026
Page 3
ANALYSIS:
Rezoning
The applicant is requesting to rezone the site from RMF-1 to PUD to accommodate the proposed
townhome development. A PUD is a customized zoning district that can allow for greater
flexibility to the development standards than allowed under conventional zoning. In exchange, the
development may be required to provide a higher level of architectural design or site design.
The comprehensive plan provides guidance and establishes criteria relating to how, and at what
density, future development is to occur. A copy of the LA-2 description from the comprehensive
plan is attached.
The LA-2 guiding designation allows detached (single-family) homes, two-family homes, and
townhomes with up to eight units per building, provided the development density falls within a
range of 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre. Based on the site area of roughly 9.5 acres, the
comprehensive plan would allow 29 to 57 dwelling units. The proposal shows 43 total dwelling
units (42 two-family units and 1 detached unit) for a density of roughly 4.5 units per acre.
Consequently, the proposed dwelling type and density are consistent with the LA-2 guiding of the
site.
PUD zoning is an appropriate corresponding zoning district in cases where the proposed dwelling
type and density are consistent with the site guiding. As a result, staff supports the requested
rezoning from RMF-1 to PUD, with the following findings:
1. PUD zoning would comply with the comprehensive plan, as the proposed dwelling type and
density are consistent with the LA-2 guiding of the site.
2. The proposed development plan and lot arrangement would comply with the requested PUD
general plan.
3. Adequate infrastructure is available to support the proposed development.
20
2020026
Page 4
PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat
The applicant is requesting approval of a PUD general plan and preliminary plat for a 43-unit
townhome development on the site (42 two-family units and 1 detached unit).
Site Access
City and Hennepin County transportation staff have extensively analyzed access for this site, to
ensure that both traffic safety and mobility concerns are properly addressed. Although the
preferred site access option was via a connection to/extension of 39th Avenue in the Walnut Grove
Pond subdivision, that concept was presented in the most recent sketch review for this site and was
not supported at that time. That conclusion resulted in the access points that are shown on the
proposed development plan. Under the plan, access to the site would come from two locations, as
follows:
--County Road 101 (east side of the site) – a right-in/right-out access would include a right-
turn/deceleration lane on southbound County Road 101; and
--Medina Road (south side of the site) – a right-in access would include a right-
turn/deceleration lane on westbound Medina Road.
Street System
The street system serving this development would be public. Two units (Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1)
would have extended private driveways in order to access their garages.
The public right-of-way for the one-way (inbound) street segment located between Medina Road
and the southerly cul-de-sac turn-around would be 34 feet wide to correspond with the 16-foot
wide paved width of that one-way street segment. All remainingstreets in this development would
have a standard 50-foot wide public right-of-way.
The westerly segment of the east/west street(indicated as ‘Street B’), which serves Lots 15 through
20 of Block 1, would have a paved width of 24 feet with parking restricted on one side. The
reduced pavement width in that area would allow for improved grading and drainage. The city’s
subdivision regulations allow the paved width of low-volume, two-way residential streets to be
reduced to as low as 21 feet if the street carries less than 500 average daily trips. All remaining
two-way streets in this development would have a standard paved width of 28 feet.
Earlier this year, the standard diameter for cul-de-sac turn-arounds was increased from 82 feet to
90 feet. The diameter of the proposed cul-de-sac turn-arounds in this development would comply
with the new standard.
21
2020026
Page 5
Sidewalks/Trails
A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk would be installed along one side of all streets in this
development, in compliance with the city’s subdivision regulations. A sidewalk would be
provided along both sides of the easterly segment of ‘Street B’ lying between County Road 101
and the neareststreet intersection in this development. Additionally, a sidewalk would be installed
along the north side of Medina Road abutting the site. All sidewalks would be privately
maintained.
The existing trail along the west side of County Road 101 would be maintained, however, a portion
of that trail would be shifted/reconstructed to make room for the right-turn lane into the site.
Lot Arrangement
The lot arrangement in a PUD is established by the PUD general plan. The development would
include 43 ‘unit lots’ that would be slightly larger than the footprint of the dwellings, and 3
‘common open-space lots’ or base lots that would surround the unit lots. The common open-space
lots would be owned by the homeowner’s association.
Setbacks
The standard setbacks specified in the RMF-1 district are as follows:
--Front yard to internal right-of-way: 25 feet
--Side yard to internal right-of-way: 25 feet
--Side yard (internal to development): 8 feet living side/6 feet garage side
--Side yard to perimeter lot lines: 8 feet living side/6 feet garage side
--From County Road 101 right-of-way: 50 feet
--Rear yard to northernmost lot line: 25 feet
--Rear yard to other perimeter lot lines: 25 feet
The setback requirements in a PUD are established by the PUD general plan. The applicant is
proposing building setbacks, as follows:
--Front yard to internal right-of-way: 20 feet or more*
--Side yard to internal right-of-way: 12 feet or more*
--Side yard (internal to development): 6 feet (12 feet between buildings)*
--Side yard to perimeter lot lines: 19.6 feet or more
--From County Road 101 right-of-way: 40 feet*
--Rear yard to northernmost lot line: 50 feet or more
--Rear yard to other perimeter lot lines: 25 feet
*PUD flexibility requested.
22
2020026
Page 6
The proposed development would be ‘self-contained’ in that it would not rely on access through
other established neighborhoods. Additionally, the physical site layout and dimensions (vis-à-vis
the relative narrowness of the southernmost and westernmost land extensions) do not allow for a
standard suburban subdivision. These factorscombine to create an opportunity for a unique pocket
neighborhood designed to promote a close-knit sense of community, with high-quality
construction of smaller homes for those who do not require a large home or who may wish to
downsize. Staff discussion of the requested PUD flexibility is provided below:
--A 20-foot front yard setback has been approved in a number of recently-approved single-
family developments and villa-style townhome developments with no issue. In this case, the
driveway length between the garage and any abutting sidewalk would be a minimum of 22
feet, and therefore would accommodate the parking of vehicles in the driveway without
blocking the sidewalk.
--The south side wall of the home on Lot 14 of Block 1 would be set back 12 feet from the
abutting street right-of-way. The boulevard in that area would be 15 feet wide, placing the
home 27 feet from the traveled roadway. The east side wall of the home on Lot 1 of Block
2, and the west side wall of the home on Lot 4 of Block 2, would be setback 15 feet from
their respectiveabutting street rights-of-way. The boulevards in those areas would be 11 feet
wide, placing the homes 26 feet from the traveled roadway. Given the one-level design of
the homes and the low traffic volumes anticipated in this development, it is unlikely these
setback reductions would be perceptible.
--The side yard setbacks internal to the development would be 6 feet, meaning that there would
be 12 feet of space between the proposed buildings. Under the current RMF-1 zoning
regulations, these buildings could be 12 feet apart if garages were positioned at the outside
corners. Furthermore, no setback is required between dwelling units located within the same
building, and up to eight units are allowed within each building under the current RMF-1
zoning. However, rather than having larger and taller buildings with more units in each
building, the proposal for this site includes smaller (one- and two-family) buildings that
would be one-level and designed to complement the character of abutting neighborhoods.
--The proposed buildings would be set back 40 feet from the right-of-way for County Road
101, as would be dedicated on the plat. Counting the width of the boulevard, the buildings
would be set back roughly 60 feet from the traveled roadway. During the initial planning
stages, the buildings were shown as being set back 50 feet from the County Road 101 right-
of-way, as specified by the RMF-1 district. However, Hennepin County recently requested
that an additional ten feet of right-of-way be dedicated on the plat. Without changing the
location of any buildings, the setback measurement went from 50 feet to 40 feet because the
proposed right-of-way line moved ten feet westerly into the site. Regardless, the physical
spacing between the buildings and the traveled roadway remains the same. Additionally, the
proposal includes adding landscaping and privacy fencing along County Road 101 to help
provide screening between the development and that roadway.
Staff finds that the requested PUD flexibility for building setbacks would provide an efficient use
of land, and would not result in adverse effects on surrounding properties or the city as a whole.
Consequently, staff supports the requested PUD flexibility.23
2020026
Page 7
Storm Water Management
The city requires that storm drainage systems be designed so the post-development rate of runoff
from a site does not exceed the pre-development rate. As part of the PUD, the proposed
development plan would decrease the amount of storm water runoff that flows from this site onto
neighboring properties. The city also requires treatment of storm water runoff before it enters the
city’s drainage system. Storm water runoff would be treated in a filtration basin that would be
constructed in the east portion of the site along County Road 101.
Roughly 3.7 acres of the south portion of the site presently sheet drains (overland/uncontrolled)
easterly toward County Road 101. There are roughly 2.8 acres of the site that presently sheet
drains (overland/uncontrolled) westerly toward the Walnut Grove Pond subdivision on 39th
Avenue. Roughly 3.2 acres of the site presently sheet drains (overland/uncontrolled)
northwesterly, between Walnut Grove Pond and the Orchards of Plymouth subdivision on 39th
Place. That drainage ultimately flows into alarge wetland that is located northwestof the proposed
Perl Gardens development site. That wetland is part of the city’s overall drainage system.
The grading and storm sewerplans were designed to redirect the majority of the storm water runoff
to the filtration basin proposed in the east portion of the site. The land elevations in the south
portion of the site would remain relatively close to existing elevations. The land elevations in the
west and north portions of the site would be raised roughly four to eight feet in order to capture
storm water runoff and tilt the site toward the filtration basin, so runoff can gravity-flow into the
basin. The plans also include roof gutters and a back yard drain tile system that would tie into the
storm sewer pipes.
Under the proposal, 0.29 acres of the site would continue to have runoff flowing to the west. This
represents an 89.6 percent reduction from the 2.8 acres that presently flow in that direction.
Additionally, 0.28 acres of the site would continue to have runoff flowing to the northwest. This
represents a 91 percent reduction from the 3.2 acres that presently flow in that direction. The areas
that would continue to flow to the west and northwest would have minimal hard surface coverage,
being mostly lawn area.
The proposed filtration basin has been designed and sized to provide treatment and rate control in
a manner that meets or exceeds all city regulations, watershed provisions, and Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency storm water permitting rules. Over-sized sump manhole structures equipped with
baffles would be used to provide pre-treatment of runoff before it discharges into the filtration
basin. The filtration basin would eventually discharge into the city’s drainage system (wetland to
the northwest) via an 18-inch culvert. HydroCAD modeling demonstrates that the city’s drainage
system has ample capacity to receive the drainage from this site.
The attached resolution requires compliance with all city and watershed regulations regarding
drainage, runoff, water quality, and erosion control.
24
2020026
Page 8
Parking
The ordinance requires two off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit. Under the plan, each unit
would have four off-street parking spaces (two in the garage and two in the driveway), and
therefore would comply with the ordinance. In addition, the city allows parking on public streets
between 5 a.m. and 2 a.m. the following day. Although some street areas within this development
would be signed for ‘no parking’ (see attached parking/fire truck turning exhibit), over 60 on-
street parking spaces would be available for guest use.
Building plans
The proposed homes would be built by Charles Cudd Company. The homes have been designed
for empty-nesters/snowbirds, and would include main floor living and an association for exterior
maintenance. The homes would have slab-on-grade construction (no basements), and would
contain roughly 1,430square feet. An optional bonus room above the garage would add 438 square
feet of finished space. The bonus room would be located within the roof truss system, so would
not change the appearance of the home or increase the building height. The RMF-1 zoning district
allows buildings to be up to 35 feet high, as measured at the mid-point of sloped roofs. The homes
proposed in this PUD would be roughly 19 feet high, as measured at the roof mid-point. See
attached building elevation drawings and floor plans.
Park Dedication
The comprehensive plan does not show the need for a future park on this site. In order to satisfy
the park dedication requirement, the city would require a cash payment in lieu of land dedication
(currently $8,000 per unit) for each of the 43 proposed units. Park dedication is addressed in the
attached resolution.
Trees
The subdivision regulations require preservation of at least 50 percent of the caliper inches of
significant trees for residential development sites, or reforestation and/or monetary restitution for
any removal in excess of 50 percent. A significant tree is defined as one being eight inches or
larger in diameter for deciduous trees, and four inches or larger in diameter for conifers.
The tree survey indicates 1,207caliper inches of eligible significant trees on the site. The applicant
submitted a tree plan indicating that 58 percent would be removed. Consequently, the applicant
would be required to replant 121 caliper inches of new trees on the site to comply with the
reforestation requirement. Through the PUD, the applicant proposes to plant 114 new trees
totaling 267 caliper inches, in excess of the reforestation requirement. The landscaping planshows
that 54 deciduous (overstory) trees, 42 conifers, 18 ornamental trees, and numerous shrubs and
foundation plantings would be provided on the site. The proposed landscaping plan exceeds the
city’s landscaping requirement.
25
2020026
Page 9
Conclusion on the PUD General Plan and Preliminary Plat
Staff supports the requested PUD general plan and preliminary plat with the findings that the
proposal: 1) would be consistent with the comprehensive plan; and 2) would comply with the
standards outlined in the subdivision regulations and zoning ordinance for establishment of a PUD.
RECOMMENDATION:
Community Development Department staff recommends approval of the rezoning, PUD general
plan, and preliminary plat for Perl Gardens, subject to the findings and conditions listed in the
attached ordinance and resolutions.
If new information is brought forward at the public hearing, staff may alter or reconsider its
recommendation.
26
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2020-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 21 (ZONING ORDINANCE)OF THE CITY CODE
TO RECLASSIFY CERTAIN LAND LOCATED AT 3735 AND 3855 COUNTY ROAD 101,
AND TO ESTABLISH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (2020026)
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH ORDAINS:
Section 1. Amendment of City Code. Chapter 21 of the City Code of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, adopted December 18, 1996 as amended, is hereby amended by changing the classification
on the City of Plymouth Zoning Map from RMF-1 (multiple family 1) to PUD (planned unit development)
with respect to two parcels with Hennepin County Property Identification Numbers 18-118-22-43-0002
(3735 County Road 101) and 18-118-22-42-0007 (3855 County Road 101). The property is presently
legally described as follows:
PARCEL 1:
The East 290 feet of the South 402 feet of the North 632 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northwest
1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118 North, Range 22 West of the 5th Principal
Meridian.
Also: The East 480 feet of the North 230 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22.
Also: That part of the West 420 feet of the East 710 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4
of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22, lying South of the North 230 feet
thereof, and North of the following described line: Commencing at the Southeast corner of the
Southwest 1/4 of said Southeast 1/4; thence North along the East line thereof 704 feet; thence
deflecting left 55 degrees 50 minutes to the Southerly extension of the East line of said West
420 feet; thence North along said Southerly extension and said East line a distance of 553.2 feet
to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence deflecting left 88 degrees 06
minutes to the West line of said East 710 feet, and there ending, according to the U.S.
Government Survey thereof, subject to an easement over the easterly 33 feet thereof for State
Highway 101, also subject to and together with an easement for driveway purposes over the
South 30 feet of the North 245 feet of the East 500 feet of said South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4
of the Southeast 1/4.
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 2:
That part of the East 290 feet of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and of the South 1/2 of
the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22, lying Northerly 27
Ordinance 2020-
2020026
Page 2
of the centerline of Medina Road, formerly known as County Road No. 48, and South of the
North 632 feet of said South 1/2, EXCEPT that part of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of
Section 18, Township 118, Range 22 described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the
center line of County Road No. 48 and the center line of State Highway No. 101; thence North
along the said center line of State Highway No. 101 a distance of 283 feet; thence West at right
angles a distance of 200 feet; thence South at right angles a distance of 153 feet to the center
line of said County Road No. 48; thence Southeasterly along the center line of said County Road
No. 48 a distance of 240 feet to the point of beginning.
And
That part of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22
described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the center line of County Road No. 48 and
the center line of Minnesota State Highway No. 101; thence North along said center line of said
State Highway No. 101 a distance of 283 feet; thence West at right angles a distance of 200 feet;
thence South at right angles a distance of 153 feet to the center line of said County Road No. 48;
thence Southeasterly along the center line of said County Road No. 48 a distance of 240 feet to
the point of beginning.
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Section 2. Amendment of City Code. Chapter 21 of the City Code of the City of Plymouth,
Minnesota, adopted December 18, 1996 as amended, is hereby amended to add Section 21655.73, as
follows:
21655.73 PERL GARDENS PUD:
Subd. 1.Legal Description. The legal description of this PUD is as follows:
PARCEL 1:
The East 290 feet of the South 402 feet of the North 632 feet of the South 1/2 of the
Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118 North, Range 22
West of the 5th Principal Meridian.
Also: The East 480 feet of the North 230 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4
of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22.
Also: That part of the West 420 feet of the East 710 feet of the South 1/2 of the
Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22, lying
South of the North 230 feet thereof, and North of the following described line:
Commencing at the Southeast corner of the Southwest 1/4 of said Southeast 1/4;
thence North along the East line thereof 704 feet; thence deflecting left 55 degrees 50
minutes to the Southerly extension of the East line of said West 420 feet; thence
North along said Southerly extension and said East line a distance of 553.2 feet to the 28
Ordinance 2020-
2020026
Page 3
point of beginning of the line being described; thence deflecting left 88 degrees 06
minutes to the West line of said East 710 feet, and there ending, according to the U.S.
Government Survey thereof, subject to an easement over the easterly 33 feet thereof
for State Highway 101, also subject to and together with an easement for driveway
purposes over the South 30 feet of the North 245 feet of the East 500 feet of said
South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4.
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 2:
That part of the East 290 feet of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and of the
South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118,
Range 22, lying Northerly of the centerline of Medina Road, formerly known as
County Road No. 48, and South of the North 632 feet of said South 1/2, EXCEPT
that part of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118,
Range 22 described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the center line of
County Road No. 48 and the center line of State Highway No. 101; thence North
along the said center line of State Highway No. 101 a distance of 283 feet; thence
West at right angles a distance of 200 feet; thence South at right angles a distance of
153 feet to the center line of said County Road No. 48; thence Southeasterly along the
center line of said County Road No. 48 a distance of 240 feet to the point of
beginning.
And
That part of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118,
Range 22 described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the center line of
County Road No. 48 and the center line of Minnesota State Highway No. 101; thence
North along said center line of said State Highway No. 101 a distance of 283 feet;
thence West at right angles a distance of 200 feet; thence South at right angles a
distance of 153 feet to the center line of said County Road No. 48; thence
Southeasterly along the center line of said County Road No. 48 a distance of 240 feet
to the point of beginning.
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Subd. 2.Incorporated herein by reference are the Perl Gardens PUD plans received
by the City on June 4, 2020, and the parking/fire truck turning exhibit received by the City on
June 3, 2020, except as may be amended by City Council Resolution 2020-___, on file in the
office of the Zoning Administrator under File 2020026.
29
Ordinance 2020-
2020026
Page 4
Subd. 3.Allowable Uses. The principal uses permitted for the lots within this PUD
include one-family and two-family homes, and the allowable accessory uses within this PUD are
any assessory uses or uses by administrative permit listed in the RMF-1 zoning district.
Subd. 4.Development Standards. Development standards shall be as indicated on
the approved PUD general plan, except as may be amended by City Council Resolution 2020-
___, on file in the office of the Zoning Administrator under File 2020026.
Section 3. Effective Date. This amendment shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
ADOPTED by the Plymouth City Council on this ** day of ****, 2020.
______________________________
Jeffry Wosje, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Sandra R. Engdahl, City Clerk
30
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE REZONING OF LAND
LOCATED AT 3735 AND 3855 COUNTY ROAD 101 (2020026)
WHEREAS, Rachel Development, Inc. has requested reclassification of the zoning from RMF-1
(multiple family 1) to PUD (planned unit development) for the roughly 9.5 acre site located at 3735 and
3855 County Road 101; and
WHEREAS, the affected property to be rezoned to PUD is presently legally described as follows:
PARCEL 1:
The East 290 feet of the South 402 feet of the North 632 feet of the South 1/2 of the
Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118 North, Range 22 West of
the 5th Principal Meridian.
Also: The East 480 feet of the North 230 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22.
Also: That part of the West 420 feet of the East 710 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northwest
1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22, lying South of the North
230 feet thereof, and North of the following described line: Commencing at the Southeast
corner of the Southwest 1/4 of said Southeast 1/4; thence North along the East line thereof
704 feet; thence deflecting left 55 degrees 50 minutes to the Southerly extension of the East
line of said West 420 feet; thence North along said Southerly extension and said East line a
distance of 553.2 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence
deflecting left 88 degrees 06 minutes to the West line of said East 710 feet, and there
ending, according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof, subject to an easement over the
easterly 33 feet thereof for State Highway 101, also subject to and together with an
easement for driveway purposes over the South 30 feet of the North 245 feet of the East
500 feet of said South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4.
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 2:
That part of the East 290 feet of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and of the South
1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22, lying
Northerly of the centerline of Medina Road, formerly known as County Road No. 48, and
South of the North 632 feet of said South 1/2, EXCEPT that part of the Southwest 1/4 of the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22 described as follows: Beginning at the
31
Resolution 2020-
(2020026)
Page 2
intersection of the center line of County Road No. 48 and the center line of State Highway
No. 101; thence North along the said center line of State Highway No. 101 a distance of 283
feet; thence West at right angles a distance of 200 feet; thence South at right angles a
distance of 153 feet to the center line of said County Road No. 48; thence Southeasterly
along the center line of said County Road No. 48 a distance of 240 feet to the point of
beginning.
And
That part of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22
described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the center line of County Road No. 48
and the center line of Minnesota State Highway No. 101; thence North along said center line
of said State Highway No. 101 a distance of 283 feet; thence West at right angles a distance
of 200 feet; thence South at right angles a distance of 153 feet to the center line of said
County Road No. 48; thence Southeasterly along the center line of said County Road No. 48
a distance of 240 feet to the point of beginning.
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called public hearing
and recommends approval; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted an ordinance rezoning the affected land from RMF-1 to
PUD.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request for reclassification of the zoning from
RMF-1 to PUD for roughly 9.5 acres as legally described above, based on the following findings:
1. PUD zoning would comply with the comprehensive plan, as the proposed dwelling type
and density are consistent with the LA-2 guiding of the site.
2. The proposed development plan and lot arrangement would comply with the requested
PUD general plan.
3. Adequate infrastructure is available to support the proposed development.
APPROVED by the Plymouth City Council on this ** day of ****, 2020.
32
Resolution 2020-
(2020026)
Page 3
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS.
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota,
certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City Council on
_________________, 2020 with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct
transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this _________ day of
________________________________.
________________________________
City Clerk
33
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PUD GENERAL PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR “PERL GARDENS”FOR ROUGHLY 9.5 ACRES LOCATED AT 3735 AND 3855
COUNTY ROAD 101 (2020026)
WHEREAS, Rachel Development, Inc. has requested approval of a PUD general plan and
preliminary plat for property presently legally described as follows:
PARCEL 1:
The East 290 feet of the South 402 feet of the North 632 feet of the South 1/2 of the
Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118 North, Range 22 West of
the 5th Principal Meridian.
Also: The East 480 feet of the North 230 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22.
Also: That part of the West 420 feet of the East 710 feet of the South 1/2 of the Northwest
1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22, lying South of the North
230 feet thereof, and North of the following described line: Commencing at the Southeast
corner of the Southwest 1/4 of said Southeast 1/4; thence North along the East line thereof
704 feet; thence deflecting left 55 degrees 50 minutes to the Southerly extension of the East
line of said West 420 feet; thence North along said Southerly extension and said East line a
distance of 553.2 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence
deflecting left 88 degrees 06 minutes to the West line of said East 710 feet, and there
ending, according to the U.S. Government Survey thereof, subject to an easement over the
easterly 33 feet thereof for State Highway 101, also subject to and together with an
easement for driveway purposes over the South 30 feet of the North 245 feet of the East
500 feet of said South 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4.
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 2:
That part of the East 290 feet of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and of the South
1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22, lying
Northerly of the centerline of Medina Road, formerly known as County Road No. 48, and
South of the North 632 feet of said South 1/2, EXCEPT that part of the Southwest 1/4 of the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22 described as follows: Beginning at the
intersection of the center line of County Road No. 48 and the center line of State Highway
No. 101; thence North along the said center line of State Highway No. 101 a distance of 283
feet; thence West at right angles a distance of 200 feet; thence South at right angles a
34
Resolution 2020-
File 2020026
Page 2
distance of 153 feet to the center line of said County Road No. 48; thence Southeasterly
along the center line of said County Road No. 48 a distance of 240 feet to the point of
beginning.
And
That part of the Southwest 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 18, Township 118, Range 22
described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the center line of County Road No. 48
and the center line of Minnesota State Highway No. 101; thence North along said center line
of said State Highway No. 101 a distance of 283 feet; thence West at right angles a distance
of 200 feet; thence South at right angles a distance of 153 feet to the center line of said
County Road No. 48; thence Southeasterly along the center line of said County Road No. 48
a distance of 240 feet to the point of beginning.
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called public hearing
and recommends approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Rachel Development, Inc. for a PUD
general plan and preliminary plat, subject to the following conditions:
1. A PUD general plan and preliminary plat are approved to allow a residential development with 43
townhome lots (42 two-family units and 1 detached unit) and 3 common open-space lots, in
accordance with the Perl Gardens PUD plans received by the City on June 4, 2020, and the
parking/fire truck turning exhibit received by the City on June 3, 2020, except as may be amended
by this resolution.
2. Approval is contingent upon City Council approval of the request to rezone the site to PUD (planned
unit development).
3.Prior to commencement of tree removal or grading operations, the developer shall install and
request inspection of tree preservation fencing and silt fencing.
4. Allowable uses are two-family and detached homes, and their related accessory uses and uses by
administrative permit as listed in the RMF-1 district.
5. Minimum building setbacks shall be as follows:
a. Front yard to internal right-of-way: 20 feet
b. Side yard to internal right-of-way: 12 feet
c. Side yard (internal to development): 6 feet (12 feet between buildings)
d. Side yard to perimeter lot lines: 19.6 feet
e. From County Road 101 right-of-way: 40 feet
f. Rear yard to northernmost lot line: 50 feet
g. Rear yard to other perimeter lot lines: 25 feet 35
Resolution 2020-
File 2020026
Page 3
6. In conjunction with submission of the final plat application, the developer shall submit homeowner’s
association documents for City review. The homeowner’s association documents shall address
responsibilities for maintenance, repair, and replacement of all sidewalks including the sidewalk
along Medina Road, back yard drain tiles (which are private facilities), subdivision signage, common
open-space lots, developer-installed retaining walls and fencing, and other similar or common
features.
7.Prior to recording the final plat, the developer shall:
a. Receive city approval of final construction plans, including those related to drainage and
treatment of runoff.
b. Provide an encroachment agreement for developer-installed retaining walls that would lie
within drainage and utility easements.
c. Provide any required trail easements along County Road 101 and Medina Road – an evaluation
of which will be included during final plat review.
d. Provide documentation of the approved access permit from Hennepin County.
e. Execute the development contract and provide the related financial guarantees and fees.
f. Pay the required park dedication fee.
g. Pay any outstanding deferred assessments.
h. Obtain all applicable permits, including watershed approvals.
8. Standard Conditions:
a. No building permits shall be issued until the final plat is recorded, the streets (including curb and
gutter installation) needed for access to lots where permits are requested are paved with the
first lift of asphalt, and the sewer and water service utilities are tested and approved by the city
engineer/designee.
b. Any signage shall require a separate sign permit, if required.
c. Compliance with all fire codes, including those for hydrant location.
d. Submission of fire flow calculations with the final plat application.
e. Building permits are required for retaining walls that exceed feet in height. Additionally, a
safety fence shall be installed at the top of retaining walls that exceed four feet in height.
f. Compliance with the city’s tree preservation regulations.
g. Removal of all hazardous trees from the property at the owner's expense.
h. No trees shall be planted in the boulevard.
i. If the required sidewalks are not installed when the streets are installed, no building permits
shall be issued for lots abutting the future sidewalk unless a separate sidewalk agreement is
provided for each affected lot.
j. This approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner or
applicant has recorded the final plat, or unless the applicant, with the consent of the property
owner, has received prior approval from the City to extend the expiration date for up to one
additional year, as regulated under Section 510 of City Code.
APPROVED by the Plymouth City Council on this ** day of ****, 2020.
36
Resolution 2020-
File 2020026
Page 4
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota,
certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City Council on
______________, 2020, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct
transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this _________ day of
_______________________________.
__________________________________
City Clerk
37
P-I
LA-2
County Road 101M
edina R
oad
38th Ave
SITE
37353855LA-2
LA-2
LA-3
P
eace Lutheran
LA-1
P-I
P-I
NSP/XCEL
CITY WATER
TOWER
LA-2
LA-3
LA-3
B
all Field
P-I
Green
w
ood Ele
m.
S
chool LA-1
39th Pl
40th Ave
39th Ave
LA-2Troy Lane2020-026
Rachel Development, Inc.
3735 & 3855 County Road K
500 0 500 1,000250
Feet
City of
Plymouth, Minnesota
38
40
41
42
43
CONCEPT SKETCH PLAN LEGEND
SENIOR LIVING (120 UNITS)
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS: 141
VILLA HOMES (21 UNITS)
11.25 ACRES
9.52 ACRES
12.53 UNITS/AC
14.81 UNITS/AC
SITE DATA
GROSS AREA
NET AREA (LESS ROW)
GROSS DENSITY
NET DENSITY
N1”=60’
PRIVATE DRIVE B PRIVATE DRIVE ASTORMWATER
BASIN
STORMWATER
BASIN
STORMWATER
BASIN COUNTY HIGHWAY 101TOWNHOMES
TOWNHOMES
MEMORY CARE FACILITY
(UNDER CONSTRUCTION )
26’ F-F
16’ TYP.
25’ MIN.
40’
TYP.
CHURCH
TOWNHOMES
TOWNHOMES
39TH PLACE N.
39TH AVE
N
U
E
N.
ME
D
I
N
A
R
O
A
D
EMERGENGY ACCESS
ONLY. INSTALL
BREAKAWAY
BOLLARDS
PROPOSED
120 UNIT
SENIOR LIVING
FACILITY
3 STORY BUILDING
PORTION
4 STORY BUILDING
PORTION
1
2
3
4
5
6
78
9
10111213
14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
PERL SITE
PLYMOUTH, MN
4.10.19
CONCEPT
SKETCH PLAN 44
45
Page 1 of 2 Appendix 3B Plymouth Land Use Plan
Plymouth Comprehensive Plan – Excerpt of Appendix 3B
LAND USE PLAN CLASSIFICATIONS
LIVING AREA 2 (LA-2)
Living Area 2 (LA-2) identifies areas for detached and attached homes and townhomes, and
directly related complementary uses such as churches, schools and recreational facilities.
The primary intent behind the LA-2 designation is to respond to a need for smaller homes on
smaller lots. The City needs to offer the opportunity for this type of housing alternative to expand
opportunities for people seeking more affordable detached home living and to respond to
changing demographics. As the population ages, there will be a growing need for smaller homes
for empty nesters and for smaller households.
LA-2 also offers the opportunity for townhomes, which provide additional life cycle housing
opportunities. Townhomes in LA-2 neighborhoods offer residents a housing option with less
maintenance than a typical detached home, while still being located in a familiar residential
setting.
Guidelines and Criteria
Minimum Density:3 units per acre
Maximum Density:6 units per acre
City Utilities:Required for all areas
Corresponding Zoning Districts: RSF-3 (Single Family Detached 3)
RSF-4 (Single and Two Family)
RMF-1 (Multiple Family 1)
RMF-2 (Multiple Family 2)
Other zoning districts may be appropriate if the
proposed development would meet the density criteria
of 3 to 6 units per acre.
Types of Development:Single unit detached dwellings
Two-unit dwellings
Townhomes
Churches, schools, and private recreational
facilities
46
Page 2 of 2 Appendix 3B Plymouth Land Use Plan
Development Location Criteria:Not appropriate adjacent to principal arterial
interchanges
Desirable Facilities:Neighborhood parks, school parks or mini parks
within ½ mile walking distance of the
neighborhood
Defined trail system that connects the
neighborhood to other services and facilities,
including parks, schools, churches and
neighborhood shopping areas
Neighborhood shopping facilities within five
minutes driving time from the neighborhood
47
48
COUNTY ROAD NO. 101STREET BSTREET CSTREET BSTREET B STREET A
M
E
D
I
N
A
R
O
A
D
ofPARKING AND FIRE TRUCK
TURNING MOVEMENTS EXHIBITRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael, MN 55376REVISIONS1.2.3.4.5.6.DRAWN BY:ISSUE DATE:JTR06/03/20PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\8461_parking exh.dwgSave Date:06/01/20 PROJECT NO.:84613890 Pheasant Ridge Drive NE,
Suite 100, Blaine, MN 55449
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYING
11NOTES49
50
51
52
53
Perl GardensPlymouth, MinnesotaofRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\8461_cover.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:Name:Signature:Date:License #:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/01/20LOC04/01/20Joseph T. Radach, P.E.45889JTR7REVISIONS1.2. 06/04/20 New Site LayoutCITY PROJECT NO:20200263890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYING
COVER SHEET
1Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR1. 04/21/20 Revise Sheets 4 & 554
OWNER:COUNTY ROAD NO. 10138TH AVE N.OWNER:OWNER:PARCEL 1OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:39TH AVE N.PARCEL 2M
E
D
I
N
A
R
O
A
D
LEGENDVICINITY MAPEXISTING CONDITIONS
RACHEL DEVELOPMENT, INC.
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael, MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, MinnesotaThomas R. BalluffName:Signature:Date:4/01/20License #: 40361I hereby certify that this survey, plan orreport was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Land Surveyor under the lawsof the State of Minnesota.ofREVISIONS1. 6/04/20 - City Comments2.3.4.5.6.DRAWN BY:ISSUE DATE:f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\survey\preliminary\8461_excon.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 FILE NO:723890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYING
KCM20764/01/20CITY PROJECT NO:202002655
OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:OWNER:STREET A COUNTY ROAD NO. 101COUNTY ROAD NO. 101M
E
D
I
N
A
R
O
A
D
STREETBSTREET B STREET B STREET CSTREET CSTREET DSTREET ALEGENDPERL GARDENS SITE DATA RACHEL DEVELOPMENT, INC.
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael, MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, MinnesotaThomas R. BalluffName:Signature:Date:4/01/20License #: 40361I hereby certify that this survey, plan orreport was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Land Surveyor under the lawsof the State of Minnesota.ofREVISIONS1. 6/4/20 - Revised Layout2.3.4.5.6.DRAWN BY:ISSUE DATE:f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\survey\preliminary\8461_prp.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 FILE NO:733890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYING
KCM20764/01/20PRELIMINARY PLATCITY PROJECT NO:202002656
ofRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\8461_site.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:Name:Signature:Date:License #:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/01/20LOC04/01/20Joseph T. Radach, P.E.45889JTR7REVISIONS1.2. 06/04/20 New Site LayoutCITY PROJECT NO:20200263890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYINGKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
41. 4/21/20 Per City comments57
ofRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\8461_utility.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:Name:Signature:Date:License #:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/01/20LOC04/01/20Joseph T. Radach, P.E.45889JTR7REVISIONS1.2. 06/04/20 New Site LayoutCITY PROJECT NO:20200263890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYINGKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN
51. 4/21/20 Per City comments58
ofRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\8461_grade.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:Name:Signature:Date:License #:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/01/20LOC04/01/20Joseph T. Radach, P.E.45889JTR7REVISIONS1.2. 06/04/20 New Site LayoutCITY PROJECT NO:20200263890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYINGKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPRELIMINARY GRADINGAND EROSION CONTROL PLAN61. 4/21/20 Per City comments59
ofRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\engineering\preliminary\8461_details.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:Name:Signature:Date:License #:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer underthe laws of the State of Minnesota04/01/20LOC04/01/20Joseph T. Radach, P.E.45889JTR7REVISIONS1.2. 06/04/20 New Site LayoutCITY PROJECT NO:20200263890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYINGFRAMECURBFRAMEDETAILS7
60
6BH6JL6CH3BH3BF6CH6HL1BH3SB5BL5BH5RM1WO4CH6HL6BL4BF3SB1BH5RB1WO8AE4FM1BH2BF3SB3SB5FM2WOofRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\landscape\8461_landscape.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:Name:Signature:Date:License #:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Landscape Architectunder the laws of the State of Minnesota04/01/20RJR04/01/20Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346RJR2REVISIONS1.2. 06/04/20 New Site LayoutCITY PROJECT NO:20200263890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYINGKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRPRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANL1
61
TREESCODE QTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERRM 5Acer rubrum `Northwood`Northwood Red Maple2.5" Cal. B&BFM 9Acer x freemanii `Sienna`Sienna Glen Maple2.5" Cal. B&BRB 5Betula nigraClump Form, 2.5" Cal EquivalentRiver Birch Multi-Trunk 10` Ht.B&BHL 12Gleditsia triacanthos inermis `Harve`Northern Acclaim ThornlessHoney Locust2.5" Cal. B&BWO4Quercus bicolorSwamp White Oak2.5" Cal. B&BBL 11 Tilia americana `Boulevard`Boulevard Linden2.5" Cal.B&BAE 8Ulmus americana `Princeton`American Elm2.5" Cal. B&BCONIFEROUS TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERBF 9Abies balsameaBalsam Fir6` Ht.B&BBH 17 Picea glauca densataBlack Hills Spruce6` Ht.B&BCH16 Tsuga canadensisCanadian Hemlock6` Ht.B&BORNAMENTAL TREES CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERSB12Amelanchier x grandiflora `AutumnBrilliance`Clump Form, 1.5" Cal EquivalentAutumn Brilliance Serviceberry7` Ht.B&BJL 6Syringa reticulata `Ivory Silk`White FlowersIvory Silk Japanese Tree Lilac 1.5" Cal. B&BSHRUBSCODE QTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERDBH 39 Diervilla loniceraDwarf Bush Honeysuckle#5 Cont.CWH6Hamamelis virginianaCommon Witch Hazel #5 Cont.VBC20Viburnum trilobum `Bailey Compact`Red Fall ColorBailey`s Compact AmericanCranberry Bush#5 Cont.EVERGREEN SHRUBS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERJSG18Juniperus chinensis `Sea Green` Sea Green Juniper#5 Cont.GRASSESCODE QTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERKFG36Calamagrostis x acutiflora `KarlFoerster`Feather Reed Grass#5 Cont.PDS44Sporobolus heterolepisPrairie Dropseed#5 Cont.PERENNIALSCODE QTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERDLB 130 Hemerocallis x `Baja`Red FlowersBaja Daylily#1 Cont.DLS101Hemerocallis x `Stella De Oro`Yellow / Gold FlowersStella De Oro Daylily#1 Cont.GROUND COVERS CODE QTY BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMESIZE CONTAINERHWM3,223 sfHardwood MulchNon-Woven Geotextile IncidentalDouble Shredded HardwoodMulch4" DepthTIII27,099 sfType III - Dry Basin Seed MixRefer to notes for acceptable seedingmethods. Seeding Rate 66.0 lb/acMnDOT Seed Mix 33-262seedTIV7,224 sfType IV - Native Seed MixRefer to notes for acceptable seedingmethods. Seeding Rate 50.0 lb/acMnDOT Seed Mix 35-241seedPLANT SCHEDULE5DBH5KFG28DLS9PDS3DBH9DLB1CWH5VBC12DLB3CWH11VBC12JSG19KFG36DLB12PDS37DLS14DBH13PDS47DLB8DBH12KFG6JSG2CWH4VBC36DLS10PDS26DLB9DBHofRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\landscape\8461_landscape.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:Name:Signature:Date:License #:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Landscape Architectunder the laws of the State of Minnesota04/01/20RJR04/01/20Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346RJR2REVISIONS1.2. 06/04/20 New Site LayoutCITY PROJECT NO:20200263890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYING
PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLANL2
62
STREET A
COUNTY ROAD NO. 101M
E
D
I
N
A
R
O
A
D
STREETBSTREET B STREET B
STREET CSTREET DSTREET AofRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\landscape\8461_tree preservation.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:Name:Signature:Date:License #:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Landscape Architectunder the laws of the State of Minnesota04/01/20RJR04/01/20Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346RJR2REVISIONS1.2. 06/04/20 New Site LayoutCITY PROJECT NO:20200263890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYINGKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRTREE PRESERVATION PLANTP1
2RJR63
ofRACHEL DEVELOPMENT
4125 Napier Court NE
St. Michael MN, 55376 PERL GARDENS
Plymouth, Minnesota
f:\jobs\8461 - 8480\8461 - rachel - perl property\cad c3d\landscape\8461_tree preservation.dwgSave Date:06/04/20 DRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:Name:Signature:Date:License #:I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Landscape Architectunder the laws of the State of Minnesota04/01/20RJR04/01/20Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA56346RJR2REVISIONS1.2. 06/04/20 New Site LayoutCITY PROJECT NO:20200263890 Pheasant Ridge Dr. NE #100, Blaine, MN
Phone: 763-489-7900 Fax: 763-489-7959
ENVIRONMENTAL ◦ ENGINEERING ◦ SURVEYING
TREE PRESERVATION PLANTP2
2RJR64