The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Commission Packet 04-19-2017WEDNESDAY, April 19, 2017 WHERE: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Plymouth City Hall 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 CONSENT AGENDA All items listed on the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner, citizen or petitioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in normal sequence on the agenda. 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PUBLIC FORUM 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approve the April 5, 2017 Planning Commission meeting minutes. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ken Heyda Design LLC. Preliminary plat and variance for "Garland Meadows" to allow the subdivision of a 0.83 acre parcel located at 1415 Garland Lane. (2017010) (Continued from April 5, 2017 meeting.) B. Plymouth Hotel Group, LLC. Preliminary plat, site plan, conditional use permit and variances for a Home2 Suites by Hilton on property located at 3000 Harbor Lane. (2017019) C. Sky Zone. Conditional use permit to allow an indoor commercial recreation use within an existing industrial building located at 1005 Berkshire Lane. (2017028) 7. NEW BUSINESS A. Matthew Dunn. Variances to allow a second accessory building over 120 square feet in area and 28 feet in height for property located at 4130 Juneau Lane. (2017022) 8. ADJOURNMENT Proposed Minutes Planning Commission Meeting SA April 5, 2017 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Marc Anderson, Commissioners Donovan Saba, Julie Witt, Jim Kovach, Bryan Oakley, David Witte and Kira Vanderlan MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager Barb Thomson and Senior Planner Shawn Drill OTHERS PRESENT: 1. CALL TO ORDER - 7:05 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PUBLIC FORUM 4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION by Commissioner Vanderlan, seconded by Commissioner Kovach, to approve the April 5, 2017 Planning Commission Agenda. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 15, 2017 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES B. ISG (ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH) (2017020) Approve a site plan amendment to allow construction of a new park shelter and related improvements at East Medicine Lake Park located at 17'40 Medicine Lake Boulevard East. MOTION by Commissioner Oakley, seconded by Commissioner Witte, to approve the consent agenda. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. WOODDALE BUILDERS (2017006) Chair Anderson introduced the request by Wooddale Builders for a preliminary plat to re -plat some of the lots within "Elm Creek Place" as `Elm Creek Place 2nd Addition" and a conditional Proposed Minutes 1 of 4 Meeting of April 5, 2017 use permit for single family development within a multi -family zoning district for property located north of County Road 47 between Lawndale and Dunkirk Lanes. Senior Planner Drill gave an overview of the staff report. Commissioner Witte referenced the vacation of drainage and utility easements mentioned in the packet. Senior Planner Drill noted that it is not a matter for commission discussion, but instead will be considered as a part of the final plat that the City Council will review. Chair Anderson referenced Road 3 identified on the plan and asked if a certain portion is right- of-way or paved street. Senior Planner Drill stated that it is platted right-of-way and noted that the road is not required to be constructed as part of the plat. He stated that if the land adjacent to the subject property can be acquired for park, the road would not be constructed. Chair Anderson introduced Peter Jarvis, representing the applicant, who stated that this is a simple request. He stated that during the presale phase there has been strong resistance for the three -unit buildings, as everyone wants an end unit, and therefore the two -unit buildings and villas are more desired. He noted that the single-family villas will be located throughout the development. He stated that the overall density would be reduced by four units to make these changes. Chair Anderson stated that it appears six of the three -unit buildings are being removed but there are still seven three -unit buildings remaining. He asked if another request would come forward lowering the number of three -unit buildings once again. Mr. Jarvis stated that he does not anticipate coming back again. Commissioner Saba asked what impact these changes will have on the cost per unit. Mr. Jarvis replied that the land purchase price and development cost are now being spread over fewer units, noting that the majority of that difference would go to the single-family villas rather than increasing the cost of the two -unit and three -unit buildings. Commissioner Saba stated that in the spirit of the comprehensive plan, he was encouraged that there would still be a range of prices and the majority of the increase would fall on the single- family villas. Commissioner Witte asked if the developer had the same problem with three -unit buildings in their project in Bloomington. Mr. Jarvis replied that they did not encounter the same issue but noted that development did not have the same distribution of three -unit buildings. Proposed Minutes 2 of 4 Meeting of April 5, 2017 Chair Anderson introduced Steve Schwieters, the applicant, who stated that they started marketing the project when grading began. He stated that he walked the site with numerous couples that repeated the comments that they do not want to be in a three -unit building. He stated that the ultimate costs are higher than anticipated for the lots that have sold and explained that the parade of homes has brought in additional interest. He stated that there will be an interest in the three -unit buildings because of the lower price that will be available for those units. Commissioner Saba asked the pricing for the villas. Mr. Schwieters stated that the villas would be priced in the $800,000's. He stated that there has been a lot of interest in the villa lots. Commissioner Vanderlan referenced the long fence along County Road 47 and asked if there will be plantings along the fence. Mr. Schwieters stated that the fence will be extended and trees will be planted along the road and fence line. Chair Anderson continued the public hearing from the March 15, 2017 meeting and closed the public hearing as there was no one present to speak on the item. Chair Anderson noted that the last time this plat was considered he recused himself because he had a potential interest in adjacent land but stated that he no longer has that interest and therefore will be voting on the item tonight. MOTION by Commissioner Witte, seconded by Commissioner Kovach, to recommend approval of the request by Wooddale Builders for a preliminary plat to re -plat some of the lots within "Elm Creek Place" as "Ehn Creek Place 2nd Addition" and a conditional use permit for single family development within a multi -family zoning district for property located north of County Road 47 between Lawndale and Dunkirk Lanes. Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION approved. B. KEN HEYDA DESIGN LLC (2017010) Chair Anderson introduced the request by Ken Heyda Designs LLC for a preliminary plat and variance for "Garland Meadows" to allow the subdivision of a 0.83 acre parcel located at 1415 Garland Lane North. Planning Manager Thomson stated that based on discussions with the city attorney about a potential adverse possession of a portion of the subject property that could affect the Planning Commission and City Council actions on this application, staff is requesting that the Planning Commission open the public hearing and continue it to the April 19 meeting. This will allow the applicant and an abutting landowner time to address the issue. Chair Anderson opened the public hearing and continued it to the April 19, 2017 meeting. 7. NEW BUSINESS Proposed Minutes 3 of 4 Meeting of April 5, 2017 8. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Chair Anderson, with no objection, to adjourn the meeting at 7:31 P.M. Proposed Minutes 4 of 4 Meeting of April 5, 2017 Agenda Number (01kFile 2017010 PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF REPORT TO: Plymouth PIanning Commission mn- FROM: Kip Berglund, Planner (509-5453) through Barbara Thomson, Planning Manager MEETING DATE: April 19, 2017 (Conlinued front,9pril 5, 2017 Planning Commission meeting) APPLICANT: Ken Heyda Design, LLC PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat and variance for "Garland Meadows" to allow the subdivision of a 0.83 acre parcel LOCATION: 1415 Garland Lane North GUIDING: LA -1 (living area 1) ZONING: RSF-1 (single family detached 1) REVIEW DEADLINE: June 30, 2017 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat and lot area variance for "Garland Meadows". The request consists of dividing the subject parcel into two lots for property located at 1415 Garland Lane, Under the proposed plat, the existing home located on the east side of the property would remain, and the west portion of the site would be platted as a single-family lot to allow construction of a new home. Notice of the public hearing was published in the city's official newspaper and mailed to all property owners within 750 feet of the site. A copy of the notification area map is attached. Development signage was also placed on the site. File 2017010 Page 2 CONTEXT: Surrounding Land Uses Natural Characteristics of Site This site is located in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. There is a medivan quality wetland on the west side of the property. There are mature trees on the property and the request is subject to the tree preservation ordinance. The site in not located in a shoreland or flood plain overlay district. Previous Actions Affecting Site The existing single family home on the property was built in 1956 as part of the Kreatz Highview Acres subdivision. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: 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. The city's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they meet the standards for a variance. ANALYSIS OF REQUEST: Preliminary Plat The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat to allow subdivision of the 0.83 -acre parcel at 1415 Garland Lane. Cinder the plan, the existing home on proposed Lot 1 (east lot) would remain, and the proposed Lot 2 (west lot) would accommodate construction of a new home. The existing lot is part of Kreatz Highview Acres, 3`d Addition platted in 1955. Section 500 of the subdivision regulations and section 21355 of the zoning ordinance include standards that preliminary plat applications must meet. Staff used these standards to review the application as follows: Adjacent Land Use Guiding Zoning North, South, East and West Single-fwnily homes, Kreatz Highview Acres subdivision LA -1 RSF-1 Natural Characteristics of Site This site is located in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. There is a medivan quality wetland on the west side of the property. There are mature trees on the property and the request is subject to the tree preservation ordinance. The site in not located in a shoreland or flood plain overlay district. Previous Actions Affecting Site The existing single family home on the property was built in 1956 as part of the Kreatz Highview Acres subdivision. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: 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. The city's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they meet the standards for a variance. ANALYSIS OF REQUEST: Preliminary Plat The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat to allow subdivision of the 0.83 -acre parcel at 1415 Garland Lane. Cinder the plan, the existing home on proposed Lot 1 (east lot) would remain, and the proposed Lot 2 (west lot) would accommodate construction of a new home. The existing lot is part of Kreatz Highview Acres, 3`d Addition platted in 1955. Section 500 of the subdivision regulations and section 21355 of the zoning ordinance include standards that preliminary plat applications must meet. Staff used these standards to review the application as follows: File 2017010 Page 3 Subdivision and Zoning Requirements Required Proposed Meets Requirements? Lot Arrangement Lot 1— Existhm Home Lot Width Min, 110 Feet 100 feet Yes — existing non- conforming Lot Area Min. 18,500 sq. ft. 17,550 sq. ft. No - variance req. Lot 2 — West Lot Lot Width Min. 110 feet 193 feet Lot Area Min. 18,500 sq, ft, 18,500 sq. ft. Yes Yes Setbacks Lot Y- Existing Home Front 25 feet 18.5 ft. Yes — existing non- conforming Side 15 feet 16.1 feet Yes Rear 25 feet 56.8 feet Yes Lot 2 — West Lot Front 25 feet 25 feet Yes Side East = 15 feet 30 feet Yes West = 15 feet from buffer 15 feet Yes Rear 25 feet 25 feet Yes Tree preservation 50 % saved (or reforest) 100 % Saved Yes * Discussed below under existing lot Tree Preservation This application is subject to the city's tree preservation regulations. Section 530 of the subdivision regulations requires preservation of at least 50 percent of the caliper inches of the significant trees for residential development sites, or reforestation and/or monetary restitution for any removal in excess of this threshold. 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 coniferous trees. The tree survey indicates 367 caliper inches of significant trees on the site. The applicant submitted a tree plan indicating that all of the significant trees (100.0 percent) would be preserved. Consequently, the proposal meets the city's requirements for tree preservation. A condition is included in the attached resolution requiring that the applicant submit a revised plan that shows the disturbance zone and tree protection fencing. File 2017010 Page 4 Wetland A medium quality wetland is located on the west side of the property, and section 21670 of the zoning ordinance requires an average 30 -foot buffer in addition to a 15 -foot structure setback. The proposed buffer complies with the requirement. A condition is included in the attached resolution that would require the lowest floor of the new home be built at least two feet above the high water elevation of the wetland. Water Quality Section 524.09, subd. 1(d) of the subdivision regulations requires treatment of storm water runoff for those developments that create more than one acre of cumulative impervious surface. The subject property is 0.83 acres and therefore does not reach the one acre threshold requiring treatment of storm water runoff. Dedication of Park Land The existing home was built in 1956 as part of the Kreatz Highview Acres subdivision. The City of Plymouth began collecting park dedication fees as part of subdivision approval in 1972. As a result, this site has never paid a park dedication fee. As part of platting two new lots at this time, the applicant would be required to pay a cash fee in lieu of land dedication for two dwelling units, pursuant to section 528 of the city code. This matter is addressed in the attached resolution. Existing LotlAccess The existing lot was platted in 1955. According to the zoning ordinance from 1949, the minimum lot width at that time was 80 feet. The home was required to be set back at least 50 feet from Garland Lane and 15 feet from 14th Avenue. Therefore, the lot width along Garland Lane and existing setback to the property line along 14th Avenue are considered to be legally non -conforming. File 2017010 Page 5 Variance The subject property is a comer lot that contains 100 feet of frontage along Garland lane and 368 feet of frontage along 14th Avenue. The applicant is requesting approval of a variance to establish a lot that does not meet lot area requirements in the RSF-1 district as outlined above. Lot 1 would contain 17,550 square feet in area where 18,500 square feet is required. Lot 2 would contain 18,500 square feet. As shown below (numbers in red), the majority of the lots in the general area of the subject property meet or exceed the miniinum lot area for lots in the RSF-1 zoning district of 18,500 square feet. However, the lot directly across 14th Avenue was split through a lot division approval by the City Council in 1981 and a lot containing 18,461 square feet was created. l " �` 4r67 s , ft. r2?Q. 15 s•'; Q•y 4 7 ft. j � t 73 95 Fr. _ 15 200 73 Sol F _ 1650 30.080aq f1 78'd Sym. fr. • . .. 21, II sq. R. i esn-F;_ r. 33.43q.Y. -- -- Findings In review of the request, staff finds that all of the applicable variance standards would be met, as follows: 1) The requested variance, and resulting construction, would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance, and would be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan. 2) The applicant has demonstrated that there are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance regulations, because: a. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. File 2017010 Page 6 b. The request is due to circumstances unique to the property that were not created by the landowner. c. The variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood as the lots would be consistent for both lot size and for lot width with the lots directly south across 10 Avenue of the two newly created lots. 3) The requested variance is not based solely upon economic considerations. The applicant is requesting the variance in order to establish a single-family home site similar to the adjacent parcels. 4) The variance, and resulting construction, would not be detrimental to the public welfare, nor would it be injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. 5) The variance, and resulting construction, would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties. nor would it increase traffic congestion or the danger of tire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood. 6) The variance requested is the minimum action required to address the practical difficulties. RECOMMENDATION: Community Development Department staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat and variance for "Garland Meadows" subject to the conditions outlined in the attached resolution. If new information is brought forward at the public hearing, staff may alter or reconsider its recommendation. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat and Variance 2. Applicant's Narrative 3. Variance Standards 4. Location Map 5. Aerial Photo 6. Notification Area Map 7. Site Graphics P/P1annine App Iications12017120 17010 CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION NO. 2017 - RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCE FOR KEN HEYDA DESIGN, LLC, FOR "GARLAND MEADOWS" FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1415 GARLAND LANE NORTH (2017010) WHEREAS, Ken Heyda Design, LLC, has requested approval of a preliminary plat and lot area variance for roughly 0.83 acres of land presently legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 1, Kreatz Highview Acres 3'd Addition, Hennepin County, Mlnnesota; and 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 Ken Heyda Design, LLC, for a preliminary plat and variance for Garland Meadows, subject to the following conditions: 1. A preliminary plat and lot area variance are approved to allow the property at 1415 Garland Lane North to be subdivided into two -single family lots, in accordance with the development plans received by the city on January 26, 2017, and additional information on January 30, 2017 and March 2, 2017, except as amended by this resolution. 2. The requested lot area variance is approved, based on the finding that all applicable variance standards have been met, specifically: aj The requested variances, and resulting construction, would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance, and would be consistent with the city's comprehensive plan. bj The applicant has demonstrated that there are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance regulations, because: I. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. 2. The request is due to circumstances unique to the property that were not created by the landowner. The variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood as the lots would be consistent far both lot size and lot width with the lots directly south across 14;6 Avenue of the two newly created lots. cj The requested variance is not based solely upon economic considerations. The applicant is requesting the variance in order to establish a single-family home site similar to the adjacent parcels. Res. 2017 - File 2017010 Page 2 d) The variance, and resulting construction, would not be detrimental to the public welfare, nor would it be injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. ej The variance, and resulting construction, would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, nor would it increase traffic congestion or the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood. fj The variance requested is the minimum action required to address the practical difficulties. 3. Prior to release of the final plat for recording, the applicant shall: a) Pay the park dedication cash fee in lieu of land dedication for two new dwelling units, in accordance with the dedication ordinance in effect at the time of filing for the final plat. bj Revise the tree preservation plan to include the disturbance zone and the location of required tree protection fencing. 4. Prior to construction of the home on Lot 2 Block 1 Garland Meadows the applicant shall obtain a building permit from the building division. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall fulfill the requirements, submit the required information, and revise the plans as indicated below, consistent with the applicable city code, zoning ordinance, and engineering guidelines, aj File and record the final plat with Hennepin County. b) Receive city approval of final construction plans. c) Install and request inspection of tree protection fencing and silt fencing. dj Obtain the necessary right-of-way permits from the City of Plymouth Engineering Division to allow work in the 14"' Avenue right-of-way. e7 Provide a certificate of survey indicating a minimum of two front yard trees to be planted. fj Add water and sewer service connections to plan. Add note to contact Public Works at 753-509- 5950 a minimum of 48 hours prior to making any connections. g) Add note to patch roadway with a minimum of 4 -inch asphalt, 8 -Inch class 5 or 7 -inch and 12 - inch select granular, or match existing, whichever is greater. Asphalt shall be saw cut. Add typical detail for curb and gutter replacement. hj Add the high water elevation for the wetland to the plan. ij Add elevations to the proposed house including basement floor, low floor, garage floor, driveway grades, etc. to the plan. The lowest floor elevation for the new home shall be at least two feet higher than the high water elevation far the wetland. jj Add drainage arrows for both Lots 1 and z and show how drainage from Lot 1 will go around Lot 2. ky Show EOF for wetland west of Lot 2. Ij Remove existing fence from the wetland. mj Show erosion and sediment controls, i.e. silt fence, inlet protections, rock entrance, etc. n) Add wetland buffer monuments on two western lot corners on Lot 2. of Obtain any necessary permits or provide any required BMP's from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Res. 2a17 - File 2017010 Page 3 6. Standard Conditions: a. Silt fence shall be installed prior to any construction, b. Retaining walls over four feet require issuance of a building permit and a minimum th(ee-foot fence installed on top. c. Removal of all hazardous trees at the owner's expense. d. No trees shall be planted in the public right-of-way. e, The preliminary plat and variance shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner or applicant has applied for final plat approval, or unless the applicant, with the consent of the landowner, 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 this ***** day of STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS. The undersigned, Being the duly qualified and appointed City Cleric of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City Council on *******►with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. WITNESS my hand officially as such City Cleric and the Corporate seal of the City this day of City Clerk Kenneth 1 Heyda 200 Niagara Ln N Plymouth, MN 55447 January 26, 2417 City of Plymouth 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 City of Pfvrnouth: I v! 7010 APPLICANT'S NARRATIVE I airs proposing the splitting of the lot situated at 1415 Garland Ln, N Plymouth, MN 5 544 7. 1. I believe that the variance and the resulting construction project, two single family homes, would be in harmony with the comprehensive plan and the neighborhood. 2. The difficulty in complying with toning is that the lot is about 950 sgft short of being a conforming lot. The lot requirement for the zoning district is 18,500 sqft. I am requesting a variance on the existing house lot. The second lot will be of the required size and in conformity to the zoning code, a. The lots will both be used as a residential building lot as allowed by the chapter, b. The lot if 3' wider or 9' deeper would not require a variance. c. The variance if granted would not alter the character of the locality as the lot directly across the street, 14tr' Ave. has been split and one of the two lots is non -conforming to the zoning, the lot being under the 18,500 sgft required by the zoning. 3. The request to Split the ]cit is not based OF'1 eLUr10rniC reasuns; by splitting the lot aril building two single family homes vs tearing down the existing and building one large home, I can keep the hornes sited more closely to the site of homes in the neighborhood vs building a larger home that would not fit the scale of the neighborhood, 4. 1 believe that the variance and resulting project would be a benefit to the neighborhood and public welfare, as new construction often adds value to adjacent properties and more housing increases city revenue and population. S. The project would not impair light, or increase traffic or affect public safety as it is only one additional residence. 6. The variance is the minimal action required to address the difficulties vs a rezoning to RFS -2 which requires only 12,500 sgft per lot. Sincerely, 1 Kenneth] a Ken Heyda Design, LLC LIC #tBC634662 612-221-6995 rp) Pl ymo uth thY Adding Quality to Life Community Development Department 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 (763)504-5450 FAX (763) 504-5407 ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE STANDARDS The City Council or Zoning Administrator may approve a variance application (major or minor, respectively) only upon finding that all of the following criteria, as applicable, have been met: 1. The variance, and its resulting construction or project, would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter, and would be consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. The variance applicant has satisfactorily established that there are practical difficulties in complying with this Chapter. "Practical difficulties" means that: a, the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter; b. the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property that were not created by the landowner; and c. the variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the locality. 3. The variance request is not based exclusively upon economic considerations. 4. The variance, and its resulting construction or project, would not be detrimental to the public welfare, nor would it be injurious to other Iand or improvements in the neighborhood. 5. The variance, and its resulting construction or project, would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, nor would it substantially increase traffic congestion in public streets, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood. 6. The variance requested is the minimum action required to address or alleviate the practical difficulties. Section 21430 -Plymouth Zoning Ordinance Forms: Zavarian[estds.doex SITE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . < . . . . . . . . .. ............ . cr, ....... . . . . . . . . . Uj-- . . L I Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1�t I . ��. ......... ... ......... I ........ ................. 13TH AVE .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 2TH Gleag Ua/d Ken Heyda Design, LLC 1415 Garland Lane North Request for a preliminary plat, final plat and variance 375 117,1 11 1-11 1111 ;b M I Feet Ciity of Nyr"Outh, Mflinesoto Legend C, Comercial CC, City Center CO. Cornmercial Office IP, Planned Indusvial LA -1, Living Area I LA -2, Living Area 2 LA -3, Living Area 3 LA -4, Living Area 4 LA -R1 LA -R2 LA -R3 LA -RT P-1, PublicdSemi-PublirJlnslitutionaI A. r;bAerial Photograph - 2017010 city of Plymouth, Minnesota 125 62.5 0 125 250 Feet Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map Provided By: Resident and Rea[ Estate Services Date: 12/21/2016 r M . w w ~` x9= I -$-T1=31 r = , 7th Aveslue North s s x110 �e - - - - - - - - Room v32-118-22-22_ lllli�lll�l Buffer Size: 750 feet Map Comments: 2911822340042 HENRY J PASTICK ET AL TRS 1415 Garland Lane North Plymouth, MN 55447 y 1 w 1 a. . - Rai til h 0 120 240 480 ft For more information contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South Minneapolis, MN 55487 gis. info@ hennepin.us SCiiS[M56:%Y! LPLYELFCL6 +3MOile ��"" �- rF"� — — 9sess NW 3%Y1 pNpl �AIHp µp7lU1L'H 4yP � •~'~ Sn4MHtl11 Q1M'4tl0A3AN[440Hd1"6a33XItlH31�U] 1 ......X anT�rw riwuM •a�r's�.�vriaassd � aaaeMoae - �, -- pa � 21 1 N P15 £Yy SS is rg cJ, elm=�yx IN �� T - +G LL W ❑ 6 W V Z en a [z7 z LU la -jx } a a [� L j Z Y Da. i rr t z z u x Q a � a � m ieL � ,Lr f 0 m ��'6 888 F Lspp P a s a� g Wax �}t.a1j- ! V Z ui w w z uj a a a� R5. ads a I i E8 � a $a g Q CIO` C ��'6 888 F Lspp P a s a� g Wax �}t.a1j- ! V Z ui w w z uj Agenda Number File 2017019 PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF REPORT TO: Plymouth Planning Commission MK FROM: Kip Berglund, Planner (509-5453) through Barbara Thomson, Planning Manager MEETING DATE: April 19, 2017 APPLICANT: Plymouth Hotel Group, LLC PROPOSAL: Preliminary plat, site pian, conditional use permit and variances for a Home2 Suites by Hilton LOCATION: 3000 Harbor Lane North GUIDING: C (commercial) ZONING: C-3 (highway commercial) REVIEW DEADLINE: lune 28, 2017 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of the following: • Preliminary plat to create a second lot on the existing 9.0 -acre site to be called "Timm Plymouth Addition"; ■ Site plan to construct a five -story, 102 -unit franchised hotel known as Home2 Suites by Hilton: • Conditional use permit to exceed the maximum building height of 45 feet in the C-3 zoning district; and • Variances for keeping the existing "Lucky 13" restaurant monument sign on the newly created parcel and for drive aisle width. The applicant has also requested a final plat, which will be reviewed by the City Council. 2017019 Page 2 Notice of the public hearing was published in the city's official newspaper and was mailed to all property owners within 750 feet of the site.. A copy of the notification area map is attached. Development signage is posted on the property. CONTEXT: Surrounding Land Uses Natural Characteristics of Site The site is located in the Bassett Creek watershed district. The site does not contain any wetlands, nor does it contain any land within the floodplain or shoreland overlay district. Previous Actions In 1979, the City Council approved a conditional use permit and site plan for the existing hotel. The hotel was constructed in 1980. In 1998, the City Council approved a lot division/lot consolidation to allow the transfer of 2.27 acres of property from a former outlot to increase the size of the current property to 9.0 acres. In 1988 and 2012, the City Council approved sign variances. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: 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. The city's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposal complies with the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance requirements. If it meets these standards, the city must approve the site plan. The city's discretion in approving or denying a conditional use permit is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards listed in the zoning ordinance. If it meets the specified standards, Adjacent Land Use Guiding Zarin North Vacant lot and town offices CO G East (across PUD NNW Office building Co Business 494) Campus) South Gas station, auto repair shop and auto C C-3 and C-5 body repair West Restaurant and daycare C C-3 Natural Characteristics of Site The site is located in the Bassett Creek watershed district. The site does not contain any wetlands, nor does it contain any land within the floodplain or shoreland overlay district. Previous Actions In 1979, the City Council approved a conditional use permit and site plan for the existing hotel. The hotel was constructed in 1980. In 1998, the City Council approved a lot division/lot consolidation to allow the transfer of 2.27 acres of property from a former outlot to increase the size of the current property to 9.0 acres. In 1988 and 2012, the City Council approved sign variances. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: 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. The city's discretion in approving or denying a site plan is limited to whether or not the proposal complies with the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance requirements. If it meets these standards, the city must approve the site plan. The city's discretion in approving or denying a conditional use permit is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards listed in the zoning ordinance. If it meets the specified standards, 2017019 Page 3 the city must approve the conditional use permit. However, the level of discretion is affected by the fact that some of the standards may be open to interpretation. The city's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they meet the standards for a variance. ANALYSIS OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide the property and a site plan, conditional use permit and variances to allow construction of a five -story, 62,807 square foot. 102 - unit franchised hotel on a now lot south of the existing hotel/restaurant located at 3000 Harbor Lane North. Under the plan, the existing hotel/restaurant would remain on a newly created lot. Preliminary Plat Lot arrangeinent The applicant proposes to subdivide the existing property into two lots. Lot 1 would be 6.68 acres and would contain the existing hotel/restaurant. Lot 2 would be 2.32 acres and would contain the proposed hotel. Both lots would meet/exceed the minimum. lot size requirement (one acre) and lot width and depth requirement (100 feet) for property located within the C-3 zoning district. Tree preservation This development is subject to the city's tree preservation regulations. The regulations require preservation of at least 25 percent of the caliper inches of significant trees for commercial development sites, or reforestation and/or monetary restitution for any removal in excess of that threshold. 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 coniferous trees. The applicant has inventoried 714.5 inches of significant trees and proposes to remove 56 percent of the total inches on the site (44 percent preserved). Consequently, the tree preservation requirement would be met. Park dedication Pursuant to the subdivision regulations, the city collects a cash fee in lieu of land dedication on a per acre basis for commercial developments. The city collected park dedication on roughly seven acres in 1979 when the existing hotel was developed. However, as previously discussed, the lot size was increased in 1998 through a lot division/lot consolidation. Therefore, the city will collect park dedication for the new lot where the new hotel will be constructed. Section 528.07, subd. 2 of the city code states that for commercial developments, the fee shall be paid prior to issuance of any building permits within the subdivision. A condition to this effect is included in the attached resolution. 2017019 Page 4 Sidewalks Section 524.07 of the subdivision regulations states that sidewalks shall be required along one side of all local streets unless waived by the City Council. Sidewalks are not proposed along Empire Lane or Harbor Lane. Staff has concluded that sidewalks are not needed in these areas at this time. Therefore, a condition is included in the attached resolution waiving the sidewalk requirement at this time and instead requiring a 10 -trail easement along both Harbor and Empire Lanes to allow for the future installation of sidewalks in these areas. Site Plan The zoning ordinance contains specific standards for approval of a site plan, and for development in the C-3 (highway commercial) zoning district. Staff used these standards to review the proposal. The specific standards that apply are as indicated on the following table. Standards for the C-3 District Specified Proposed Complies? Building Setbacks: --Front (along Empire Ln) 52 ft, (min.) 220 ft. Yes** --Sides froin north and south 17 ft. rein. 20 ft. & 32 ft. Yes** --Rear equivalent (alon I-494) 52 ft. (min.) 215 ft. Yes** Parkin Setbacks: --F~ om Lot Lines: 20 ft. min.) 20 ft. Yes --From Building: 10 ft. (min.} 10 ft. Yes Drive Aisle Setbacks: --Front (along Empire & Harbor): 10 ft. min.) 40 ft. & 10 ft. Yes ---Sides (from north & south) I5 ft. (min)50 ft. Yes --Rear e uivalent (along 1-494) 10 ft. (miff) 38 ft. Yes Parking Spaces: 436 (inin.) 444 Yes** Building Height: 45 ft. max. 55 ft. Yes** Structural Covera e: 50% (max.) 20% Yes Landscaping: 63 overstory trees (min.) 1 19 total — with equivalency yes** Lighting_._ --Fixture Height 30 ft. (max.) 30 ft. Yes ** --Urnensls , ft. 2.5 max.) Unknown No ** ** Discussi❑:z follows 2017019 Page 5 AccesslTru is .Study Access to the proposed hotel would be shared with the existing Comfort Inn and Lucky 13 restaurant and would come from the existing entrance located on the north side of Harbor Lane and from a new entrance that would be located on the east side of Empire Lane. SRF Consulting Group prepared the traffic study required for the proposed hotel. The study concluded that all study area intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. It further concluded, that based on the estimated trip generation for the proposed hotel use {32 a. m. peak hour trips, 39 p.m. peak hour trips and 378 daily trips), the proposed use is not expected to impact overall operations within the study area. The traffic study also identified potential alternatives to improve traffic safety at the Harbor Lane and Comfort Inn/Lucky 13 intersection, which has a unique configuration that can create confusion with respect to who has the right-of-way. Access alternative one suggests eliminating the existing access to the Comfort IrualLucky 13 and providing two new access points from the west along Empire Lane. With input from the city's fire inspector, staff has concluded that maintaining this access is critical from a fire, life safety perspective. Access alternative two would require the closing of an entrance to a property that is not part of this application. This alternative may be considered if and when that property were to redevelop. Parking Based on the proposed hotel use and existing hotel/restaurant, the site is required to have 436 parking spaces. The applicant has provided a site plan showing 444 parking spaces to meet the zoning ordinance requirement for parking. A cross -easement for parking will be recorded against the properties allowing for shared parking between the properties. Building Materials Materials for the proposed five -story building include different colors of EIFS with stone and corrugated metal panel accents, The building would have a flat roof. The finishes would provide a compatible appearance with the neighboring commercial uses. The proposed building materials and design would comply with the standards listed in the zoning ordinance. The proposed enclosed freestanding trash enclosure located cast of the building would be finished with manufactured stone to match tine stone on the hotel, The top would be finished with metal coping and niatch the adjacent wall color. The enclosure would be protected by bollards and have a metal gate. Lands -caping Section 21130 of the zoning ordinance states that for new non-residential developments, a minimum of the greater of one new overstory tree per lineal feet of site perimeter (32 trees) or one 2017019 Page 6 new overstory tree per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area (63 trees). Therefore, 63 overstory trees or equivalent overstory trees are required for this site, Up to 50 percent of tl}e required number of overstory trees on a site may be substituted with an equivalent number- of understory trees or shrubs. [n such case, three understory trees or ten shrubs shall be equivalent to one overstory tree. The applicant has submitted a plan showing 59 overstory trees, 25 understory trees and 548 shrubs or the equivalent of 118 overstory trees. The proposed number of overstory trees exceeds the minimum requirement. Lighting The applicant submitted a lighting plan showing the proposed location, mounting height, and proposed lighting output in watts per square foot and foot candles. Additional information and fixture details are required in order to determine the lumens per square feet of hardscape, backlight, uplight and glare (B.U.G) ratings, color -rendering index (CCR) and correlated color temperature (CCT). A condition is included in the attached resolution stating that a revised lighting plan and fixture details are required prior to the issuance of a building permit that meet requirements for exterior lighting in the L72 (light zone 2) pursuant to section 21105,06 of the zoning ordinance. DrainagelTreatnnent of R n7ol The city requires that storm drainage systems be designed so that the post -development rate of runoff from a site does not exceed the pre -development rate of runoff. Additionally, the city requires treatment of stormwater runoff before it enters the drainage system. To address runoff and water quality, the applicant is proposing two detention ponds on the north and south side of the eastern parking lot along I-494 and an infiltration pond south of the new building. The drainage plan would be required to comply with city and watershed regulations. Conditional Use Permit A conditional use permit is required for buildings that exceed 45 feet in height. The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow construction of a building that would be 55 feet in height (five -stories). The applicant states that the additional height is needed because a four-story building would require a larger footprint and would encroach into the setback requirements and existing powerline easement and limit the area to meet parking requirements. In addition to the general conditional use permit standards (attached), section 21465.07 of the zoning ordinance includes two specific standards for the Planning Commission to consider when reviewing the request; • For each additional five feet in height above 45 feet, the fi-on/ acrd side -.yard setback requirenleMS .shall be increased by one foot. As indicated in the previous table, the applicant has proposed additional setbacks on all the sides of the development that exceed this requirement. 2017019 Page 7 • The construction cannot limit solar access to abutting andlor neighboringproperties. The applicant has submitted an exhibit that identifies the anticipated shadowing impact on the adjacent properties on one day in December (winter solstice) and one in dune (summer solstice). With the exception of a portion (south building facade) of the existing hotel/restaurant being impacted during the winter months, the exhibit indicates that the shadows from the building will not impact the other adjacent businesses. The applicant does not have any concerns about potential impact to their existing business caused by the shadowing of the proposed building. Consequently, staff finds the impact of the increased height acceptable. Staff used the attached conditional use permit standards to review the request and finds it would meet all of the applicable standards. Specifically, the proposed use. 1) would be consistent with the comprehensive pian; 2) would not endanger the public health or safety; 3) would not be injurious to other properties in the vicinity or to the city as a whole; and 4) would not impede the orderly development of surrounding properties. SOUTH BUILDING FACADE WINTER SHADOWING EXHIBIT r =� Variances The applicant is requesting variances for the following; • To keep an existing monument sign advertising a business that would no longer be located on the property; and • Drive aisles for a portion of the parking lot that would be 24 feet in width where 26 feet is required. Sign variance As part of the subject application, the applicant is requesting to keep the existing "Lucky 13" monuinent sign in its current location on the southwest corner of the property near the Harbor Lane and Empire Lane intersection. In 1998, the applicant received a variance for the sign in question. That variance allowed the applicant to increase the sign to 49 square feet and to keep the existing 96 square foot freestanding Comfort Inn sign located along I-494. In exchange, the applicant agreed not to install any additional Lucky 13 signage on the sign along I-494. Without the 2017019 Page 8 variances, such a commercial site would be limited to one freestanding sign Nvith a maximum size of 100 square feet in surface area. Section 21 155.05 subd. 16, of the zoning ordinance states that all signs shall direct primary attention to the business, commodity, service, activity, or entertainment conducted, sold, or offered on the premises where the sign is located. The Lucky 13 restaurant would no longer be located on the newly created Lot 2, Block 1, Timm Plymouth Addition. The applicant has stated that keeping the sign in its current location, rather than moving it to the newly created Lot 1, Block 1, where Lucky 13 restaurant would be located, is needed for visibility purposes. The applicant stated that the new hotel will block visibility of the restaurant. Consequently, i F the sign were moved north along Empire Lane to the newly created lot, vehicles traveling on Fernbrook Lane would not be able to see the sign or the restaurant. The applicant has included on the site plan a roughly 32 square -foot relocated Comfort Inn entrance monument sign on the north side of Empire Lane, and a similar sized Home2 Suites entrance monument sign at the Harbor Lane and Empire Lane entrance. These signs would require separate sign permits and no additional freestanding signs would be allowed on either property. Conditions to this effect are included in the attached resolution. The applicant has stated that they would not request any additional freestanding signage for the new hotel at the corner. A condition is included in the attached resolution restricting any additional freestanding signage at the corner of Empire Lane and Harbor Lane. Staff used these standards to review the proposal and finds that it meets the applicable standards. Specifically, the requested variance; 1) would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning regulations; 2) would address the practical difficulties related to lost visibility resulting from construction of the new buiiding; 3) is not based exclusively upon economic considerations; 4) would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the area; 5) would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, nor would it increase traffic congestion, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety. or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood; and 6) is the minimum action required to alleviate the practical difficulties. Drive aisle variance In the southeast corner of the new parking lot, the applicant is proposing 24 -foot drive aisles where 26 feet is required for drive aisles that have parking spaces on both sides. The applicant has revised plans as originally submitted in order to limit the areas where the variance is requested. They have stated that they cannot meet the width along two areas due to the limited area of the site and the grades going down toward 1-494. They have stated that if the parking lot were to be extended any further east, the steeper grades in that location would require installation of retaining walls. 2017019 Page 9 Staff dotes that the city approved 24 -foot drive aisles in the recently approved Agora development at the southwest corner of Rockford Road and State Highway 169 as well as the Shops at Plymouth Creek at the southwest corner of Vicksburg Lane and State Highway 55. The parking spaces along the proposed 24 -foot drive aisles are located away from the main entrance of the new building and would provide more long -tern parking spaces as opposed to the higher turn -aver spaces located near the main entrances or restaurant. The Planning Commission must review the variance request for compliance with the standards outlined in the ordinance. A copy of the variance standards is attached. Staff used these standards to review the proposal and finds that it meets the applicable standards. Specifically, the requested variance: 1) would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning regulations; 2) would address the practical difficulties related to developing a parking lot with limited space and grade changes. 3) is not based exclusively upon economic considerations; 4) would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the area as the parking spaces near the reduced drive aisles would be for longer term parking and not higher turn -over spaces; 5) would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, nor would it increase traffic congestion, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood; and 6) is the minirnurn action required to alleviate the practical difficulties. RECOMMENDATION: Community Development Department staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat, site plan, conditional use permit and variances for Plymouth Hotel Group, LLC for a new five -story, 102 -unit hotel, subject to the conditions listed in the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat 2. Draft Resolution Approving Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variances 3. Location Map 4, Aerial Photo 5. Notification Area Map 6. CUP Standards 7. Variance Standards 8. Traffic Study 9. Email from resident 10. Applicant's Narrative 11. Site Graphics CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION No. 2017- A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PLYMOUTH HOTEL GROUP, LLC FOR "TtMM PLYMOUTH ADDITION" FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3000 HARBOR LANE (2017019) WHEREAS, Plymouth Hotel Group, LLC, has requested approval of a preliminary plat for the roughly 9.0 -acre parcel presently legally described as follows:: Parcel 1: Lot 1, Block 1, Plymouth Freeway Center 2"d Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Parcel 2: That part of Outlot A, Elwell Miley and Quinn Addition lying Southerly of the Easterly extension of the North line of Lot 1, Block 1, Plymouth Freeway Center 216 Addition, 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 Plymouth Hotel Group, LLC for a preliminary plat for "Timm Plymouth Addition", subject to the following conditions: A preliminary is approved to allow the property located at 3000 Harbor Lane to be subdivided to create two lots, in accordance with the application and plans received by the city on February 22 and 28, 2017 and April 12 and 13, 2017, except as may be amended by this resolution. 2. Prior to release of the final plat for recording purposes, the applicant shaft fulfill the requirements, submit the required information, and revise the plans as indicated below, consistent with the applicable city code, zoning ordinance, and engineering guidelines: a. Submit final construction plans for the development. b. Submit private easements regarding cross access, ingress and egress, parking, and utilities and covenants regarding shared maintenance of all common property including signage. These documents shall be recorded against the property and proof of recording shall be submitted to the city prior to issuance of any building permits. c. The sidewalk requirement for Empire and Harbor Lanes is waived at the time. Submit an approved 10 -foot trail easement along property abutting Empire Lane and Harbor Lane to accommodate the addition of sidewalks in the future. d. Revise the plat to dedicate six-foot drainage and utility easements along bath the north and south sides of the new property line separating Lot 1 from Lot 2. e. Revise the plat to include the detention ponds and infiltration basins in drainage and utility easeme nts. Res. 2017 - File 2017019 Page 2 3. This approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the applicant has filed a complete application for 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. ADOPTED by the City Council on this * * * * day of ***** 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 1 compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City CounclI on ******* 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 CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION No. 2017- A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SITE PLAN, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR PLYMOUTH HOTEL GROUP, LLC FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3000 HARBOR LANE NORTH (2017019) WHEREAS, Plymouth Hotel Group, LLC, has requested approval of a site plan, conditional use permit and variances to allow construction of a hotel in the C-3 (highway commercial) zoning district for the property presently legally described as follows: Parcel 1: Lot 1, Block 1, Plymouth Freeway Center 2nd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Parcel 2: That part of Outlot A, Elwell Miley and Quinn Addition lying Southerly of the Easterly extension of the North line of Lot 1, Block 1, Plymouth Freeway Center 2rnd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duty 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 Plymouth Hotel Group, LLC, for a site plan, conditional use permit and variances to allow construction of a hotel, subject to the following conditions; 1. A site plan is approved to allow construction of a five -story, 102 -unit, 62,807 -square -foot hotel and related site improvements, in accordance with the plans received by the city on February 22 and 28, 2017 and April 12 and 13, 2017, except as amended by this resolution. 2. A conditional use permit is approved to allow a building to exceed 45 feet in height in the C-3 district with the finding that the proposal complies with all applicable conditional use permit standards. 3. Variances are approved to allow 1) an existing monument sign to remain in p#ace advertising a business that would no longer be located on the property (an off-site monument sign); and 2) drive aisles that would be 24 feet in width where 26 feet is required for a portion of the parking lot, with the finding that the proposal complies with all applicable variance criteria. 4. With the exception of the existing off-site freestanding monument sign located near the intersection of Empire Lane and Harbor Lane on the southwest corner of Lot 2, Block 1, Timm Plymouth Addition, no additional permanent freestanding signage is permitted in that area. Resolution 2017 - File 2017019 Page 2 S. One additional freestanding sign is permitted on the new hotel property Lot 2, Block 1, Timm Plymouth Addition, pursuant section 21155 of the zoning ordinance. 6. With exception to a relocated Comfort Inn entrance monument sign, and existing freestanding sign along 1-494, no additional freestanding signage is permitted on Lot 1, Block 1, Timm Plymouth Addition. 7. All signage shall require separate permits. With the exception of the variances, all signs shall be in conformance with the sign regulations in section 21155 of zoning ordinance. 8. Approval of the site plan, conditional use permit and variances is contingent on approval of the preliminary plat. 9. A separate building permit is required prior to construction of the project. 10. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the applicant shall fulfill the requirements, submit the required information, and revise the plans as indicated below, consistent with the applicable city code, zoning ordinance, and engineering guidelines: a. Execute a site improvement performance agreement and submit a financial guarantee pursuant to section 21045.10 of the zoning ordinance. b. Submit for city review, execute and record a maintenance agreement for the detention ponds and infiltration basin. c. Pay the required park dedication fee. d. Provide proof of recording for the final plat and all easements and agreements. e. Obtain the required right-of-way permits from the City of Plymouth engineering division for any work in the Empire Lane or Harbor Lane right-of-way. f. Obtain any required permits from other agencies including, but not limited to, Mn€7OT and the watershed district. g. Obtain city approval of final construction plans. h. Revise the lighting plan pursuant to section 21105 of the zoning ordinance in conformance to the exterior lighting requirements for the Light Zone 2 (LZ -2). The plan shall include the proposed lumens per square foott of hardscape (maximum 2.5 lumen per square foot of hardscape). L Provide exterior lightingfixture detailsthat include the backlight, uplight and glare (B.U.G) ratings, color rendering index (CRI) and correlated color temperature (CCT). j. Revise the tree inventory plan to list details of all the significant trees including the species and diameter of the tree and indication whether the tree will be preserved or removed as a result of the project. k. Revise the tree inventory plan to identify the proposed disturbance zone and proposed location and details of the required tree protection fencing. I. Revise the landscaping plan to: 1) include at least 25 percent of the required overstory trees being coniferous (no more than 25 percent of the overstory trees shall be any one species); and 2) remove the northern pin oak from the landscape islands and replace with a different species. m. Revise the plans to meet fire code requirements as follows: n. Identify the main entrance location to the building. Resolution 2017 - File 2017019 Page 3 o. Identify the fire department connection and post indica torvalve locations. The fire department connection is required in an approved location in the immediate area of the main entrance location. p. Submit fire apparatus turning evaluations on all drive aisles on all sides of the building. The apparatus shall not come in contact with any objects or extend into parking spaces. q. Show additional hydrants as required in approved locations on the final plans. r. Submit fire flow calculations flowing the two highest elevation hydrants individually and simultaneously to 20 psi residual pressure at each hydrant with the total gpm at each hydrant. s. Show fire lane signs locations on the final plans. t. Show an approved solenoid valve as required on the combination water supply line for fire and domestic use. u. Provide approved cross easement agreements for unobstructed access and water supply as required for the property and the property to the north of the site, v. Revise the plans to meet engineering requirements as follows; w. Add typical City of Plymouth detail STRT-11 for concrete apron. Add note to sheet 0200 that aprons shall be constructed to detail. x. Sheet 0300 and 0301: 1. Add NWL and HWL elevations to plan sheet for infiltration basin and ponds. 2. Recommend using City standard outlet control structure detail. 3. Add FFE for existing building. 4. Storm pipe into northern pond will be submerged, Recommend raising pipe elevation. 5. Add note that infiltration basin shall drain within 48 hours. 6. Recommend adding pipe from outlet control structure to southeastern pond. 7. A detail on sheet 0504 is referenced, however is not part of the plan set. Add to plans. 8. Install new storm sewer casting west of the existing driveway. The existing casting is damaged and appears it will be impacted with the project. 9. Clarify note "See detail on Sheet CSxX" (sheet C301), 14. Recommend using reinforced concrete pipe, 11. Identify whether JB#8 will connect to the existing storm pipe or to a new pipe. If a new pipe to the north, add plan sheets showing the new pipe. 12, Note that native plantings are not allowed in BMPs. Use turf seed mixture in basin ponds as necessary. y. Sheet 0500 1. Add inlet protection to catch basins in Empire and Harbor Lanes 2. Add inlet protection to catch basin southwest of northern pond. 3. Identify whether "Erosion Matting" blanket is being used or another product. Identify other product if applicable, 4. Recommend installing biology or rock bag at three curb cuts on the east side of the parking lot to slow the flow during construction and seed establishment. x. Storm Water Management: 1. Add MIDS calculator to submittal. 2. Identify sand depth for borings 7 and 9 where ponds will be. Resolution 2017 - File 2017019 Page 4 3. For proposed pond infiltration, contact MPCA and MnDNR to determine if permits are required, 11. All construction parking shall be located on-site. 12. All rooftop and mechanical equipment shall be screened as required by section 21130.05 of the zoning ordinance. 13. Silt fence shall be installed prior to any grading or construction on the site. 14. Fire lane signage shall be provided in locations to be field identified by the fire inspector. 15. Standard Conditions: a. The applicant shall remove any diseased or hazardous trees. b. The site shall remain in conformance with section 2025 of the city code regarding noise regulations. c. No trees may be planted in the public right-of-way. d. Compliance with the city's lighting regulations. e. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per ordinance provisions. 16. The conditional use permit, site plan and variances shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner or applicant has started the project, 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 sections 21015.07, 21015,09 and 21030.06 respectively, of the zoning ordinance. ADOPTED by the City Council this **** day of ******* 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 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 SITE � w F 11 "'.•. Jr Ir r : . rf dor F � lot Cif T ri`►: r7- L7►i 7 fY" Rota 1'r or jr r • a � �. Irr AA Aerial Photograph �- 2017019 �,tyof Plymouth, Minnesota 175 87.5 0 175 350 M 00=00i Feet i r. moi•.; �:* � - � Y'�.-� _�_ _ . �r, ,r'' r *•r.. � • .sem; i � '�'.�. i - � � is --- .� -- •. � .. ., � - � w F 11 "'.•. Jr Ir r : . rf dor F � lot Cif T ri`►: r7- L7►i 7 fY" Rota 1'r or jr r • a � �. Irr AA Aerial Photograph �- 2017019 �,tyof Plymouth, Minnesota 175 87.5 0 175 350 M 00=00i Feet i r HHennepin County Locate & Notify Map Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Date: 12/27/2016 Buffer Size: 750 feet Map Comments: SANDMAN MOTELS LLC 3000 Harbor Lane North Plymouth, MN 55447 0 120 240 480 ft I i r r I r i r I For more information wntad: Hennepin County GIS Of m 300 6th Street South Minneapolis, MN 55,187 gis.info@hennepm.us o 21-118-22-11 22-118-22-22 22-118-22-21 -4 - - - 2 -1 2-24 J------------- 22-11 = 2� 22-118-22 24 21-118 2-41 3 - 22-11 22-31 21-118-22-41' 22-118-22-32 2 -11 -31 21-118-2�i44, 22-118-22-33 22 -118 -22 - Buffer Size: 750 feet Map Comments: SANDMAN MOTELS LLC 3000 Harbor Lane North Plymouth, MN 55447 0 120 240 480 ft I i r r I r i r I For more information wntad: Hennepin County GIS Of m 300 6th Street South Minneapolis, MN 55,187 gis.info@hennepm.us ZONING ORDINANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS 21015.02. PROCEDURE: Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 15.99, an application for a conditional use permit shall be approved or denied within sixty(60) days from the date of its official and complete submission unless extended pursuant to Statute or a time waiver is granted by the applicant. If applicable, processing of the application through required state or federal agencies shall extend the review and decision-making period an additional sixty (60) days unless this limitation is waived by the applicant. Subd.5. The Planning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use. Its judgment shall be based upon (but not limited to) the following factors: i. Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. 2. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. 3 The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. 4. The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. 5. Adequate public facilities and services are available or can be reasonably provided to accommodate the use which is proposed. 6. The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. i. The conditional use complies with the general and specific perfonnance standards as specified by this Section and this Chapter. Section 21015 -Plymouth Zoning Ordinance (tfornWciipsta) rp) Pl ymo uth thY Adding Quality to Life Community Development Department 3404 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 {763j509-5450 FAX (763j509-5407 ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE STANDARDS The City Council or Zoning Administrator may approve a variance application (major or minor, respectively) only upon finding that all of the following criteria, as applicable, have been met: 1. The variance, and its resulting construction or project, would be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter, and would be consistent with the comprehensive plan. 2. The variance applicant has satisfactorily established that there are practical difficulties in complying with this Chapter. "Practical difficulties" means that: a. the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter; b. the plight of the Iandowner is due to circumstances unique to the property that were not created by the landowner; and c. the variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the locality. 3. The variance request is not based exclusively upon economic considerations_ 4. The variance, and its resulting construction or project, would not be detrimental to the public welfare, nor would it be injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. 5. The variance, and its resulting constmetion or project, would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, nor would it substantially increase traffic congestion in public streets, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood. 6. The variance requested is the minimum action required to address or alleviate the practical difficulties. Section 21030 -Plymouth Zoning Ordinance farms: Nvariancestds.dorx 161E N C I N E F k 5 FLAMNER5 DES] GNERS Consulting Group, Inc. To: Kip Berglund, Planner CITY OF PIYN40DTII From: Alatt Pacyna, PE, Senior Associate Brent Clark, EIT, Engineer Date: April 11, 20117 Subject: 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study Introduction Memorandum SRF No. 0171052-5 SRF has completed a traffic study For the proposed extended stay hotel in the City of Plymouth. The proposed development is generally located in the northeast quadrant of the Harbor Lane/ Empire Lane intersection, south of the existing Comfort Inn and Luckys 13 Pub (see Figure 1: Pro' ect Location). The main objectives of the study are to review existing operations, evaluate potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed development, and recommend improvements to ensure safe and efficient operations, if necessary. The following information provides the assumptions, analysis, and study recommendations offered for consideration. Existing Conditions Existing conditions were reviewed to establish a baseline to identify any future impacts associated with the proposed development. The evaluation of existing conditions includes peak hour intersection turning movement counts, field observations, and an intersection capacity analysis. Data Collection Weekday a.m, and p,m. peak period turning movement counts were collected at the following study intersections on Thursday, March 23, 2017: ■ Harbor Lane and Fernbrook Lane • Harbor Lane and Empire Lane • Harbor Lane and Comfort Inn/Luckys 13 Pub Access Historical average daily traffic (ADT) volumes witiun the study area were provided by the Minnesora Department of Transportation (I'vInD07). ON F, CARL ti ON PARKWAY, Surra 150 1 NI1NNEAPOLUS, hiN 55447 1 763.47 100 10 1 W%%1W.SRJ1C0NSU1.7ING.CC YI / C \ � � � -�, rte• Y � ,+� � -- _ ' �'� �} �* - -J--V. a j o LL V IF i r e � Project Location10. t i Tom..• Harbor Ln55 � w : 4" 0 or 40 E' k �- A - Jv �' •�- •'armor 7 �. "" -i.e ��' �� .,$ •. �� . LZ 7 !• + s r fk o � � Ste' � � ; : � ! } 3.r � •y • .•�' i U - V I Project Location i ua•ulling GrouF�. Inc. 3000 Harbor Large Traffic Study Figure 1 001710525 Plymouth, MN Apr l 2017 Flip Berglund, Planner April 11, 2017 3000 Harhor Lane Traffic Study Page 3 Field observations were completed to identify roadway characteristics within the study area (i.e. roadway geometry, posted speed limits, and traffic controls). Fernbrook Lane (north of MN Highway 55) is a four -lane divided roadway that transitions into a five -lane undivided roadway with a continuous center two-way left -stun lane north of Harbor Lane. The posted speed limit along Fernbrook Lane is 40 miles per hour (mph). Harbor Lane is a two-lane undivided roadway with tura lanes at Fernbrook Lane and a 30 mph posted speed limit. Fernbrook Lane is functionally classified as a major collector and Harbor Lane is classified as a local road. The Harbor Lane/Fernbrook Lane intersection is signalized, while the Harbor Lane/Empire Lane intersection is side -street stop controlled. The Harbor Lane and Comfort Inn/Luckys 13 Pub access is uncontrolled. Existing geometrics, traffic controls, and traffic volumes in the study area art shown in Figure 2. Intersection Capacity Analysis An existing intersection capacity analysis was completed to establish a baseline condition to which future traffic operations can be compared_ The capaci", analysis was completed for the a.m. and p.m. peak hour's using Synchro/SitnTrafFic software (V9.0). Capacity analysis results identify a Level of Service (LOS), which -indicates the quality of traffic flow through an 'intersection. Intersections are given a ranking from LOS A through LOS F. The LOS results are based on average delay per vehicle, which correspond to the delay threshold values shown in Table t. LOS A indicates the best traffic operation, with vehicles experiencing minimal delays. LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity, or a breakdown of traffic flow, An overall LOS A through D is generally considered acceptable by drivers in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Table 1 Level of Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections LOS Resignation Signalized Intersection Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds) Unsignalized Intersection Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds) A S 10 S.10 B > 10-20 > 10-15 C >20-35 > 15-25 D X35-55 X25-35 B a 55 - 80 > 35 - 50 F > 80 >50 For side -street stop controlled intersections, special emphasis is given to providing an estimate for the level of service of the side -street approach. Traffic operations at an unsignalized intersection with side - street stop control can be described in two ways. First, consideration is given to the overall intersection level of service. This takes into account the total number of vehicles entering the intersection and the capability of the -intersection to support these volumes. LEGEND Xx A.M. Peak Hour Volume {>v[y P.M. Peak Hour Volume r - F ` r Q Side-Street Stop Control B Signalized Control o r tt . Ax t °i - — IX� Existing Average Daily + Traffic Volume T' :� ? I Project Location Harbor Ln 4.300 J ,+:1 1 !lF 1d 164 [141] >t V 119] 13� "a f132) 11R �qn P P Noo * 0 R FZ v a _1� 473 (10a)+ 4�7 [1] Crr i� i 3 f5j iii 0 (01 �lJ 9 i'F (22) 15 �.■y.� t821 16 [1281 50 I 111 1► N - - 1531 58 i a c• [54] 36 �_ f• v z = - ■ Existing Conditions Figure 2 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study .,...,,,;�s �•��,•. Ind. o6r�saszs Plymouth, MN April 2017 Kip Berglund, PIanner April 11, 2017 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study Rage 3 Second, it is important to consider the delay on the minor approach. Since the mainline does not have to stop, the majority of delay is attributed to the side -street approaches. It is typical of intersections with higher mainline traffic volumes to experience high levels of delay (i.e. poor levels of service) on the side -street approaches, but an acceptable overall intersection level of service during the peak hours. Results of the existing intersection capacity analysis shown in Table ? indicate that all study intersections currently operate at an acceptable overall LOS B or better during the a.in. and p.m. peak hours. Queuing was observed on the westbound left -turn movement at the Harbor Lane/Fernbrook Lane intersection where 9th percentile queues extend beyond the left -turn lane storage approximately 10 percent of the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. It should be noted that while not a study intersection, southbound left -turns at the IVIN Highway 55/Fernbrook Lane intersection were observed to occasionally extend to Harbor Lane during both the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Table 2 Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour LOS Delay Los Delay Harbor Lane and Fernbrook Lane B 13 sec. B 15 sec.. Harbor Lane and Empire Lane ,= A/A 6 sec. A/A 7 sec. Harbor Lane and Comfort Inn/Luckys 13 Pub Access A/A 3 sec. j A/A 3 sec. (11 Indicates pn unsignalixed Intersection wit)i stile -street stop control ,ire OIL overall LOS Is shown followed by the worst side -street approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side -street ai)9foar;il [leloy. Tne northbound corpmeecial access approach IUnt:ontrolledl was analysed as side -street step control. fly llncon=roiled rhtersection analyasn as a coma oubn of side -street stop control at the southbpunq and we3Lboupd approaches (Comfort tnnf Luckys 13 Pub and Imola Access). yield control at the eastbaursd Harbor Lane approach, and Fres-flow at the northbound Empire Lane approach. Traffic ccritroI based on site observations. The overall L05 rs shown followed by the yrors E side-strHet appioach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side -street approach diel a� - Proposed Development The proposed development, shown in Figure 3, includes construction of a 102-1001711 extended stay hotel, reconfiguration of the existing parking lot, and construction of a new parking lot east of the site. The proposed development is expected to be fully constructed by the year 2018. Overall, the proposed development would proVide a net increase of 22 parking spaces. The adjacent Comfort Inn and Luckys 13 Pub are expected to retrain open. The proposed development plans to share access with the existing Comfort Inn/Luckys 13 Pub at Harbor Lane, white also .incorporating a new access to Empire Lane. o ,.ter-��sx�, � i CITIES LOCH e•�Im rr,.�_,.«.w — ,1j rAR[FlITEC75 ■ —.I IT r Tal it r All Lill 7-v 14� - - - C ¢ y 4{ 5 P4f`5 102 Ui4+`5 HARBOR. LANE rwrc ') 51a i� Site Plan 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study tl0,71D525 Plymouth, MN ApfM 24)17 Figure 3 Kip Berglund, Planner 3000 Harbor lake Traffic Study. Year Build 2019 Conditions April t 1, 2017 Page 7 To identify potential impacts associated with the proposed development, traffic forecasts for year 2019 conditions (i.e. one-year after opening) were developed. The year 2019 conditions take into account general area background growth and traffic generated by the proposed development. The following sections provide details on the background traffic forecasts, proposed development trip generation, and an intersection capacity analysis. Background Traffic Growth To account for general background growth in the area, an annual growth rate of one-half percent was applied to the existing peak hour traffic volumes to develop year 2019 background traffic forecasts. This growth tate is Consistent with historical growth in the study area based on MnDOT A.ADT volumes. Trip Generation The proposed development is not expected to operate similar to a general hotel. Therefore, local trip data previously collected at an Extended Stay in Maple Grove, Minnesota was utilized for comparison purposes. Similar to the Maple Grove Extended Stay, the proposed hotel is expected to operate as an extended stay corporate living facility that would provide rooms to contract employees for weeks or months at a time. This is different than a more typical hotel that hosts shorter -term patrons. The Maple Grove Extended Stay has 104 rooms. Vehicles entering/exiting the hotel driveway were collected on a weekday for a 24-hout period in October 2016 and are shown in Table 3. These driveway counts were compared to hotel and residential trip rate estimates from the I►rrtitute of Dunspnrtation Engineers (fM) Trip Generation Manual, 9tij Edition. Results of this comparison indicate that the Maple Grove Extended Stay trip generation estimates are more similar to a residential land use for both magnitude of trips generated as well as distribution (entering versus exiting peak hour trips). This suggests that an extended stay hotel will operate similar to a residential use with more vehicles exiting than entering during the a.m. peak hour and more vehicles entering than exiting during p.m. peak hour. Since the Maple Grove Extended Stay represents a comparable land use and the best available data, the local trip rate data was used to estimate trips for the proposed development. Table 3 Local Extended Stay Driveway Counts A.M. Peak hour P.M. Peak Hour Land use type (!TE Code) Size Trips Trips Daily Trips IVlatjie. Grove Extender! Slay,' I '104 -Rooms I k 26 1 -4 f 12 1 385 ! 1 R-wwd uCi 34'Urel dfiveWay CGuilfs COIIBCted In Ortobc-r :20117 Kip Berglund, Planner Ap6l 11, 2017 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study Page 8 To account for traffic impacts associated with the proposed 1.02 -room development, trip generation estimates for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours as well as a daily basis were developed based on the Maple Grove Extended Stay trip rates. Results of the trip generation estimates shown in Table 4 indicate that the proposed development is expected to generate approximately 32 a.m. peak hour trips, 39 p.m. peak hour trips, and 378 daily trips. These trips were distributed throughout the area based on the directional distribution shown in Figure 4, which was developed based on existing travel patterns and engineering judgment. The existing site and proposed development trips were adjusted to account for travel pattern changes associated with the proposed access on Empire Lane. The resultant year 2019 peak hour traffic forecasts, which include general background growth and traffic generated by the proposed development, are shown in Figure 5. Table 4 Land Use Trip Generation Cornparlson A.M. Pear Hour P.M. Peak Hour Land Use Type (!TF Code) Size Trips Trips daily Trips In I Out I In I Out Proposed hotel I 102-Rooins 1 b 1 26 1 27 1 1-2 1 378 Intersection Capacity Analysis To determine how the existing roadway network is expected to operate under year 2419 build conditions, a detailed traffic capacity analysis was completed using Synchro/SimTraffic software. Results of the year 2019 build intersection capacity analysis shown in Table 5 indicate that all srudy intersections and proposed access locations are expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOS S or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The queues identified under existing conditions at the Harbor Lane/Fernbrook Lane intersection are expected to increase slightly (i.e. by approximately one vehicle) under year 3019 build conditions. The southbound queues at the MN Idighway 55/ Fernbrook Lane intersection will continue to occasionally extend back to Harbor Lane. In general, the proposed development is not expected to impact overall operations within the study area. Table 5 Year 2019 Build Intersection Capacity Analysis Intersection A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour LOS Delay LDS Delay Harbor Zane and Fernbrook tans B 14 sec. 8 15 sec - ec.Harbor Ha rbo rLane and Empire Lane i1 A/A G sec. A/A 7 sec. Harbor Lane and Comfort Inn/Luckys 13 PUb Access:-' A/A 3 sec. A/A 3 sec. Empire Lane and Proposed Access,!- A/A -' sec. A/A 4 sec. 1) Indicates an unsrgrtalved Intersection With Sido-streel stop cootrot, where the overall LOS is shown followed b] rhe Wor'St side -street. apptcarh LOS. The decay shown represents the worst swe-street approcich delay. i h� rlorthllGLIFId ccr*tni@rf lel access approach tuncantrdRed) was anal veed as side -street stop control. 12l uncontrolled rntarsection analyzed as conihinatiorr of 3ide`slreetstep rontrdl a the snrithboun0 a n a wesihorrnd aplrroachas lCori rfort fnn/Luokys 13 Pub artd !mo{a Acoesal, yteld Conlif)I at the eastborio0 Hafbar Lane approach. and free-tlow at lne nort h b aund Einprrr Lade apin oach. Twtfc control Lased an site observations. The overall LOS is shown topowed by the worst srde•sIreel appf0arir LOS. TI ie delay shorn represents r I I e worst side street app roar,h delay. 1 4a� y Ha -bar Ln 40 ; .. _ -'- q fff C r�. m jo o- 2k !, LI ION I Directional Distribution Figure 4 , ,,,,.W IF.8 G—P, I— 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study oo=r1osxs Plymouth, MN AprO 2017 NMI 2079 Build Conditions � �,,� y 10 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study Fi ure 5 oa171osxs Plymouth, MN April 2017 Mp Berglund, PIanner 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study Site Plan Review April 11, 2011 Page 11 A review of the proposed site plan was completed to identify any issues and recominend potential improvements with regard to access, circulation, and parking. In general, the following should be considered when designing internal traffic controls and roadways: * Incorporate traffic controls, signing and striping based on guidelines established in the Manrrcrl on UnifonN Traffic Control Deuit'es (MUTCD). ❑ In particular, it is important to identify traffic controls at intersections between internal roadways to minimize vehicular conflicts and driver confusion. ■ Special consideration should be made to limit any sight distance impacts from future structures, landscaping and signing. Existing power poles are partial site obstructions. While not needed from an intersection capacity perspective, reconstruction of the Harbor Lane and Comfort Inn/Luckys Pub 13 intersection should be considered. The current uncontrolled intersection configuration is unique, creating confusion with respect to who has the right-of-way. "herefore, preliminary alternatives were developed to provide a more common traffic control, roadway, and access condition. The purpose of these alternatives is to improve safety while maintaining access to the existing and proposed development. The following information provides a general overview of the potential access alternatives, which are illustrated in Figures G and 7. It should be noted that the Imola Inc. access is not part of the proposed project and further discussions with area stakeholders would need to occur before any access or roadway modifications were constructed. Access Alternative 1 1) Reconfigures the parking lot layout and provides an additional access to Empire Lane. This option would reduce the proposed parking by approximately three (3) spaces. Access Alternative 2 1) Closes the Imola Inc. north access and modifies the roadway alignment to reduce conflicts, increase safety, and improve drive-- expectations. a) The existing north access to Iinola Inc. was utilized by one exiting and one entering vehicle during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. b) Closing this access would create the opportunity for three (3) additional parking spaces within the Imola Inc. site. c) With the roadway alignment reconfiguration, an advisory speed limit o approximately 15 to 20 mph would likely he required. It should be noted that the roadway currently has no posted speed limit. 2) Reconfigures the proposed development parking lot layout to reduce conflicts along the driveway aisle to/from Empire Lane. As shown, approximately three (3) additional parking spaces could be provided. Kip Berglund, Planner 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study Figure 6: Access Alternative 1 ZD + �frta ola�Gn. CL r Y• � r m �w. S w r I t Irnola Inc_ access is not HAPBOR LXNE _ part of the proposed project and further discussions with area Ustakeholders would neer CLz to occur before any acres I z ur roadway rnodificatior,� were constructed I Figure 7: Access Alternative 2 I - it, -�� -- - I .ieee I 11111T 2 = rrr - 946.25 w ! -r w, TTFEI 0� IMola lnc. access is not HARBOR LANE �h — part of the proposed project and further discussions wrth area - stakeholders would need i C z i to occur before any access J or roadway modifications ' were constructed � I Agri 11, 2017 Page 12 Kip Berglund, Planner April 11, 2017 3000 Harbor Lane Traffic Study Page 13 Summary and Conclusion The following summary and conclusions are offered for consideration: .All study intersections currently operate at an acceptable overall LOS B or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. ■ Westbound left -turn queues at the Harbor Lane/Fernbrook Lane intersection queue beyond the left -turn lane storage approximately 10 percent of the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. • The southbound left -turn movements at the AIN Highway 55/Fernbrook Avenue intersection were observed to occasionally extend to Harbor Lane during both the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. 2. The proposed development includes construction of a 1012 -room extended stay hotel, reconfiguration of the existing parking lot, and construction of a new parking lot east of the site. Overall, the proposed development would provide a net increase of 22 parking spaces. The proposed development plans to share access with the existing Comfort Inn/Luckys 13 Pub at Harbor Lane, while also incorporating a new access to Empire Lane. 3. Trip rate data previously collected at a Maple Grove. Extended Stay was used to develop trip generation estimates for the proposed development. The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 32 a.m. peak hour, 39 p.m. peak hour trips, and 378 daily trips. 4. Results of the year 2019 build intersection capacity analysis indicate that all study intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable overall LDS B or better during the a.m, and p.m. peak hours. The queues identified under existing conditions at the Harbor Lane/Fernbrook Lane intersection are expected to increase slightly (i.e. by approximately one vehicle) under year 2019 build conditions. The southbound left -turn queue at the 1VfN Highway 55/ Fernbrook Lane intersection will continue to occasionally extend back to Harbor Lane. • In general, the proposed development is not expected to impact overall operations within the study area. 5. Access alternatives, illustrated in Figures G and 7, should be considered to improve safety while maintaining access to the existing and proposed development. Further discussion with area stakeholders would need to occur before any access or roadway modifications were constructed. H:\Pm_ jedf\ 10000\ 1052A TS j Report\ / 704'1 1_3000 Hamar Lane T'S Ff NALdoex Kip Berglund From: Barb Thomson Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2817 8:37 AM To: Steve Anderson Cc: Kip Berglund Subject: Re: Plymouth Planning Commission Steve, Thank you for your comments. They will be forwarded to the commissioners and made a part of the public record. Barb Thomson Sent from my iPhone 0 Apr 11, 2017, at 7:57 AM, Steve Anderson <stevea andersonagencyinc.com> wrote: Dear Brenda, My concern for this proposed site build are as follows: 1. A five story 100+ room hotel will unbalance the immediate area skyline and existing landscape. 2. With existing hotel capacity to the north, south and east, does the current hotel capacity warrant an additional 102 rooms? As an avid user of hotel space for business guests in the immediate area of Maple Grove and Plymouth, we never find ourselves short of room space. I realize also Plymouth's need and desire for additional business revenue and tax revenue in the mentioned area. 3. Lastly, with two hotel sites already in the proposed area, is there any intention of ciosing those sites in an attempt to maximize the seemingly more desirable Hilton project? Hope these comments are addressed publically. Regards, Steve Steve Anderson President of Anderson Agency, Inc. 3370-A Annapolis Lane North Plymouth, MN 55447 753-559-0845 www.andersonagencyinc.com @=CITI ES EDGE wARCH ITE CTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Owner Statement for 3000 Harbor Lane Plyrnotith, MN Applicant: Plymouth Hotel Group, LLC Cities Edge Architects 163 Fifteenth Ave NW Willmar, MN 56201-2242 320.235.7775 320.235.8673 Fax www.CitiesEdgeArchitects.com VFi0VE FE$ 2 2 _ i Y rip ?'-"Iou i H �7,AI�RJN[ii' ❑E1fELOPMEM; DEPAI4TFAr-Wr p001 Proposed Uses: The owner is proposing a 5 Story, 102 -unit franchised hotel to be built at the location of 3000 Harbor Lane Plymouth, Minnesota. This property is home to the existing Comfort Inn, along with Lucky 13's Restaurant. The proposed hotel will cause the existing parcel of property to be divided as shown on the Site Plan. With the addition of a franchised hotel there will be a new access added on the West side of the property (off Empire Lane North). All three businesses will utilize this new access, while still having the existing access as an option. The parking lot will also be expanded on the East portion of the property to meet parking stall requirements for all facilities. Estimated construction completion date is Spring 2018. The owner of the Comfort Inn and the Owner of the new hotel will enter into a Reciprocal Easemcnt Agreement to be recorded with the Plat that will contain the necessary cross -easements for utilities, drainage, ingress and egress access, parking and signage, as applicable. Page 1 Variance Application (Sign) Project: [-tome 2 Suite Plymouth Location: 3000 I larbor Lane, Plymouth MN €�'--. THS Properties *Below you will find the proposed use and how it conforms with the variance standards as set forth in Section 21430 of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance. 1'rnnasal: TUG Properties is proposing to keep the current monument sign labeled "Lucky 13" in its current state and not relocate it to Comfort Inn Parcel after the subdivision of land. This request goes against Section 21155 that states each property can only have signage that serves only the business that the parcel is owned by. The sign currently complies with zoning however, because of the proposed subdivision for development, after the subdivision the parcel where the current corner Lucky's Sign is located will then belong to the proposed Home 2 Suites parcel owner so the subdivision will result in non-compliance with the Signage Ordinance since it will no longer be on the property where the business is located . 1. The construction of this new Home2 by Hilton hotel project will conform and be in harmony with the intent for this chapter and is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The area is currently zoned for C-3 Highway commercial and a hotel use falls underneath acceptable uses. Reasoning for the RgLyest for Variance. The sign as currently located complies with the Zoning requirements. The subdivision for the new hotel results in the noncompliance. The practical difficulty that arises if the sign is moved is lack of visibility for the "Lucky 13" restaurant business. If the sign is not on the corner, the business "Lucky 13" will no longer have visibility from Fernbrook Lane as depicted below. Not having this visibility could cause harm to the business, and this business is not owned by the landowner. (The plight of this obstacle is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by landowner "visibility"). This is a thriving restaurant that serves the Plymouth community and we don't want visibility to result in loss of this business. 2. recognizing that the comer signage is critical to the ongoing business currently on the property as it is situated prior to the subdivision. Home 2 Suites parcel owner will forfeit placing a monument sign on that corner for its identification because with the height of the building we will have visibility from Fernbrook without the use of the monument sign. 3. The sign already exists in the location so it will cause a hindrance and economic impact to relocate the sign. 4. An alternative to comply with the zoning would be to have THG Properties create the lot line for Comfort InnlLucky 13 Parcel to include the corner where the sign is located as part of its parcel (creating a sliver parcel to include the corner) so the sign continues to be on the Comfort Inn/Lucky 13 Lot but by doing so: (1) it would then no longer have what would be normal lot line configuration for the property that is generally desired, and (2) the new access point for both properties then would be entirely on the Comfort Inn/Lucky 13 parcel since as part of the development we are closing the currently located Harbor Lane access point and thus creating a parcel that does not have access directly to the street directly from its lot but only through an easement and the preference is to have direct access. The variance will NOT BE - Detrimental to public welfare nor injurious to other improvements in the neighborhood, the sign will continue to exist as it currently is situated Increase the danger of fire Substantially diminish the property values within the area In this instance where the variance requested requires little to no action required to alleviate the practical difficulties as well as the reasons listed above we, THG Properties, ask that you graciously grant our proposal to keep the monument sign where it currently resides so that the Lucky 13 business has visibility to the public without the necessity of creating an unusual lot line configuration to accomplish this purpose or having to take impractical action to comply with code that is resulting from the subdivision that will bring new hotel development to Plymouth. View from Fernbrook Conditional Use (Building Height) Project: Home ? Suite Plymouth Locadom. 3000 Harbor LUIC. Plymouth MN ®� THS Properties *`Below you will find the proposed use and how it conforms with the conditional use permit standards as set forth in section 21015 of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance. Proposal: Plymouth Hotel Group is proposing to build a five -story (55'-0") Home 2 Suites hotel on the south end of the lot currently known as 3000 Harbor Lane. This will be in line Section 21465.13 of this Chapter, provided that: (a) For each additional five feet in height above the maximum building height specified in this district, the front and side yard setback requirements shall be increased by one foot. We will be 10'-0" above the specified footage of 45 feet. 1. The construction of this hotel project would conform with and be in harmony with the intent for this chapter and would be consistent with the comprehensive plan. The area is currently zoned for C-3 highway commercial and a hotel use falls underneath acceptable uses. Reasoning: L The reasoning that this development needs to be 55'-0" is because a building with 4 -stories would increase the footprint of the building and would create problems with unattainable solutions for construction such as: a. Violating set rack restrictions b. Not having room given the highline-wires located on the Property along Hwy 494 c. Not enough space on the site for the footprint of a 4 -story given the Property configuration, current improvements located on the Property and the setback requirements. (The plight of this obstacle is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by landowner "Building Footprint") 2. The development of this building would bring value to the surrounding properties and will promote/enhance the general public welfare. The variance would NOT BE: Detrimental to public welfare nor injurious to other improvements in the neighborhood Increase the danger of fire Substantially diminish the property values within the area In this instance where the conditional use requested complies with the current comprehensive plan, without would be detrimental to the development of this project as well as the reasons listed above we, Plymouth Hotel Group, ask that you graciously grant the request Conditional Use Permit permitting the construction of the hotel. Variance Application (Aisle Width) Item 44 an Pltuining Commission Comments Project: Home 2 Suite Plymouth Location; 3000 Harbor Lane, Plymouth MN Applicant; Plymouth Motel Group, LLC 1.917017 THG Properties *Below you will find the proposed use and how it conforms to the variance standards as set faith in section 21030 of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance. Proposal: The parking at the west end of the site has been adjusted to provide the required 26 -feet of drive aisle. For the parking layout on the east side of the site, we would like to request a variance to allow the 24 -feet drive aisles currently shown based upon the following items: Reasoning: a. This area is used solely For the purpose of circulating parking traffic (no "through -traffic" or entry/exit from the site), ideally, parking traffic should be traveling at slower speeds to help avoid potential collisions in the parking lot. Increasing the aisle width may give the driver a sense of "openness" causing him/her to travel faster than they would with the narrower 24 -feet width. b. 26 -feet drive aisle widths in this area would result in a net increase of 1,800 square feet of impervious surface. The City of Plymouth Surface Water Management Plan acknowledges that development/redevelopment throughout the City will have an impact on the quality of the community's surface waters, and best management practices in engineering currently strive to reduce the amount of impervious surface on a site as much as practical. Using the industry standard 24 -feet wide drive aisles allows the site designer to provide as much green space as possible. If the drive aisles are allowed to remain at the 24 -feet width currently shown, the design promotes the best management practice of a grassy swale to convey the storm water instead of piping it. G. Requiring the 26 -feet wide aisles will result in increased development costs due to tete steep grade changes atthe east end of the site, possibly resulting in an extremely long retaining wall, storm sewer catch basins and piping that currently isn't needed with the swale design as described above. There are other items that aren't quite as significant as the three described above, but 26 -feet aisles in this area would also take longer to snow plow, require slightly more illumination for the area and result in additional costs of asphalt pavement and gravel base materials The variance would NOT BE: Detrimental to public welfare nor injurious to other improvements in the neighborhood • Substantially diminish the property values within the area In this instance where the variance requested requires little to no action required to alleviate the practical diffieulties as well as the reasons listed above we, THG Properties, ask that you graciously grant our proposal to keep the aisle widths the length that we have proposed. ECo. EI V E AN 13 CITY OF PLYMOUTH W Qi �-- I Lo n ❑ ate' v�❑` U fcm } as S :-i zgx�-'�� m gd�r M1 AVMPgg4-41VI;`,�31N1 ��• P iy I. r Ni S --x V.n"�" 3 1 ;JNV1 —TJ1J 3 wj i 44i C MIN!F — — — 5 Ego t D- ry ti �. f p m_ V I I I 41'1',AVf W --O 'C]'AhMV9-' welt -r0 loz-bz I., wMga .Aq F> -,j b!•P'po.DOS. lowt-ay.ugw-2�w—1051iE1?.J•4fiv: --elpiwarr ;r pct i zrdwc+aQ �? LOU +u g � rruc i�8 ` n N Y Rz� o z= o �5ia ldM�l`JILf =IivLSdfaw I I - J a K� 9� I 4-[AON 2NVI 2,84dNA Ni'JON 9N'99 3JIdM9 Sol SpS �j{$yy g yy �a zy 3 yyy py y3 i� ❑OOC y _ of '�8� �F � K � L ii � �E �R l i Y4 AW);I'7 'T�g A Wi: wr 12'I I- 2102 'vZ �j w v97 'R4 FWJ r+'V 0 Q 17-66 •f g4 -,:w I vv=r,4—cr IG"rd YnniJ.�,�-Bayou-.w1 O5 i Ffw 16Etii per, Wr �^�; ��- .�` ...9�__}1_ --- --�--- .. �•� J � � pa ��v'i �� I]J�� O ❑ q_O FIE s� � 7- W §Y LL YY ;pp 2 til¢{].' to�i-AG POWr�Zp: i'4X0271+W-Vq- "'9 Aa I"A Z P'ODED- OC 15C&L55 L 3. zu W §Y LL YY ;pp 2 til¢{].' to�i-AG POWr�Zp: i'4X0271+W-Vq- "'9 Aa I"A Z P'ODED- OC 15C&L55 V }�_ - �,i�S � nJ � F- �-• sn LI4f � � � .1ft 'y?�_..Y!` ,SSP = e � 5 � � ❑ �� 7 _� v F!C _� I I IT ILLI _ 05 iG-1Y':4 1:; is wf4 '�52�1• • L SDE ' � i �tl ^� N�� 'R0 Po.•u�d F""P'[71`aQ'?' OS I FEl ^'^ W^9^84'f��Tl�+�:�a�V�.'ey�aeaavf11�7 �t4'ef . T1'x'3 • � 5 i ` N •a.. _ tib` .-`� ��IdW3 i�•.,.� "''` sem. x»�- -�.ti,.. ,y,�:.r ��.... - r . m li w cz cz I z 'I+"qvi �2iIdIN3 iG-1Y':4 1:; is wf4 '�52�1• • L SDE ' � i �tl ^� N�� 'R0 Po.•u�d F""P'[71`aQ'?' OS I FEl ^'^ W^9^84'f��Tl�+�:�a�V�.'ey�aeaavf11�7 �t4'ef . T1'x'3 • 7 � sops ZawOH E CD 1,1ll a If ha 1111 m�ae�� e' e'� �� a�� Whim 00 1,,, i k 1 1 M ill _ 1_ 2110,111a s a a d f E p a e a a a LLi NW'41f�DtIFSId i� _..�. saps ZawOH ;� z v t2 4 e � LLi NW'41f�DtIFSId i� _..�. saps ZawOH ;� z v t2 4 m.e mw6 ¢ ww CYf55 Nri '31yIV11d N363 w d!E 3llnS '3rulfa 837r+3O 3l""U ia MIL Ni38 m. 'D77 '13ion NVAGNVS u me -•v wGY IA �YM6 �.YY a¢ ivu� aaem .w.�+ • :1O �nV � .. ]� Vav e.11Vr. f f ��b1s��zNr f. 3.8C.Li.S 11`6k� 1 34043 I Jfi�1 � I I i S tit � g � F V Q " ~ CV cc:LU t� z �rz Q �T Q�� N �0d W �- 4 Z M �� f„ _ co Y--1 W trrE5S NW '3laedad M343 Oli 311115 '3Na6 a31 N39 VON 31WL Y{WIl 4130 ill '13106 N"QNb'S +w1ea u= -c. m roor. ua mnw `o sa •a ..wc !i — x�c�5 x ion I Illll�illl I, •�f -[✓sky' S.GGrr. Guy W ' � m --f rIE a i _3 I Illll�illl rv1 y" 'mriay si# r,vure � ? nli,y L •'-C Y� �I ____l.___ __ 9 a _ a 1 € is PP Of5 3.6E.4t.P� S �-` —.—.—.—.—.—._ G �a r= a � f Fxt is, ! ! x 1 r y�6 f� R x !r[ ya - E 3hi�� 3�ldVr' E f � t- - I I I J f fJ4l1IC17?� 1..Y317inp� dPltl rIf1VG1 I i.d'lA33�f� i-iincbF.L�d a ml � ! - - 2 7r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - !r'r�r M-rn,w.00r - - - - - - - �rxsvc a.lr.n ons" - 3� i Eiiq j E[�1i r '3g;{� ,q }l 3iaig�31t-4 G �d £d'Zpg•7 3$LLZ.S N•9ti� jf 4 � to J J p �� o U >s L17C >1�01j1QOb a NXT In I. ❑�f m!E O n i ,� i Q • 3 i J aa rv1 y" 'mriay r,vure � ? nli,y L •'-C f �I ____l.___ __ a _ a 1 a 4 PP Of5 3.6E.4t.P� S �-` —.—.—.—.—.—._ G �a r= a � f � o ! ! ! a Li f� W Li x !r[ ya - E 3hi�� 3�ldVr' E f � t- - I I I •'-C f Z`Ef ____l.___ __ a _ PP Of5 3.6E.4t.P� S �-` —.—.—.—.—.—._ G ?------ — ------------------------ J -�_ ! ! ! f l = I f n � I I kP❑IB ': 17I 41 � ! I t7 I I NPCIH 7 1177 � I 3 I -! NOURIOy 082 931UD "r;! J f fJ4l1IC17?� 1..Y317inp� dPltl rIf1VG1 I i.d'lA33�f� i-iincbF.L�d a ml � ! - - 2 7r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - !r'r�r M-rn,w.00r - - - - - - - �rxsvc a.lr.n ons" - E.2 54 �NVI 9'c FFF7 to INV] ni, LU LL -i 0 uj II _ I I I . I 8i�k ��iC N AL jL I LA ;INV] l2flISI II Iii, III �3 ALL N jL I LA ;INV] l2flISI II Iii, III �3 ALL In I"! Agenda Number File 201702$ PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF REPORT TO: PIymouth Planning Commission y� FROM: lip Berglund, Planner (509-5453) through Barbara ThomsA Planning Manager MEETING DATE: April 19, 2017 APPLICANT; Sky Zone PROPOSAL:. Conditional use permit to allow an indoor commercial recreation use within an existing industrial bu-ilding LOCATION: 1005 Berkshire Lane North GUIDING: IP (Planned Industrial) ZONING: I-2 (General Industrial) REVIEW DEADLINE: July 15, 2017 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow an indoor commercial recreation use in the I-2 zoning district for property located at 1005 Berkshire Lane. Under the plan, Sky Zone would occupy 31,200 square feet of the 124,600 -square foot multi -tenant building. The zoning ordinance allows indoor commercial recreation uses in the industrial districts upon issuance of a conditional use permit. Notice of the public hearing was published in the city's official newspaper and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. A copy of the notification area map is attached, File 2017028 Page 2 CONTEXT: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Previous Actions Affecting Site In 1979, the City Council approved a lot division and site plan to allow the construction of a multi -tenant office/warehouse building consisting of 121,500 square feet. The subject building was constructed in 1980. In 1991 and 1998, site plan amendments were administratively approved to allow parking lot expansions, LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city's discretion in approving or denying a conditional use permit is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards listed in the zoning ordinance. If it meets the specified standards, the city must approve the permit. However, the level of discretion is affected by the fact that some of these standards are open to interpretation. ANALYSIS: Sky Gone received a conditional use permit in 20 1. 0 to operate in a different industrial building in Plymouth. The applicant states that the Iease on their current space will not be renewed. Therefore, they are requesting approval of a conditional use permit to operate Sky Zone at the subject property. The applicant is proposing to construct trampoline playing courts in the 31,204 -square foot tenant space. Sky Zone would also offer party roams, concessions, and locker/changing areas. The applicant states that the trampoline courts are used to provide individual play, group outings, corporate team building events, birthday parties, league play (dodgeball, volleyball, SkyRobics for kids, etc.), intramurals, youth outings, aerobic fitness classes, charity events, and individual and group crass training. Sky Zone would be open to all ages, although the majority of their clientele are age 19 and under. The primary use of the courts is for "open jump" where individuals or groups purchase jump time in one-hour blocks. The applicant's hours of operation are as follows: Adjacent Land Use Guiding Zonis North Railroad and substation 1P 1-2 East, West, and Industrial Uses IP 1-2 South Previous Actions Affecting Site In 1979, the City Council approved a lot division and site plan to allow the construction of a multi -tenant office/warehouse building consisting of 121,500 square feet. The subject building was constructed in 1980. In 1991 and 1998, site plan amendments were administratively approved to allow parking lot expansions, LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city's discretion in approving or denying a conditional use permit is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards listed in the zoning ordinance. If it meets the specified standards, the city must approve the permit. However, the level of discretion is affected by the fact that some of these standards are open to interpretation. ANALYSIS: Sky Gone received a conditional use permit in 20 1. 0 to operate in a different industrial building in Plymouth. The applicant states that the Iease on their current space will not be renewed. Therefore, they are requesting approval of a conditional use permit to operate Sky Zone at the subject property. The applicant is proposing to construct trampoline playing courts in the 31,204 -square foot tenant space. Sky Zone would also offer party roams, concessions, and locker/changing areas. The applicant states that the trampoline courts are used to provide individual play, group outings, corporate team building events, birthday parties, league play (dodgeball, volleyball, SkyRobics for kids, etc.), intramurals, youth outings, aerobic fitness classes, charity events, and individual and group crass training. Sky Zone would be open to all ages, although the majority of their clientele are age 19 and under. The primary use of the courts is for "open jump" where individuals or groups purchase jump time in one-hour blocks. The applicant's hours of operation are as follows: File 2017028 Page 3 Summer Season (.lune to August): Monday to Thursday, 11:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Friday, 11:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Saturday 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. Sunday, 11:00 a.m, to 7:00 p.m. Fall/Winter Season (September to December and January to May] Tuesday through Thursday, 4:00 to 8:00 p,m. Friday, noon to 10:00 p.m. Saturday, 10:00 a.m. to 11:04 p.m. Sunday, 11:00 am to 7:00 p.m. Parking is generally the main item that needs to be reviewed for this type of application. Based on the existing and proposed uses within the building, the ordinance would require 127 parking spaces. This number is based on 7,460 square feet of office requiring 27 spaces; 80,144 square feet of warehouse requiring 37 spaces; and roughly 21,040 square feet of indoor commercial recreation requiring 63 parking spaces. The subject site currently contains 122 parking spaces. The applicant has submitted two site plans with optional parking layouts that show where additional parking spaces could be added/striped (up to 45 for a total of 164 spaces) in the existing parking lot area in the northwest corner of the site near the proposed tenant space. Neither option shows either the required ten -foot building to parking setback or adequate maneuvering area for fire department apparatus for a dead-end turnaround. However, staff finds that only minor site plan alteration would be needed to provide the additional five spaces required. Consequently, a condition is included in the attached resolution requiring that prior to issuance of a building permit, the site plan be revised to snow that any new parking spaces meet zoning ordinance requirements and fire department turn -around standards. With that condition, the proposal would meet the zoning ordinance requirements for parking. The applicant states that overlap for parking demand among the tenants is limited because nine months out of the year Sky Zone business hours are different than the neighboring tenant who closes at 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and is closed on weekends. In addition, the majority of Sky Zone customer traffic (upwards of 90 percent of the business) occurs from Friday evening to Sunday evening when most adjacent tenants are closed for business. Other than the northwest parking area alterations, there are no physical changes proposed to the site plan. Any changes to remodel the existing tenant space would happen internal to the building upon issuance of a building pen -nit. A condition is included in the attached resolution stating that separate building permits are required prior to any proposed tenant finish. The PIanning Commission must review the requested conditional use permit for compliance with the standards listed in the zoning ordinance. A copy of the standards is attached. Staff used these standards to review the request and finds it would meet the applicable standards. Specifically, the proposed use would conform to the comprehensive plan, would not have any affect on public File 2017028 Page 4 improvements in the area, would not impede the orderly development of the district, nor would it be detrimental to the surrounding properties or the city as a whole. RECOMMENDATION: Community Development Department staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit to allow an indoor commercial recreation use for property located at 1005 Berkshire Lane North, subject to the conditions listed in the attached resolution. If new information is brought forward at the public hearing, staff may alter or reconsider its recommendation. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit 2. Location Map 3. Aerial Photo 4. Notification Area Map 5. Conditional Use Permit Standards 5. Applicant's Narrative 7. Site Graphics P_IPlanning ApplicationSVO 1 7QO 17028 PC Reporl CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION NO. 2017- A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SKY ZONE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1005 BERKSHIRE LANE NORTH (201 7028) WHEREAS, Sky Zone has requested approval of a conditional use permit for an indoor commercial recreation use for the property legally described as follows: Lot 1, Block 1, Carlson Companies 3rd Addition, 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 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Sky Zone fora conditional use permit to allow an indoor commercial recreation use in the existing industrial building located at 1005 Berkshire Lane North, subject to the following conditions: 1. A conditional use permit is approved to allow a roughly 21,000 square foot indoor commercial recreation use, in accordance with the application and plans received by the city on March 16, 2017, and additional information on April 3 and 11, 2017, except as may be amended by this resolution. 2. The conditional use permit is approved with the finding that all applicable conditional use permit standards are met. 3. Prior to commencement of any improvements, the applicant shall obtain the required building permits. 4. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan that shows: 1) any new parking spaces or drive aisles meeting zoning ordinance requirements pursuant to section 21135 of the zoning ordinance; and 2) an approved fire lane turnaround pursuant to standard turnaround requirements for dead-end fire apparatus access roads (fire lanes), S. The permit is subject to all applicable building and fire codes, and to all city regulations and ordinances. Any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 6. Standard conditions: a. Any signage shall require issuance of separate sign permits and comply with the city's sign regulations. b. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within approved designated areas. c. All parking shall be off-street in designated parking spaces. Res. 2017 - File 2017028 Page 2 d. Subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per ordinance provisions. e. This approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner or applicant has started the project, or unless the landowneror applicant has received priorapproval from the city to extend the expiration date for up to one additional year, as regulated under section 21015.07 of the zoning ordinance. ADOPTED by the City Council this ******* day of ******* 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 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 MIN FAA loll id W CD L;A= C) Sky Zone 1005 Berkshire Lane N Request for a conditional use permit 500 251 D 511 1,100 Feet llCfty of Plymouth, Mfnnesote CARLS❑ N PKWY Legend ® C, Comeroai ® CC, City center ® CO, COMMertlal Office ® IP, Planned Industrial LA -1, Living Area 1 LA -2, Living Area 2 LA -3, Living Area 3 ® LA -4, Living Area 4 LA -R1 LA -R2 ® LA -R3 LA -RT P -I, PubliGSelni-PvuliGlnslilulional rp) Aerial Photograph - 2477428 city of Plymouth, Minnesota 250 125 0 250 500 IT Feet 0 Hennepin county Locate & Notify Map Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Date: 3/11/2017 Buffer Size: 500 feet Map Comments: JAMES CAMPBELL CO LLC 4005 Berkshire Lane North Plymouth, MN 55441 0 245 490 980 ft 11 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 For more information contact: Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South Minneapolis, MN 55487 gis,info@hennepin.us Ir•ae %c. rt 1 lath -Avenue North 1,tQg,t1$1�,41 27-118-22-32 27-118-22-31 27-118-22-42 15thA:venu=North 27-118-22-3 Ile, ;q 27-118-22-34 27=1.18-22-43 291-18-22-44 rth 3 -1 34-118-22-12 r,7r1134-1 22-22 - S: - 1'th Fbtth - '18- 2-2 --118- 33-118-22-11 -21 34-118-22-12 L 34-11 -22-2 34-118-22-13 _ 4-118-22-32 34-118-22-32 Buffer Size: 500 feet Map Comments: JAMES CAMPBELL CO LLC 4005 Berkshire Lane North Plymouth, MN 55441 0 245 490 980 ft 11 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 For more information contact: Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South Minneapolis, MN 55487 gis,info@hennepin.us ZONING ORDINANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERAM STANDARDS 21015M PROCEDURE: Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 15.99, an application for a conditional use permit shall be approved or denied within sixty(60) days from the date of its official and complete submission unless extended pursuant to Statute or a time waiver is granted by the applicant, If applicable, processing of the application through required state or federal agencies shall extend the review and decision-making period an additional sixty (60) days unless this limitation is waived by the applicant. Subd.5. The Planning Commission shall consider possible adverse effects of the proposed conditional use, Its judgment shall be based upon (but not Limited to) the following factors: Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan, including public facilities and capital improvement plans. ? _ The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purpose already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. 4. The establislunent of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. 5.. Adequate public facilities and services are available or can be reasonably provided to accommodate the use which is proposed. 6. The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. 7. The conditional use complies with the general and specific performance standards as specified by this Section and this Chapter. Section 21015 -Plymouth Zoning Ordinance 0't3 20/ 707 0 APPLICANT'S NARRATIVE SKY ZONE=" Contact, David Hustrulid Phone: 952-567-4450 6455 Wayzata Blvd 4810 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 AiNnY D vaLoP.AEN-rCFPhMEn rr SUBJECT: Business Description Document for City Planning/Zoning Initial Planning Proposed Location: 1005 Berkshire Lane N General Business Description: We propose to open an independently owned and operated franchise of Sky Zone Franchise Group, LLC. it will do business as a Sky Zone Recreational Center (SZRC}. What is it? Sky Zone developed and patented a unique and relatively new family recreational and entertainment experience. Sky Zone's patented playing fields consist of hyper resillent trampolines interlocked together through a cabling system with padding covering the sea nis. Trampoline walls enclose the entire fields for safety. In addition, the ability to move vertically and laterally off the trampolines and walls adds a completely new dimension to any game or activity playable on a flat surface. SZRCs use the trampoline courts to provide services for individual play, group outings, corporate team building events, birthday parties, league play (Dodgeball, Volleyball, etc..), intramurals, youth group outings, aerobics fitness classes, charity events, individual and group cross training and more... Visit htto:J/skyzone.comlminneapolis. Sky Zone at its current location in Plymouth has been in operation since 2010and has 160 Sky Zones are open nationally and internationally, Facility: The facility will have a max "jumper" capacity of roughly 150 per hour. There will be about 270 sf of office space with the rest consisting of the trampoline courts, reception, locker, and changing areas as well as storage. Hours of Operation: SZRCs have two seasons of operating schedules Fall/Winter Season: January —May and September -December with operating flours Tuesday thru Thursday from 4-8pm and Friday hours of 12pm to 10pm, Saturday 10am-11pm, and Sunday 11am - 7prn. Summer Season: June - August operating Monday to Thursday from 11am-9 pm, Friday 11am-11:00pm, Saturday 10ar-n-12am, and Sunday 11am-7pm Sky Zone is open on most holidays except Easter, 4th of July, Thanksgiving and Christmas day. Since 9 months out of the year the SZRC will be operating mostly after 4pm on weekdays and peak customer traffic is during the weekend, prior experience has shown that other more industrial tenants are not adversely affected by Sky Zone's presence. Target Market: Because of the many uses of the trampoline courts, we provide services to people of all ages and physical abilities but primarily focus on the 19 and under age group. Open Jump is the primary service offered where individuals and groups come in to purchase 1 hour biotics of'jurnp time." The SZRC will have 2 event rooms for birthday parties or group/carporate events. Groups can rent court Business Description Document for City Planning/Zoning Initial Planning space and the event roonis. Other services targeted mainly towards the 19 and under crowd are 3D Dodgeba11, 3D Volleyball, and SkyRobics for Kids (a fitness class specifically designed for kids of all ages and abilities). NASA and The President's Council on Physical Fitness both determined trampoline fitness, called "rebounding" is one of the most effective and beneficial forms of exercise. Some products tailored more towards adults include the SkyRobics Fitness Classes designed around traditional aerobics classes but incorporating elements of Yoga as well as anaerobic exercises tailored to take advantage of the trampoline surfaces. Dodgeball tournaments for adults as well as corporate or group events are also tailored towards the adult market. Employees: The SZRC will have 3 salaried employees as well as about 40 to 50 hourly, full-time and part-time ernpfoyees. Typically, only about 2-3 employees will be operating the facility during the daytime hours during the week. On weekends, up to 15 employees can be required depending on scheduled events. Some job descriptions are: Building Service Manager —Salaried position responsible for all maintenance, repair, and operations of the trampoline courts and associated equipment. Event Coordinator — Salaried position responsible for outside sales and booking events. Event Asst. — hourly position assisting the Event Coordinator. Cashier-- hourly position operating cash drawers, checking in customers and operating concessions. Party Host — hourly position dedicated solely to hosting parties. Court Monitor — hourly position dedicated to maintaining safety rules on the courts. There is a minimum requirement of 1 court monitor for every 25 jumpers. SkyRobics Fitness Instructor — hourly position responsible for instructing the SkyRobics fitness classes. Since there is no certification for trampoline fitness, current instructors are either current or past certified personal trainers, certified aerobics instructors or hold or have held some other form of Fitness certification or are specifically trained and approved by Sky Zone to teach its trademarked SkyRobics class. Parking: One of the first issues that typically come up is parking accommodations. As previously mentioned, 9 months out of the year SZRCs are only open after 4prn on weekdays and 11am on Friday; our neighboring tenant closes at 4; 0pm during the week and is closed on the weekend. The majority of customer traffic (upwards of 90% of our business) occurs from Friday evening to Sunday evening when most adjacent tenants are closed for business. During summer months (June, July and August), hours of operation are extended to 11am; but, most significant customer traffic remains mostly an the weekends and evenings of weekdays. 2 Business Descriptic n Document for City Planning/Coning Initial Plann ng Section 21015 of the Plyrrrouth Zoning Ordinance: 1. Compliance with, and effect upon the Plymouth Comprehensive plan. The site proposed for Sky Zone is currently 1-2 and for the Comprehensive Plan for 2030 continues to be planned for Industrial. The establishment, maintenance or operation of this conditional use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and wiiI not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort. Safety for all customers, employees and neighboring tenants is of utmost concern for us_ We have taken every measure possible, and will continue to make safety a priority. 3. The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. Maintaining a fresh, clean, functional and attractive place of business is another high priority of Sky Zone. 4. The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district, s Sky Zone will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property. 5. Adequate measures have been, or will be, taken to provide ingress, egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in public streets. ® Sky Zone has been, and will continue to work with the landlord on such matters. 6. The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in whicli it is located, 0 Confo rrn ing to codes and regulations is the area will be kept at all times. 7. The conditional use complies with the general and specific performance standards as specified by Section 21015 and the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance, Again, Sky Zone will corn ply with the general and specific performance standards as written by the City of Plymouth. 3 JMnLLtvd3a JA7;vdal3n3o At3rlrY,Yl:,.. MrIOArLd JO AitU N ------------ -- - f xa a !OA O7 R. F-HAS, !� - HM wg��$ .-a ^J h Vii c!i G h�cv�a 0 V'1 n N �0 � N ❑ W O Z Z Ii II it � � W o � [li u9 V/ N < v rnOJO `1 0 .n n II II !I II Q .J .-a �0 ❑ W Z Z � W D [li u9 V/ N v rnOJO `1 M 6 N N .n n II II !I II r"1 W .JCF"3F- r .-a C" 4F FYMQUTH 2 1 _< o Q J IL J Q = U)0 Z ❑ W K ` 2 J W or �C() J rr- W m Ln 0 C) 7m- 0 P w Z191 70Z8 PARKING CONCEPT A fl7 C.C.1•A'�H:T G414 PARCRYa - 8' YL e'ALLB PARKING PLAN CONCEPT A COMM- 02017,229.0 � Oarc: 03.01.2017 nn PARKING COUNT: IYe tm) E C E VE Compact: [D]) 1 HC Stalls: [03)Vn Regular stalls: ff2l APR —3 20 Total: (62) cm o> a«lany carrrtuorrrnEve_t>�rrr❑�eerrr - Site Plan Key: Skyxnne Trampoline Park I,rralBA4aa+gni BY 111,11hCUSHMAN Plymouth Industrial Park A NorthMnrq nm ra.c .a. 4 ;suai 1005 Berkshire Lane North "M na�.�.rrn v4:sr w?. Plymouth, NIN 55441 R"IngiMLA41759111 PARKING CONCEPT B ZGi-7p2O PARKING PLAN CONCEPT B Scale: 1" -4& -0 - Comm. #2017.229.0 VAlt, 03-01.2017 PARKING CDUNT: (Yellow) Compact Stoll$: (10) HIC Stalls: [03] Regular Slalls:S�1 , Total: (0) EOEIVE APR -3Ulr � F. oouutrvm oarlterr orsxnrMe+rr I Ili li r .......... ..... ...... Site Plan Key: Skyaane Trampoline Park I,rc� 6Afenegnd ax K AMANA ttli1� Y W�sFtt:La Plymouth Industrial Park A tGythlbmA =��lt, „votes. w.sax. wo 1005 Berkshire Lit ne No rt III ... Plymouth, p!N 55441 Sa;urlm Skaminglm,.5LS S5Cii Agenda Number File 2017022 7A PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF REPORT TO: Plymouth PIanning Commission FROM: Marie Darling, Senior Planner (509-5457) through Barbara Thomson Planning Manager MEETING DATE: April 19, 2017 APPLICANT: Matthew Durm PROPOSAL: Variances to allow a second accessory building over 120 square feet in area and 28 feet in height LOCATION: 4130 Juneau Lane North GUIDING: LA -1 (living area 1) ZONING: RSF-1 (single family detached 1) REVIEW DEADLINE: June 29, 2017 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting variances to allow two detached accessory buildings over 120 square feet to remain on the property where the zoning ordinance allows only one and to allow the second detached accessory building to remain at 28 feet in height where the zoning ordinance lim=its the height of accessory buildings over 120 square feet to 15 feet. The applicant constructed the accessory building without a permit after calling the city to ask if a treehouse required a permit. The city was notified about the construction of the building by complaint. Approval of the variances would allow the applicant to keep the second accessory building, and denial of the request would require removal. 2017022 Page 2 Notice of the public meeting was mailed to all property owners within 200 feet of the site. A copy of the notification area map is attached. CONTEXT: Surroundinia Land Uses Adjacent Land Use Guiding Zoning North, East, South Single-family homes LA -1 RSF-i Northeast, West Single-family homes _ LA -1 _ RSF-2 Natural Characteristics of Site The lot is located in the Bassett Creek watershed. The property contains a low -quality wetland on the west side of the home, but no impact is proposed. The property is not located in a shoreland or floodplain overlay district. Although the site contains mature trees, the request is not subject to tree preservation. No tree removal is proposed. Previous Actions Affecting Site The home was built in 1977. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The city's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposal meets the standards for a variance. The city has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the burden of proof is on the applicant to show that they meet the standards for a variance. ANALYSIS OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting variances to allow two detached accessory buildings over 120 square feet to remain on the property where the zoning ordinance allows only one and to allow the second detached accessory building to remain at 28 feet in height where the zoning ordinance limits the height of accessory buildings over 120 square feet to 15 feet. Section 21005.02 of the zoning ordinance defines accessory building, structure, or use as, "a subordinate building, structure, or use which is located on the same lot on which the principal building or use is situated and which is reasonably necessary, appropriate and incidental to the conduct of the primary use of such building or main use. Accessory buildings or structures may be attached to or detached from the principal building, and typically include (but are not limited to) garages, shed, storage or workshop areas, docks, gazebos, and the like." Sections 21120 and 21355.13 of the zoning ordinance allows only one accessory building to contain greater than 120 square feet in area. Additionally, accessory structures over 120 square 2017422 Page 3 feet are limited to 15 feet in height. Section 21120 of the zoning ordinance also requires the applicant to design accessory structures with colors complementary to the principal structure. The initial accessory building on the property was a 400 square foot garage. The subject accessory building, including the main level, Ioft and screened porch, is roughly 400 square feet in area. The building platform is approximately I l feet above grade. The total height of the building is 28 feet. Staff reviewed the request according to the standards listed in section 21030 of the zoning ordinance and has made the following findings: The applicant has indicated that he constructed the accessory building for private recreation and relaxation and that he would not use the structure as a separate dwelling. Consequently, the property would remain residential in character, which would be consistent with the residential uses listed for this land use classification in the comprehensive plan and the use of the property for a single-family home as prescribed in the RSF-1 zoning district. 2. The applicant has not established that there are practical difficulties in complying with the Chapter. For an applicant to establish practical difficulties, they must establish the following: a. The applicant proposes -to use the property in a reasonable maruner not permitted by the Chapter. The applicant has proposed a second accessory building over I20 square feet ori a 3.5 -acre property. Based on the size of the property, a second accessory building of larger size could be a reasonable use of the property, b. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property that were not created by the landowner. The applicant has not demonstrated any circumstances unique to the property. The applicant would have the option of reducing or eliminating the request for the height variance by placing the platform on the ground and altering the roof/loft area. c. The variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the locality. The accessory building is taller than typical accessory buildings found in suburban neighborhoods. Iri addition, it is not painted in colors complementary to the principal structure. 3. The purpose for the variations is not based exclusively on economic considerations, but rather the variances are requested to provide an accessory building for the private use and enjoyment of the applicant and an outdoor structure free of insects. 4. Granting the variance could be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood due to its height. The accessory building is 28 feet tall where other detached accessory buildings over 120 square feet are limited to 15 feet in height. In addition, the accessory building is visible from adjacent properties six to seven months out of the year (in leaf -off conditions). The accessory building is set back about 96 feet from the south property line and about the same fi-om the north property line. Consequently, it would not impair an adequate supply of light or air to adjacent properties. As the building is not intended to be a separate dwelling, it would not substantially increase traffic congestion or otherwise endanger public safety or 2017422 Page 4 substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood. Staff finds the danger to fire is similar to other accessory buildings, as long as the applicant would be able to provide electrical service to the structure consistent with the state electrical code. 6. The variance requested is not the minimum action necessary to alleviate the practical difficulty as no practical difficulties have been established. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the request for variances to allow a second accessory building to remain on the property, based on the findings in the attached resolution. As the variance standards are open to interpretation and the PIanning Commission could reasonably disagree. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Resolution Denying the Variance 2. Correspondence Received 3. Variance Standards 4. Location Map 5. Aerial Photo 6. Notification Area Map 7. Applicant's Narrative and Graphics 8. Site Photos f :NpkIHuan(ApMrcA1P-6WUl AM 7U7? ifunn Ircpnausr' Vp+n[amm Oerly[ $off 9eRar[-&vx CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION 2017- A RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST FOR VARIANCES FOR AN ACCESSORY BUILDING AT 4130 JUNEAU LANE (2017022) WHEREAS, Matthew Dunn has applied for variances to allow a second accessory building over 120 square feet in area and 28 feet in height to remain an the site where only one is allowed at a maximum height of 15 feet. WHEREAS, the property is legally described as follows: The south 247.30 feet front and rear of the north 741.90 feet front and rear of the west % for the southeast X of the northeast Y of Section 16, Township 118, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Subject to an easement for Juneau Lane. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the application at a duly called public meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA that it denies the request forvariances for a second accessory building over 120 square feet in area and 28 feet in height, based on the following findings: 1. The subject property is guided LA -1 on the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan. 2. The subject property is zoned RSF-1 on the Plymouth Zoning Map. 3. The applicant has not shown that there are practical difficulties in complying with the Chapter as: 1) there are no circumstances unique to the property; 2) the height of the structure is out of character with typical accessory buildings in suburban neighborhoods; and 3) the applicant can reduce or eliminate the request for the variance to maximum height by placing the platform on the ground and altering the roof/loft area, 4. The variances could be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood as it is taller than allowed by the current regulations, and is visible from the adjacent properties in leaf -off conditions. S. The applicant's current use of the property for a home with one detached accessory building provides a reasonable use of the property. ADOPTED by the Plymouth City Council on this xxt" day of xx, 2017. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 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 xx, 2017 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 .2017. City Clerk ,207tld,;� In Early June 2016 1 placed a phone to call to the city of Plymouth to inquire about any information or permits necessary to build a tree house (See conversation below). At the time I was told no permit was needed for a treehouse, and upon my final question of if there were any other details that could be thought of, was told, "no". After 5 months of construction, and completion of the treehouse, a complaint was placed by a neighbor concerned that I would be using the treehouse for rental purposes. The treehouse however was constructed for play and relaxation purposes only, and a way to enjoy the beauty of the private tot without the nuisance of bugs (screen porch). Upon city inspection, I was told what I built did need a permit as it was too many square feet and too tall, despite not having any information regarding size and height for treehouses on the City of Plymouth's web site, nor staff providing me with that information upon my initial phone call. The city is now requesting I get a variance for the treehouses height and to have a second "accessory structure" over 120 square feet. I. The structure was constructed for allay and relaxation. There was and is no intent for it to be a second living area or rental. 2. during early June 2016 1 began my plans for the treehouse 1 constructed. I first began by visiting the city of Plymouth's website looking for any information, such as permits required for such a project. I also researched the city building codes. I was unable to find any information regarding treehouses. I later called the main city number and asked to speak with someone in the building permit department and was connected to Dan Wallin. The following is the conversation we had. Dunn — Hello, I was calling to find out if I need a permit to build a tree house? Wallin -- No Dunn — Ok, So nothing needed for building a treehouse? Wallin -- That's correct Dunn — Ok. Anything else you can think of that I might need to know? Wallin — Well, I can think of one time where perhaps someone built a treehouse with a tree that bordered a neighbor, and the house crossed over the property line. Make sure your treehouse would not hang over anyone's yard. I can also think of another time where perhaps the treehouse looked directly into someone's bedroom window. Make sure it does not do that. Other than that, No. Dunn — Alright. Very good. I don't see any of that being a problem, 5o, Thank you very much. Wallin — Have a nice day After the construction it was brought to my attention by the city that the treehouse does not meet their definition of a treehouse "A small house built among the branches of a tree." (Produced from Webster dictionary). This definition was never provided to me, nor was it listed on the cities web site (and still is not), nor is it in the cities code book. Therefore, I am requesting a variance for the following issues, Leight and to have another "accessory structure" over 120 square feet. (A detached garage already exists.) It should be noted that Frank Rondoni, Golden Valley City Prosecutor of Chestnut Cambronne, provided ample evidence to the City of Plymouth indicating that this is indeed a treehouse and NOT an accessory structure. Plymouth City Attorney Elliott Knetsch declined to directly respond to the Plymouth code provided to him by Rondoni, and instead responded with, "I have drafted a formal complaint and intent to file it shortly." Knetsch had been contacted prior to this by myself where ! asked, how in any way I could amend the treehouse to meet the tithes definition of a treehouse, his response was, "You can tear it down." From the beginning of construction, until now, I am wanting and willing to do whatever 4 can to follow the ru#es. i greatly appreciate your consideration for this variance. 3. The reason for creating this treehouse was not only for play and relaxation but it also provides the only insect free zone anywhere on the property. The treehouse has a screen porch and will be used to enjoy summer days without the nuisance of insects. 4. The treehouse will not be detrimental to the public welfare, nor be injurious to other land or improvements in the neihborhood. 5. The property is 3.5 acres. The treehouse is nestled in the center of the backyard surrounded by trees and far from neighbors. The treehouse also received a 3 color paint treatment using colors from the bark of adjacent trees. It blends in beautifully. It will not impair an adequate supply of light to adjacent properties, nor will it increase traffic congestion in public streets, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood. 6. The variance requested is the minimum action required to address or alleviate the practical difficulties �-.I Ili QUI 7-C1d �`� T U�t �1 ] i rr �a 1551 f� i2 J UYIl7 5 /400 II aI tlirT// e• ILP I- C: I y Duane and Beverly Delke 4145 Glacier Ln. No. - Plymouth, MN MN 55446 t:_ I VED T 112017 Alyn, 001 y ee m rp) Plymouth t Adding Quality to Life Community Development Department 3400 Plymouth Boulevard Plymouth, MN 55447 (763)509-5450 FAX (763) 509-5407 ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE STANDARDS The City Council or Zoning Administrator may approve a variance application (major or minor, respectively) only upon finding that all of the following criteria, as applicable, have been met: 1. The variance, and its resulting construction or project, would be in harmony with the general purposes--and-intent--ofthis Chapter, and would--be--consistent with -the comprehensive plan. 2. The variance applicant has satisfactorily established that there are practical difficulties in complying with this Chapter. "Practical difficulties" means that: a. the applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Chapter; b. the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property that were not created by the landowner; and c. the variance, if granted, would not alter the essential character of the locality. 3. The variance request is not based exclusively upon economic considerations. 4. The variance, and its resulting construction or project, would not be detrimental to the public welfare, nor would it be inju.:ous to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. S. The variance, and its resulting construction or project, would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, nor would it substantially increase traffic congestion in public streets, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish property values within the neighborhood. G. The variance requested is the minimum action required to address or alleviate the practical difficulties. Section 21030 -Plymouth Zoning Ordinance Forms: Wvariancestds.docx ■ M:kraw.!mo lylum"! '01 1 2077022 -- Aerial Photo r;bcity of Plymouth, Minnesota 300 150 0 300 600 RM 1 Feet Notification Area Map Hennepin County Locate & Notify Map Provided By: Resident and Real Estate Services Date: 1/31/2017 -- m (41 {7g} f�1 mY �Y r� 0) (3) 1751 574) 16-118-22-12 16-118-22-11 1101 '�-S f y� �i. ;��.I l;• {91 � CM r f�i f l98} g91 {1 107 - - (2) 16-118-22-13 16-118-22-14 { „ (40 0) 04) rn}_ Im �] {241 {51 I5] (T} 16-118-22 3 [59} ` ) "1 16-198-22-14 f291 =1 venue Nort t SBi {f] 14) Im {-r. r�+i Cffi1 L J 16-118-22-13 16-118-22-14 _5 fi5} It41 Buffer Size: 200 feet Map Comments: MATTHEW DUNN 4130 Juneau Lane North Plymouth, MN 55446 0 60 120 240 rt For more information contact Hennepin County GIS Office 300 6th Street South Minneapolis, MN 55487 gis.info@hennepin.us � f n zz 2f s•. `y� a5 3N E o � � l c c � r y O 1 11 1 N w p d ` �1 J i =� .t Uji 4z r < �7 a � E o � � l c c � O y O 1 11 1 N w p d ` �1 J f =� .t Uji 4z r < 1 a � V b h L ; =i � . J c t - r {r, 9A. D S a[vl• C C �1 D 3N v-7 '-:7IVs/`'. - • GE � G� - 41 rl le CA - d6 '1 �1 • • _ _ 9 n LJ c c y 1 11 1 N w p d ` �1 J o L m a Uji < L ; c t - r9 ] R• rf Y .- r T 47 u d E y x J K iqr •- �•{ v = - i F f r � . �j jlrl �C j -]NU2F�u 4' r00, ■ r 000 10 -•. � r _ � � '� � � � inti,, r { R ,+r...,, �I r•i. 'tYv " % r'f'r� I •�I t A A wl'c �. �iF �y11, 1p iL Aw