HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 01-23-1985PLANNING CONNISSION RFCOMHENDATION JANUARY 23, IM
x'O*rF NDATI
APPROVING SITE PLAN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCEADVANCE HA INF (A-519)
WHEREAS, advance Machiae has requested approval of a SlIte Platl Conditional Use
Permit and Variance for the construction of a ; xpanslon to their building located
north of 21st. Avenue between Fernbrook Lane and Niagara Lane; and
WWERR'AS the Planning Commission has reviewed ai,ld request at a duly called public
H,-ariqg and recommends approval of the e,..ansion to the building.,
I THEREFOREt ` BE IT HM BY RESOLVED BY THE 'STY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ' PLYMOUTH,,
II N a TAA that it should and hereby does approve the request for Advance, Machine
for a Site plan. Conditional Use permitaM Variance for the expansion to the
faellity located ori the north of 11=t Avenge between Fernbrook lane and Niagara
Lane,, subject to the following o(,ixd1t1*o sz
1Compliance with It Engineer's Vemorandum.
t Payment of park dedication fees,ln- lieu of dedication in accordance withDedi-
cation Policy in effect at the time of i.ailding permit issu4nee.
3. Submission of required financial guarantee .and performanee agreement for comple-
tion
o pl.e-
tion of site improvements.
Any subsequent phases of expansions are suhjject .to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provision -i.
5 All waste and waste oontainers shell, be stored within the approved enclosure.
6. The Conditional Use Permit for temporary > outside storage, is subject to all
applicable codes, regulations anJ ordinan est and violation thereof' shall be
grounds for revocation-,
74 The Conditional Use permit is issued to the petitioner/tenant as operator of the
facility and shall net be transferable*
PLEASE SEEPAGE: TWO
CITY OF 11C40"ITH
PLAMIM COW41!SSWN MINUTES
3ANUARY 23,.. 1985
The re u ar moeting of the Plymouth PLanntag Commission w"As
called to order at 700 P.M*
WIMS PRESENT- Chairman tel(,ter ald,, Commissioner
Wire, " Magnusj alfa and tRauba
tom` . ABSENT: Commi Ener Stult erg,
STAfT PRESENT-. Community elopm n ` ordinetor
Sara, M C nnCity4qty) m o yer
Community Development Secretary
Grace Win man,
Chalrmafi Stenger a d ` explainedained t e us(- and purpose of the
Consent Agenda. MOTION by, Commissioner Pauba, seconded b
Co9tuissicner Wire to adopt the Consent Agenda, adding Tt m .
and 4-D to the Consent Agenda. air a-, St 1q rivald
nquired x there were question$ or comments t'r,;the repre-
ntative of these petitions., qtr. David Volker stated fie
wished to discuss 64i Lot Consolidation, Lot I lei l un and
Variance for David Volker and Thomas Betz with the COMB -
un. The representative for _A, Alfred berlej 3r4, Lot
I)Ivision and Variance, stated he had no (iiestions or
oeom ent4t and n aqr m nt/
1 withp the t ldnn.n
p
to f
l gg y y l 1985. dktflepJanuar
the addIt on of Item 6-R.
VO > Ayes. MOTION carried.
M.s NUTS
by Commissioner Pau , seconded b cmm c`£.. r Wiret1tn MI , „
to, approve theF Minutes of January 91 1985 as a mitt(,- 1985
VOTE. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried.
PUMLIC NGS
Chairman t g rwa .d introduced the request by Advance ADVANCE HA Hf1W
Maehine and requested that Coordinator M,,«Conn review the LOT CONSOLD T10N
January 11 1985 .Staff Report. CWrman Steilgerivald C XTX USE
e Fir E
parking, at landscaping variances were requested. AND VARIANCE (A-519)
Commissioner Pduba requested an explanation of the phasing
and building looations on the. graphie. Chairman Steigerwald
Introduced t"fir. Ron flay,, 560 Weston ;wane, representing
Advance Rac into
Page 14
P ann ing Commission Wnutes
46 C
January i A 7
Mr. pay reviewed the graphic and provided background on the
development. He explained that, the land was purchased In
1971, and some of their assemble operations were moved from
their Sprang Park location to Plymouth. They expanded into
both existing buildings; brought all their assembly
operations to Plymouth; and, have purchased an additional 1
acres, No explained that In 1974; when they purchased the
addit",dnal acreage, the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance permitted
a axlc um of coverage in the Industrial District. He
stated that upon their decision to further expand their
operations; and at the time of submission of initial plays-,
they were ;informed by the City, that the Plymouth Zoning
Ordinance now allows a maximum lot coverage of in the
Industrial District. He plaaned that they have three
locations In the metres area.; southeast. Minneapolis, Spring,
Park, and Plymouth, they don't want to face the need to find
nes sites in six to 7 years, and, they need the lot
coverage for their expansion plans. He stated that to
reduce the lot coverage they require, would mean a large
reducticin of the building ; floor space needed..
Mr. Pay stated his concern about landscaping requirements,
and questioned the importance of Increasing the landscaping
because of a mezzanine area they are proposing. He stated
that the need fo:r incre,-sed screening in an area where there
is nothing but warehousing and manufacturing operations such
as Toro Corp.,. does not seem plausible.
Mr. Pay explained that, in reference to the parking
requirements, their operations will consist of two to three
s ifts so that the total number of employees roll across
tree shifts, and the parking plan as. submitted would be
more than sufficient for their needs. He stated Advance
Machine does not want any parking on the streets, and If
additional parking is needed, they will provide for it.
Chairman Steigewald stated that, the City's concerns about
adequate parking in the Industrial District comes from past
experiences with companies that face the need for expansion
and do not have adequate parking ori-site, or where new
tenants/owners of industrial buildings require a higher use
of the propertyt and the parking is not rj fflci nt for their
needs.;
ff .clay stated haat.Advance is aware of these problems, and
is hopeful that with the phased' development, the parking
required will be provided, He stated they are 'committed to
continue doing business in this area, and even though it is
e pen ive to operate in Minnesota, their work force is dere
and they don't want to move their operations out of State..
Page
Plannity omm i ssion
Janoary ?3, 1916,
Commissioner Magnus -d abocit locatioti of the drkitk„,
ramp. Mr, Ray explained their "proof of-parking” pan and
stated that construction of a ramp is probably ;lost poi-
tje, fie stated their surface parking for stalls.
Chairman Stelgerwald. inquired about tete staff commentsfa
how compliance. can be a h .eyed, and how employee levels
could be regulated. Coordinator McConn stated that the City
has out ,oned Advance td be real i it i Aboat her future
parking needs- and, that actual experOnce has shown that
problems do occur whe=a deve .opmers gauge and obtain approval
for a lower use thea when a new owner/tenant, . who needs a
xno sten e use of the facility, has to apply for variances
because the parking required has not been provided.
Mr. tray stated they understand that) because they have this
problem at their Spring Park facility. They willl take any
and all a0ton necessary to provide the parking theyy will
require.
Coordinator Mc nn added that utilltizinr.z more than one
shift of employeos will help control the need for parking, at
any divan time.
Commissioner Pluf a *°onf rmed that Phase T does not exceed
the 3 maximum -A Coordinator McConn answered
affirmatively, hast added that the issue of lot coverage is
Import ri-U to (114SOUSS now before there Is further
development.
Mr tray exp .aint-d that they wadi to move the, Corporate}
offices, from Spring flark to the Plymouth` location. They
plan to move their corporate offices 'sato Phase IT of the
r1ev( lopment and Ph4se III will ,b : ani ex ansion of their
MMANCtUring OperdtIOPS-
Commitssioner Pa tau Inquired If they could salve the var anoe
request by the cora -uct on of a multi-story office build-
Ino.
ui d-
In . Mr. pay confirmed they have a 3-story office building
In tale plans. (Alis oner paub a inquired if they could
construct other multi-,story buildings elsewhere on ache prop.
er y to coat down on ` the lot coverage,, Mr, day stated they
could not do this with the existing bullrings, but ;trey, do
have plans for a mezzanine to provide office space.
Co=ilssioner Wire inquired about the outside s orae e. tar.
flay st t ct that there will he some outside storage in phase
wh ch will be - ere ned with plantings and 'fencing* He ad-
vised
d-<
v ed there is some outside storage in use at the facility
now, with occasional short term storage of truck trtil ers
which are moved in axt out. He confirmed they would not
Page 16
Planning o piss on Minute's
Ja uary
store components in the trailers, as they have adequate
warehouse space. Commissioner lire inquired if the new area
wi I l have paved storagee area; M.r. Hay answered
affirmatively.
Commissionerr d ire confirmed that trailers will not be parked
In this storage area, and: that the s-,tora e of materials
would be on , a temporary basis; Mr. Ray stated trailers would
not be parked in the area; that this area is for storage of
waste steed:.. etc.; and, , collection containers tru+ h like
Iedampst rs" will be provided. The area will be screened and
paved
Chairman Steigerwald'opened the Public Hearing There was
no one present
I
to speak on the item. Chairman Stelgerwald
closed the public Hearing.
Chairman Steigerwaild stated be cannot remember the reason
for the Ordinance chance from 0 o lot ooverae in the
Tndustr al District. Coordinator McConn stated she does not
know the history of the Ordinance amendment but at one time
there was l- Zoning that allowed for more intense
industrial. use. Mr. Ray concurred, stating that the 1-2
Zoning District had a maximum €l lot coverage.
Commissioner Wire stated that these changes were made to re-
duce the u V di nq "footprint", He is concerned that the
petitioner purchased the additional land under the assump-
tion, that they could; have 5lot coverage, and he is in-
clined to recommend that the variance be approved because
they acquired the hand before the Ordinance was changed. He
confirmed that the parking is covered by Condition No. 1 of
the draft Resolution. Coordinator McConn answered
affirmatively. She stated that standard language is used,
and the Commission may reiemher that a covenant was prepared
for a similar appl.icati.on, (Stevens -Lee ddition!3) .
Commissioner Plufka stated that, the parking requirements
and, lot coveragerage variance work against each other, and that
it is agreed that constructing a .ramp could be very costly.
He; stated that if the application is recommended for
approval,, the petitioner must look very carefully at their
plans for phases li and Tll, to determine what the ultimate
use will be for the -property. if AtIvance leaves, and the
building is used by a new owner for a more intense use,
there could be too few parking stalls for a very large
facility.
Mr. Ray stated that, of course, they cannot foresee th it
course in 20 years, but they assure the City they are very
sensitive to their long-range ,seeds# and are totally commit..
ted to this development. He stated that :once' Phase i is
complete, tete City will understand more of their operation.
Page 17
Planninq Commission Minutess
a ar , 1985
MOTION by Commissioner W
it
r , seconded by Commissioner Ri a ka RECOWENDATION
to recommend approval of the Loi: Consolidation for Advance
Viachin,subject to the, conditionsion as stated in th draft
i olutiont. to recommend approval of the Haster Plans Site
Plan, Conditional Usefi> i.t and Variances subjec, to the
first five conditions of the draftResolution; modify nq
Condition No. 6 to state, "The Conditional ase Permit for
temporary du AsIde storage is subject to all applicable
codes, regulations and ordinances, and violation thereof
shall be q*-ounds for revocation; subject to Condition Nes
throughh 0- delete Condition Nos. II; delete #yup to, , but not
exceeding Ordinance allowed lot coverage" of Condition flo.
It subject to Condition No. 13 as stated; and, adding
Condition No. 14 a "a) Lot coverage as per the has r
Plan at 46.2%. rather than 1 'Landscape Plan to allow
for 1 over --store plantings as proposed".
Commissioner Wire stated that he, agrees with the pe itioneT
re ardino the landscape plan, and that a variance requestst°
for increased lot e vera i would not have been required` i
development had taken place at the brae -Advance purchased
the land. Commissioner Paula stated his agreement, except
that the lot coverage variance request is "too much" and he
opposes granting, the variance.
Commissioner Magnus stated that he could recommend approval
for the lot coverage and agrees with the covenant for park-
Ino,requirements, but: that it is appropriate for thea, to
meet the landscaping requirements of the City to hu l*er this
large facility. Mr. Ray :Mated that plantings> evil, be placed I
In the area to the svostt and they, will add some smaller
trees dor future growth. He inquired if putting in the ' 172
over -story trees, with an addition of the 35 plantings at a
smaller size than Policy requires, could he recommended by
the Commission.
MOTION to AMEND the NAIR MOTION by Commissioner Magnus, NOTION TiaW,
seconded by Commissioner Pluf a that the Landscape Plan
hall contain 3,14 additional plantings at `l inch 'minimum
size, to nr fi ittu, for screening of the east and west
perimeters of tood-Volza men and fu re phases.
VOTE. 6 Ayes. MOTION TO, AH[WD carried. VOTE HOTIORCARRIED
Ca mmi,s ioner Plu ka commented that Advance Machine is a
highly desirable corporate citizen or Plymouth; their plans
exhibit 'their oresi hta in phasing their development; and,
the City is not dissimilar in regard to eeon nmim
considerations of'mature planning.
page 18
ANIL
Planning Comm. linn Rin s
January 21. 1985
Commissioner pa ha con orred, ' but he is concerned that an
recommending approval o n *Increased lot coverage,,
eaves it open for someone eLi , to come forward to ask for
increased lotcoverage- for similar reasons.
Commissioner Wire stated that, the; precedent has been set In
the past with other requests. < Coordinator RcCoiin clarified
that tears have been : requests for .p to 40%o coverage.
ncom r - nor lger aldonm_-, nd that he is not uncomfor-
a a with the approval for locreased lot coveragel, in that, table
the factlity Is not close to res d n t are -as, and is not a
highly vitihlsite.
Coordinator M C nn stated ttriat staf-l" has similar concerns to
those e Commissioner to tus, and recommend cnmpl a wit', h
the Landscape Policy to reiluothe impact of the buildings.
Mr. Ray commented that thoir development overlooks other in-
dustrial buildtngst, and that they are sensitive to the pub-
licts view, however, they feel they are providing ad",nate
bufferingand sx°reeninq for their development.,
Commissioner Plufka .inquired if the City Engineer had any
on ern r aardina storm Nyater rust off. En inn r Goldberq
stated they have no special concerns.
Rtill Cali Vote on the tMA `N MOTION as ONCE AMENDED. 5 ;Ayes. VOTE -- MOTTO C.ARRTED
Comis,sio er Poubal, May. MOTION carried.
Chairman Soaq rwald Introduced the request by Hennepin NEWPIN CUMTY PARK
County Park Reserve District, and requested a review of theRESERVE DISTRICT
January 11, 11085 Staff Report. Coordinator McConn explained REVMD COHOTIJONAL
the revision to the approved plan as a relocation of the PERMIT AMEWWW
parking lot, because of dental by the Minnesota Depa tmentM SITE PEM (840657
of Natural Resources (DNR) for a permit to odn truot the
parking lot as originally proposed. She explained that the
parking lots as initially pr +pos d was ton close to the
High eater Elevation.
Chairman Steigerwald introduced fir., Don King,, Hennepin
County park Reserve istriotj who further explained that the
parking area as initially proposed would have required
extensive fill.
n ro- Chairman Steigerwald opened the Public Hearing,, and Intro-
d o d Mrs. Arlene J hnsont Rosewood Laney who inquiredduced
how many trees would be out down as the result of this pro-
posal. She was conenei,ned that applications seem to be
a:• approved so, quickly, and they are not advised of these hear - ar-
In . Chairman Stelgerwald explained the City's legalIngs.
page 19
P"'lanning
Commission minutes
January 21$,1985
notice procedures, and advised Mrs, 3ohnson, that: if she
would call City Center, they, would be glad to answer any of
her questions, at any time.
tlrs. 3ohnson stated she is very concerned about the removal
of trees; that 30 trees have already been removed; and, she
wants to know how many more zre to be removed.
Coordinator McCenn : pl -a ,ned that the plan calls ' for 16
deciduous and 5 conifer trees to be removed- that new trees
III be pl.antedt and existing trees will be retained. She
noted that they ar,.., l,ndreasinq the number of over -story
trees b13, and meet all, requirements of the Policy.
Mr. ding ,explained that the orxiginal plan would have made it
necessary to remove four more trees,which are now retained.
Mrs. 3ohns n stated she .was not a resident when the Park
Reserve District purchased the land, but she is sivrfh the tax
payers were unaware that "part of the park land iased by
the County rould be used for offices and p rkinT I, t. Com-
missioner Plufkand Coordinator : cConn explained that the
Hennepin Couuty Park District received City approval of a
Master Plan, and they; proposals for the District Headquarters
complies blah Ordinance standards.
Mr. !(In, ilated that thi: use of park land for district head -
quarter* is not unique, and that out of the 300 katal.: acres,
their complex esus approximately 3 acres, :less than 1 of
the total park area.
Mrs. 3ohnson inquired that percentage of the park is useable
land. Mr. King stated that 3 of the total area is marsh.
land.
Chairman Steigerwald closed tate Public Hearing.
Commissioner Wire inquired about the waiver of construction
of a °dire lane. Coordinator McConn stated that tate Else
Chief took the topography and physical characteristics of
the property into consideration, in his determination to
MCOMmerld granting the wa ve ; that the. City Council found
the recommendation appropriate- and, approval has been car-
ried forward with this application.
TION by 'Chairman Steigerwald, seconded by Commissioner R.0 MATION
Padba to recommend approval, of the Revised Conditional Use
Permit Amendment and Site Plan for the Hennepin County 'ark
Reserve District subject to the conditions: as stated in 'the
draft Resolution
Roll Call. Vote. 6 Ayes MOTION carried. VOTE 14ni cN CARRIED
Page ZO
lanningommis io z s
January j 1985
BUSINESS
TION by commissioner Rauba, seconded by Commissioner Wire REC0'14EWATION C TO
to recommend approval of Lot Division and Variance for APPROVE LOT DIVISION
Alfred Eberle, Jr., subject to the conditions as stated In AND VARIANCE FOR
the draft Resolution (planning Staff Report (11ated 3anuary AURED EBERL , JR.
84104)
VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Vote. 6 Ayes. MO€ carried.
DAVID VOLKER AND
Chairman Steigerwald introduced the application,, and Mr. THOMAS DET
David Voliker, 2830 Brockton Lane. Reading of the , anuary LOT CONSOLIDATION
i1', 1985 Staff Report was waived. LOT DIVISION AND
VARIANCE (84109)
Commissioner pauba stated he agrees with; the staff recom
rendat or to provide the minimum 6 ft. setback to the
garage.
Charman telge!iyald commented that the problem beg4n with a
surveyor's error, and that on behalf of the present proper-
ty owners, the•--ity should be flexible in this case.
Mr. Volker: explained that this requesIt. is made after a
series of compromises between himself and f1r. Betz. Now
that ter. Betz is selling his home, he is allo ing this prob-
lem to be resolved by giving land to lr. Volker so that his
garage will be on his land. The lot adjustment of 5 ft. I$
equitable to both he and Mr. Betz.
ommssioner Plufka stated he is concerned about not having
the required setback. Further discussion ensured regarding
location of utilities. Clity Esigincer Goldberg stated that
the setback variance ecoid not impact overhead utility
Bic . service.
y+
4 I 1
MOTION by Chairman Steiqerwald, seconded by _Commissioner
Magnus to recommend approval for the Lot Consolidation,, Lot
Division and Variance for David Volker and. Thomas Meet'* sub-
eet to the conditions as stated in the draft Resolution,
with a change to Condition No. 5 to state. "The common
property line shall ue adjusted o the south appy ops h ely
to provide a minimum 3 ft, setback to the garage".
VOTE -MOTION CARRIED
Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes. Commissioner plufka, Nay., MOTION
carried.
Mr. Volker coat cnted that the average citizen has a diffi-
cult time understanding the procedures involved with appli-
cation's to the City, and that perhaps the City of Plymouth
could put together information for th ;si. Chairman telger-
wa.d stated that this could be lengthy, but the City staff
is available and ready to help all cltI ens witf, questions
concerning their property.
Page
lannng Commission Minutes
anuary , 1985
Coninis ion r R ufka Inquired if there Mould be a" problem
with any odd -shaped lot that could require varlar oe re-
questst or could have a problem of poor traffic circilatlon
for a fast food restaurant, Mr. Sathre stated thei - plans
show that the us,,s. now proposed would fit the configuration
o the lots within Ordinance requirements.
Actnq Chairman Stegeald opened the Publle Hearingf as
there was no one to speak on this Item, he closed the Public
Hearing.
MOTION by Commissioner Paubal seconded by Commissioner RECOHMENDATION C
Magnus to recommend approval for Orn Properties for Revis-
ed Preliminary Plat for "Rockford Square's subject to the
staff ;recommendations in the draft staff report.
Roll. Call Vote. 6 Ayes. MOTION carried. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
Acting Chairman Steigerwald introduced the Item and request- ROOERT GERSBACH
ed background on the application. Coordinator lcConn intro- PRELIMINARY PLAT
duced correspondence received from the: Department of Natural VARIANCES (84107
Resources (DOR) received this date, and: reviewed that their
comments reflect the recommendation of Clay staff for defer-
ral, of the item for redesign. A review of the december 1.*
E 198k staff report was provided,
Commissioner pl.tufka requested clarification of lot line
locations.
Acting; Chairman Steigerwald introduced lr, forest Anderson,
Attorney, 7501 60th St. So., representing the petitioner.
Mr. .Anderson submitted a letter to the Commission, from the
former owner of the property, Mr. Raymond C. Zurek, who up-
hol.ds the petitioner's variance request, s1
He stated that, the former "L.ynnette Marie Addition". plat
approved In 1982, provided for the demolition of the exist-
ing structu*e;,, however, these tomes are year-round dwel-
lings, with a total valuation of 20G, Q0,Q» CC.. He commented
that as with the statement from the former owner, no one can
economica tl,y develop this property t a the or ginal. prolim-
ary plat, and with the additional cost of demolition.`
Another concern is the potential need to remove trees at the
northerly edge of the property. If the original pl=at were
used, a roedway would need to be constructedy which would
require removal of trees. He explained that Mr. Gersbach
has male improvements to the property, and the northerly
structure. It was felt that any purchaser of Lot 2, would
probably demolish the existing structure and rebuild, which
is why they request the setback variance for this lot. He
feels this proposal, lessens ..he existing variance problem,
xid will result In Improvement of the entire area. Lot 2 as
a buildable lot, makes the plat economically, feasible, for
the applicant, and enhances the area.
Page two
Planning Recommen aton January ,, 1985
8. The site shall he mdlnt,ined in a sanitary maiul -xr,
9. All waste and w } containers shall: he ;Mored Nvi han approved designated areas a
diagraom d on It, i4 nls. dated August 2-4. 1084.
fit?. The permit shall be renewed in one 1) year to assure compliance with the
conditions.
11. Future development of this site shall, be consistent with the approved taster Plan.
l Appropriate legal: documents establishing a covenant on the property shall be
approved by ths City Attorney, and filed at Hennepin County identifying that the
Future use of, the building may require the construction of a parking ramp to
satisfy Ordinance parking requirements.
13. Approved Variances include
a. trot Coverage as per the submitted Master plata at 46.2%; and,
h*. landscape pan aha contain provision for 91 plantings plus 1
additionallcnal plantings at I inch minimum size to provide screening of the east
and gest perars.
Ot lENATION FOR JANUARY 2 19
RECOMMENDATION B
APPROVTNG A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AME"31.4rNTs, SITE PLAN, AND VARIANCE FOR , HENNEPIN
COUNTY PARK RESERVE DISTRICT C 406
WHEREAS, the Hennepin C=ity Park Reserve District has requested approval of a
Conditional Use permit Amendment$ Site Plans and Variance for relocating the parking
lot area for the istrldt Headquarters within the Clifton E. French Regional ark'- and,
4 A , the City Council approved a Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan, and Variance
for the location of 'the District Headquarters within the Clifton E. Preach Regional,
Park on September 24t 1984 throuqh Resolution No. 4- *1 and,
WHEREASs the Planning Commission, has reg, ewed said request at a duly called public
fleang and recommends approval
OW2 THEREFORE, BF 1T HFREBY RESOLVEDBY THE CT.TY COUNCIL OF THE CITYOF PLYMOUTH,
MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request for relocating the
parking lot area for the District Headquarters, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with City nqIr -_ergs Memorandum.
2. Conp.rian e with Policy Resolution No. 79-80 regarding minlmu flour Bleu"tions for
new structures on sates adjacent to or containing any open storm. water drainage
faoil l ty
3. Submission of requare, financial guarantee and per.*forma oe agreement for
es mpleti n of sate Improvements*
4. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals
per Ordinance provisions.
All waste and ease containers shall he stored within the enclosure and no outside
storage Is permitted.
Compliance with Resolutlon.No. 82-235.
7. Waiver of the fare lane requirements.
8. Prior to issdanee of a Building Permit, e structural analysis prepared by a
structural engineer who Is registered in the State of Minnesota shall be provided
to the Building Official, confirming that the use of the existing building for
purposes ether than residential meet and/or exceed the Uniform Blui iding Cede
requirements.
9. Resolution 'N . 4-669 is hereby reg-inded.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ,'Ai da -MY 23, 1985
RECOMMENDATION C
SETTING CONDITIONS TO `'8L ME1 PRIOR TO FILING AND REG-ARDINO LOT DIVISION FOR ALFRED
FM RL , JR. ( 8410
WH RAS$ the City Coup .11 has approveda taut Division for Alfred Eberle, Jr. for
property located Orth of Ridgemount Avenge and East of Zachary Lane ander Resolution
No., 85 -
NOW, THEREFORE, HF IT HEREBY RESOLE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY or PLYMOUTH,,
MIi MESOTA, that it should and hereby does direct the following conditions to be met
prior to filing of and regarding said Lot giv.siont
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum,
No yard setback variances are granted or implied.
Payment ` of park 'dedication fees -in -lieu of: dedioatlon for Parcel A prior t
filing of the Division in aecordilnue with City Policyy i effect at the time of
filing of the ivislo o, Parcel B is subject to park dedication requirements a
the time of further division,.
4. 'Mo Building Permit to be issued until. the Lot Division is filed with Hennepin
County for Parcel. A.
5. Appropriate documents `shall be filed on all parcels indicating that in conjunction
with this division, conceptual' documents have been placed on file with the City
for future reference,
6*1 Submittal of all necessary utility easements prior to filing Lot Division
with Hennepin County.
7. Approved Variances: : dot width of 100 ft. rather than 110 ft. for Parcel R.
The driveway for Parcel A shall be constructed with a wra so that traffic onto
Zachary Lane shall be in a forward motion.
9. No further division of Parcel H, by means other than lotting.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AWARY; ,, 1985
RECOMMENDATION
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MFT PRIOR TO FILING AND REGARDING LOT CMISM IDATIONIDIVISTON
OR, A,,IID VOLKER AND T 10 A BETS "'.84109)
Ra REA t the City 'Council has approved a Leat Consolidation/Lot Division, for
David Volker and Thomas Rett for property att*3 Brockton Lane and 815 Alvarado Lane
under Resolution NQ*
W t THEREFOREt. HE IT HEREBY RESOLVEDLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PL Y a9Q TR
MNNESOT - that it should and hereby does direct the following conditions to be met
prior to filing of andregarding said Lot Consolidation/Lot, Division*
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum
Submittal of all necpssary utility easements: prior to fit -In (Lot Division) (Lot
Consolidation)with Hennepin County.
Approved Variances-* To divide property by metes and bounds description rather
that platting.
4. Parcel shall be deeded to the City for Right- Of-1Way
purpn:ts..
The common property line shah, be adjusted to the south appropriai'-,ely to provide a
inlmum 3 ft. I -at aok to the garage.