HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 01-09-1985CITY OF PLYMOUTH
PLANNIN4 COM4ISSION MINUTES
3ANUARY 1985
The regular meeting of tr a PlymouthPlanning Commission was
called to order at 7*430 P.M.
HENWIS PRESENTz Acting Chairman SteigerwaldtCommis-
sioners Wire, 'Magnus, Stulberg, plu ka
and Pauba
STAFF PRESENT-. Community Development Coordinator
Sara MoConn
City Engineer Sherm Gol&erg
Community Development Secretary
Grace Wineman,
705 P.M. A special presentation to former Chairwoman aria
s i uwas given by the Commission. Chairwoman 'Vasiliou
has been appointed to fill a vacancy on the Plymouth City
Council.
KNUTES
MOTION by Commissioner Stulbergj,; seconded by Commissioner
Magnus > to approve the Minutes of December 1 ,, 1984,, with a
correction to page 2q,% 'nth paragraph,, "Commissioner
teig ald withdrew the MOTION; Commissioner Wire concur-
red" should ready "Chairwoman Vasillou ,concurred".. VOTE.
Ayes. Commissioner pauba abstained. MOTION carried.
OLIY KARINGS
Acting Chairman Steigerwald, introduced the request by WALLACE FREE !t
Freeman, ine. and requested that Coordinator McConn review FREEMAN2 INC.
the staff report, dated January 21, 1985. REVISED PRELIKKARY
PLAT y VARIANCES AND .
Acting Chairman teigerwald .introduced Mr. John Klick, SITE, PLAN (8#i 9 9
Architect, representing the petitioner. Acting Chairman
Stelgerwal.d Inquired if the 'buildings could be grouped
closer together, to allow green areas on the perimeters.
Mr. Klick thanked staff for their cooperation and consider-
ation of this proposal., as office "ndow-Inium buildings are
new concept with many questions concerning them, He
presented drawings of the off condomInxums constructed in
15t. Louts park,. explaining that the buildings are clustered
around courtyards. These courtyards are shared by the
tenants owners and employees. He explained further that
these are designed to be attrac ive open areas for
relaxation, meeting: people, .and having lunch. The Willow
Grove proposal is the same concept. .1r. B,l ck e ?la ned
that if the buildings were moved closer together to achieve
the 35 ft. perimeter setback, the buildings would encro ch
and reduce courtyard space between the buildings.
Page 2
l nniho Commission Minutes
3anuary
T,
1955
Ne. Klick explained that :this design also gives the tenant/
owner individual access and Inientity that is very desirable
and affords the buildings their marketing success.
Acting Chairman Stelger ald Inquired if they had Investi-
gated other design considerat tons and gave as an example,
other office complexes of similar type, but different
design. Mr. Kliek stated they do not feel these are as sue-
cessful
suc-
cessfulas the provedbuildings- that the purchaser wants
the exterior exposure to thein building area and the inter-
ior courtyard amenities. Acting Chairman Steigerwald asked
what type of businesses, would be interested in purchasing
this office space. Mr. Mick stated they would be profes-
sional -type businesses) such' s architects, CPA's attor-
ro s,. insurance offices,; chiropractors and other medical
office uses*
Mr. Klic: commented regarding setback requirements in the
1 vs B-2 ni District; that since' the development Is a
office use,, perhaps the 8-1 standards could be appiled
oordinator McConn commented that the buildings are to be
constructed in the 6-.2 Zoning District, and therefore the
proposal should meet the Ordinance. requirements for that
District
Commissioner Magaus inquired if they would consider smaller
buildings. qtr. Klick stated the , lot coverage is , and
they are at only 2/ of that percentage. They have provided
green area in the central areas of the complex, which they
feel is a better use than providing green, area along the
roadway or ` next` to the shared parking area, that would .not
be used by the owners and employees of the office condo-
miniums.
Commissioner Pl f a inquired about the temporary read, and
what would ' occur if it were abandoned. Mr. Kilok stated
the temporary road will be replaced with a permanent road-
way,, and they have included cross easements with their pro-
posal for this purpose. Coordinator McCo n clarified the
temporary road" is included as `,part of the Willow trove
Development.,
Mr. Klick stated he is in basic a ree _nt with the planning
staff report, and the c-nf'li t comes- from the, fact that the
Zoninq Ordinance does Pot allow for, condominium of lele
buildings that use interior lot lines*'
A Acting Chairman Stelgerwald opened Public Hearing.
There was no one to speak on the Vice Chairman
t igerwal .to ed the Public Hearing.
T 'Page
Planning Commission Minutes
January ', 1985
MOTION hy Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner ON A
pauba to recommend approval of the Revised Preliminary ..Plt,
and Site Plan for Wallace Freeman, Freeman, Inc., deleting
Condition No. 12 of the draft Resolution; and recommending
approval of all setback variances
om- Commissioner pauba concurred with the recommendation. Com-
miss o er p"lufka commented that the design is good for themissioner
tenantlowners and employees. Commissioner Stul.berg agreed
that the use of the .interior courtyards is very popular.
Commissioner ire concurred with the recommendation- and
Commissioner Magnus stated they have developed a goad land-
Cape plan.
Roll. ai l VOTE. 6 Ayes. NOTION carried. VOTE - MOTIONCARRIED
Com%issa.oner Stulberg suggested that research be done re-
garding Ordinance language and requirements for office
condominium complexes, and that staff rake a report to the
Cott s•,.on ;
Acting Chairman Stelgerwald introduced the Iters and request- DON MYR NN
ed a review of the December 28, 1984 staff report, which was PRZkii41NARY PLAT
provided by Coordinator WcConn. AND VARIANCE
p OAKDE WEST 3RD
Aocing Chairman $teigerwald introduced lair. Mark Gronberg, ADDITION (8407)
representative- and Don Myron, petitioner.
Mr. Cronberg provided some history on, the property and the
proposal}. He noted that they first investigated a 6 lut
subdivision of the property, however, the fill, requirements
for this property made It economically unfeasible, ;and led
to the proposal for a fur lot subdivision. He 'addressed
the correspondence received from the Director of Community
De-elopment Blair Tremere, dated June 21, 1984, at which
time, Mr. Tremere refers to a piece of property owned by the
City :and purchased for street and utility purposes. It was
their opinion that there was adequate frontage on the road-
way, with access being maintained through the>outlot. He
stated that, they felt a was, unfair for this petitioner to
x ca to provide access for the northerly property, plus hav-
Aq to put in the street and utilities. Flo mated that Don
Myron provided utility service and easement for Nturn, ox- ,
tension to the Pribble property when Oakdale West was
proposed.
Coordinator McConn explained that, as Mr. Dronberg has andi-
c ted, the City owns the triangle of land, but it is not
deeded right-of-way for 19th Avenue north, it is only open
property owned by the City. She stated, that the City's pol-
icy) to prevent "land -locked" parcels, is to recommend that
provisions be made forright-of-way as development occurs,
as the City would have no rights in providing access in the
future if f utlot D is retained.
Page
nq Comm; 11
anuary 9, 1985
Coordinator HaConn stated that, in reference to Mr.
ronbergis accounting of the history of development for this
area; tb t during the development of,Sunhyacres 3rd, the
owner of the northerly property (Mr. Bill pribble) Yas
approached by the City, and asked if the roadway could cross
his property,, Mr. Dribble would not grant his permission for
V,is to occur. The City has looked at other alternatives,
but this is the last of the undeveloped land around the
Pribbl.e property, and It is the City's policy to provide
access ` for all property in the area of development.
Acting Chairman Stet erwald opened the Pcibllc Hearing, and
introduced Mr. Don Myron'. Mr. Myron requested that he be
last to speak.
Mr. Bill pribbl, 17330 '1"th Avenue Norte.) stated that he
would 111te to request i t the City remove a "non-existent"
bice path from the mApsf he po.nted out the location to
staff )rd the Commission, as being on the east side of
Klreatz _ake R He stated he ` has read the planning staff
report, and concurs with the staff recommendations. He
stated that the ` property is not owned '_ by Mro M ;iron $ but by
Mrs. Copeland, and that he has made offers on this .property
in the past, because of his need for access to his property,.-
however, this was not accepted.
He referred to the triangular piece of property discussed as
owped by the Ci yr and stated that he and Mr. Copeland have
easeAlents that encumbers ;this piece.
He event on to say that the suer stub provided does not help
his property as; it is too far away. He enjoys his property
just a it, is,and plans to retire there. Mr. pr,ibbl.e
stated that he could -incur with either approach (Cutl;ot M
or right-of-way) to serve this lard, and that the staff
recommendation should be endorsed by the Commission.
He inquired about the street name of Kimberly Lane, and
Inquired if he would have to change: his address's
Coordinator McConn confirmed the street name, ` but had no
knowledge of the need for his change of address at this
Coordinator McConn stated, in response to Mr. Pribble' s
comments on the bike path, that she does not have that
information available to her at this time, but will check
into it and report to the Commission and Mr. Pribble
Page
Planning Commission Minutes
anuary 9-1 198
Acting Chairman teiVer ald introduced Mr. Don Myron, 2425
Me ri o ' ane, who discussed the problems of developing this
property. It Is hi.sopinion that this property has ",given"
too much with the zany ;requi s-ments placed on it by the
City. He stated that the northern property owner,Mr*
Pri.bbl, could have obtained permanent access to his
property a number of times in the past, and it would have
been more economical 'them as time has increased the cost o
development. He emphasized that, their proposal will leave
an: easement so that Mr. Pribble -rill always :have access to
his property, but: they are asking for the right to retain
Outiot B. He stated that if the triangular piece of
property owned by the City, was owned ,oy this development$
there would be substantial lot frontage.
Mr pri.bble stated that, in response to Mr. Byron, he couid
have made an offer on property within $unnyacres,, but fie
could not afford the property at that time.. He understands
that 9 . Myron is desirous o retaining 0 tlot 8, but that
City staff has madam the appropriate recommendation.
Acting Chairman Steigerwald closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner, Stul.ber inquired about tie proposal for 6
lots, and, their reasoning for developing four lots:.; Mr.
Gronbe g .stated that alone with requirements for fil,l, this
proposal was undesirable due to the heed for soils
correction which would be very costly.Commissioner
Stulberg, noted that lake' shore property is mare valuable,
and that if developed as such, they could vacate the
easement and N,r. Pribbl,e could use a new pub,l. c roadway.
Mr. 'Myron stated* there would need, to be a solid base for
construction, which could necessitate going. down 50 ft. for
firm footingt and the poor soil conditions could cause
future ; problems. Commissioner Plufka concurred* and stated
that a roadway could not be built without exceptionally high
construction costs because,of the poor-svil,s,.
Co lssianer pie inquired about the private drive easement
and: proposal for Outlot B. Coordinator McCann stated that,
all other land is new platted, and this is the last option
for access from an adjacent developing parcel.
Co i l.ssi.oner Plufka` stated teat the City must provide
access, and cannot forever be assured that the property
owner will retain all his property, and that at some point,
the property may be proposed for a different; use.
Page
Planning Commission Minutes
anuary 9t 1985
MOTION by Commissioner Plufka, seconded by Commissioner RECO"HENDATION,
tulberg to recommend approval for; tion Myron for Preliminary
Plat and Variance with the, staff's recommendation for dedi-
eated right of-way as stated in the draft Resolution.
Commissioner Pauba stated a he ":is no n comp agree
ment with the recommendations of approval, but there seems
to be no ether choice.
Mr. Don Myron stated that, he realizes the staffreoommenda-
tion. is based on Ordinance standards and engineering reoom-
mhdations, but ti. at there should be renumeration for this
outright giving of land".
The Commission advised Mr. Myron that, this matter is some-
thing they cannot dlseuss, and could only be considered by
City Council.
Roll Call. Vote. 6,Ayes. MOTION carried, VOTE - ff3i10H CARRIED
Acting Chairman Steigerwald called a 5 minute Recess a 5*00 RECESS
P.M* The meeting reconvened at 8:55 P.M.
Acting Chairman Stelgerwald introduced the Revised Prellinin- OCRM PROPERTIES
ary 'plat for "Root'-ford Sguarell., the reading of the December PW-LMINARY
811984 Staff Report was waived. PLAT FOR "!ROCKF
SWARE" 84103),
Acting, Chairman tel-gerwald introduced fir. Rick Sathret
Sathre Berquist Assoc., representing the petitioner.
Mr. Sathre, provided a history on the projeett eomment ng
the project has required al.ot of work over a long period of
time, and they meant ;to bring It to a «ltastefull conellisi;on.
He, advised the Commission that if this ,project is recommend- ecom mend_
ededfor approval., they want to process futureappl,ioati.ons in
a timely manner.
Commissioner d ire .inquired about the Analysis portion of the
staff report, noting the 8-2 .Zoning w10 the CM (neighbor-
hood shopping center) guiding, and his e%nuern that the pro-
posals would not be neighborhood Services, and therefore the
zoning is misleading for this guiding. Moor d nator MeConn,
stated that this guiding is the basis for the B-2 Zoning
District, and is corresponding, Commissioner }'dire question
ed the Class IT restaurant use.. Coordinator McCann pointed
out that, Item tb# 3 in the Analysis Section of the report
states that Site Plan applications and Conditional Use Per-
mits if applicable) will require approval. of Ordinance
eviews.
Mr. Sathre commented that they are not presupposing approv-
als of any use proposed for the property*
Page
Planning commission Minutes
January 9, 1985
Commissioner Plufka inquired about the width of the build-
able pads for Lots I end 2. Acting Chairman Ste gerwald and
Coordinator McConn confirmed ' it would be 84 ft. minus 30
ft., leaving a perpendicular Width for buildable area at 54
ft. Coi-mnissioner Plufka inquired Why they -could not try to
evenly distribute the area dor each lot, and would it tra;.
possible to move the ` lot lines and; come up with more useabD..
lots. Mrs Cerhaoh stated he would like to be able to; do
this, however, equal: division for the northernmost lot would
er croach to the edge of the 'structure. It i's his hope to
have two lots that meet the Ordinance standards as closely
as possible.
Commissioner Plufka inquired 'I ` lot lines could be adjusted
to provide ,a 55 ft. width for Lot 3, ter. Cersbach stated
the common lot line would then run through the middle of the
house.
Acting Chairman Steigerwald inquired if they had considered
different lot configurations, such as pie -shaped lots, so
new homes could be built further from: the lake. ter.
Ge sbach stated they had considered many designs, but
because he lives there, he wants privacy and space for the
homes.. lie stated he i:5 ; open to ali suggestions, and feels
that his proposal Is "haunted" by the previous plat; this is
his home, and he is making a commitment to the property.
Acting Charman Ste agerwald confirme that demolition is
being considered only for Lot ?.
Commissioner Plufka commented that the lot lines buld be
moved north riy, to prevent the person buying Lot 3 from
needing to make variance regd,sts Mr. Gerbach stated this
would he feasible, but he is, concerned that the north lot
lire net come up aga.'nst his residence
Acting Chairman' Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing. As
there ; was no one to speak, Acting Chairman Stelgerwald
closed the Public Clearing.
Acting Chairman Stei.gerwald sated the staff recommendations
are appropriate. Commilssioner Plufka noted that the discus-
sion on possible removal of trees is a. big concer.n,, as hese
trees are "treasures" and should be retained as ter. Cersbach
has stated.
Commissioner dire stated that in regard to the 'Lynette
Marie Addition"$ he understands the concern about the
prop+ rty lines, ` but the City must look to the Future once
the original structures are demolished. He :believes that
redesign Is appropriate.
Page
Planning Commission minutes
1985
Acting chairman. tei er ald concurred, and offered that mere
think time" is )ecessar 'nor this proposal He ,advised toe
petitioner that this proposal could be passed vn to City
Council and recommended for denial; however, the o mission
could also recommend deferral > for redesignt and It could be
reconsidered at a future meeting.
Mr. Gersbach inquired if they would consider the proposal
for approval If he moved the lot lines 10 ft.. Commissioner
l uifka : stated the Commission would want staff to have the
opportunity to review any new and/or revised plans, so that
staff can respond to the new design and report to the Com-
mission. Coordinator McConn concured
Acting. _ hairman Steigerwald inquired, how much time would be
involved before the proposal could be re -considered by the
Commission. Coordinator McConn stated, that it could be
scheduled tentatively for the first meeting in February.,
Mr., Gersbaoh commented that he had spoken to all his neigh- eighhorshorsabouthisproposal,, and no one had objections to the
plans.
MOTION, by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Commissioner RECOMMEMATION FOR:
plufka to recommend deferral of the Preliminary Plat and DWERM
Variance for Robert rs ach, with direction for redesign of
the plans.
Commissioner Stulberg confirmed that, the applicant is not
under the impression there will be an automatic recommenda-
tion for approval by his moving the lot lanes 10 ft..; and,
that direction on square footage should be given. He is in
agreement that redesign should provide the building pads
that will be more practically useable for the future; that
the natural vegetation should be preserved; and,, shared
driveways could be considered for giving access..
CommIssioncr Wire concurred, stating he is not as concerned
with lot width, as he would consider ,irregular shaped lots .
and shared drives to 'Fork out an acceptable plan.
Acting Chairman Steiqerwald explained the Motion and direc-
tions for redesign to the pensioner.
Roll Call Vote. 6 ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE- MOTION CARRIED
Acting Chairman Steigerwal.d introduced the applioat=un, and PAUL W%SONt Jit*
reading of the December 31, 1984 staff report was waived. WNTt LOT
Chairman Stei.gerwald that Mr. Wilson has
CONSOLIDATION/
DIVISION, (84108) Acting explained
provided three alternatives in his narrative, but all would
not be needed to achieve his request- and,- he reminded the
Commission that the issue of lot coverage will he discussed ;
with: the Development Council in the near future
Page `1g
Planning Commission Minutes
anuary 9, 1985
ommAss over Stulberg suggested the Commissionon not deal with
the elimination of decks and garages, but took at the Amend-
ment to the Planned Unit V`_—*elopment.
Coordinator Ro onn commented that the staff report identi-
fied Items similar to those noted in the Harrison Hills
report.
Acting Chairman Steiger ald introduced Mr. Paul Wilson, and
inquired why he was making application at this time, as dis-
cussion is ongoing concerning the lot coverage.
Mr. Wilson stated that, he is in the middle :of building his
home fnd wants the deckand porch, He, stated' that he re-
ceived ece ,ved calls from neighbors requesting ,an explanation of his
application. He stated that because his property Is within
the PUBt he is requesting the broad approvals so other prop-
erty ownersi who might find themselves in he same circum-
stance won't need to go through the ex sense, and time re-
quired`for processing the application. He regoested that
the Commission look at the development at,. a whole for future
residents.
Mr. Wilson explained that he selected the lot Because Its
location, and lid net think about lot coverage problems. He
stated that his builder has dune word in -East Plymouth over
a long; period of time, and did not questlon, the design of
the residence; however, at the time a. BuIlding permit was.
requested, ;the bull,der was Informed the "footprint" was tee
large. The removed tae garage and eliminated the deck, but
he wants to be -able to add the deck and porel', He feels
that the comment in the staff report stating that a planned
unit development allows for reduced lot size to provide for
more affordable housing,, prejudices his desire for an expen-
sive home. In reviewing the background Information for this
Planned Unit Development, 1.t was noted that the developec
planned his development to tie in with. the Wellington 5ztb_
division; and, the let layout decision Was based on the
opography of the property. He noted that the developer was
asked what type of accusing he would see for this develop-
ment, and his answer was that it would be "expensive homes".
Mr., Wilsvi stated that, it is his opinion that the 'City of
Plymouth PUD requirements are not "cowfion knowledge" to home
buyers, builders,, or architects. He wonders It the City is
better ofd"" because it was necessary for him to build a
smaller garage. He : noted haat. -car garages are built be-
cause families are acquiring snowmobiles) boatst etc. In
his case, he plans on buying a boat, and because of the need
to reduce the size of the garage, it will have to be stared
outside. tie requested that) the Commission consider haat
the request for increased lotcoverage and :lot division/con-
solidation was undertaken by himself as a private property
owner incurring the expense- and, the 'developer had no part
in,. nor is profiting; From thi request,
Iddl 116.
Page I
Planning Commission Minutes
1985
Conti Is stoner Pluf a stated that he concurs with Mr. Wilson's
statements about the ho aeowrter's Saeed for storage which
leads tea the construction of -oar garages. He commented
t'aat, =1r. Wilson made a good point regarding the City's
opinion of smaller lots trans ,a.tinglntca affordablehousing;
and, that the City heeds: to deal with the factthat people
are buying the smaller lots, and want ng to build larger,
more expensive homes.
Commissioner Stulberg ratted ' that developers request PUD,
status to attain more lots that cast less thanlots within
standard plats, where they coaxial rouble or triple in coat.
Coordinator McConn added that, the statement made on "af-
fordable housing" comes'from smaller lots costingng less be-
cause of shorter utility lines; less lot frontage; and, that
ca a% and do accommodate affordable housing.
dice Chairman Stelg vial,d opened the Public Hearing. There
was noone; present to speak on this item,, Vine ChaIr aan
t igerwald; closed the Public' Hearing.'
MOTION kay Commissioner Stulber9j, seconded' by Commissioner RECM-1ENDAT-10H E
Wire to recommend approval for Paul. Wilson,, 3r., for an
Amendment to the Residential Planned Unit Development to
al;l-w lot coverage of up to 2 for Lot 3, Block 1, CORY A'S
THIRD ADDITION.
Comissioner tulbercg stated that, in his opinion, the Har-
rison Hills PUD speaks to what a~ PUD shotAld be, with much
more open space than the Gon ea PUD; and, that if they had
proposed this lot coverage within the PUD Placa it would not
have, been approved.. Novio-ver, his 'notion is for this appli—
cAnt's property only. Mr. Gonyea was not present, nor any
other property owner within the Gonyea's Third Addition, so
It affects only Mfr. Wilson's property.
Commissioner Pau ba concurs, but falls to see the "magic" of
lot coverage. Hopefully these recent concerns of lot
coverage wathin PUD's can be resolved.
Acting Chairman Steigerkald inquired about storm drainage,.
Engineer Goldberg stated; haat for every increase in lot
coverage, there is a 5increase in runoff, however deck
additions ua not have as much Impact.
Rill Call Vote.. 5 Ayes, Acting Chairman Stelgerwald Nay. VOTE MOTION CARRIED:
MOTION carried.
Acting Chairman `Stei erwald explained his nay vote was based
on the fact that the lot coverage concern is sander
discussion
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOKIENDATION JANUARY 91 1985
RECOMMENDATION A
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT, VARIANCESt AND GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLhN FOR WALLANCE
FRl*F1lAR FOR FREEMAN, INC. -(81-400-51184-090
WHEREAS, Wallace Freeman, F'reemant Inc.,, has requested approval of a Preliminary
Plat, Variances and General Development Plan for Wallacelace Freeman for "reeman,. Ino«
for four commercial lots and two outlots for Phase l`of the development at the
northeast corner of Nathan Lane and Betty Crocker Drive and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has ,reviewed the request at a dull called Public
Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, TH :REFOR , BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
MINNESOTA* that it should and hereby does ,approve the Preliminary Plat, Variances,'
and General Development Plan for Wallace Freeman, Freeman., Inc. for four doommerolal
lots and two outlots for Phase l of the developmentopment to be located at the northeast
corner of Nathan Lane and Betty Crocker Drive, subject to the following' conditions:
Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum,
2.. Removal of all dead or dying trees fz%om the property at the owner's expense.
3. He Building Permits shall he !°d, until a Contract has been awarded for sewer
and water,
Payment of park dedication fees-in-Lieu of dedication in accordance with the
Dedication Policy ire effect at the time of Issuance of Building Permit.
Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 79-60 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures. in subdivisions ad acey t to, or containing shy open storm
water drainage facility.
6. ` No Building Permits shall be issued , intil. the Final Plat is filed and recorded
with Hennepin County.
7. Approved variances are for loot size requirements; lot dimen ions and, lack of
frontage to a public roadway as diagrammed on plans staff dated December 20,'
1984,
S. Appropriate legal documents regarding the Cendotinium Association, covenants and
restrictions as approved by the City Attorney, shall: be filed with the Final
Plat.
9. Goss easement dicumen.ts as approved by the City Attorney shall be filed with
the final Plat allowing for shared drives, parking, and open space common areas.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMIMENDATION JANUARY 91 1985
RECOMMENDATION A
APPROVING SITE PLAN FOR WALLACE ` E MANN FREEMAN, INC. (84096)
WHEREAS, Wallace Freeman, Freeman,. Inc. has requested approval: of a Site Paan for the
construction of ,a phased office condominium development to be located at the north-
east
rth-
east, corner of Nathan Lane and Betty Crocker thrive, and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called Public
Hearing and recommends approval.,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does apr rove the re u ,st fir Wallace Freeman,
Freeman Inc. for a Site 'Plan for the construction of a ph. sed office condominium
development to be located at the northeast cornt:r of Nathan Lane and ;Betty Crocker
Drive, subject the fv.
lowi€
q conditions
1. Compliance with City Engineer'sn.eer's Memorandum
Payment of pare dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with the
Dedication Policy in effect at the time of Iluilding Permit issuance.
3ffi Compliance with Policy Resolution No.: 79-80 regarding minimun floor elevations
for new, structures on sites adjacent to, or containing any open storm water
drainage facility.
4. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement for
completion of site Improvements.
Any signage shall be in compliance with thea proved Sign Program and City Ord-
inance, with a vas lance from the setback requirements for the tenant identifi-
cation signage to internal property lines.
6. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approv,.
a s per Ordinance provisl;ons.
7. Compliance with 'the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants. A`t=ire
Lane variance is approved per December, 27, 1984 'memorandum from te Fire Chief.
8. All waste and waste containers shall, be stored within the enclosure, and no
outside storage is permitted.
9.. No Building Permit to be issued until the Final Plat is filed and recorded with
Hennepin County.
10Approved Variances anclode-. Building setbacks to interior property lanes (17
ft.)- and, sign setbacks for tenant identification signage C ft) to interior
lot lines; and, building setbacks to perimeter lot lanes ( 20 ft. yrs 35 ft,
11`, dip to 20 spares of the parking area for the adjacent shopping center may be
credited toward this development, subject to submittal of a proof -of --parking
plan which' Identifies the location of the stalls, and such st ills have been
constructed.
PLANNING Cg i la lM RECOMMENDATION JANUARY 91 1985
R COKTE14DATION
APPRCvI C PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DEIN MY ON FOR OA DALE WEST 3RD ADDITION (84097)
WHEREAS, Don Myron has requested approval of a Preliminary Plat for Oakdale I --Vest 3rd
Addition for Baur single family resident.'al lots and two outl ats located east of
Highway 101 and north of 49th Avenue lorth and,
RIAS, the Planning. Commission hr s reviewed the request at a duly; called Public
Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLY!mTN 7
MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the Preliminary Plat for Dan Myron n
for Oakdale West 3rd Addition for four single family residential lots and two odt.lots
located east of Highway 101 and north of 19th Avenue North, subject to the following
conditions t
1. Compliance with, the City Engineer's Memorandum.
Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's expense.
3. Payment of park dedication fees -In -,lieu of dedication In accordance with the
Dedication Policy In effect at the time of issuance of Building Permit.
4 Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 79--80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures in subdivisions. adjacent to, or containing any ripen; storm
water drainage facility..
3. No Building Permits shall be issued until the Final Play .is filed and recorded
with Hennepin County.
4. No yard setbacks are granted or Implied.
5 Appropriate legal documents regarding covenants and restrictions as approved by
the Clay Attorney,,_ shall be filed with the Final Plat, addressing the sharers
o nership of Outlot A and maintaining the private drive access to property to
the north
6. All existing structures shall be removed at the developer's expen-se at initial
development.
7. All existing wells shall be capped and sealed in accordance with Hennepin County
Health Department regulations.
8. The Final Plat shall include dedication of right-of-way, and construction of a
publi
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOM?4ENDATION 3ANUARY 9t 1985
RECOMMENDATION
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR OGR N PROPERTIES FOR ROCKFORD SOUARE (84103)
EREA ., Ogren Properties has requested approval of a Revised Preliminary Plat and
General Development Plan for Rockford Square for four commercial lots located on the
east side of Nathan Lane and north of Rockford Road; and,
WHEREAS, tido planning Commission has .reviewed - the request at a duly called Public
Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HERMY RESOLVED' Y THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the Revised Preliminary fiat for
Ogren properties for Rockford Square for four commercial lots located on the oast
side of Nathan Lane and north; of Rockford Road, subject to the following ondlt ons*
1> Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum,
Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's expense.
Payment of park dedication fees-'n-lieu of dedication in accordance with the
Dedication ''Policy In effect at the time of Issuance.of wilding Permit.
4. compliance with Policy Resolution No 5-U regarding minimum floor >elev tion$
for new structures in subdivisions adjacent to,, or containing any open storm
water drainage facility.
s No Building Permits shall be Issued until the Final Mat is filed and recorded
with Hennepin County.
No yard setbacks are granted or Implied.
7 Development of lots is subject to approval of the Ordinance required site plans.
Appropriate legal dooum nts, as approved by the City attorney, allowing for the
shared use and maintenance of an access drive for bots 2 and 3 shall be filed
with the final Play,,
9. Prior to submission of the Final Flat application, the City Atterney's concerns
regarding the Title shall be 'addressed.
10* All existing structures shall be removed at thedeveloper's expense with initial
development*
11. All existing wells shall be capped and sealed in accordance with Hennepin County
Health Department regulations.
12. The Final Plat application shall include a revised General Development plan
conibrminq with the recommendations for access points to Nathan Lane.