HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 01-22-199211040
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: January 9, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: January 22, 1992
FILE NO.: 91106
PETITIONER: Craig and Gary Scherber
REQUEST: Planned Unit Development Concept Plan, Preliminary
Plan /Plat, Conditional Use Permit, and Rezoning of a 47.24
acre site for a 63 lot single family Residential Planned
Unit Development
LOCATION: Southwest quadrant of Rockford Road and Dunkirk Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development District)
BACKGROUND:
There are no Community Development activity files for this tract of land.
Notice of this Public Hearing was published in the Official City Newspaper and
has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. A development sign
has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The Concept Plan presented provides for 30.15 acres of Low Density
Residential land located south of County Road 9, and 11.6 acres proposed
for park dedication, of which 1.9 acres is above the Ordinary High Water
elevation of Plymouth Creek and 9.7 acres is wetland. An additional 5.49
acres is proposed for City street right -of -way dedication. An average lot
size of 20,848 square feet is proposed with 18 of 63 lots under 18,500
square feet. No lot is proposed less than 14,200 square feet in area.
2. This site is located in the Bassett Creek Storm Water Drainage District;
contains storm water holding areas required by the City of Plymouth (pond
BC -P4); contains Shoreland Management area; contains land within the Flood
Plain Overlay Zoning District; contains wetlands regulated by both State
and Federal regulations; contains woodlands of significant stature as
defined by the Physical Constraints Analysis; contains some slopes greater
than 12 percent; and contains land which has physical constraints to urban
development even with public sewers.
3. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the
Concept Plan and Plat due to its location in the Shoreland Overlay
District. DNR comments on the plat are technical in nature and do not
affect plat design.
4. Three public street access points are proposed into this site. One is
proposed as a cul -de -sac extending south from Rockford Road; another
proposed access will connect to future residential development on the
south; and, a third will be the primary access point to Dunkirk Lane from
this subdivision.
5. Gross density calculations include all land that is above the high water
elevation established by the adopted Storm Water Drainage Plan. Street
right -of -way is counted in the gross density for the site.
Existing Single Family Existing
Conditions Detached Park Row Total
Gross Area (Acres) 35.3 11.6 0.34 47.24
Area Below 991.5 4.3 8.5 0 12.8
Flood Plain (Acres)
NET AREA (ACRES) 31.0 3.1 0.34 34.44
6. The applicant is not proposing PUD bonus points for this project. A total
of 63 lots are proposed for this subdivision. Without bonus points, the
maximum number of units allowed on this site is 69.
2 units per net acre x 34.44 acres = 68.8
7. The PUD Plan proposes dimensional standards varying from Zoning Ordinance
Standards for a R -1A zoning classification as follow:
a. Minimum side yard setback of 10 feet versus the Ordinance standard of
15 feet.
b. A minimum front lot width of 95 feet versus the Ordinance standard of
110 feet.
c. A minimum lot size of 14,200 square feet versus the Ordinance standard
of 18,500.
8. The petitioner is proposing to dedicate 11.6 acres for park purposes.
Park dedication fee credit will be given to the 1.9 acres of trail
corridor that is land above the Ordinary High Water level. The Director
of Parks and Recreation recommends the City accept title to the 9.7 acres
of wetland but that no park dedication credit for those wetlands be
assigned.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. CONCEPT PLAN
a. The relationship of the proposal to the surrounding neighborhood. The
PUD Concept Plan proposes uses that are consistent with the proposed
uses of the surrounding land. The guiding for the property on the
north, south and west sides is LA -1. The guiding on the east is LA -1
and Public- Semi - Public.
b. Compliance with City Ordinances and the Comprehensive Plan. The
proposed PUD Concept Pan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
with respect to land use guiding for low density residential uses. dt
is not however consistent with the Thoroughfare Guide Plan. Holly Lane
is proposed to be a major collector extending along the western
boundary of this site. This proposal does not provide for the
extension of Holly Lane.
2. PUD PRELIMINARY PLAN /PLAT /CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
a. We find the PUD Preliminary Plan /Plat /Conditional Use Permit to
present a positive relationship to the expected land uses in this
area and to the other provisions in the Zoning Ordinance except as
noted below.
b. We find the internal organization of the proposal as acceptable. The
proposed platting of this subdivision is consistent with Planned Unit
Development subdivisions approved recently in terms of dimensional
standards for side yard setbacks, lot widths and lot sizes. The
dimensional standards should not be reduced further.
C. Although the Thoroughfare Plan shows a north -south major collector
along the west side of this property, the likelihood that this road
could be extended across the protected wetland is remote. The
proposal not to extend Holly Lane as major collector is reasonable
based on the wetland situation in this area of the City.
An alternative to constructing Holly Lane as a major collector is to
use Dunkirk Lane as a major collector. If this option is used, 80
feet of right -of -way (40 feet from the center line) will be required
to have Dunkirk Lane functions as a major collector. A 90 degree
link to Holly Lane north of Rockford Road will be provided via
Rockford Road.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for the
approval of a RPUD Concept Plan; RPUD Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional
Use Permit in accordance with the attached resolutions. I also recommend
approval of the proposed Ordinance rezoning of this site from the FRD Zoning
District to be consistent with the Land Use Guide Plan.
Submitted by:
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution Approving RPUD Concept Plan
2. Draft Resolution Approving RPUD Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use
Permit
3. Ordinance Rezoning Land from FRD to R -1A
4. Engineer's Memo
5. PUD Attributes
6. Location Map
7. Large Plans
8. Petitioner's Study
APPROVING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN FOR CRAIG AND GARY
SCHERBER FOR HOLLY CREEK LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF ROCKFORD ROAD
AND DUNKIRK LANE (91106)
WHEREAS, Craig and Gary Scherber have requested approval of a Residential
Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for the development of approximately
47.24 acres located in the southwest quadrant of Rockford Road and Dunkirk
Lane; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request at a duly called
Public Informational Hearing and has recommended 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 Residential
Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for the development of approximately
47.24 acres located in the southwest quadrant of Rockford Road and Dunkirk
Lane, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Staging of the development shall be in accc,dance with utility
availability as approved by the City Engineer.
3. All public street right -of -way shall be dedicated.
4. The maximum number of dwelling units approved is 63 with zero bonus points
assigned.
res /pc /91106.cp)
APPROVING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN /PLAT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR CRAIG AND GARY SCHERBER FOR HOLLY CREEK LOCATED IN
THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF ROCKFORD ROAD AND DUNKIRK LANE (91106)
WHEREAS, Craig and Gary Scherber have requested approval for a Residential
Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit for
property located in the southwest quadrant of Rockford Road and Dunkirk Lane;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by
Craig and Gary Scherber for a Residential Planned Unit Development Preliminary
Plan /Plat and Conditional Use permit for property located in the southwest
quadrant of Rockford Road and Dunkirk Lane, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's
expense.
3. No building permits shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for
sewer and water.
4. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication with appropriate
credits in an amount determined according to verified acreage and trail
paving costs and according to the Dedication Policy in effect at the time
of filing the Final Plat with Hennepin County.
5. Street names shall comply with the City Street Naming System.
6. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures in subdivisions adjacent to, or containing any open
storm water drainage facility.
7. Rezoning shall be finalized with the filing of the Final Plat.
8. No building permits shall be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
9. Private drive access shall be limited to internal public roads and
restricted from Rockford Road and Dunkirk Lane.
10. Transitional screening and berming shall be provided along Rockford Road
and Dunkirk Lane.
11. Final Plat mylars shall refer to RPUD 92 -1.
12. The minimum side setback shall be 10 feet; the minimum rear setback shall
be 25 feet; and the minimum front setback shall be 35 feet.
13. The minimum lot width shall be 95 feet.
14. Compliance with the terms of City Council Resolution 89 -439 regarding tree
preservation.
res /pc /91106.pp)
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO CLASSIFY CERTAIN LANDS LOCATED
AT THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT FO ROCKFORD ROAD AND DUNKIRK LANE FROM FRD TO R -1A
91106)
Section 1. Amendment of Ordinance. Ordinance No. 80 -9 of the City of
Plymouth, Minnesota, adopted June 15, 1980 as amended, is hereby amended by
changing the classification on the City of Plymouth Zoning Map from FRD
Future Restricted Development) to R -1A (Low Density Single Family
Residential) District with respect to the hereinafter described property:
Insert Legal)
Section 2. General Development Plan. This Ordinance authorizes the
development of said tracts only in accordance with the Plan approved for the
File No. 91106.
Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon filing
the Final Plat with Hennepin County and upon its passage and publication.
Adopted by the City Council day of .
Mayor
ATTEST
City Clerk
File 91106
ord /pc /91106)
DATE:
FILE NO.:
PETITIONER:
PRELIMINARY PLAT:
LOCATION:
N/A Yes No
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
January 13, 1992
91106
Craig Scherber and Gary Scherber, P.O. Box 181, Rogers, MN 55374
HOLLY CREEK
South of County Road 9, west of Dunkirk Lane in the Northwest 1/4
of Section 17
1. _ X _ Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _ X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No. 1 and
No. 2•
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of final plat approval.
4. Area assessments: N=
5. Other additional assessments estimated: The developer is responsible
for the cost of concrete curb an"utter along County Road 9. This
cost estimated to be 854 feet x S8 a foot - S6.832 also. Dunkirk
Lane, one -half the cost of a 36 foot wide street: this cost is
estimated to be 979 feet a S65 a foot - S63.635.
N/A Yes No
6. _ _ X Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The City will require utility and drainage easements ten feet (101)
in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in width adjoining
side and rear lot lines.
N/A Yes No
7. X All standard utility easements required for construction are provided
The City will require twenty foot (20') utility and drainage
easements for proposed utilities along the lot lines where these
utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has been reviewed
with the final plat and final construction plans.
8. _ _ X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's comprehensive
storm water drainage plan.
9. X _ _ All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way to
facilitate the development. This is not an automatic process in
conjunction with the platting process. It is the owner's
responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal descriptions of
easements proposed to be vacated.
10. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application - If it is subsequently determined that
the subject property is abstract property, then this requirement does
not apply.
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
11. _ _ X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
X DNR
MnDOT
X Hennepin County
X MPCA
X State Health Department
X Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
X Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
2 -
0
Li: "041
N/A Yes No
12. _ _ X Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to the
City grid system for street names. The following changes will be
necessary. Garland Lane shall be renamed Fountain Lane, Holly Lane
shall be renamed Garland Lane, 40th Avenue North shall be renamed
40th Place between Lot 1 and the curve on Lot 11, Block 3 and from
that point north to 41st Avenue North it shall be renamed Everest
Lane.
13. _ X _ Conforms with the City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan -
The following revisions must be made to conform with the City's
adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan.
14. _ _ X Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
Fountain Lane on County Road 9
15. _ _ X All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required: seven additional feet will
be required for County Road 9 and Dunkirk Lane each making the total
from centerline 40 feet.
N/A Yes No
16. _ X Conforms with City standards requiring the developer to construct
utilities necessary to serve this plat -
In accordance with City standards, the developer shall be responsible
for constructing the necessary sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer and
streets needed to serve this plat. A registered professional
engineer must prepare the plans and profiles of the proposed sanitary
sewer, watermain, storm sewer facilities and streets to serve the
development. See Special Conditions.
MM
N/A Yes No
17. _ _ X Preliminary utility plans submitted comply with all City requirements
The developer has submitted the required preliminary plans for the
proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities. See
Special Conditions.
0
18. _ _ X Per developer's request a preliminary report and plan will be
prepared by the City -
If it is their desire to have the City construct these facilities as
part of its Capital Improvements Program, a petition must be
submitted to the City. The cutoff date for petitions is October 1,
of the year preceding construction. The developer shall petition the
19. _ X _ Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots. As noted in the preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan.
N/A Yes No
20. _ X _ The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
21. X _ The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
4 -
Iq
22. _ XX _ It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's utility
foreman, 24 hours in advance of making any proposed utility
connections to the City's sanitary sewer and water systems. The
developer shall also be responsible for contacting Jim Kolstad of the
Public Works Department for an excavating permit prior to any digging
within the City right -of -way. All water connections shall be via
wet tap.
23. _ _ X Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been submitted to
the City's Consulting Engineer for review to see if it is in
conformance with the City's Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All
of their recommendations shall be incorporated in a revised plan.
The grading and drainage plan shall also indicate proposed methods of
erosion control, including the placement of silt fence in strategic
locations. Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary:
Shall comply with all agency requirements.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
24. A. Except for the lots having access to County Road 9, a final plat will not be
considered for the lots accessing Dunkirk Lane until a contract has been
awarded for improvements to Dunkirk Lane.
B. The radius to the back of curb for the cul -de -sacs is 41 feet.
C. If any grading is to take place out of a plat boundary, easements from adjacent
property owners will be required.
D. Additional catch basins may be required at intersections.
E. The invert of the culvert under Dunkirk Lane must be provided so that the trail
elevation over the control structure can be set accordingly.
F. Elevations within Pond BC -P4 within the plat boundaries shall be field verified
to assure the required storage for 100 year elevation is provided.
G. The storm sewer on County Road 9 and the outlet to the pond is identified as
CMP. RCP shall be used for all pipe including culverts.
H. A CUP will be required for filling in the "flood fringe ".
I. On the three wetlands not controlled by the DNR, provide all necessary
information for the City to administer any proposed encroachment or determine
an exemption in accordance with the interim program for wetlands under Wetland
Conservation Act of 1991. Any mitigation plan for encroachment will need City
Council approval .
swim
J. An emergency overflow swale shall be provided along the east property line of
Block 5, 1 foot below any door or window openings.
Submitted by: O
Daniel L. Faulkner, .E.
City Engineer
4
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
P.U.D. CRITERIA
The Planning Commission, after holding the public hearing, shall make its
recommendations to the City Council for approval; approval with conditions;
or denial of the Conditional Use Permit for a P.U.D., preliminary plat and
rezoning if considered.
The Planning Commission shall forward to the City Council its recommendations
based on and including, but not limited to the following:
1) Compatibility with the stated purposes and intent of the Planned Unit
Development.
2) Relationship of the proposed plan to the neighborhood in which it is
proposed to be located, to the City's Comprehensive Plan and to other
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3) Internal organization and adequacy of various uses or densities;
circulation and parking facilities; recreation areas and open spaces.
conventions:pl /jk /pud)
AGA MAP
L \
PLYMOUTH CREEK
SCHOOL
Il
MINN
q, 6.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: January 9, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: January 22, 1992
FILE NO.: 91108
PETITIONER: Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.
REQUEST: Land Use Guide Plan Amendment to reclassify approximately
24 acres from CL (Limited Business) to CR -2 (Retail
Shopping) for Wal -Mart Store
LOCATION: Northwest corner of Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CL (Limited Business)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development District)
BACKGROUND:
On May 21, 1991, the
Guide Plan Amendment I
That Land Use Guide
Limited Business) to
based in part on the
would have a negative
City.
City Council, by Resolution 91 -280 denied a Land Use
or Harstad and Forbragd Company for Sugar Hills (90109).
Plan Amendment proposed reguiding this site from CL
LA -2 (Low Medium Density Residential). The denial was
finding that reguiding this site for residential uses
fiscal impact on future residential development in the
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the Official City
Newspaper, and all property owners within 500 feet have been notified. A
development sign has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. This Land Use Guide Plan Amendment is to reclassify approximately 24 acres
from CL (Limited Business) to CR -2 (Retail Shopping). This request is for
a Land Use Guide Plan reclassification only and does not include a Site
Plan application. The Site Plan submitted-Ty the petitioner is in support
of the Land Use Guide Plan reclassification request. No additional
applications (such as platting or a Site Plan) have been made at this
time. Since land use is the basic issue, staff generally supports
resolution of that issue prior to consideration of the more mechanical
issues of platting and site design - -as has been the case here. In
analyzing this request, what is to be considered is what could be proposed
under the CR -2 guiding generically, and not a user specific request.
2. This site is located within the Gleason Lake Drainage District; contains
no land within the Flood Plain Overlay District; contains no land within
the Shoreland Overlay District, or Department of Natural Resources
protected wetlands.
1 -
New state wetland protection statutes effectively broaden the scope of
wetland that is subject to protection at least during an 18 month study
period beginning January 1, 1992. It appears that a significant portion
of this site is wetland, subject to this broadened protection by state
mandate but - local administration.
The site does not contain City of Plymouth ponding. This site does
however, contain Corps of Engineers designated wetlands and significant
woodlands of mature oak and maple. The site does not contain areas of
significant slopes in excess of 12 percent. Nearly 40% of the site
exhibits physical constraints to urban development. Public utilities are
available to the majority of the site at this time.
3. The north line of the proposed reguiding is also the location of the
proposed extension of 36th Avenue North. During the review of the "Sugar
Hills" proposal (90109), the City Council found that a Land Use Guide Plan
boundary could be tied with the location of 36th Avenue North as depicted
on the graphics and description of this application.
4. The Land Use Guide Plan Amendment checklist requires both the petitioner
and staff to review the proposal regarding specific topics. The
petitioner's response is included in their attached booklet. Staff's
response is found under the comment section of this report. A copy of the
checklist is also attached to this report.
5. The applicant, in a booklet dated January 9, 1992, presents testimony and
research from marketing and fiscal consultants in support of their
proposal. Generally, the focus of the applicant's presentation addresses
four areas:
a. That the site is not developable during the foreseeable future as an
office site ".
b. That no other site exists within Plymouth of sufficient size (18
acres) to accommodate the specific end user (Wal- Mart).
c. That a specific end user (Wal -Mart) will both prove to be a marketing
magnet for the "Plymouth Hills Development" to the east, and, has a
track record of good corporate citizenship.
d. Fiscal advantages will accrue to the City of Plymouth from the retail
classification of this site versus the current Limited Commercial
classification.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. Approximately 40 percent of this site is covered by wetlands, woodlands or
contains slopes over 10 percent. Since these natural features are spread
throughout the site, any large scale development will result in the loss
of at least a orptionofthesesignificantnaturalfeatures. It is
reasonable to suggest which land use classification would encourage a site
plan design that could take advantage of the physical features with the
least amount of loss of these site natural resources.
Although the land use classification does not ensure quality development,
we find that uses allowed in CL (Limited Commercial) land use
2 -
classification property have characteristics that can be more compatible
with the natural environment than those uses allowed in CR -2 guided
property. Office buildings are more likely to be multi -story than retail
producing less ground coverage); tend the accommodate more varied parking
arrangements than retail uses; and, do not rely as extensively on highway
visibility as retail uses.
On January 1, 1992, the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 Interim Program
went into effect. This program requires a 1 for 1 replacement of all
disturbed wetlands. Any development of this site will be required to meet
the new, regulations and to replace any loss of wetlands. Again, uses
allowed under CL land use classification can respond to these new
regulations through design options that are not generally used in the
design of uses allowed under CR -2 land use classification.
2. Staff analysis and findings per the application checklist for Land Use
Guide Plan Amendments are as follows:
a. Is the locational criteria of both the existing and proposed
classifications satisfied by the specific site? The existing
classification CL Limited Business meets the ocational criteria
set forth in the Land Use Guide Plan. The proposed classification of
CR -2 (Retail Shopping) also meets the locational criteria found in
the Land Use Guide Plan regarding adjacency to arterial streets, but
does not meet the criteria regarding adjacency to Low Density
Residential. The Land Use Guide Plan states that CR -2 property
should not be adjacent to low density residential property. This
proposal would place CR -2 property adjacent to low density
residential property guided LA -2, noting only that a "4 lane road"
and future Site Plan mitigation will serve as transition. The road
36th Avenue North) will likely not be 4 lane and future Site Plan
mitigation is only speculation at this time.
b. Can the site be reasonably developed under the current
classification? The area proposed for reclassification from CL to
CR -2 could be reasonably developed under the existing classification.
The applicant states that development is not foreseen in the near
future for the portion of the site currently CL due to the oversupply
of existing office space. Although there may be a current oversupply
of office space, the Land Use Guide Plan should not be amended in
response to the swings of the real estate market. The classification
on this site should be based on its relationship to surrounding
property and physical features of the site, and not based on the
timing of development economics.
Uses allowed by right under CL guiding (B -1 zoning) include: medical
offices, financial institutions, and personal services such as beauty
shops. Uses allowed with a Conditional Use Permit include: nursing
homes, motels and Class I restaurants. Office use is not the only
possibility with CL Land Use Classification.
Uses allowed by right under CR -2 guiding (B -2 zoning) include:
laundries, retail shops and stores and off -sale liquor stores. Uses
allowed with a Conditional Use Permit include: bowling alleys,
sports and fitness centers and Class II restaurants. These all must
3 -
be considered equally possible
approved.
C. Is there a lack of developable p
that which is being proposed?
located in Plymouth. The Land
supply of CR -2. Staff is not
lack of shopping opportunities.
should a CR -2 classification be
erty in the same classification as
There is vacant property guided CR -2
Use Guide Plan assumes an adequate
routinely advised by residents of a
Owners of sites currently classified CR -2 made investments relying on
the Land Use Guide Plan. This may negatively impact those other CR -2
sites -- vacant and developed - simply on the basis of altering
supply /demand. Areas where vacant retail classification or PUD
assigned use remain include: east of Vicksburg Lane north of Highway
55 (Plymouth Hills PUD); Northwest Business Campus; Parkers Lake
North; and, Carlson Center (southwest quadrant of Carlson Parkway and
I -494 and southeast quadrant of Carlson Parkway and I -494).
d. Will other undevelo ed or develo ed ro ert in the classification
proposed for this site, be adversely affected by this action? This
Guide Plan change may negatively impact the vacant CR -2 guided
property and the redevelopment of previously developed CR -2 property
on Highway 55 east of I -494 due to increasing the supply of CR -2
guided property in Plymouth.
e. How does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of the
owner? This proposal does not appear to demonstrate merit beyond the
interests of the owner. The petitioner does not show how a
substantially increased supply of CR -2 guided property will benefit
the City of Plymouth if a large single user does not build on this
site.
f. How does the proposal demonstrate that the new classification would
be the highest and best use of the site? The petitioner is
addressing the issue of highest and best use primarily in terms of
the timing of development of this site. The Land Use Guide Plan is
not based on this premise, but on the relationship of the proposed
land uses to the neighboring properties, infrastructure provisions,
transportation needs, and the other elements of the Comprehensive
Plan. Staff does not find that the highest and best use for the site
should be exclusively determined on how quickly the site can be
developed.
g. What impact will the proposed change have upon the several
Comprehensive Plan Elements? The potential impact upon the several
elements of the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan has been reviewed during
the Development Review Committee process. No negative impacts have
been identified with respect to the sanitary sewer, storm drainage,
municipal water, capital improvement programs, official controls or
City parks /open space.
A potentially significant impact has been identified however, with
respect to the Transportation Plan. A traffic study has been
completed by the City Traffic Consultant, Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch,
addressing the Land Use Guide Plan Amendment. The study used a
Sly
412,000 square foot office project for the CL use and a 205,809
square foot retail use (the applicant's concept plan) for the CR -2
use analysis.
The traffic study found that the average daily trips would be
expected to increase substantially and the peak hour trips somewhat
as well as changing the peak hour from A.M. to P.M.) if the
classification is changed from CL to CR -2.
Average Daily Traffic
Peak Hour Traffic
Proposed CR -2
15,296
690
p.m. peak)
Existing CL
4,092
539
a.m. peak)
The petitioner's traffic study concludes that the average daily
traffic would rise from 4,797 trips under CL guiding to 7,380 trips
under CR -2 guiding. The petitioner's study is based on trips
generated per acre and Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch's study is based on trips
generated per square footage of building. (the standard used in all
City of Plymouth traffic forecasting)
The traffic study finds that the Guide Plan change could be supported
from a traffic perspective if traffic control improvements are
implemented to maintain the level of service currently proposed for
the area in Year 2010. The following excerpt is the traffic
improvement recommendations from the Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch study:
A future traffic control signal would be required at the
intersection of Vicksburg Lane and 36th Avenue North.
Dual left turn lanes would need to be added to the south bound
Vicksburg Lane approach to Highway 55 in order.to provide safe and
effective traffic operations.
The intersection geometrics and traffic control signal would need
to be revised at Vicksburg Lane and Highway 55 to accommodate the
above geometric improvements.
Who will pay for the traffic improvements recommended by Strgar-
Roscoe- Fausch, most notably the left turn lane? The City cannot
legally bind the approval of this request with the requirement that
the petitioner pay for the improvements.
The need to add to the transportation infrastructure to assure
continued acceptable intersection service levels underscores the
impact of the proposed land use reclassification on the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Traffic engineers
can design a solution to most hypothetical traffic scenarios. The
question is, at this point, whether the added traffic volume is in
the best interest of the City and immediate neighborhood - -not solely
whether a solution to the additional traffic can be engineered.
In addition the increase in peak hour traffic from the proposed
reclassification, total daily traffic generated by the site is
forecasted by Strgar- Roscoe- Fausch to be triple for CR use over the
5 -
existing CL use. While the roadway infrastructure may be capable of
physically handling this total daily traffic increase, there should
be consideration of the added air and water degradation, and noise
levels that will result from the additional trips generated by the CR
use of the site.
h. What would be the likely impact upon area utility charges and future
property tax assessments? Discussion with respect to the impact on
utility charges is contained in the Engineer's Memorandum that has
been attached to this staff report.
The applicant implies that the revenues to taxing districts (of which
the City is but a 16% "partner ") will be greater with a CR use on the
site than with a CL use. The City Assessor has advised us that tax
revenue of CR over CL is not significant. The applicant has assumed
the site to remain undeveloped for 13 years as CL in its revenue
projections.
2. The Public Safety Department has analyzed this request with regard to the
number of service calls and the number of personnel hours that could be
expected from a 400,000 square foot office complex and a 125,000 square
foot retail development over a one year period.
PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT COMPARISON FOR SERVICE DEMANDS
125,000 sq. ft. 400,000 sq. ft.
Retail Office
Establishment Establishment
Total Number of Calls Received 344 78
for Service
Number of Personnel Hours Committed 122 24
to Provide the Requested Service
Assuming ',lust the initial 125,000 square foot retail use of the site,
Public Safety service would be approximately three times that of a
typical office (CL) use of the site.
3. We find that this proposal may negatively impact the design concept of
this neighborhood by decreasing the concentration of retail uses. The
Plymouth Hills" plan includes provisions for sidewalks throughout the
area to encourage and facilitate pedestrian traffic. The placement of a
large retail area west of Vicksburg Lane would not be conducive to
pedestrian traffic. Vicksburg Lane would become a barrier to pedestrian
traffic between this site and "Downtown Plymouth ". Many people would use
their cars to go across Vicksburg Lane rather than walk across such a
high volume street. In addition, pressure may be placed on the City to
reclassify additional property on the west side of Vicksburg Lane north
to the extension of County Road 9 to nonresidential uses.
RECOMMENDATION:
The burden of proof in any Land Use Guide Plan reclassification is with the
applicant. The assumption is that the classification of the site that exists
is correct (particularly when a city has, as recently as two years previous,
S
reviewed the land use classifications of the entire community - -as Plymouth
has) . You would expect a substantial case in support of an error in
classification or a change in physical conditions to support a
reclassification of this scale, in these circumstances.
From our investigation of the applicant's submission materials and the issues
that are routinely addressed with any Land Use Guide Plan reclassification
application, it would appear that the preponderance of evidence supports
retaining existing CL (Limited Business) classification for this site. The
bulk of the applicant's supporting evidence for a reclassification of the site
is either based on a specific end user or considerations of the potential
difference in the timing of development on the site. The specific end user
may not be the basis for a Land Use Guide Plan reclassification (no matter how
attractive that specific end user may be as a business entity) and the
relative probability of site development by alternative uses is but a single
factor of consideration, among many.
We have provided the Planning Commission alternative draft resolutions for
consideration in this matter. The first draft resolution provides for the
denial of the Land Use Guide Plan reclassification request which I believe is
supported by the bulk of the evidence we have reviewed. The second draft
resolution provides for the approval of the Land Use Guide Plan
reclassification proposed based on findings consistent with the
representations of he applicant.
r f
Submitted by: C'',( s r,' Imo_ Lug
arles E. Dillerud, Community
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Denying Land Use Guide Plan Amendment
2. Resolution Approving Land Use Guide Plan Amendment
3. Engineer's Memorandum
4. Petitioner's Request and Study
5. Land Use Guide Plan Checklist
6. Location Map
7. Physical Constraints Map
8. Undeveloped CR -2 Property Map
9. "Sugar Hills" (90109) History
10. Petitioner's Letter Dated January 15, 1992
pc /jk /91108:jw)
7 -
irector
DENYING LAND USE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR WAL -MART STORES, INC. LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF VICKSBURG LANE AND HIGHWAY 55 (91108)
WHEREAS, Wal -Mart Stores, Inc. has requested approval for a Land Use Guide
Plan amendment to reclassify 24 acres of CL (Limited Business) property to CR-
2 (Retail Shopping) located at the northwest corner of Highway 55 and
Vicksburg Lane; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the request following a duly
scheduled Public Hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the application of
Wal -Mart Stores, Inc. for a Land Use Guide Plan amendment to reclassify 24
acres of CL (Limited Business) property to CR -2 (Retail Shopping) located at
the northwest corner of Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane, for the following
reasons:
1. The proposed reclassification will result in a traffic volume level not
supported by existing traffic improvements and will result in an increase
in air, water and noise pollution.
2. The proposed reclassification will negatively impact the development and
redevelopment of existing CR -2 guided property in the City.
3. The proposed reclassification will permit land use development that is not
compatible with the natural features and physical constraints of the site.
4. The reclassification will result in an increase in the level of public
services required to the site -- particularly Public Safety.
res /pc /91108:jw)
APPROVING LAND USE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR WAL -MART STORES, INC. LOCATED AT
THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF VICKSBURG LANE AND HIGHWAY 55 (91108)
WHEREAS, Wal -Mart Stores, Inc. has requested approval for a Land Use Guide
Plan amendment to reclassify 24 acres of CL (Limited Business) property to CR-
2 (Retail Shopping) located at the northwest corner of Highway 55 and
Vicksburg Lane; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the request following a duly
scheduled Public Hearing and has recommended 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 application of
Wal -Mart Stores, Inc. for a Land Use Guide Plan amendment to reclassify 24
acres of CL (Limited Business) property to CR -2 (Retail Shopping) located at
the northwest corner of Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Staging of the development shall be in accordance with utility-
availability and approved by the City Engineer.
3. Approval of the Land Use Guide Plan Amendment is contingent upon and
subject to the required review and response by the Metropolitan Council,
and additional reviews appropriate for this site.
4. The reclassification is based on a finding that CR -2 (Retail Shopping) is
the highest and best use of the site.
res /pc /91108:jw)
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
ENGINEER'S MEMO
to
PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
DATE: January 14, 1992
FILE NO.: 91108
PETITIONER: Mike Gair, McCombs - Frank -Roos Associates, Inc., 15050 23rd Avenue North,
Plymouth, MN 55447
LUGPA: WAL -MART STORES, INC. - To re -guide approximately 24.6 acres from CL
limited business) to CR 2 (retail shopping) north of Highway 55, west
of Dunkirk Lane.
This memo was prepared in response to the request for a Land Use Guide Plan Amendment
for parcels 20- 118 -22 -0001 and 0002 to allow the construction of a Wal -Mart store.
Specific comments on site plan details will be provided after a plan has been formally
submitted. The following comments identify the impact the proposed change would have on
the comprehensive plan elements:
TRANSPORTATION:
0 36th Avenue should be a minimum of 41 feet wide back to back of curb to allow
for a left turn lane into the proposed Wal -Mart Site.
A future traffic control signal will be required at the intersection of
Vicksburg Lane and 36th Avenue.
Dual left turn lanes must be added to the southbound Vicksburg Lane approach
to Highway 55.
The intersection, geometrics and traffic control signal will need to be
revised at Vicksburg Lane and Highway 55 to accommodate the above geometric
improvement.
Refer to attached traffic study for further details of traffic analysis.
SANITARY SEWER:
o The re- guiding will have no effect on the sanitary sewer system.
WATERMAIN:
o A 12" watermain will need to be constructed on 36th Avenue to serve the site.
o Holding and sediment ponds will be required to meet the City's Comprehensive
Storm Sewer Plan and watershed requirements.
SUBMITTED BY: 6 "^ z —a,x I_,.,
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
SRFSTRGAR- ROSCOE- FAUSCH, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
TRANSPORTATION CIVIL STRUCTURAL PARKING LAND SURVEYORS
January 9, 1952
Mr. Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
UPC WAL -MART DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
PROPOSED RETAIL DEVELOPMENT /LAND USE GUID]
Dear Fred:
SRF No. 0911617
As you requested, a traffic study and analysis has been completed
for the above referenced project, located in the northwest
quadrant of Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane in Plymouth (see
Figure 1). Based on this study, the following comments and
recommendations are offered for your consideration:
Summary of Findings
In order to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed
retail development (see Figure 2), a comparison was made
between retail development trip generation estimates and an
estimate of the site developed as limited business. The
limited business land use corresponds with the existing land
use guide plan for the subject site.
In determining the trip generation rates for the limited
business development, general office trip rates were used. It
should also be noted that the 412,000 square foot total for
limited business (see Table 1), was determined on the basis of
23.6 acre site and a typical floor area ratio of 0.4.
Using the stated land use assumptions and the 1991 I.T.E.
Average Trip Generation Rates (see Table 1), the average daily
trips generated are tabulated as follows:
Average Daily Development Generated Trips Based on
1991 I.T.E. Average Trip Generation Rates
Proposed Retail Development Plan Limited Business
Daily Volumes Daily Volumes
15,296 4,092
Suite 150, One Carlson Parkway North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447
612/475 -0010 FAX 612/475 -2429
Mud
STlots, 1a1STAVE. 5
Lake
our PL i
14
4
JW AVE. A fii -St.-k: I
SRO AVE. ft. F.A.U. 13RD AVE. -
F
17 LE
GVROI E
TH AVE. AASCAUTTE40. Rice PIP. ZB "T*W' VE,
4
eEArE, iA-
VSTN ... @
R R
I'm 4m
@77T. AVE. N.*:' M.— LAKE
A- COOL Ar.A-
L Fish
Laks
LARUN ap. d 94
SS 0. A u
itApar
IjLand :3
VIA
A r
o
TRAMIL A 0 $ U.A
OKAMORE 0 ..... .... --- G2,WwD-,-, A
IR7: It
BASS LAKE
4
Ro.
F.A. ... t>
M (9) ST
Lake
RoUr
S"b Pomorlaau I LIM NAbIEL
Smith
g `ADO PLYMOUTH Lake
CO. I'm 3Lm v W HOPE
pop.2Lw?
MEDINA
7UrtJA
ItD.
b.iW .... -a7
NA 4
36TH AVE.•. -1 f
Holy
LAMM
X.
VoWeld
Lake X-1-mooney C
Lake
MEDI
LAKE
0 pw. 4"
GOLDEN VALLE
PW. 2L?TS
Sop— + Farmers
F
y N
i.MT6,oUTM
Trans.
Hadley
40
494 (10 GTH AVE.".
X
A Fi-.'. 39 I2
vo eAT2ATA
ORONO 72311
ST. rar.Am Iii '-WAYZA A .. 101
PIP. 3W
ncwer w a 14JLA
Bay Ic = W. 3LM 16 ::Hannan
Browni: 0
Alt
e
Bay : .. IJWOODLAND
ay ....
X
5mith
MIWCMWA
4' Bay AKE . . . . . . .
LAKE ;;.LOUISMin
R Cr. PARY
MINNE70NKA F.AA). r
r W .71% DEEPHAVE .........
LOWER LAKE: y.9rlA
SRFSTRGAR-ROSCOE-FAUSCH, INC CITY OF PLYMOUTH FIGURE
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
PROJECT LOCATION
SRF NO. 0911617 1 WAL-MART RETAIL DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
W
CN
RJR a 1; .qj_ N
eI= a
R _
S
QW
W a
i LL
w
a Z
w
i, a. J
O
CL W
w
O W W
UJ w
tip
7 L i N30Nyp Qit
to I
I i , ; = c lisp
Z
U
g
z
a f.
U8 Z
O n
r.
z
V J
a
TABLE ONE
WAL-MART RETAIL DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
TRIP GENERATION RATES
za sxxxxxxsxaa :azxxxsssasxassssxxs sasss szxxxsa: ssssaxssasxssazzza: sxssaasssaasaxaaszxsxszsaassasxaszzx
LAND USES
DISCOUNT STORE
RETAIL - OUTLOT A
RETAIL - OUTLOT B
GENERAL OFFICE
ssaassasxs: aasax: axassasxxxsaxzzxz saaxasasxxsssassaaxxsxxzaassxaxxzs zaa zszasssxsaxasssszsaassssssassa
NOTE: THESE RATES APPLY ONLY TO THE SPECIFIC SQUARE FOOTAGES LISTED BELOW
WAL-MART RETAIL DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES / PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
xsxsxxaxaxz masxxssxxsxxxxxxssxss xxxsxxszzxxxsasaxaxxsazssaxxxs sz:s az sss zzaszsasasasssazzsss :ssasszssxs
LAND USES
DISCOUNT STORE*
RETAIL OUTLOT A
RETAIL - OUTLOT B
TRIP GEN. RATE TRIP GEN. RATE
MEASURE FOR A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR
TRIP GEN. RATE IN OUT IN OUT
sq. ft. 0.56 0.23 3.18 2.93
sq. ft. 2.14 1.28 6.31 6.31
sq. ft. 1.49 0.87 4.57 4.57
sq. ft. 1.43 0.21 0.28 1.30
ssaassasxs: aasax: axassasxxxsaxzzxz saaxasasxxsssassaaxxsxxzaassxaxxzs zaa zszasssxsaxasssszsaassssssassa
NOTE: THESE RATES APPLY ONLY TO THE SPECIFIC SQUARE FOOTAGES LISTED BELOW
WAL-MART RETAIL DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES / PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
xsxsxxaxaxz masxxssxxsxxxxxxssxss xxxsxxszzxxxsasaxaxxsazssaxxxs sz:s az sss zzaszsasasasssazzsss :ssasszssxs
LAND USES
DISCOUNT STORE*
RETAIL OUTLOT A
RETAIL - OUTLOT B
TRAFFIC GENERATED
DAILY
SIZE VOLUMES
149,181 S.F. 9,024
16,335 S.F. 2,274
40,293 S.F. 3,998
TRAFFIC GENERATED
A.M. PEAK HOUR
IN OUT
71 30
35 21
60 35
TRAFFIC GENERATED
P.M. PEAK HOUR
IN OUT
403 371
103 103
184 184
sxaxxsssasxxsxssxsssxsxas xxxxxxxssasxxxxxxxxxxaxsxassxxssxxxxsaxxxxxsxssassas zaxxxsxxssxasasxsxsss :ax
TOTALS I 205,809 S.F. I 15,296 ( 166 86 I 690 658
NOTE: DISCOUNT STORE TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES INCLUDE A 15 PERCENT
TRIP REDUCTION FACTOR FOR MULTI-PURPOSE TRIPS
WAL -MART RETAIL DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES / EXISTING LAND USE GUIDE PLAN
z xxxsassxassasszsxxxs xsxsassxxxxssaaxssxxxxxxazazaaszxaxssaxs xassasaaaxasaxsszzxszxxsassxaasaasa ssssss
LAND USES
GENERAL OFFICE
DAILY
SIZE VOLUMES
412,000 S.F. .4,092
TRAFFIC GENERATED
A.M. PEAK HOUR
IN OUT
589 88
TRAFFIC GENERATED
P.M. PEAK HOUR
IN OUT
102 535
xsxsassaxsxsxxsszsxxxxxsxsxxxaxxassxxxxxs _s___ sass----- s-- xsssxxsaxxa: aasaxszssazasazssasasssszzxxaax
TOTALS I 412,000 S.F. I 4,092 I 589 88 I 102 535
NOTE: ALL TRIP GENERATION RATES ARE AVERAGE RATES FROM THE 1991 I.T.E.
TRIP GENERATION REPORT , 5TH EDITION.
ssszaxsxsxassxsaxxsxasxassassxsxaxasxxasxssaaassxs xz as ssxz xasas s: a: assasxxaxasaxassssxsaxsxssszss szss
Mr. Fred G. Moore, P.E. -5- January 9, 1992
Note that the proposed retail development would generate
significantly more daily traffic than the limited business
development. Based on the daily trip generation estimates, it
can be assumed that the proposed retail development will
generate more than three times as much daily traffic as would
the limited business development.
The proposed retail development would generate significantly
fewer a.m. peak hour trips than the limited business.
However, based on the trip generation estimates, the proposed
retail development would generate significantly (112 percent)
more trips in the p.m. peak hour than the limited business
development.
Note that a trip reduction factor of 15 percent was applied to
the discount store trip generation estimates. However, no
trip reduction factors were applied to the other retail trip
generation estimates because the I.T.E. retail shopping center
trip rates already account for multi - purpose trips and other
trip reduction factors.
In order to analyze the capacity of existing and proposed
roadways to accommodate traffic from the proposed development,
a traffic analysis has been completed using existing peak hour
traffic volumes (see Figure 3), the Wal -Mart proposed
development plan, updated data on future background traffic
and a micro- computer application of the 1985 Highway Capacity
Manual.
The directional trip distribution (see Figure 4) for the
proposed Wal -Mart development was estimated based on regional
distribution of population and employment.
Year 2010 traffic forecasts for Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane
were developed for both the existing Plymouth Land Use Guide
Plan and the Wal -Mart proposed development plan, based on the
latest Plymouth Thoroughfare Guide Plan 2010 Forecasts
TRANPLAN Network Computer Model). Based on these forecasts,
a year 2010 capacity analysis of the subject intersection (see
Figure 5) indicated that Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane would
operate at a Level of Service E during the future p.m. peak
hour for both development scenarios (see Appendix for a
description of levels of service).
PUNNING APPLICATION WORKSHEET
Intersmion: f—g S 1%I S y L1. Date- 12- /6 — 91
J. BWQAI?l W ?W Ak P0 0C
Ansirst r m Pt Ana1y=d. ,
P:orrt rIa 116 7 City/Slate: r} y` 6c.0't. -I
v u; ? SILL W.
SB 1OTAL N -5 STREET
177
Iii
1'.J
W! 1DTAL
f) T -t
Eti<STREET
EB TOTAL 1
NB TOTAL
1Q/
EB IT ! ,'^_ NO LT MAXIMUM
WITH SO TH
SUM OF CRITICAL CAPACITY
VOLUMES LEVEL
wB LT — _ SO IT — 0 T 1.200 UNDER
EB TH -
OR
NO TH — 1
OR
1.201 to 1.100 NFAR
E 1.100 OVER
I k2t) STATUS? 122—
E -w CRITICAL N -5 CRITICAL
SRFSTRGAR- ROSCOE- FAUSCH, INC CITY OF PLYMOUTH FIGURE
CONSULTNGENGINEERS EXISTING P.M. PEAK HOUR
INTERSECTION VOLUMES 3
SRF NO. 0911617 WAL -MART RETAIL DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
STRGAR - ROSCOE- FAUSCH, INC CITY OF PLYMOUTH FIGURESRFCONSULTINGENGINEERS
DIRECTIONAL TRIP DISTURBUTION 4
SRF NO. 0911617 WAL -MART RETAIL DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY
W
tuci
w
N M Vn
v
I J
Z 0
Zl-
O
LU ul M
En
U
ca
W
CO) OIL cn Q
IL
O. vl v = W ~
CL Iz M ~ Z
kn p Z LU
o< oCL
w
W O Q
W
J
a
w
a
Lon
zu
A JIM ti o
Lu
N
M W
W W
z N W
LL
Cl
W
O a 1 Z
z
F
a Q a
W k - (• Z
x 00
On
O
z
z
V J
w
a
a
t < . W
Q w
N H n0 • N
u
J1
0 +
p
3
1 N
z
2 uoi v°i Z
d
z
V
u°+
N
W 3 3 W
O
t < . W
J1 J
p
3
z
V
u°+
p
Mr. Fred G. Moore, P.E. -9- January 9, 1992
Primary access to the Wal -Mart development is proposed from
36th Avenue, west of Vicksburg Lane. Year 2010 traffic
forecasts for Vicksburg Lane and 36th Avenue were developed
for both the existing land use guide plan and the proposed
Wal -Mart retail development plan. Based on these forecasts, a
year 2010 planning level capacity analysis of the intersection
of Vicksburg Lane and 36th Avenue (see Figure 6) indicates
that during the future p.m. peak hour the subject intersection
would operate at a Level of Service B for both development
scenarios. However, results of a micro - computer based
application of the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (see Appendix)
indicated the eastbound and westbound left turns from 36th
Avenue would operate at a Level of Service F unsignalized.
This is an unacceptable level of service with queues in the
infinate range. Therefore, it can be assumed that a traffic
control signal would be required at the intersection of
Vicksburg Lane and 36th Avenue in the future.
Also of particular concern is the southbound left turns from
Vicksburg Lane to Highway 55. Based on the findings of the
capacity analysis, dual left turn lanes southbound on
Vicksburg Lane to eastbound Highway 55 would be justified.
With this improvement, the level of service for Highway 55 and
Vicksburg Lane would improve to a Level of Service D (see
Figure 5).
Summary of Recommendations
Based on these findings and analysis, it is concluded that
land use proposed in the Wal -Mart development plan could be
supported by the adjacent roadway system if the following
recommended intersection and traffic control improvements are
implemented as part of the proposed development:
Provide access to retail "outlot All in order to minimize
the impact on the future residential neighborhood along
36th Avenue (see Figure 7). 36th Avenue should be a
minimum of forty to forty -four feet in width in order to
provide room to bypass vehicles making left turns into
site.
The developer may want to consider an alternative site
access from 36th Avenue which would also provide access to
retail "outlot All (see Figure 8). However, we prefer the
alternate layout shown in Figure 7, provided that a
westbound left turn access to the outlot is allowed only at
the west edge of the property.
W
C.7
w
L J
I
zil J
Z N O
W },
d
O
Qi O
W
J W U-
i <
O
0 v J Z
Q z Z 0 Z W
It C 0
cc
I< U ' = oo LL L
u QQ 0 =
3 LLL
1
w U Q
Cl) a c
Cl) -
I
O
N
LLI W
N
W
Z
tN I 1_1 , U-
m
W
1
Z
u
x
lul
wlzwcZ7
O u.
i< z
tv a F
c) 3 Z
W o
n U
O
z
a
m
2
J
Q 2 '2J7
NZ
Y
Z
J
J
ys
o
lil O s
x a
u
Z J 2 N N Z
z
Z
nl `) ml
ois s
W
v W > W
Y
Z J
lil O s
x a
u x
Z
z
Z uei
Z
nl `) ml
ois s
W
v W > W
W
z zac -
FEZ
WWJ WQ
CO
C Z m a c gp:
CL U N
Q QZ _ E 5 ff •
N /
m3 u.0 Wk € ^s W
L Q
Z /
On Zi
p '^
O i _ _ t?. a -3.B
V+
v!
c Z I LL U
st I W
LL
LLJ
CL
LU
v / >- W o
U cc J
g }• W
IL
Q oil o
1 f;o; f J'1 63Jt Jf _ Q
I t r
W I
I yam 1-' , 1 (
ij'
j A _a E- ! :x
Z
Z
Z
U?
uZ
FO n
8 cn V ^o
S $
O
z
c
w
a
W
U. 00
LL
Z< yY4 A 6 Ag 1: t •f*
ifz3l
ij
r T4
CO
cn U1--I a iiilaj.
W q ii3t E
U Z
W
cc i! :o 0
R
W WW U
I v LL
a
W Z
O F- W
CO)
O
CL
lot, LL /
r O > LU
ap
I I 3 J¢
AU
o
W (Jci1mz
W
Z
oa
aN
s 9
F
g v UU
1 ^
e ^
zz
V J
W.
a
th
Mr. Fred G. Moore, P.E. -13- January 9, 1992
A future traffic control signal is expected to be required,
at the intersection of Vicksburg Lane and 36th Avenue.
Dual left turn lanes must be added to the southbound
Vicksburg lane approach to Highway 55 in order to provide
safe and effective traffic operations.
The intersection geometrics and traffic control signal
should be revised at Vicksburg Lane and Highway 55 to
accommodate the above geometric improvements.
Should you have any questions or comments concerning this traffic
study analysis, please contact us.
Sincerely,
STRGAR- ROSCOE- FAUSCH, INC.
OX4444
Dennis R. Eyler, P.E.
Principal
DRE /mdg
Attachments
APPENDIX
LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTIONS
The operational characteristics of roadways can be expressed as
one of six levels of service (L.O.S.), described as A through F.
Levels of Service "A" through "C" describe free to stable flow
conditions where there are few problems in using the roadways.
Level of Service "D" describes conditions approaching unstable
flow where problems begin to occur on the roadway, especially
for turning traffic.
Level of Service "E" describes unstable flow conditions where
traffic volumes on the roadway are at capacity levels and many
problems develop, i.e., long delays, much congestion and long
queues (a queue is a waiting line of vehicles) .
Level of Service "F" describes forced flow and failure
conditions on the roadway, characterized by severe congestion
and extremely long delays. As an example, under L.O.S. "F"
conditions, a motorist would experience a delay of at least
one full cycle length at a signalized intersection.
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Paae -1
ittii# ttti## 2## itti# tttiti# Ittt# tttti# tt #ttt22i2 #i #ttt#2 #tt# #tittttt#
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35
PEAK HOUR FACTOR ..................... .9
AREA POPULATION ...................... 1000000
NAME OF THE EAST /REST STREET......... 36th AVENUE NORTH
NAME OF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET....... VICKSBURG LANE
NAME OF THE ANALYST .................. SRF,INC.
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (®r /dd /yy)...... 12 /18/91
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ................. 2010 PM PEAK HOUR
OTHER INFORMATION.... EXISTING LAND USE - LIMITED BUSINESS
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: 4 -LEG
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH /SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE EASTBOUND: STOP SIGN
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
EB WB NB SB
LEFT 525 100 130 35
THRU 20 5 690 410
RIGHT 82" 85 85 45
NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE
EB WB NB SB
LANES 3 3 3 3
LANE USAGE L + TR L + TR
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page -2
PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE
GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS
EASTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
WESTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
VEHICLE COMPOSITION
X SU TRUCKS X COMBINATION
AND RV'S VEHICLES X MOTORCYCLES
EASTBOUND 0 0 0
WESTBOUND 0 0 0
NORTHBOUND 0 0 0
SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0
CRITICAL GAPS
TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL
Table 10 -2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP
MINOR RIGHTS
EB 5.70 5.20 0.00 5.20
WB 5.70 5.20 0.00 5.20
MAJOR LEFTS
SB 5.60 5.10 0.00 5.10
NB 5.60 5.10 0.00 5.10
MINOR THROUGHS
ED 630 6.30 0.00 6.30
WB 6.80 6.30 0.00 6.30
MINOR LEFTS
ED 7.30 6.80 0.00 6.80
WB 7.30 6.80 0.00 6.80
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST /WEST STREET...... 36th AVENUE NORTH
NAME OF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET.... VICKSBURG LANE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 12!18191 ; 2010 PM PEAK HOUR
OTHER INFORMATIOON.... EXISTING LAND USE - LIMITED BUSINESS
CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF- SERVICE Page -3
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
p M SH R SH
MINOR STREET
EB LEFT 642 83 59 59 583 F
THROUGH 24 116 91 91 67 E
RIGHT 1002 959 959 959 43 F
MINOR STREET
WB LEFT 122 83 0 0 122 F
THROUGH 6 120 94 94 88 E
RIGHT 104 847 847 847 744 A
MAJOR STREET
SB LEFT 43 454 454 454 411 A
NB LEFT 159 691 691 691 532 A
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST /WEST STREET...... 36th AVENUE NORTH
NAME OF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET.... VICKSBURG LANE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 12/18/91 ; 2010 PM PEAK HOUR
OTHER INFORMATION.... EXISTING LAND USE - LIMITED BUSINESS
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page -1
ittititi i#### tti# i#2 itliiitii## ittit# iiii 22 #itittt#2 ##titittitt# # ##i!
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35
PEAK HOUR FACTOR ..................... .9
AREA POPULATION ...................... 1000000
NAME OF THE EAST /WEST STREET......... 36th AVENUE NORTH
NAME OF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET....... VICKSBURG LANE
NAME OF THE ANALYST .................. SRF,INC.
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (s® /dd /yy) ...... 12/18/91
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED ................. 2010 PM PEAK HOUR
OTHER INFORMATION.... PROPOSED LAND USE
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: 4 -LEG
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH /SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE EASTBOUND: STOP SIGN
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
EB WB NB SB
LEFT 145 100 600 35
THRU 20 15 690 410
RIGHT 90 85 85 155
NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE
EB WB NB SB
LANES 3 3 3 3
LANE USAGE L + TR L + TR
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page -2
PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE
GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS
EASTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
WESTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
VEHICLE COMPOSITION
SU TRUCKS 1 COMBINATION
AND RV'S VEHICLES X MOTORCYCLES
EASTBOUND 0 0 0
WESTBOUND 0 0 0
NORTHBOUND 0 0 0
SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0
CRITICAL GAPS
TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL
Table 10 -2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP
MINOR RIGHTS
EB 5.70 5.20 0.00 5.20
WB 5.70 5.20 0.00 5.20
MAJOR LEFTS
SB 5.60 5.10 0.00 5.10
NB 5.60 5.10 0.00 5.10
MINOR THROUGHS
EB 6.80 6.30 0.00 6.30
WB 6.80 6.30 0.00 6.30
MINOR LEFTS
EB 7.30 6.80 0.00 6.80
WB 7.30 6.80 0.00 6.80
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST /WEST STREET...... 36th AVENUE NORTH
NAME OF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET.... VICKSBURG LANE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 12/18/91 ; 2010 PM PEAK HOUR
OTHER INFORMATION.... PROPOSED LAND USE
CAPACITY AND LEVEL -OF- SERVICE Page -3
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
p M SH R SH
MINOR STREET
ED LEFT 177 83 0 0 177 F
THROUGH 24 103 0 0 24 f
RIGHT 110 910 910 910 800 A
MINOR STREET
NB LEFT 122 83 0 0 122 F
THROUGH 18 103 0 0 18 F
RIGHT 104 847 847 847 744 A
MAJOR STREET
SB LEFT 43 454 454 454 411 A
NB LEFT 733 597 597 597 136 F
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST /WEST STREET...... 36th AVENUE NORTH
NAME OF THE NORTH /SOUTH STREET.... VICKSBURG LANE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 12/18/91 ; 2010 PM PEAK HOUR
OTHER INFORMATION.... PROPOSED LAND USE
Each item must have a response, including "Not Applicable ", if that should be
the case.
1. Is the locational criteria of both the existing and proposed
classifications satisfied by the specific site? Explain.
2. Can the site be reasonably developed under the current classification? If
not, explain and demonstrate.
3. Is there a lack of developable property in the same classification as that
which is being proposed? If so, is the proposed expansion supported by
the Comprehensive Plan Coimnuuty Structure Concept? If not, explain the
need for expansion.
4. Will other undeveloped property, in the classification proposed for this
site, be adversely affected by this action? Will other developed property
in the proposed classification, which might be subject to
redevelopment /rehabilitation, be adversely affected by this action?
5. Haw does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interests of the owner,
proponent, or prospective developer of the site?
6. How does the proposal demonstrate that the new classification would be the
highest and best use of the site? What is the public need or cormn:nity
benefit?
7. What impact will the proposed change have upon the several Umprehensive
Plan Elements?
Transportation
Sanitary Sewer
Storm Drainage
Municipal Water
Housing
Capital 7nprovement Program
Official Controls (Zoning, Subdivision, Environmental)
City Parks and Open Space
8. What would be the likely impact upon area utility charges; current and
future special assessments; current and future property tax assessments;
and, per capita -based municipal aids?
forms:o >pl /lugp.item /s) 10/89
6TOWA I Lo I \ A
y ! ! :.
IMM
M.
Y
T
A
w IrAD
AS
WME
kIMEADO
WSE
ESROGI
y
NT
0
2 PEMC
I , --,
N
l®r
ANN
t i , ; 1 Rp"
0 "20.3
N
t
r\ N
CN11-
1..
SEASONALLY
EMERGENT
WETLAND/'
04 PEMC#1 eo
0.56 A
o
7"A s Irl A T HIGH WA Y No
li
PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS
ii
WETLAND AREAS
WOODLAND AREAS
AREAS OF 10%+ SLOPE
W P E
CITY OF SCALE OF MILES
PLYMOUTH- , -
p $ y €yt .Qi$•i d 9 ,= C 3 g 7I i d i ' q :p f= ¢i.d is w i
191g1g gggggg ggaggg ggg g$Ig Igtg IgIggIgIgI ggggggagg11M Ill! gllgIgIgI$IgIBIgIaIgIgIgIBIggIIgIgHill! I iI IIIIIIIIII I$IIidiiidiiiisiEEeEEbeEe6iiGiiiilriidiiiiriiaialilaaiiiiiiiilBiiiLfiii:Il.l IIi685BE96¢6
STREET MAP 12-91
UNDEVELOPED CR -2 OR P.U.D EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
winM aI1j
MY
grz`
raRrrel f
STREET MAP 12-91
UNDEVELOPED CR -2 OR P.U.D EQUIVALENT PROPERTY
HISTORY (90109)
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a Re ular meeting of the
City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 21st day of
May 1991 The following members were present: Mavor Bergman,
Councilmembers Helliwell Ricker and Vasiliou
The following members were absent: Councilmember Zitur
Councilmember Vasiliou introduced the following Resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 91 -280
DENYING LAND USE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR HARSTAD & FORBRAGD COMPANY FOR SUGAR
HILLS (90109)
WHEREAS, Harstad & Forbragd have requested approval of Land Use Guide Plan
Amendment to reclassify approximately 26 acres of CL (Limited Business) and 54
acres of LA -2 (Low Medium Density) classified land to LA -3 (High Medium
Residential) and LA -1 (Low Density Residential) located at the northwest
corner of Vicksburg Lane and Hwy. 55; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the request following a duly
scheduled Public Hearing and has recommended approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the reclassification
of land use guiding for Harstad & Forbra d for approximately 26 acres of CL
Limited Business) and 54 acres of LA -2 (Low Medium Density) classified land
to LA -3 (High Medium Residential) and LA -1 (Low Density Residential) located
at the northwest corner of Vicksburg Lane and Highway 55, based on the
following findings:
1. The proposed guiding especially at the corner does not represent the
highest and best land use for this property.
2. Preservation of trees would likely be diminished with lower density
development versus the higher density residential now permitted which will
provide for clustering and open space.
3. The elimination of the commercial corner will have an adverse fiscal impact
on future residential development in the City which was recently analyzed
in detail for and by the City.
4. Access limitations to this area apply to any Land Use Guide Plan
classification and therefore do not serve as a basis for amending the
classifications as proposed.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded
by Councilmember Ricker and upon vote being taken thereon,
the following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Bergman, Councilmembers
Helliwell Ricker and Vasiliou
The following voted against or abstained None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
res /pc /90109.lugpa:lr)
Regular Council Mee,_lig
May 21, 1991
Page 187
MOTION was made by Counciln
by Councilmember Helliwell,
No. 91 -279, DENYING LAND
FOR THE CITY OF PLYMOUT C
NORTHEAST CORNER OF IR'
91035)
Motion carrie
mj Ricker, seconded
p adopt Resolution
GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT
LAND LOCATED AT THE
LANE AND HIGHWAY 55
a roll call vote. Four ayes.
Community Development Director Tremere stated
that the Planning Commission deferred-
consideration of this item pending the outcome of
the previous agenda item. The Planning
Commission voted 6 -to -1 to recommend approval of
the land use guide plan request reclassification
and RPUD concept plan which would envision up 333
dwelling units on a 109 acre net parcel. The
land use reclassification would be from
Commercial- Limited and Low - Medium Density
Residential to High - Medium Density Residential
and Low Density Residential.
Councilmember Vasiliou expressed concern about
access to this site from Vicksburg Lane.
Councilmember Helliwell stated that she was
concerned about the tree loss on this site and
wanted to know if there was a responsible way to
develop this area with minimum tree loss. She
said limitations on access apply to any land use
category and thus that is not a sound basis for
changing the guiding.
Mayor Bergman expressed concern about the
appropriateness of the Land Use Guide Plan change
in relation to Downtown Plymouth. He recalled
the area had been reviewed by the City during the
Comprehensive Plan Update process.
Councilmember Ricker expressed concern about the
loss of commercial base to support the
residential development in Plymouth; this
proposal would reduce that base, and could have
negative fiscal impacts.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated the proposed
guiding was not.that highest and best land use
for this corner.
HISTORY (90109)
RESOLUTION 91 -279
DENYING LAND USE
GUIDE PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR CITY
OF PLYMOUTH,
DUNKIRK LANE & HWY
55
Item 8 -F
LAND USE GUIDE
PLAN AMENDMENT &
RPUD FOR SUGAR
HILLS (90109)
Item 8 -G
Regular Council Mee' ig
May 21, 1991
Page 188
enT,
MOTION was made by Councilmember Vasiliou, TJmTON 91 -280
DENYING LAND USE
seconded by Councilmember Ricker, to adopt
Resolution No. 91 -280, DENYING LAND USE GUIDE GUIDE PLAN
PLAN AMENDMENT FOR HARSTAD & FORBRAGD COMPANY FOR AMENDMENT
90109)
UGAR
SUGAR HILLS (90109) Item 8 -G
Attorney Thompson clarified that the reasons for
denial were as articulated by Councilmembers
Ricker, Vasiliou and Helliwell.
Motion carried on a roll call vote. Four ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Vasiliou, RESOLUTION 91 -281
seconded by Councilmember Ricker, to adopt DENYING RPUD
Resolution No. 91 -281, DENYING RESIDENTIAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN FOR HARSTAD SUGAR
FORBRADG FOR SUGAR HILLS (90109) (901 99)
Motion carried on a roll call vote. Four ayes.
MOTION wa made by Councilmember Vasiliou, RES ^LUTION 91 -2$2
seconded Mayor Bergman, to adopt RESOLUTION P pTi"F RFINAL
NO. 91 -282, APPROVING MPUD FINAL PLAT FOR NORTHCO COMPANY
NORTHCO COMP Y FOR NORTHWEST BUSINESS CAMPUS (81028) MPUD 81 -1
11TH ADDITION 91028) (MPUD 81 -1).
Item *8 -H
Motion carried A a roll call vote, four ayes.
MOTION was made by \
an
ber Vasiliou,
seconded by Mayor B adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -283, SETTINONS TO BE MET PRIOR
TO FILING OF AND REINAL PLAT FOR
NORTHCO COMPANY FOR T BUSINESS CAMPUS
11TH ADDITION LOCATHWEST CORNER OF
NORTHWEST BOULEVARD AD 61) AND XENIUM
LANE (91028) (MPUD
Motion carried on a roll call vot four ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Vasi 'ou,
seconded by Mayor Bergman, to adopt RES UTION
N0. 91 -284, AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF SITE
PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR KRUTZIG HOMES, I . FOR
BOULDER RIDGE (88124).
Motion carried on a roll call vote, four ayes.
HISTORY (90109)
RESOLUTION 91 -283
SETTING CONDITIONS
TO BE MET PRIOR TO
FILING (91028)
Item *8 -H
ur-c(1T.TTTTnN 91 -284
RELEASE OF SITE
PERFORMANCE
GUARANTEE FOR
BOULDER RIDGE
88124)
Item *8 -I
A. Low - MED RESNNiNTULL )
5.3 AC
43 DU MAX.
1.Ow - ME0. RgIOENTIAL C 25 2 5 1 UWT TOw/R/OMES
i 1.0AC 15.5AC
20 OU MA)L
t
if
iii I rt. r- ,•' -- —x -
Q. I % / ; r i j i ^1\
7
1Z /
if
C I
l e. I I Ii / /''_ \
i(/ /.. /
fir \
I
J
0.14 S
52IT"
FAMILY LOTS _
2 Aeta
i E -
E. 176 8612 UWr TDwwIOME11 M N{tiFq _
1t5'EAO 555.5DW AC
1
I
D
ISUMMARY
TOTAL SITE' _ 105 ACRES
COUNTY ROADS R.O.w: 25.5 ACRES
HISTORY (90109)
t' ERE
Sugar Hills RPUD e. Concept Plan
Plymouth, Minnesota ' " —.- 7=LJ 1
By Forbragd & Harstad
7Hfl 15 '? t =14 ttF'fl 11CCi= p1Fr =; FF'Hfll:: F'i_r_, F _
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
5050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447 Telephone Engineers
612/476 -6010 Planners
612/476 -8532 FAX Surveyors
MEMO
TO: Mr. Charles Dillerud, Director of Community Development
City of Plymouth
FROM: Michael J. Cair, McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
DATE: January 15, 1992
SUBJECT: Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.
Land Use Amendment
Trunk Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane
MFRA #9689
1. During a brief phone conversation in the late afternoon of January 14,
1992, we mentioned the January 9, 1992 traffic analysis concluded
that Land Use proposed in the Wal -Mart development could be supported
by the adjacent roadway system ", if the recommendations contained in
the traffic study were implemented. You mentioned traffic is of
concern, insofar as one of the recommendations is for additional left
turn lanes at Vicksburg and T.H. 55.
I understand your point; however, I think it is also worth noting that
the Traffic Stuffy states "based on these forecasts (as found in the
study), a Year 2010 capacity analysis of the subject intersection
indicated that Vicksburg and Highway 55 would operate at a level of
service E, during the future PM peak hour for both development
scenarios, or alternatively, level D service with the improvements It
is, in part, on this analysis that the traffic recommendations are
made.
2. With regard to the idea of approving this request and "making other
land use amendment requests by others more feasible or likely ", I
understand that land use changes are determined strictly at the
discretion of the City. I believe this aspect of discretionary action
would allow the City the opportunity to determine such issues on the
merits of each individual request and not constitute a negative trend.
3. The subject property is, in fact, a unique Betting and embodies the
elements of Trunk Highway 55, Vicksburg and, most importantly, the
City Center. This uniqueness makes the determination of appropriate
land use distinct from other areas of Plymouth. No other setting in
the City is comparable considering the fact that "downtown Plymouth"
is adjacent.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
AH 15 '91-:' 04 : E1G,Ft'1 f 1C = _!I 1B FRAI II ; P01-YE.
Mr. Charles Dillerud
January 15, 1992
Page Two
P. - _
4. With regard to property to the north, it is important to note that
this Land Use Amendment request is co- sponsored by Mr. Forbragd, fee
owners and the owner of additional property located north of proposed
36th Avenue North. Mr. Forbragd owns property that extends 1,800 feet
north along Vicksburg; he is fully cognizant of the request and
confident of overall development.
cc: Bruce Malkerson, Esq.
Carl Ownbey, Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.
Terry Gibson, Raul Walters Properties
Eugene Forbragd
Martin Harstad
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
January 17, 1992
Mr. Charles Dillerud, Director of Community Development
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
SUBJECT: Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.
City File #91 -108
Land Use Guide Plan Amendment Request
MFRA #9689
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
Telephone Engineers
612/476 -6010 Planners
612/476 -8532 FAX Surveyors
JAN 17 13, "
CIT`/ OF PLYMOUTH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
On January 16, 1992, we received notice of the completed Staff Report for
the above referenced project. Upon receipt and review, we determined that a
response was in order, and as normal procedure, the applicant is encouraged to
respond appropriately.
I contacted your office first thing on January 17, 1992; however, I was
informed that you were out and would not be returning until January 21, 1992•
As a matter of courtesy, I would have preferred to review our concerns with
regard to the Planning Staff Report prior to preparing the attached letter.
However, I would appreciate, if you find it appropriate and convenient, to
review this matter upon return to your office.
Kindest regards,
McgOMBS ROOS/ SOCIATES, INC.
4ichael J. arr
MG:jmj
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Bruce Malkerson, Esq.
Mr. Carl Ownbey, Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.
Mr. Terry Gibson, Raul Walters Properties
Mr. Eugene Forbragd
An Equal Opportunity Employer
McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.
15050 23rd Avenue North, Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Mayor Kim Bergman
City Council Members
Chairman Michael Stulberg
Planning Commission Members
ATTN: Mr. Charles E. Dillerud,
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Telephone Engineers
612/476 -6010 Planners
612/476 -8532 FAX Surveyors
January 17, 1992 R =7r== EWE 0
JAN 17 19P2
CITE' OF PLYMOUTH
Community Development Director OMMUtdiTY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
SUBJECT: Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.
Planning and Zoning Application Staff Report
City File #91108
Comments in Response to Questions Raised
In the Staff Report
MFRA #9689
Dear Mayor, Councilmembers and Planning Commission:
1. Overview
The purpose of this letter is to respond to the questions raised in
the City Staff's report concerning Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.'s request for
a reguiding and rezoning.
The Planning Commission has before it an opportunity to support the
development of a significant retail facility which will provide
benefits to the City. Those benefits include:
a. quality and a variety of retail shopping at very competitive
prices for the citizens of Plymouth at a Wal -Mart Store which is
recognized as the nation's leading and most successful retail
outlet;
b. immediate and significant increases in the tax base of the City
versus having this property remain vacant for 13 years
estimated) as determined by an independent market expert if this
property remains guided as CL;
C. the creation of numerous jobs; and
d. the development of this property to its highest and best use in
corformance with good planning for the City.
We beleive these benefits are meaningful and should be desired by the
City; however, if the City does not agree or want the above benefits,
denial of the request would be appropriate.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Mayor Kim Bergman
City Council Members
Chairman Michael Stulberg
Planning Commission Members
January 17, 1992
Page Two
Wal -Mart Stores, Inc., and Mr. Forbragd, the present fee owner of the
site and the adjacent 80+ acres to the north, are ready, willing and
able to modify both the Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.'s proposal and Mr.
Forbragd's pending proposed residential plat on the property, adjacent
to north to meet the needs of the City related to this site.
Similarly, if the Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.'s proposal requires fair share
payment for off -site roadway improvements, Wal -Mart Stores, Inc. would
like to know the cost thereof, but philosophically sees no reason not
to pay for improvements it benefits from.
2. History of Development of this Site and the Additional Adjacent
the North
As City staff points out, when Mr. Forbragd sought to develop this
site and his adjacent property, he and his experts determined that the
site adjacent to Highway 55 could not be developed for CL uses,
because there was no market for such uses in the foreseeable future.
Mr. Forbragd sought to have this site reguided to LA -3 (High Medium
Density). The Planning Commission agreed on a 6 to 1 vote.
However, as shown in the Council minutes in the staff report, the City
Council rejected the Planning Commission's recommendation. The
overwhelmingly expressed reason wsa that the proposed residential use
did not create enough tax base for the City. The minutes state:
Councilmember Ricker expressed concern about the loss of
commercial base to support the residential development in
Plymouth; this proposal would reduce that base, and could have
negative fiscal impacts.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated the proposed guiding was not the
highest and best land use for this corner.
Mr. Forbragd's representative met with Blair Tremere to discuss
possible retail reguiding and was informed that if the City were to
consider retail guiding at this site, it would be better to have a
proposed end user under contract so the City would know what the end
retail user would be if the City approved the reguiding. That was
understandable. Mr. Forbragd thereafter proceeded to obtain
preliminary plat approval for the remainder of the property, leaving
this present site for future development. He was approached by
Wal -Mart Stores, Inc., which had determined that this was the only
site in the City with the appropriate size, visibility and central
location for a major retail store; an additional positive feature is
the adjacency to City Center and downtown Plymouth. This retail store
would clearly be the highest and best use of the property. Mr. Lee
Maxfield, a well known market analyst, confirmed that this site
otherwise would remain vacant for at least 13 years (and perhaps
longer) if it remained guided CL (see report in your packet).
Mayor Kim Bergman
City Council Members
Chairman Michael Stulberg
Planning Commission Members
January 17, 1992
Page Three
Meanwhile, the City Council was debating whether or not to extend
sanitary sewer to properties west of this area because of the City
Council's concern that additional residential development would not
pay its way, and would have a negative impact on the City's finances
and may increase the School District's taxes on the citizens of
Plymouth because of additional school children.
Mr. Forbragd concluded that a Wal -Mart development at this site would
provide substantial and immediate increase of tax base, without
creating the demand for City and School District Services as
residential would. He entered into a purchase agreement with Wal -Mart
Stores, Inc., contingent upon development approval by the City.
3. The Wal -Mart Development would be good for the City. We believe that
all concerns of the staff and Planning Commission can be adequately
addressed to the City's satisfaction.
The biggest concern seems to be that if the reguiding and rezoning is
approved. Wal -Mart may not be the end user. We beleive this concern
is a procedural one which can be adequately addressed by the Council.
Alternative ways of handling this procedure are as follows:
A. Any reguiding and rezoning need not be approved by the City
Council until the Planning Commission and City Council have seen
and approved of the entire detailed and final development plan,
including the appropriate developer's agreement to ensure that
Wal -Mart binds itself to specific on -site improvements and
payment of benefitting off -site improvements.
Moreover, Mr. Forbragd can and will concurrently modify his final
residential plat to make those changes required by the City, if
any, to provide additional buffers, create wetland compensation,
etc.
B. In the alternative to the procedure suggested above and although
procedurally we do not think it is necessary, if the City wanted
to do so, any final reguiding and rezoning of this could be
contingent upon Wal -Mart Stores, Inc's completing the agreed -upon
improvements by a date certain, or the City could reguide and
rezone the property back to the original CL. Wal -Mart Stores,
Inc. and Mr. Forbragd agree to sign an agreement with the City to
that affect and to waive any right to object to such a reversion
back to the original CL. In that way, the City will be assured
of having only a specific City approved retail store at this
site. This procedure is used throughout the country by cities
which want greater control over the development process.
Mayor Kim Bergman
City Council Members
Chairman Michael Stulberg
Planning Commission Members
January 17, 1992
Page Four
4. Response to Certain Specific Comments or Questions in the City Staff's
Report
A. End Use - Staff had suggested to us previously and stated in
their report that a complete end use development Plan at this
point is not desirable. That is fine with us, but we do not want
our request rejected because the City does not have all the
details of the proposed end land use.
In any event, we would rather have a "concept" recommendation of
approval from the Planning Commission if the Commission does not
want to make a formal recommendation of approval at this time.
We could then see if the City Council conceptually agrees with
the proposed reguiding and thereafter return to the Planning
Commision to work out the details of the formal approvals.
B. Wetlands - We would be filling one acre of wetland which has been
approved by the Army Corps of Engineers. If the City determines
that replacement of wetland is needed, we can do so on this site
or on the adjacent property owned by Mr. Forbragd. This is a
development detail which we know we can work out to the City's
satisfaction.
C. Compatibility with Proposed Adjacent Residential Uses - Because
the property be developed by Mr. Forbragd to the north is still
in the platting process. Mr. Forbragd has agreed to modify the
lot layouts and buffer areas, as may be necessary at the City's
request to ensure compatibility with this project. We are
confident we can meet such concerns the City may have.
D. Timing of CL Development - It is interpreted that if the property
remains guided as CL, there would not be a market for that use
until at least 13 years (see Maxfield's report). However, this
is not the reason why this reguiding should be approved; it is at
least a relevant factor to be considered.
E. Impact on Other CR -2 Property - We have seen no information that
would show or tend to show that the developmetn of a Wal -Mart
Store on this site would negatively impact other vacant CR -2
property. This is a unique site with its visibility and
proximity to the City Center. A Wal -Mart Store needs a large
site of this size with this visibility in the central area of the
City. No other CR -2 site meets these locational and size
criteria.
Mayor Kim Bergman
City Council Members
Chairman Michael Stulberg
Planning Commission Members
January 17, 1992
Page Five
F. Benefits to the City - Of course, this proposal benefits
Wal -Mart; otherwise, Wal -Mart would not be proposing it.
However, the City will benefit for the reasons noted herein and
in our prior submissions to the City.
G. Highest and Best Use - We do not think any other possible use
could be developed on this site that is a higher or better use
than this proposal. There is no information to the contrary.
H. Impact on Other Elements of the Comprehensive Plan - The only
possible impact relates to traffic. However, the traffic
engineers report shows that the adjacent roadway system could
support this amendment, with the addition of the proposed
off -site and on -site improvements.
I. Future Taxes - Mr. Maxfield finds that this property will not
otherwise be developed for at least 13 years. The loss of
revenue to the City will be substantial during that time period
see report by Publicorp in your packet). We beleive that the
City Council has clearly directed this site should be developed
to the "Highest and Best Use" to maximize the City's tax base
see prior Council minutes relating to this site). That is good
planning and this proposal meets this goal.
J. Pedestrian Traffic Areas - Because there will be a semaphore on
Vicksburg at 36th, we believe that pedestrians can easily access
to this project.
K. Other Issues - There will undoubtedly be other issues, concerns
and questions raised during the Public Hearing; we hope to
satisfactorily address these on January 22, 1992•
5. SUMMARY
Because of the planning flexibility related to this site, i.e.,
unplatted land to the north owned by Mr. Forbragd, we believe we can
modify this proposed End Use Plan to meet the City's needs. However,
we cannot suggest such changes for your review and approval without
your input.
Mayor Kim Bergman
City Council Members
Chairman Michael Stulberg
Planning Commission Members
January 17, 1992
Page Six
We hope that, at the January 22, 1992 meeting, we can discuss these matters
and, if necessary, modify our plans to meet City needs. Please contact me if
you find a need for additional information we should provide prior to the
meeting.
Kindest regards,
McC MBS FRANK ROOS
Michael 96gr
MG:jmj
cc: Mr. Charles Dillerud, Community Development Director
Mr. Bruce Malkerson, Esq.
Mr. Carl Ownbey, Wal -Mart Stores, Inc.
Mr. Terry Gibson, Raul Walters Properties
Mr. Eugene Forbragd
ASSOCIATES, INC.
i
5,'A.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: January 7, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: January 22, 1992
FILE NO.: 91109
PETITIONER: GEM Enterprises
REQUEST: Site Plan Amendment at Plymouth Shopping Center for Twin
City Pet Supply
LOCATION: Southeast quadrant of Highway 55 and Cottonwood Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CR -2 (Retail Shopping)
ZONING: B -2 (Shopping Center Business)
BACKGROUND:
There are no Community Development activity files regarding the construction
of the existing Plymouth Shopping Center building. There are however, several
Community Development activity files concerning proposals for this property
subsequent to the initial construction of the building.
In 1982, a grading permit was issued to allow the surcharge filling of the
easterly portion of this site. In 1983, a second grading permit was issued
for additional grading and filling on the eastern portion of the site.
In August, 1988, the Prime Development Corporation applied for a Preliminary
Plat and General Development Plan for redevelopment of this site . A Planning
Commission hearing was held on August 10, 1988 resulting in action to defer
consideration of the Prime Development application for design modifications to
reflect existing zoning of the site, and consistency with the then existing
Thoroughfare Guide Plan for the area. No further submissions or actions were
taken regarding that application.
On July 2, 1990, the City Council, by Resolution 90 -394, approved a
Preliminary Plat and General Development Plan for the Shopping Center which
included an 8,127 square foot addition to the existing 33,440 square foot
shopping center and 27,010 square feet of construction for three additional
buildings on this site. This project was never started.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. This request is for the construction of a loading dock on the rear of the
building and the placement of a new bituminous driving area, curb and
gutter, and catch basin /outfall on the south and east portions on the
existing building. There are no building expansions proposed by this Site
Plan application.
Page Two
File 91109
2. Since the property abuts residentially zoned property to the south, this
proposal can not be administratively approved and must be reviewed by the
Planning Commission and approved by the City Council.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. This proposal will facilitate the renovation of this shopping center site
into a better utilized center.
2. Staff finds that the proposed Site Plan Amendment meets the standards set
for Section 11, Subdivision A regarding Site Plans. Since there is no
building addition proposed, additional landscaping requirements and other
site improvements are not required at this time.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the Site Plan Amendment in accordance with the
attached resolution for the Plymouth Shopping Center.
Submitted by:
arles E. Dillerud, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Site Plan Amendment
2. Engineer's Memo
3. Petitioner's Narrative
4. Location Map
5. Large Plans
pc /jk /91109:dh)
0
APPROVING SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR GEM ENTERPRISES (91109)
WHEREAS, GEM Enterprises has requested approval for a Site Plan Amendment for
the. addition of a loading dock and driving area construction for property
located at 11311 State Highway 55; 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 for
GEM Enterprises for a Site Plan Amendment for the construction of a loading
dock and driving area for property located at 11311 State Highway 55 subject
to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Submission of a required financial guarantee and Site Performance
Agreement for completion of site improvements within 12 months from the
date of this resolution.
3. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
4. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
5. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants
and fire lanes.
6. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the principal
structure, and no outside storage is permitted.
res /pc /91109:dh)
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: Januaary 14, 1992
FILE NO.: 91109
PETITIONER: Mr. Charles Kennedy, GEM Enterprises, 527 Marquette, /1925,
Minneapolx, MN 55402
SITE PLAN: PARKING LOT TWIN CITY PET SUPPLY
LOCATION: South of Highway 55, east of Cottonwood Lane in the northeast 1/4 of
Section 35
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X _ SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No. 1 and
No. 2•
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Site Plan approval:
4. Area assessments estimated - None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None.
LEGAL /EASEMENTS /PERMITS:
N/A Yes No
6. _ X Property is one parcel -
The approval of the site plan as proposed requires that a lot
consolidation be approved by the City Council and the necessary
resolution should be processed at the same time as the site plan
approval.
N/A Yes No
7. X — — Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining a.11 streets and six feet W) in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any
building permits.) Necessary easements will be required with future
development.
8. X — — Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100
year high water elevation and conformance with the City's
comprehensive storm water requirements. Ponding easements will be
required with future development.
9. — X — All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities.
N/A Yes No
10. X — — All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
N/A Yes No
12. _ _ X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
X DNR
MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
X Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
X Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
13. _ X _ Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The site plan will be submitted to the City's consulting engineer
for review to see if it is in conformance with the City's
Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All of their recommendations
shall be incorporated in a revised plan. The grading and drainage
plan shall also indicate proposed methods of erosion control,
including the placement of silt fence in strategic locations.
Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary:
N/A Yes No
14. X _ _ Necessary fire hydrants provided -
The City of Plymouth requires that all parts of a building such as
the one proposed be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. It will be
necessary to locate hydrants in such a manner that the site plan
complies with this section of the City Ordinance.
15. _ XX Size and type of material proposed in utility systems has been
provided
The utility plan shall be revised to indicate the size and type of
material required in the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain services
and storm sewer.
16. X _ _ Post indicator valve - fire department connection
It will be necessary to locate the post indicator valve in such a
manner that it will not render any of the existing fire hydrants
inoperable.
3-
N/A Yes No
17. X _ _ Hydrant valves provided -
All new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6" gate valves per City
Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W -2. This plate should be
referenced on the site plan.
18. X _ _ Sanitary sewer clean -outs provided -
It will be necessary to provide clean -outs on the proposed internal
sanitary sewer system at a maximum of 100 foot intervals.
19. _X_ _ _ Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
N/A Yes No
20. _X_ _ All existing street right -of -ways are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on
21. _ X _ Complies with site drainage requirements -
The City will not permit drainage onto a City street from a private
parking lot; therefore, the site plan shall be revised accordingly.
4-
N/A Yes No
22. _ _ X Curb and gutter provided -
The City requires B -612 concrete curb and gutter at all entrances
and where drainage must be controlled, Curb Stone may be used where
it is not necessary to control drainage. For traffic control either
B -612 or curb stone is required around the bituminous surfaced
parking lot. The site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance
Xith this requirement. The curb at the rear of the building shall
be either curbstone or B -612 curb and gutter/
23. _ X _ Complies with parking lot standards -
The City will require that all traveled areas within the parking
lot, as well as the proposed entrances, shall be constructed to a
7 -ton standard City design with six inches of Class 5 1002 crushed
limestone and three inches of 2341 wear or five and one -half inches
of 2331 base and two inches of 2341 wear. All parking areas may be
constructed to a standard 5 -ton design consisting of four inches of
Class 5 1002 crushed base and two inch bituminous mat. The site
plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with these
requirements.
N/A Yes No
24. _ X _ It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's utility
foreman,
24 hours in advance of making any proposed utility connections to
the City's sanitary sewer and water systems. The developer shall
also be responsible for contacting Jim Kolstad of the Public Works
Department for an excavating permit prior to any digging within the
City's right -of -way. All connections to the water system shall be
via wet tap.
25. _ X _ The City will require reproducible mylar prints of sanitary sewer,
water service and storm sewer As- Builts for the site prior to
occupancy permits being granted.
26. _ _ X The site plan complies with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual. See Item Nos. 7. 8. 11. 12. and 22.
5-
27.
Submitted : b y
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
6-
City Engineer
Planning and Zoning Applicatioi inn
Paige -e 11 a
t.
7. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST (Attach separate sheet, if necessary):
Loading dock, 7 ton bituminous drive surface, B6 -12 curbing and
gutter acid `catc'h basin with outfall to the south and east portions
of the east end of the existing building.
MIN
r
II
I IN i lei:
i r mr rr^
Iiiillli
INa
0
JA008
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: January 6, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: January 22, 1992
FILE NO.: 91110
PETITIONER: Gerald W. Theis
REQUEST: Lot Division and Subdivision Ordinance Variance for Dunkirk
55 /RBJ
LOCATION: Northwest of Highway 55 and Dunkirk Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Medium Residential) and CS (Service
Business)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development District)
BACKGROUND:
There are no Community Development activity files on this parcel.
Notice of Planning Commission consideration of this application has been
mailed as a courtesy to all property owners within 100 feet of the site.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The applicant proposes a division of an existing 37.94 acre tract of land
into two tracts of 19.89 acres and 17.25 acres with .8 acres being
proposed for Dunkirk Lane easement.
2. Resulting from this property division application would be a Variance from
Section 500.37 of the Subdivision Ordinance. That section permits the
division of 1pattedlandbutdoesnotprovideforthedivisionof
unplatted land. The Variance is to allow the division of an unplatted
parcel by this procedure.
3. The Subdivision Ordinance provides for three criteria to be found by the
Planning Commission and City Council before any Subdivision Ordinance
Variance may be granted. A copy of those three criteria and the
applicant's response is attached to this staff report.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. We find the requested variance complies with Subdivision Ordinance
Variance Criteria.
2. Park dedication fees will be applied with the development of two parcels.
Page Two
File 91110
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the Lot Division and Variances in accordance
with the attached esolutions.
Submitted by:_ t
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Developm rector
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Lot Division
2. Resolution Setting Conditions Granting Subdivision Ordinance Variance
3. Engineer's Memorandum
4. Subdivision Ordinance Variance Criteria
5. Petitioner's Narrative
6. Location Map
7. Site Graphics
pc /jk /91110:jw)
J
APPROVING LOT DIVISION AND VARIANCE FOR DUNKIRK 55 /RBJ LOCATED NORTHWEST OF
HIGHWAY 55 AND DUNKIRK LANE (91110)
WHEREAS, Dunkirk 55 /RBJ has requested approval for a lot division and variance
for the creation of 2 lots located northwest of Highway 55 and Dunkirk Lane;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the lot division
and variance for Dunkirk 55 /RBJ for property located northwest of Highway 55
and Dunkirk Lane.
EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
That part of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17,
Township 118, Range 22, lying south of a line drawn from a point on the
east line thereof distant 659 feet south of the northeast corner thereof
to a point on the west line thereof distant 651.7 feet south of the
Northwest corner thereof, excepting therefrom that part thereof described
as follows: Beginning at a point on the south line of said Northeast 1/4
of the Southwest 1/4, distant 485.00 feet west of the southeast corner
thereof; thence east along said south line to the southeast corner of
said Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4; thence north 247.00 feet along
the east line of said Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4; thence
deflecting left 90 degrees a distance of 263.00 feet to a point of curve;
thence along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 190 feet
and delta angle of 34 degrees a distance of 112.75 feet to a point of
common curve; thence along a tangential curve to the left having a radius
of 250 feet and delta angle of 21 degrees a distance of 91.63 feet;
thence southerly to the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
To be divided and consolidated as follows:
PARCEL A
That part of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17,
Township 118, North Range 22, West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying
North of a line drawn from a point on the East line thereof distant
659.00 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof to a point on the West
line thereof 651.7 feet South of the Northwest corner thereof.
PARCEL B
That part of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17,
Township 118, Range 22, lying south of a line drawn from a point on the
east line thereof distant 659 feet south of the northeast corner thereof
to a point on the west line thereof distant 651.7 feet south of the
Northwest corner thereof, excepting therefrom that part thereof described
as follows: Beginning at a point on the south line of said Northeast 1/4
of the Southwest 1/4, distant 485.00 feet west of the southeast corner
thereof; thence east along said south line to the southeast corner of
said Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4; thence north 247.00 feet along
the east line of said Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4; thence
deflecting left 90 degrees a distance of 263.00 feet to a point of curve;
thence along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 190 feet
Page Two
File 91110
and delta angle of 34 degrees a distance of 112.75 feet to a point of
common curve; thence along a tangential curve to the left having a radius
of 250 feet and delta angle of 21 degrees a distance of 91.63 feet;
thence southerly to the point of beginning, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
FURTHER, that the City Manager be authorized to make the necessary special
assessment corrections based upon City Policy when the division /consolidation
is approved by Hennepin County.
res /pc /91110)
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO LOT DIVISION
AND APPROVING A SUBDIVISION VARIANCE FOR DUNKIRK 55 /RBJ (91110)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved a Lot Division, and Subdivision
Variance for Dunkirk 55 /RBJ for the creation of two tracts of land located
northwest of Highway 55 and Dunkirk Lane,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does direct the following
conditions to be met prior to recording of, and related to said lot
division /consolidation:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. No yard setback variances are granted or implied.
3. A variance is granted from Section 500.21 of the City Code (Subdivision
Ordinance) for the creation of a 19.89 acre tract of land (Parcel A) and
a 17.25 tract of land (Parcel B), versus the Zoning Ordinance minimum of
20 acres in the FRD Zone based on the request meeting the variance
criteria.
4. A variance is granted from Section 500.37 (Subdivision Ordinance)
regarding division of platted property, based on the request meeting the
variance criteria.
res /pc /91110.sc)
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: January 14, 1992
FILE NO.: 91110
PETITIONER: Mr. Gerald Theis, RBJ, Inc., 16800 Highway 55, Plymouth, MN 55446
LOT DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION: Parcel No. 17- 118 -22 -31 -0002
LOCATION: North of Highway 55, west of Dunkirk Lane in the southwest 1/4 of
Section 17.
N/A Yes No
1. _ X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Lot Division /Consolidation approval:
4. Area assessments: None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None.
LEGAL /EASEMENTS /PERMITS:
6. X _ _ Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required,
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any building
permits.) Easements will be obtained when the parcel is final
platted.
N/A Yes No
7. XX _ _ Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Storm Drainage Plan.
8. X — _ Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots:
9. X _ _ All standard utility easements required for construction
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities itTi1ityeasementswhererequiredwillbeobtainedwith
final plat.
10. X _ _ All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way to
facilitate the development. This vacation is not an automatic
process in conjunction with the platting process. It is entirely
dependent upon the City receiving a petition for the vacation from
the property owner; therefore, it is their responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated.
X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
12. _ _ X All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on An additional 7 feet of
right -of -way will be required on Dunkirk Lane, making a total
distance from center line of 40 feet.
13. A. A comprehensive storm sewer plan shows a 36 inch trunk sewer from the center of
the parcel northeasterly to Dunkirk Lane.
Submitted by: V a N77 C1- rr lit
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
2
City Engineer
i:'1 •• 0:'
1. General Conditions. The Planning Comaission may recommend a variance fram
the provisions of this Section (500.41) as to specific properties when, in
its judgment, an unusual hardship on the land exists. In granting a
variance, the Commission may prescribe conditions that it deems necessary
or desirable in the public interest. In making its findings, as required
below, the Commission shall consider the nature of the proposed use of the
land and the existing use of land in the vicinity, the number of persons
to reside or work in the proposed subdivision, and the probable ^ffect of
the proposed subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. No
variance shall be granted unless the Commission finds:
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the
specific property such that the strict application of the provisions
of this Section would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of
the land.
b. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant.
c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in
which the property is situated.
The Commission findings in granting or denying a variance shall be in
writing and filed with the City Clerk.
2. &4plication _»mod. Applications for any variance under this Subsection
shall be submitted in writing by the owner or subdivider at the time the
preliminary plat is filed for consideration by the Planning Commission,
and shall state all facts relied upon by the applicant, and shall be
supplemented with maps, plans or other additional data which may aid the
Commission in the analysis of the proposed project. The plans for such
development shall include such covenants, restrictions or other legal
provisions necessary to guarantee the full achievement of the plan for the
proposed project.
forms:o >pl /sub.stnd /s) 10/89
Planning and Zoning Applicatior )rm
Page Two
7. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF REa = (Attach separate sheet, if necessary):
It
The parcel was purchased by contract in 1984 and the contract was
registered. The titled owner did not split the property at that time,
since then the balance of property has been sold and the sewer and water
assessments are to be levied. The above mentioned parcel is adjacent to
other land that I own and it is not practical to create an extremely
long legal.
OC TION kp i
9 slillio
I
1 + I
I I
le
PLYMOUTH CREEK 0.
II SCHOOL
t7
TTI-
I
l ,
R
t
f
I r
I I 34TH A%
I '
ILL
BOUNDARY SURVEY FOR:
CRAIG MORTON
lll
HY -LAND SURVEYING INC
Lo.nd Surveyor
N•r k, e •f NE 1/4 •{ $w "4 ie.• T IIA, R I2
1321 6 • -- ti e•Zi ..,3' E I
glee .e
ZIla
i P
J
33 33
m Ni
G
N
N
4
N T 3227) - ti 61 041 .
i W I R1rJ1 - Cs•eersr..• ,losoc_ i2E/9 37_ Eo• <•r ' .rr O.r N. 4E4S1.C w _ Z
Ads
Z e
YC
VIulE nV OI
Y
PI
0 . O I A I to
MI3
1
sl°
1' I
4 33 33
I Wit
1300
e•re' "w I x
e. y,•oo i V R. NO 00 cr
u175 o j
H ti
V N
0
OON
b -- X659-
e38 as•-' ni B/•23 Z(E r eaet ;,•. ner .:
i
5•.iti ee . NE %4 4 SW ' 4 !7
i
NE'a ,r Sw '•4
PARCEL "A" 866,386 Square Feet
That port of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of
Section 17, Township 118, North Range 22, west of the
5trn Principal Merldiom. lying Nortn of a line ;raven from
a point on the East line thereof ,listont 655.uJ feet
Soutn of the Northeast corner to -,reuf to a pn.tnt on t:ie
West line thereof 651.7 feet Scutn of the Nortriwest corner
Invoice No. 142
Scale: 1" =150'
Note: No title opinion provied by owner.
I nereoy hereby certify that this plan was prepureC
nr under r,y direct supervision and that I om a duly
rea uteren land survevor under the laws of the Stut
t.
JAMES J. THOMSON
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial (612) 337 -9209
January 16, 1992
J k
HoLmEs & GRAVEN
CHARTERED
470 Pillsbury Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
t_ t L- 1 lViOUTF (612) 337-9300
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
Chuck Dillerud
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
RE: Regulation of Advertising Signs
Dear Chuck:
You requested an opinion regarding the City's ability to regulate
advertising signs. Municipalities have the authority to regulate
signs, including advertising signs. The regulations must be
reasonable and based on legitimate health, safety and welfare
concerns. Courts have generally concluded that aesthetics and
traffic safety reasons are a valid basis for regulating signs.
Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego, 101 S. Ct. 2882 (1981); City
Council v. Taxpayers for Vincent, 104 S. Ct. 2118 (1984).
A distinction needs to be kept in mind between signs that contain
commercial message and signs that contain noncommercial messages.
When reviewing regulations governing signs containing a commercial
message, the courts will normally give deference to the City's
actions. However, restrictions on signs that contain noncommercial
messages receive greater protection under the First Amendment and
therefore will be closely scrutinized by the courts.
In Minnesota, courts have upheld the City's ability to
differentiate between on -site commercial signs ( "business signs"
under the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance) and off -site commercial signs
advertising signs" under the Zoning Ordinance) . Courts have
upheld a total prohibition of off -site commercial signs, even
though on -site commercial signs were allowed. City of Cottage
Grove v. Ott, 395 N.W.2d 111 (Minn. App. 1986). Again, the
regulation has to be reasonable and based on legitimate concerns
such as traffic safety and aesthetics. Regulations that place more
restrictions on noncommercial signs than on commercial signs
normally will run into problems. Goward v. City of Minneapolis,
456 N.W.2d 460 (Minn. App. 1990).
Currently, the City's Zoning Ordinance differentiates between
business signs and advertising signs. Both types of signs are
allowable accessory uses in the B -3 and I -1 Districts and are
JJT27560
PL100 -32CD
Chuck Dillerud
January 16, 1992
Page 2
subject to certain location and size regulations. Business signs
are also allowable in the B -1 and B -2 Districts.
You have asked me the following specific questions.
1. Can the City prohibit all advertising signs?
2. Can the City restrict advertising signs to certain areas in
the City?
The answers to your questions are that the City can prohibit
advertising signs provided there is a legitimate public health and
welfare concern, such as aesthetics or traffic safety. The City
could also limit advertising signs to specified areas. Again, keep
in mind that signs containing noncommercial speech cannot be
prohibited. The City may, however, adopt reasonable regulations
pertaining to the size and location of such noncommercial signs.
One other factor that needs to be kept in mind is that if the City
adopts an ordinance prohibiting advertising signs, the existing
advertising signs will become nonconforming. Under the current
City Zoning Ordinance, those signs would be allowed to remain in
place for five years. That amortization period, however, could not
apply to advertising signs that are located adjacent to "primary
highways." Minn. Stat. §173.14(4) (1990). Primary highways
include interstate highways and trunk highways. In those areas,
the City would have to pay for the signs if they wanted them
eliminated. Op. Attorney General, 477 -B -2, November 15, 1983.
You may want to consider adding a new Zoning Ordinance provision
pertaining to "Public Service Signs." The term would be defined to
include signs containing a noncommercial message. Those signs
could then be regulated separately from "advertising signs" and
business signs."
Please let me know if you have any additional questions. If you
would like me to attend the Planning Commission meeting at which
this topic is discussed, I would be happy to do so.
Sincerely,
J me J. Thomson
JJT:jes
JJT27560
PL100 -32CD