HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 04-17-199229LIJ
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: April 17, 1992
TO: Planning C
FROM: Chuck Dil nity Development Director
a Ao
SUBJECT: CONTINUED NSIDERATION OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS REGARDING
ADULT RECTION FACILITIES
Attached please find a memorandum from the City Attorney regarding the issue
raised at the March 11, 1992 Planning Commission meeting.
Mr. Fine, Superintendent of the Hennepin County Adult Corrections Facility had
asked whether the "Master Plan" approved for the ACF which shows an adult
education and gymnasium facility that is yet to be constructed would have
precedence over the Zoning Ordinance setback provisions that were now under
consideration. He noted that those new setback provisions would preclude
construction of the gymnasium and adult education facility as additions to the
mens unit due to violation of setbacks if the previously approved Master Plan
did not take precedence.
The City Attorney tells us that the City may amend its zoning provisions at
any time, and have the new zoning provisions applicable to any construction
that is undertaken thereafter, regardless of whether a site design contrary to
those new zoning regulations may have been previously approved - -but not
executed. In other words, the 600 foot setback provisions now proposed in the
Zoning Ordinance Amendment under consideration would prevail, and the
gymnasium /adult education facility could not be constructed unless a Zoning
Ordinance Variance were granted regarding the 600 foot setback now under
consideration.
Copies of this attorney's opinion and notice of consideration of this matter
by the Planning Commission on April 22, was mailed to all parties who spoke at
the March 11, 1992 Public Hearing. I have attached the agenda materials that
were originally provided regarding this agenda item.
Attachments:
1. Opinion of the City Attorney, April 9, 1992
2. Letter Requesting Attorney's Opinion of March 20, 1992
3. Agenda Materials Regarding Zoning Ordinance Amendment for Adult Correction
Facilities from March 11, 1992
SR:pc /cd /ac /4- 22:jw)
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: CITY MANAGER
FROM: CITY ATTORNEY
DATE: April 9, 1992
RE: City of Plymouth /Hennepin County Workhouse Rezoning
Issue
BACKGROUND
In 1981 the Plymouth City Council approved a
Conditional use permit for the Adult Correctional Facility
operated by Hennepin County. Among the conditions included in
this permit was the proviso that "any additional construction
and expansion shall be subject to ordinance conditional use and
site plan approval requirements [sic]." City Council Resolution
No. 81 -141, Item 5. A "Conceptual Master Plan" was subsequently
approved by the City Council in 1983, with the requirement "that
future developments shall be subject to the approved Conceptual
Master Plan." Resolution No. 83 -48, Item 1. Unfortunately, we
have not located the conditional use permit itself, or any
agreement affirmatively executed by the County memorializing its
agreement to these terms. Amendment of this Master Plan, and
the conditional use permit, was approved by the City Council in
July, 1991, requiring that "development of the site shall be in
compliance with the Conceptual Master Plan dated December, 1989
Resolution No. 91 -395, Item 1. All of the developments
contained in the master plan have been completed or are under
construction, except.for an adult educational facility and a
gymnasium.
This facility was originally designed to house
approximately 400 inmates, and these inmates have historically
been misdemeanants. The Plymouth Planning Commission has
recommended two zoning ordinance changes which would if upheld
effectively prevent any further development or construction on
the site, including the previously planned educational facility
and gymnasium. The first proposed change is to delete "adult
correctional facility" from the definition of permitted
conditional uses within any residential district. This would
make the Hennepin County facility a nonconforming use, so that
no expansion of this use could occur. However, this would not
necessarily prevent the construction of the educational facility
and gymnasium if these would not be expansions of the adult
correctional facility use. The second change would be to
increase the set -back requirement for adult correctional
facilities to 600 feet, which would leave only a very small
triangle of land in the center of the site open to development.
This would effectively prevent any further development on the
site, including the planned new educational facility and
gymnasium. Plymouth's Community Development Director has asked
us to determine if the fact that the City Council has approved
the "Conceptual Master Plan" which included the educational
facility and gymnasium prevents adoption of ordinance changes
which would prevent their construction, and, if not, whether
these changes are otherwise permissible.
ANALYSIS
Generally, a municipality may amend a zoning statute to
make previously permitted uses nonconforming, and thereby
prevent their further expansion, regardless of whether the use
was previously conditional or permitted as of right. See
Rathkop, The Law of Zoning and Planning, Volume 3 at 41 -92;
see also Hawkinson v. Itasca County, 231 N.W.2d 279, 304 Minn.
367 (1975); Rose Cliff Nursery v. City of Rosemount, 476 N.W.2d
641, (Minn. App. 1991) (city could deny building permit based on
amendment to zoning ordinance made after permit application was
filed). This right to amend zoning ordinances is limited where
a property owner has acquired a "vested right" in a previously
permitted use by having started construction, expended funds,
entered into binding commitments, or otherwise substantially
changed his position in reliance upon the previous permit or
ordinance. See, e.g., Wermaqer v. Cormorant Township Board, 416
F.2d 1211 (CA 8 1983); Rose Cliff Nursery, 467 N.W.2d 641.
Although no Minnesota court has considered the issue, courts in
other states have concluded that "no vested right to a
particular use in a zoned district is acquired by approval of a
plan for it." McQuillin, Municipal Corporations, Volumn 8,
Section 25.155 at 691; see also, York Township Zoning Board v.
Brown, 407 P.A. 649, 182 A.2nd 706 (no vested rights despite
approval of subdivision plans prior to passage of zoning
ordinance). Therefore, although the lack of Minnesota precedent
on the point prevents the drawing of a firm conclusion, it seems
likely that simple approval of a plan generally does not create
a vested right in the property owner which prevents a city from
subsequently changing a zoning ordinance to prohibit the planned
use, unless the property owner has already acted in reliance on
the city's previous approval.
In Plymouth's situation, there is some question what
the actual affect has been of the City Council's resolutions
regarding the County's "Conceptual Master Plan." Although the
resolutions adopted by the City Council purport to approve the
master plan, the actual language of the resolutions tends to
indicate that the master plan is a condition of the permit, not
a blanket approval of all construction pursuant to the plan. In
both the 1983 and 1991 City Council resolutions which purport to
approve the Conceptual Master Plan, the approval is expressly
conditioned upon development in accordance with the master
2-
plan. The resolutions do not state that all such development is
approved, but rather seem to contemplate a plan for development
which may be approved.
In fact, the original conditional use permit resolution
in 1981 provided that all additional construction would be
subject to conditional use and site plan approval requirements.
Resolution 81 -141, Item 5. Another condition was that a
general development plan" be submitted within one year from the
date of that resolution. Id., Item 8. Therefore, it is at
least arguable that submission of the plan was not intended to
result in a blanket approval of all development pursuant to the
plan, but rather that creation of a general development plan was
simply a requirement for initial approval of the conditional use
permit. The City Council later "approved" the development plan
in the sense that it accepted it as satisfying one of the
conditions of the initial permit, but still reserved the right
to review any actual proposed construction, whether or not
pursuant to the plan. If this is the case, the master plan
should not restrain any subsequent zoning ordinance changes.
Even if the master plan was "approved" and the
conditional use permit covers all construction pursuant to the
plan, the zoning regulation can be amended unless the County has
acquired a "vested right" to complete development pursuant to
the plan. See, e.g., Wermager; Rose Cliff Nursery. Since the
County has not begun construction of the additional buildings, nor does it appear that the County has entered into binding
commitments for such construction, it seems unlikely that the
County will be able to establish the reliance necessary to
create such a vested right. It is possible, however, that the
design of the existing buildings was altered in reliance upon
the plan to add the additional facilities, and this could
constitute sufficient.reliance to create a "vested right."
Also, the County may `argue that approval of the master plan has
created a contract between the City and the County to allow
development pursuant to it, but there does not seem to be much
support for this argument in the cases where no action has been
taken in reliance on the approval. In short, whatever the
intent was in "approving" the master plan, this approval may not
prevent the City.:from amending its zoning ordinances to prevent
any further development pursuant to the plan unless the Countycanshowthatithasactedtoitsdetrimentinrelianceuponthe
City's prior approval.
The proposed amendment to make adult correctional
facilities a nonconforming use apparently will not prevent
completion of development pursuant to the master plan in any
event, assuming the City Council would not deem completion of
these facilities an expansion of the "use" as an adult
correctional facility. See Proposed Amendment, Draft No. 1
Explanation and Purpose." Therefore, the status of the master
plan is not relevant to consideration of this amendment.
3-
Likewise, this amendment would not prevent any future
developments which would not be deemed expansions of the "use"
as an adult correctional facility. The City Council would
therefore appear to be free to adopt this amendment, since it
could not affect any "vested rights" the County might have.
The proposed set -back requirement would, however,
prevent any further development of the site, whether or not
pursuant to the master plan. Assuming that the County cannot
show detrimental reliance on the City's prior "approval" of the
master plan, the City will not be prevented by this prior action
from amending the set -back requirement as it proposes. However,
the City Council's action will nonetheless be subject to the
general requirement that zoning ordinances be reasonable and not
arbitrary or capricious. See, e.g., Honn v. City of Coon
Rapids, 313 N.W.2d 409, 417 (Minn. 1981); Curtin Oil v. City of
North Branch, 364 N.W.2d 764 (Minn. App. 1984) (City cannot
arbitrarily deny conditional use permit where all conditions in
ordinances have been satisfied).
CONCLUSION
Unless the County can show detrimental reliance upon
the City's prior approval of the "Conceptual Master Plan," prior
approval of this plan does not, by itself, appear to prevent the
City from amending the zoning ordinance to make Adult
Correctional Facilities a non - conforming use. This amendment
would not prevent further development pursuant to the
Conceptual Master Plan" so long as the additional construction
is not viewed as an expansion of the "use" as an adult
correctional facility. Since a city can clearly amend zoning
ordinances to make previously conforming uses non- conforming,
nothing appears to prevent the City from doing so in this case.
Likewise, prior approval of the "Conceptual Master Plan" will
prevent the City's implementation of the set -back requirement
change only if the County has acquired a "vested right" to
complete development pursuant to the master plan. Assuming that
the County has not acquired such a "vested right" the set -back
requirement may be adopted if it is reasonable, and not
arbitrary and capricious.
2a22u
4-
March 20, 1992
Mr. Robert L. Meller, Jr.
City Attorney
Best & Flanagan
80 S. 8th St., #3500
Minneapolis, MN 55402 -2113
SUBJECT: ADULT CORRECTION FACILITY ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT -- CONFLICT WITH
THE EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Dear Mr. Meller:
At its meeting March 11, 1992 the Planning Commission held the required Public
Hearing and deliberated proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance regarding
adult correction facilities. Your office had reviewed the draft amendments
prior to presentation to the Planning Commission.
During the Public Hearing the Superintendent of the Hennepin County Adult
Correction Facility asked whether the remaining new additions to that
facility, which were a part of the Master Plan, would be permitted or
prohibited should the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance now under
consideration be adopted. Since the facility itself would become a
nonconforming use as the result of our amendments, and since the additions (a
gym and an adult educational facility) would both be within prescribed setback
per the amendments proposed I responded that I was not certain of the
appropriate answer, and would request an opinion of the City Attorney.
Following substantial discussion by the Planning Commission and City Council a
Conditional Use Permit was approved in 1983 to allow the Hennepin County Adult
Corrections Facility on its current location subject to a site Master Plan
which specified future additions and improvements to the site. The
Conditional Use Permit and the site Master Plan were amended in 1991 to
reflect adjustments to the plan requested by Hennepin County. Of the site
improvements shown on the latest approved Master Plan all are either
constructed or under construction except the adult educational facility and
the gymnasium shown 'as additions to the mens facility. These are the future
additions that are in question should the now proposed Zoning Ordinance
amendments regarding adult correction facilities be adopted.
I have enclosed with this letter a copy of the latest Adult Correction
Facility Master Plan together with the approving resolution for the
Conditional Use Permit. I believe the appropriate question here is whether
the existence of an approved Master Plan as a condition of the Conditional Use
Permit takes precedent or is subject to a later Zoning Ordinance amendment
making the facility both nonconforming and the yet to be constructed
improvements nonconforming as to setback and site coverage.
3400 PLYMOUTH EOULF \YARD PLYMO! i1 H ! ",i %E' zOIA = 1 17_.:- IF I. FPHONF (6121 750 5000
s
Page Two
Robert Meller
Should you have any questions concerning these matters please feel free to
contact me at 550 -5059. I have indicated to the Planning Commission that we
will not be returning with this until at least their meeting of April 8, 1992.
To enable appropriate notification of neighbors who are concerned about this
matter is will be necessary.for me to hear from you during the week of March
23 if the April 8 meeting is still our target.
Sincerely,
La
C es E. Di 11 e ru
U
d
Community Development Director
Enclosures
cc: James G. Willis, City Manager
pl /cd /bm.3- 20:jw)
L /
4 CPO
DRAFT AMENDMENT NO.
NEARING DATE: March 11, 1992
DESCRIPTION:
Redefinition of dimensional standards relating to yard setbacks, lot coverage, and
parking lot setbacks for adult correctional facilities. Deletion of adult
correctional facilities as an allowable use in all zoning districts.
SECTIONS INVOLVED: Section 7, Subdivision C; Section 7, Subdivision D; and Section
10, Subdivision B.
EXPLANATION /PURPOSE:
The City Council adopted Resolution 91 -512 directing staff to review the Zoning
Ordinance with respect to the possible need for additional requirements for spacial
or other buffering of adult correction facilities from adjacent neighborhoods and /or
other recommendations they may make regarding this type of use.
At their December 18, 1991 meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to draft
Zoning Ordinance language reflecting the Commission's desire to increase setbacks
and screening for adult correctional facilities; and to delete adult correctional
facilities as an allowable conditional use in all zoning districts.
Section 12 of the Zoning Ordinance is so structured that only uses can be rendered
nonconforming by amendments to the allowable uses or map c alssifications.
Dimensional standards inconsistent with the specifications of the Zoning Ordinance
do not constitute nonconformity by definition.
While the proposed change in allowable uses regarding adult correctional facilities
will effectively preclude enlargement of the use, it does not necessarily preclude
site modifications such as recreational areas or parking. Therefore it is necessary
to retain /modify dimensional standards regarding adult correctional facilities as
well to fully accomplish the direction provided by the Planning Commission on this
matter. The dimensional standards proposed are the minimum that will ensure the
health, safety, and public welfare of the general public of the City of Plymouth.
CONCLUSIONS /RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Planning Commission has found that the inclusion of adult correctional
facilities as allowable uses within the Zoning Ordinance may not be in the
best interests of the public health, safety and welfare of the City of
Plymouth in the future.
2. Amendment to the allowable uses portion of Section 7, Subdivision C to strike
reference to adult correctional facilities will effectively
1 -
accomplish the Planning Commission's direction with regard to allowance for
adult correctional facilities.
3. The existing adult corrections facility in Plymouth would become a
nonconforming use" upon the adoption and publication of a Zoning Ordinance
amendment that would remove the use as allowable under the Plymouth Zoning
Ordinance. The use could continue to exist at the scale of existing date of
ordinance publication, but could not be expanded or could not be continued if
abandoned for more than a one year period.
4. The nonconforming use section of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance excludes
dimensional inconsistencies with the Zoning Ordinance standards from the
definition of "nonconforming ". To control modifications to adult correction
facility sites that do no involve enlargement of the use itself it is
necessary to retain and modify dimensional standards related to adult
correction facilities to assure consistency with the spirit of the Planning
Commission direction in this regard.
5. To accomplish the foregoing amendment to Section 7, Subdivision C, Number 18
of the Zoning Ordinance is necessary as follows:
ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
SUBDIVISION C - ALLOWABLE USES
Within the Residence Districts, no building or land shall be used except for
one or more of the following uses. Letter designations shall be interpreted as
meaning:
P - Permitted Uses
C - Uses by Conditional Use Permit
A - Accessory Uses
DISTRICTS
FRD R -lA R -1B R -2 R -3 R -4
18. C C C C C C
2 -
USES
Municipal, administrative and
service buildings or uses, public
libraries, museums, post offices
and the like except incompatible
activity of an industrial
character; and Adult Gerreeti
Faeilities in eperatien as of
Neyember— 20, 19 (Amend. Ord.
89 -38 & 90 -09)
0
6. In addition, it is recommended that Section 7, Subdivision D, Numbers 5, 6, 7, 8,
and 9 of the Zoning Ordinance be modified to address dimensional standards
regarding adult correctional facilities as follows:
SUBDIVISION D - SCHEDULE OF LOT AREAS, DEPTH, WIDTH, COVERAGE, SETBACKS,
AND HEIGHT REGULATIONS IN RESIDENCE DISTRICTS.
NOTE:
Lots in the Flood Plain or Shoreland Management Overlay Districts are subject
to the Special Protection District requirements as set forth in Section 5 of
this Ordinance. (Amended Ord. No. 82 -33)
FRD R -1A R -1B
5. Maximum Lot Coverage of
a. Adult Correctional 6% 6% 6%
Facilities
b. All Other Structures ** 20% 20% 20%
Ord.88 -45 & 89 -02)
6. Maximum Imaervious Surface
of All Non - residence Condi-
tional Uses * * * * ** Ord. 89 -02)
7. Minimum Front Yard in Feet **
R -2* R -3* R -4*
6% 6% 6%
20% 20% 20%
50% 50% 50% 60%
Applies to Each Street Frontage)
60%
a. Dwellings, abutting an
Arterial Street 50 50 50 50 50 50
b. Other Uses 100 50 50 50 50 50
c. Dwellings, one family 50 35 35 35
d. Dwellings, two family 50 35 35 35 35 35
e. Dwellings, over two family -- 50 50 50 50
Amended Ord. 86 -07 and 86 -26)
f. Adult Correctional
Facility 600 600 600 600 600 600
8. Minimum Side Yard in Feet **
a. Dwellings, one family 15 15 10 10
b. Dwellings, two family 15 15 10 10 20 20
c. Other Uses 30 30 30 30 30 30
d. Other Uses abutting
residences 50 50 50 50 50 50
e. Adult Correctional
Facility 600 600 600 600 600 600
f. Detached accessory uses 15 6 6 10 20 20
g. Attached accessory uses 15 15 10 10 20 20
Items 8 a. & b. Amend. Ord. 89- 37)(Items 8 e. & f. Amend. Ord. 90 -4)
mm
9. Minimum Rear Yard in Feet"
a. Dwellings, one family 25 25 20 15
b. Dwellings, two family 25 25 20 15 15 15
c. Other Uses 40 40 35 30 30 30
d. Other Uses abutting
residences 50 50 50 50 50 50
e. Adult Correctional
Facility 600 600 600 600 600 600
f. Detached accessory uses 25 6 6 15 15 15
g. Abutting an arterial
street 50 50 50 50 50 50
7. Amend Section 10, Subdivision B, Table 1 of the Zoning Ordinance to read as
follows:
Side and rear yard setback
of parking to lot line
Amended Ord. 89 -02)
Front yard setback
of parking to lot line
Amended Ord. 89 -02)
Bold - indicates new text
Strikeeu - indicates deleted text
ord:pc /jk /adult)
K For resident uses in residence
district: as required for
accessory building. For Non-
resident uses in residence
district: 30 ft., Adult
Correctional Facilities: 600
ft.
Non - residence districts: 20
M R Districts Residence Uses: 20
feet, R Districts Non - residence
Uses: 30ft. Adult Correctional
Facilities: 600 ft.
B Districts: 20 ft., Industrial
District: 50 ft.
IKI>!
2 March 1992
ALL PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
RECENED
MAR 5 W2
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
AOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
We live on Vicksburg across the street from the adult corrections facility.
We have lived here for 29 years. We have watched the changes made on this
facility for all these years. It was originally designed as a work -house
for very minor offenses - not a hard core prison. This is not what the
facility was designed for.
We do not feel that hard core prisoners should be at this location and we
strongly urge that the zoning be made so no extensions of the work -house can
be done and thO set back requirements be implemented. If the prisons at
St. Cloud, Stillwater and the new high security prison are over - crowded,
then it is apparent something else has to be considered but this should not
be done at this facility. This facility was built for 400 and not 800.
We resent the fact that hard core prisoners have been sent to the adult
corrections facility over the years without the knowledge of the residents
in the area. We have a grade school and a high school within a mile of this
facility and this is not good for the personal safety and welfare of the young
people of the community as well as the residents. There have been a number
of prisoners escaping from this facility and we are not advised whether they
are hard core prisoners or not.
We need zoning that will eliminate the facility as an "allowable use"
and need to increase "set back requirements ".
We are writing to let you know that we do not wanta prison situated in
Plymouth. We need ordinance changes that will stop Hennepin County from
using this facility for hard core prisoners.
ThanA.
Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Finn wL
15900 14th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55447
March 2, 1992
All Plymouth Planning Commission Members
and All Plymouth City Council Members
Plymouth City Center
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
To Whom It May Concern:
MAR 4 1:'•:
PLYMOUTHk: :: DEVELOPMENT DP
We would like to express our concerns regarding the zoning ordinance changes for
the Hennepin County Adult Correction Facility.
It is our desire that the adult corrections facility become a non - conforming use and that
increased set back requirements be implemented. We are very concerned about the
type of inmates housed in the facility. The current population consists of a number of
major felons.
We live just a few blocks from the facility and believe there should be some limit as to
the type of felon housed there as well as more security. At the present time there is no
fence whatsoever around the facility.
Hopefully, there will be no major additions to the present set of buildings already
located in our neighborhood.
Please feel free to present this letter at the Planning Commission meeting on
March 11, 1992.
Sincerely,
ao;'
Frank and Arletta Adams
15215 - 9th Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55447
RECEVED
M4R 3 TS2
CITY OF t LYiNAOUTHJackieGryczan
625 Niagara Lane 1
pl-wy {T' C E O'S t T DEPT.
Plymouth, Mn 55447
March 2, 1992
Plymouth City Center
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, Mn 55447
Dear Planning Commission:
I am writing this as a concerned citizen regarding the Adult
Correction Facility. Please submit this letter to be
recorded as part of the record for the March 11th meeting
regarding this issue.
Before I moved into the neighborhood 2 1/2 years ago, I
talked with the neighbors and Realtor about my concern of
living so close to this facility. I was assured by all and
many that there was never any problems or reason to be
concerned with living by the facility. It did not have a
bad reputation ".
I have now become concerned with the Adult Facility for the
following reasons..
1) The proposed expansion plans.
2) The type of inmates. (major felons)
3) The escapes. This is a recreational area of Plymouth
along with a heavy residential area. I feel this could
become a risk for the area
4) Increased undesirable traffic around the area.
5) Decreased home and property value because of the area
becoming a "bad area ".
Please consider and share my concerns by seeing that this
facility does not expand. Also that it does not house
major felons. Please keep this area of Plymouth which is
noted and valued as a nice recreational area and
neighborhood a safe and enjoyable place to be and live.
Sincerely,
J a64k4
Jackie Gryczan
v . a*(
r
S•CA A
0 ..1•( 't t
of'f
oet 't
L3f 1•t ( i
rR
M l
L
LA of
3 /. c c •
O: t AI
i i t •
Of
O: A •4
L
q
C; 4,,. . •4
4 t i •
t i i t •
Of i 1 • f
To 2l a' f
M
D
MAR
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
C'NUENtTY DtMQFlAlUN'f DtrT.
G -
0-
ME@HWER
UTAHW-r
CITY OF PLYMOUTHOf 'AMML%Tf -WELD EW NK
o z t Jo
2
C 9 .c c
O.LI •
l L. t. L.
t " 4v
P x544 7
y/q"
TO:. Plymouth City Council
Plymouth Planning Commission
FROM: Concerned Undersigned Citizens
We wish to express our extreme concern regarding the Adult Corrections Facility (ACF)— present
and future. We also wish to support strongly the concept of the ACF being a "non - conforming
use" coupled with significantly increased "setback requirements" in the city of Plymouth. We
strongly believe that these zoning changes, as they relate to the ACF in Plymouth, are in the very
best interest of public safety and welfare of our community, families and homes.
As you probably know, the ACF is either the 3rd or 4th largest PRISON in the state of Minnesota.
This facility was originally designed as an 800 inmate facility but was only constructed at the 400
inmate level -- which means it could double in physical size. Additionally, it was originally
designed with an entirely different inmate population in mind than it currently handles. The
population today is significantly more dangerous than what was originally intended and we have
seen a number of examples recently where previous inmates of the ACF have gone on to commit
additional serious crimes and in some cases have either killed or been killed (see attached). A
number of escapes have also occurred.
You also probably know that Hennepin County will not give the City of Plymouth any kind of
assurances regarding the seriousness of crimes committed by the population housed in the
ACF. With everyone pleading ignorance and an inability to control the situation, how dangerous
will the inmate population become before a serious and tragic accident occurs ? ? ?? We need to
be proactive to protect our. community, citizens and property.
We as a community need to be proactive and protect the public safety and welfare of our
community, families and homes (property values also). We believe that it is in everyone's best
interest that the ACF be considered a non - conforming use and have additional significant set
back requirements placed on it today. We sincerely ask for and appreciate your support.
Name: Address:
ued on next page: -
Z
November 11, 199
Page 10A ---Law makers rejected life without parole for three time sea offenders in favor of a 37 year
sentence which translates to 25 years in prison. But many criminals who have committed three or more
crimes will be able to escape the sentence because of plea bargaining in the past — that is they have
pleaded guilty to burglary or kidnapping instead of sex charges.
Page 11A- -- Orville Redale Foster was supposed to go to prison for more than 7 years. He was
sentenced to probation and treatment instead. So were 30 other rapists, child molestors and incest
offenders — nearly half the 66 people who were sentenced on the state's most serious sex charge in
Hennepin County last year. Hennepin County gives light sentences across the board said State
Representative Kathleen Vellenga who heads the House Judiciary Committee. Criminals say, •if I'm
going to offend again, I'll do it in Hennepin•.
In February 1990, Foster lay in wait for women as they walked to work at Abbot Northwestern
Hospital. On February 19 he was arrested. The county attorney's office wanted Foster to go to prison
but Judge Charles Porter sentenced him to 20 years probation, a year in the workhouse and treatment,
with an 86 month stayed sentence. Foster ultimately fled the state and was resentenced to 86 months.
An overcrowded jail also creates pressures to move cases along. Plea bargains resolve cases quickly,
and Judges sometimes take chances on people who are willing to enter treatment programs said
Roberta Levy, Chief Judge in Hennepin County.
The pressures are especially heavy in Hennepin which has 24% of the state's population. In 1988, the
county handled 30% of the state's felony cases but accounted for 44% of the downward departures
from the state sentencing guidelines.
Page 12A - - -It was the most brutal sexual assault Fred Karasov had seen in seven years as a prosecutor.
Photographs of the 21 year old woman's wounds shocked the jurors, who convicted Morsey Sykes of
rape and first degree assault in August 1989. Hennepin County District Judge Ann Montgomery told
Sykes she was tempted to "let you rot in prison" but she decided not to — instead Sykes spent 10 months
in the Hennepin County Adult Corrections Facility then went to a treatment program for sex offenders
at the Minnesota Security Hospital at St. Peter. If he does well there, he'll be released in
2 - 3 years.
February 7.1992
This edition shows a listing of the Hennepin County District Court records. Of the 63 listings shown,
44 of them (approL 70%) were sentenced to some time in the Adult Corrections Facility. Charges
varied but 6 cases were crimes against people ranging from 2nd and 3rd degree assault to 19 and 2nd
degree criminal sexual conduct.
February 13.1992
The man (Theodore Bobo) who was shot and killed by Minneapolis Police for allegedly holding his
girlfriend at knifepoint had been released 3 days earlier from the Hennepin County Adult Correction
Facility. He has served 30 days for assaulting his girlfriend with a gun.
t 13
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: April 14, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: April 22, 1992
FILE NO.: 92016
PETITIONER: Quantum Development
REQUEST: Site Plan Amendment and Conditional Use Permit Amendment to
add additional parking and eliminate berming and fencing
from the west side of the property.
LOCATION: 12325 State Highway 55
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: Public and Semi - public
ZONING: R -IA (Low density residential district)
BACKGROUND:
In 1982, the Beacon Heights School was closed by the Wayzata School District.
On August 20, 1984, the City Council, by Resolution 84 -546 denied a Land Use
Guide Plan Amendment and Rezoning of this site from the R -1A (Low density
single family residential district) to B -1 (office limited business district).
On July 1, 1991, the City Council by Resolution 91 -360 approved a Conditional
Use Permit for a daycare facility in a private school and, by Resolution 91-
361 approved a Conditional Use Permit for a private nursery school; by
Resolution 91 -362 approved.a site plan for parking lot expansion and variance
for Quantum Development Inc.; and, by Resolution 91 -363 approved a lot
consolidation for Quantum Development Inc. for the Beacon Heights School.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the official 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. The petitioner is proposing to add 36 parking spaces to the site at 4
locations, and is requesting modification of the previously approved
screening requirements adjacent to those parking spaces. The Site Plan
and Conditional Use Permit approved for this nursery school and daycare
required fencing, a berm and landscaping to screen the parking on the west
side of the property from the residences immediately to the west. The
petitioner is requesting that this be modified to eliminate the fence and
berm.
2. The Planning Commission, in consideration of a Conditional Use Permit must
find the 6 standards of Section 9, Subdivision A, Paragraph 2a are
complied with. A copy of the Conditional Use Permit Standard is attached
along with the petitioner's narrative.
3. The Zoning Ordinance requires that offstreet parking be screened from
adjacent residential property. The approved Conditional Use Permit and
Site Plan provides for a combination of berm, fencing and landscaping
along the west property line to fullfill this requirement. The
landscaping will not provide screening until the trees mature. As part of
the Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan approval, additional temporary
screening (fence) was required to fullfill the screening requirement until
the landscaping matures.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The petitioner has submitted letters from all the adjoining property
owners affected by the proposal to the west indicating that they do not
object to this request for a modification of the fence and berming
requirements. These letters were not presented when the original
Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan were being reviewed in 1991.
2. Staff finds that the new parking lot for 13 vehicles on the eastern
portion of the site is sufficiently screened from the adjoining property
by the existing topography and the proposed landscaping along the east
property line.
3. Staff finds that the Conditional Use Permit Criteria have been met for the
new 13 spaces in front of the building.
4. Staff does not find that the Conditional Use Permit Criteria have been met
for the 23 new parking spaces on the west side of the site. This request
without the fence /berm will be injurious to the use and enjoyment of
adjacent property, particularly during the winter.
5. Although adjacent property owners have indicated that the additional
screening is not needed, the properties could be sold to new owners who do
desire that the Zoning Ordinance screening requirement be in place.
6. Staff finds that the Site Plan Amendment for the addition of 36 parking
spaces meets the standards for Site Plans as stated in Section 11,
Subdivision A.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the Site Plan Amendment, and denial of the
Conditional Use Permit Amendment regarding modification of parking lot
screening in conformance with the conditions of the attached resolution. I
have also attached a resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit
Amendment.
Submitted by:
arles E. Uillerua, Community ueveiopment uirector
ATTACHMENTS:
1 Resolution Denying Conditional Use Permit Amendment
2. Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit Amendment
3. Resolution Approving Site Plan Amendment
4. Engineer's Memo
5. Conditional Use Permit Standards
6. Petitioner's Narrative
7. Location Map
B. Large Plans
DENYING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR QUANTUM DEVELOPMENT, INC. FOR
FAMILY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER (92016)
WHEREAS, Quantum Development, Inc. has requested approval for a Conditional
Use Permit Amendment to modify parking screening for the property located at
12325 State Highway 55; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
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 request by
Quantum Development, Inc. for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to modify
parking screening for the property located at 12325 State Highway 55, based on
the following:
1. Parking lot screening shall be in conformance with the approved Site Plan
approved by Resolution 91 -362 and the approved Conditional Use Permit
Resolution 91 -361.
2. All fencing /berming previously approved is required to properly screen
parking pending maturity of the landscaping along the west property line.
res /pc/92016)
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR QUANTUM DEVELOPMENT, INC. FOR
FAMILY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER (92016)
WHEREAS, Quantum Development, Inc. has requested approval for a Conditional
Use Permit Amendment to modify parking screening on the property located at
12325 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 by
Quantum Development, Inc. for a Conditional Use Permit Amendment to modify
parking screening from the property located at 12325 State Highway 55, subject
to the following conditions:
1. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, regulations and ordinances,
and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation.
2. Compliance with all conditions of Resolution 91 -361.
3. This amendment is to modify screening of parking along the west side of
the site to remove a portion of the fencing and berm per plans dated July
25, 1992.
res /pc/92016)
APPROVING SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR PARKING LOT EXPANSION FOR QUANTUM
DEVELOPMENT, INC. (92016)
WHEREAS, Quantum Development, Inc. has requested approval for a Site Plan
Amendment for parking lot expansion located at 12325 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 by
Quantum Development, Inc. for a Site Plan Amendment for parking lot expansion
located at 12325 State Highway 55, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2., Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement
for completion of all site improvements within 12 months of the date of
this resolution.
3. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
4. Compliance with all conditions of Resolution 91 -362.
res /pc /92016.sp:jw)
i
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
t0
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: April 15, 1992
FILE NO.: 92016
PETITIONER: Mr. Clint Carlson, Quantum Development, 202 Peninsula Road, Medicine
Lake, MN 55441
SITE PLAN: FAMILY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER
LOCATION: 12325 State Highway 55
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. X Have watermain area assessments been levied based on proposed use?
2. _ Have Sanitary sewer area assessments been levied based on proposed
use?
3. _ X _ Will 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: pone.
6. _ X _ Is property one parcel?
If "No" is marked, the approval of the site plan as proposed
requires that a lot consolidation be approved by the City Council.
N/A Yes No
7. _ JL _ Complies with standard utility /drainage easements?
If "No" is marked, the current City ordinance requires utility and
drainage easements ten feet (101) 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.)
8. _X_ _ _ Complies with ponding easement 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. If "No" is marked, the
following changes are necessary:
9. X _ _ Are all standard utility easements required for construction
provided?
The City requires twenty foot (20') utility and drainage easements
where these utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has
been reviewed with the final site plan. If "No" is marked, the
following changes are necessary:
10. JL _ Have all existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way been
vacated?
If "No" is marked, it will be necessary to vacate the obsolete
easements /right -of -way to facilitate the development. This is not
an automatic process, it is the owner's responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated.
11. X _ _ Has ;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 annly.
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-
UTILITIES AND TRAFFIC:
N/A Yes No
12. _ —X
13. _X-
14. - -X
Have all necessary permits for this project been obtained?
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
DNR
MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
JL Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Wetland Conservation Act of
1991 from City
Does the Site Plan comply with The City's Adopted Storm Drainage
Plan? If "No" is marked, the following revisions are required:
Does the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan comply with the
City's erosion control policy?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions are required: Erosion
control methods shall be shown on the grading plan.
15. X _ _ Are necessary fire hydrants provided?
If "No" is marked, the City of Plymouth requires five hydrants be
spaced 300 feet apart. It will be necessary to locate hydrants in
such a manner that the site plan complies with Plymouth City Code
Section 905.05.
16. X _ Is the size and type of material proposed in the utility systems
included on the utility plans?
If "No" is marked, the utility plan shall be revised to indicate the
size and type of material.
Sanitary Sewer
Watermain
Storm Sewer
3-
N/A Yes No
17. , X _ _ Is the post indicator valve and fire department connection provided?
If "No" is marked, they shall be included in the site utility plan.
18. X Are hydrant valves provided?
If "No" is marked, all new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6"
gate valves per City Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W -2.
19. X _ _ Are sanitary sewer clean -outs provided?
If "No" is marked, it will be necessary to provide clean -outs on the
proposed internal sanitary sewer system at a maximum of 100 foot
intervals.
N/A Yes No
20. X _ _ Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided?
If "No" is marked, Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at
the intersection of
and
21. _ X _ Are all existing street rights -of -way the required width?
If "No" is marked, an additional feet of right -of -way will
be required on
22. _ X _ Does the grading plan comply with site drainage requirements?
If "No" is marked, the City will not permit drainage onto a City
street from a private parking lot, the site plan shall be revised
accordingly.
23. _ X _ Is concrete curb and gutter provided?
If "No" it marked, 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 with this requirement.
24. _ X _ Does the site plan comply with parking lot standards?
The City requires 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. If "No" is
marked, the site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with
these requirements:
4-
N/A Yes No
STANDARDS-
0
N/A Yes No
25. _ _X.. _ Is it necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's public utility
foreman, at 550 -7492?
If "Yes" is marked 24 hours notice is required in advance of making
any proposed utility connections to the City's sanitary sewer and
water systems. All water connections shall be via wet tan.
26. _ X Is it necessary to contact Tom Vetsch, the City's Street Foreman, at
550 -7493 for an excavating permit?
If "Yes" is marked 24 hours notice is required before digging within
the City right -of -way.
27. _ X _ The City requires reproducible mylar prints of sanitary sewer, water
service and storm sewer As- Builts for the site prior to the
financial guarantee being released.
28. _ _ X Does the site plan comply with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual?
If "No" is marked, see Items 12, 14. 26. and Special Conditions.
29 A. A grading plan shall be submitted for the two new parking areas.
B. The fire hydrant north of the driveway and west of the frontage road shall be
raised.
Submitted by: L a(-
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
5-
FR M SELMCN 9, SUMIVISICK A
2. $ Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Cmmission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recamkendation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Camtission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) ccupliance with and effect upon the C'+a%mhensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or comfort.
3) The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the neighborhood.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and J1 ; it ovement of surrounding
property for uses permitted in the district.
5) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress,
egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic
congestion in the public streets.
6) The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the
applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.
forms:o >pl /cup.stnd /s) 10/89
SITE PLAN AMENDMENT AND VARIANCE REQUEST
FOR 12325 STATE HIGHWAY 55
Currently there are 16 existing spaces of blacktopped parking to the west
of the Family Child Development Center (FCDC) space. This is a very inade-
quate amount of parking for their use. We are proposing a revised site plan
with an addition of 24 more spaces for a total of 40 spaces. Our revised
plan shows parking spaces where we previously showed berm and fence.
Based upon the topography of the hill on the west side of this property,
it is extremely difficult to screen this property during the near future
because of the elevation differences. However, when the evergreen trees
along the west boundary grow high enough, they will provide screening in
the future when they are more fully grown.
Therefore, we request a variance for screening of all the parking spaces
west of the FCDC space. This variance is for the additional spaces as well
as the existing spaces that would have been screened under the previous plan.
The idea with the previous plan was that the fence and berm would be removed
when the trees to the west were tall enough. The spaces that we are proposing
to add now would be considerably more difficult to screen than the existing
spaces.
This variance request meets the standards because:
1. The hill on the west creates a major obstacle to being able to
screen parking for FCDC. There is not enough parking for the parents using
the FCDC space and it has become a parking problem.
2. The unique factor to this piece of property is the hill on the
west which makes it much more difficult to screen parking; even though this
hill actually provides screening on a practical basis.
3. The existing amount of parking is insufficient. FCDC is concerned
about losing students because of the parking problem. The tenant needs more
parking than required under the ordinance and we are willing to provide
it for them.
4. The ordinance's strict screening rules are the problem. However,
this is a temporary problem until the evergreens to the west are fully grown.
The neighboring homes are too far away to see the parking spaces from their
houses. The hill actually provides excellent screening, but because of the
ownership of the very top of the hill, it creates a tremendous screening
problem under.the ordinance.
5. It will not be injurious to the neighborhood primarily because
the hill to the west provides a natural barrier from the houses on the other
side of the hill.
6. The granting of this variance will decrease the danger of fire
and safety problems because it will eliminate the traffic and congestion
problems around the FCDC space.
QUANTUM DEVELOPMENT, INC.
202 Peninsula Road
Medicine Lake, Minnesota 55441
q L o l (o
April 7, 1992
Mr. John Keho, Associate Planner
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth MN 55447
Re: Quantum Development Site Plan Amendment, Conditional
Use Permit, and Variance for Beacon Heights
School (92016)
Dear Mr. Keho,
This is written in response to your request for our opinion on the
screening we are proposing on our new site plan.
Throughout our process of upgrading the Beacon Heights project, we have
tried to be aware of the neighborhood's concerns and desires. The
neighbors to the west that own the large hill are pleased with our
reuse of the school and seem to be comfortable without additional ,
screening being provided. I think if a person walks between their
houses and the school, it is easy to see why they are not concerned.
The adjacent neighbor on the west, closest to Highway 55, would like a
fence. This provides proper screening and that is what he desires. So,
that is what we are putting up.
The neighbor immediately east of the school, closest to Highway 55,
prefers trees as shown on the site plan. We gave them a choice and we
are providing what they want.
We feel we are providing adequate screening and making the effort to
give the neighbors the screening they desire.
Very truly yours,
Clint Carl son
President
APR 9 sc"^
CITY O
COMMUNITY D`AR
j Lit 4
Mr. John Keho, Associate Planner
April 6, 1992
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: Quantum Development Site Plan Amendment,
Conditional Use Permit, and Variance for Beacon Heights
School (92016)
Dear Mr. Keho,
We are owners of the 2 houses which include the large hill west
of the school. We have received a copy of the site plan amendment
from Clint Carlson of Quantum Development.
We wish to register our opinion that this proposal should be approved
by the City of Plymouth. We feel that the hill that creates the
problem under the technical rules of Plymouth, in reality provides
an excellent buffer from the school.
We do not feel that any additional buffer is needed, especially
not fences to buffer the parking areas. We understand that when
the new evergreen trees are tall enough, they will satisfy your
technical requirements. This is acceptable to us.
As neighbors, what we want is the continued occupancy by Family
Child Development Center and similarly good tenants and proper
maintenance of the school. We don't want to go through another
period without maintenance, cooperation and occupancy.
Sincerely,
Mr. and Mrs. Mylo Hoisve
1340 Oakview Lane N.
2
Mr. and Mrs. Daniel 'o ning
1330 Oakview Lane N(
p ltP•n
APR 9 i0
CITE'
WAMUNIn p .-
it
g Lot &0
April 7, 1992
12235 State Highway
Mr. John Keho, Associate Planner
Plymouth, MN 55441
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Re: Quantum Development Site Plan Amendment, Conditional Use Permit,
and Variance for Beacon Heights School (92016)
Dear Mr. Keho,
We are owners of the home immediately east of the school. We have
received a copy of the new site plan from Clint Carlson of Quantum
Development.
We were asked what type of screening should be provided by Quantum
Development for between our property and the new parking area.
We would like evergreen trees planted instead of a fence put up.
We understand that the fence would provide more immediate absolute
screening, however, we would like the longrange image of evergreen
trees, when they grow larger. Furthermore, we feel that the existing
trees on our land and the amount of space between the parking and
our house provide adequate screening even before the new trees grow
up.
We have a daughter in the Family Child Development Center program
and are happy to see such a good reuse of Beacon Heights School.
Sincerely,,.,
Mr. and Mrs. Mark Tomczyk
1-iat.4_
Af
MT fp-q..p -.nn
APR 9 1"0)
CITY OF
a..
a
NONE 10111IFJQIMM
fit 11
NONE
IrINS
EbAft:
MINIMUM
kv, L-
Tm
AM K.UpIl 11 milliMR..
91, d.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: April 10, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: April 22, 1992
FILE NO.: 92014
PETITIONER: Sports and Entertainment Concepts, Inc.
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for commercial recreation facility
to be located within a 42,321 square foot lease space in
the Plymouth Plaza Shopping Center
LOCATION: 1455 County Road 101
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CR -2 (Retail Shopping)
ZONING: B -2 (Shopping Center Business District)
BACKGROUND:
On January 6, 1986, the City Council, by Resolution 86 -12 approved a Site Plan
and variances for the construction of this 74,775 square foot shopping center.
On November 17, 1986, the City Council, by Resolution 86 -762 approved a
Conditional Use Permit for a 100 seat Pizza Hut restaurant in this center.
On May 24, 1988, an Administrative Approval Letter was established approving
the removal of two parking spaces. The number of parking spaces in the center
was reduced to 436.
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. The petitioner is requesting approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a
commercial recreation center to occupy the space formerly occupied as a
grocery store in the Plymouth Shopping Center. The facility will include
miniature golf, 4 batting cages, 2 basketball courts, an arena for either
soccer or ice skating, video arcades, billiards, whirliball, a restaurant
for the use of the patrons of this facility) as well as other
recreational uses. The hours of operation for the facility are proposed
as 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and 10:00 a.m. to
Midnight on Friday and Saturday. The proposed restaurant will seat 35 and
will have capacity for a 150 person private party.
2. In addition to the Conditional Use Permit for a commercial recreational
center, the petitioner must also obtain a license through the
Administration Department for an amusement center at this site. Amusement
center licenses are required for businesses that have 7 or more coin
Page Two, File 92014
operated amusement machines. This application is being handled separately
from this Conditional Use Permit process.
3. One of the issues that is commonly raised with this type of use is
security. The petitioner has submitted a letter indicating security
arrangements that Grand Slam and the property management will have at the
site.
4. Parking concerns are the primary issue with this site The Plymouth
Zoning Ordinance does not specify parking requirements for commercial
recreational centers. The City must therefore either determine the most
similar use in or determine individual parking requirements for this site.
The petitioner has indicated that the peak use of this facility would
require 200 parking spaces. The petitioner also states that Saturdays
would be their peak day with a maximum of 325 people in the facility at
the peak time. The shopping center has 436 parking spaces.
5. The petitioner has included a letter from the Welsh Companies in their
application, to all the merchants in the center, notifying them of this
proposed use.
6. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider a
Conditional Use Permit in terms of the six criteria found in Section 9,
Subdivision A, Paragraph 2a. We have attached a copy of the referenced
citation together with the petitioner's narrative. Also attached for your
review is the Zoning Ordinance definition of commercial recreation.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. Subject to petitioner securing a City amusement center license and based
on no violations of that license, we find the proposed use to be
responsive to the 6 criteria upon which the Planning Commission must base
its recommendation to the City Council.
2. Total parking requirements for this shopping center, including the stated
200 parking spaces, for this use, is 405. The shopping center has 436
parking spaces. Staff finds that the 200 parking spaces required as
submitted by the petitioner is a reasonable number of parking spaces for
this use. It is reasonable to expect large numbers of patrons to arrive
by carpool or by Joot or bicycle. High volume use of this site on weekend
days would correspond to the same high traffic level generated for the
other retail and medical facilities in the shopping center.
3. The petitioner must file an application for an amusement center license
responsive to provisions of the City Code in that regard. We have
attached to this staff report a copy of the City Code provisions with
respect to amusement centers. We specifically direct the attention of the
Planning Commission to Section 1103.07, Subdivision 9. The licensing
provisions are intended to relieve the Conditional Use Permit process of
Page Three, File 92014
the use policing functions that can be a substantial problem where no such
licensing provisions are available. Any Conditional Use Permit should
carry a condition directly referencing these conditions.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend approval of this Conditional Use Permit subject to amusement
center licensing i annual renewalAthe Cond'* 1 Use Permit.
Submitted by:
rtes t. uiiierua, community
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit
2. Conditional Use Permit Criteria
3. Petitioner's Narrative
4. Definition of Commercial Recreation
5. Section 1103 of the City Code Regarding Licensing of Amusement Centers
6. Location Map
7. Large Plans
pc /jk /92014:jw)
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT CONCEPTS, INC.
FOR GRAND SLAM LOCATED IN THE PLYMOUTH PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER AT 1455 COUNTY
ROAD 101 (92014)
WHEREAS, Sports and Entertainment Concepts, Inc. has requested approval for a
Conditional Use Permit for Grand Slam, a commercial recreation center, at 1455
County Road 101; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by
Sports and Entertainment Concepts, Inc. for a Conditional Use Permit for Grand
Slam, a commercial recreation center 1455 County Road 101, subject to the
following conditions:
1. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, regulations and ordinances,
and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation.
2. The permit is issued to Sports and Entertainment Concepts, Inc. for Grand
Slam and shall not be transferable.
3. The site shall be maintained in a sanitary manner.
4. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within approved designated
areas.
5. All parking shall be offstreet in designated areas which comply with the
Zoning Ordinance.
6. Hours of operation shall be 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Sunday through
Thursday and 10:00 a.m. to Midnight on Friday and Saturday.
7. The permit shall be renewed annually, coincident with renewal of the
license to assure compliance with the conditions.
8. A copy of the current City Amusement Center license shall be provided
prior to issuance of the Permit and shall be kept on file with the City
Planning Division.
9. Compliance with applicable Building and Fire Code requirements shall be
verified by the City prior to Permit issuance.
res /pc /92014:jw)
FECM SPX.TICN 9, SUBDIVISION A
2. Before any Oonditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning C="sion for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a reccmatea cation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Camdssion shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) cmpliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or comfort.
3) The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the neighborhood.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and hit of surrounding
property for uses permitted in the district.
5) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress,
egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic
congestion in the public streets.
6) The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the
applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.
forms:o >pl /cup.stnd /s) 10/89
Ab
4D
q
q:
000r
A
uj
4
NUMBER ONE
IN SPORTS AND FUN TM
GRAND SLAM - ADVENTURE WORLD
Plymouth Plaza - Plymouth, Minnesota
Grand Slam- Adventure World is an indoor drug /smoke /alcohol -free family
entertainment center. A proposed opening for Plymouth Plaza is fall 1992.
The 41,000 square foot sports and entertainment center is designed to serve the
recreational needs of the people and families of Plymouth and surrounding
communities in a unique way. This is not an ordinary recreation center. This is
the kind of center where you can hit baseballs and softballs, putt a round of
miniature golf, ride a bumper car, play basketball, practice hockey or soccer, win
at a video game, enjoy a good meal and shop in a sports equipment store.
For the first time in the western suburbs, Grand Slam- Adventure World will
offer a fresh, wholesome and safe alternative venue for traditional family and
young adult social and sports functions. Grand Slam, will be used for birthday
parties, company picnics, church functions, Christmas parties, school field trips,
little league sign -ups, senior citizen functions, baseball, softball and hockey
team practices, to name a few.
Plymouth residents will enjoy the variety of Grand Slam's 17 different activities
designed for five year olds to seniors. The heart of Grand Slam- Adventure World
is the Batting Cages. There will be four baseball and softball slow and fast
pitch ATEC (Athletic Training Equipment Company) Grand Slam batting cages.
The batting cages give the public, little league, Legion, high school and college
baseball and softball teams and players the opportunity to train year round. All
26 Major League Baseball teams, including the Minnesota Twins, use ATEC
equipment as their primary training tools. The pitching machines can be
adjusted to throw slow or fast pitch softball or baseballs from 30 -80 mph.
Today baseball is the nation's favorite pastime -50 million Americans play either
baseball or softball in youth leagues, company teams and senior leagues.
At Grand Slam, University of Minnesota Gopher Baseball coach John Anderson,
his staff, and other professional coaches and players will hold instructional
little league clinics group lessons coaches clinics and summer camps.
Individual instruction is available in baseball and softball through an academy
curriculum designed by Gopher Coach Anderson and a national Baseball Coaches
Advisory Board that includes Jim Lefebvre, manager- Chicago Cubs and Jeff
Torborg, manager- Chicago White Sox.
Grand Slom- Adventure World* 395 lake Avenue South • Canal Park • Duluth, MN 55802 (218) 722 -5667
Grand Slam- Adventure World
Plymouth Plaza
Page two
Team discounts and group and promotional packages will also be offered.
After training at Grand Slam, players will "touch 'em all ", say's Twin's
broadcaster and Grand Slam radio spokes person John Gordon.
Another major attraction for the Plymouth facility will be an all- purpose
artificial Ice Surface /Soccer Field combination. The ice rink will provide
local residence the chance to ice skate year round, teams to practice hockey,
training for figure skating and in -line skating. The surface, once covered with an
Astroturf -type material, will lend itself for soccer and little league fielding
training. In this same area will be a sporting goods Pro Shop that will offer all
the equipment and gear kids will need to play baseball, softball, soccer and
hockey.
An 18 -hole miniature golf course -- Camelot Castle Adventure Golf- -set in
the theme of King Arthur's Medieval Castle will provide year round golf
entertainment, a sport where Minnesotans nationally rank number one in golfers
per capita. With holes names like Lancelot's Winding Way, Excalibur, Merlin's
Magic and Tower Steps, the custom designed course will challenge even the low
handicappers. Senior citizens can organize golf leagues. Charities will use the
course for tournaments, fund raisers, putting contests and golf marathons.
Additionally, two Basketball Courts will be available with Slam Dunk
adjustable rims. The courts can also be used for volleyball, aerobic classes and
baseball instructional academies. Children will ride the Krazy Bumper Kars
and play in Adventure Playland, with shoots, slides, tree forts, and ball pits.
Teens will enjoy Video Skill and Sports Games with prize redemption.
The Grand Slam Restaurant will feature a complete menu of hamburgers,
pizza, hot dogs, polish, french fries, nachos, soda, ice cream, yogurt and popcorn.
The restaurant will seat 35 and the facility as a whole can seat 150 for a private
party.
Another benefit of Grand Slam is the family affordable rice. With free
admission, a family of four can entertain themselves for two hours for less than
the cost of a movie. Hours of operation will be 10:00am- 10:00pm Sunday through
Thursday and 10:00pm to midnight Friday and Saturday. There is sufficient
parking both in front and behind the Plymouth Plaza facility.
c
r
Grand Slam- Adventure World
Plymouth Plaza
Page three
The first Grand Slam- Adventure World will open in Duluth's Canal Park in April
1992. There are 85 ATEC Grand Slam U.S.A. centers in the country, but are
primarily batting cages, a Pro Shop and snack bar. Grand Slam- Adventure World
is a franchisee of ATEC Grand Slam U.S.A. for the four batting cages.
With such a wide variety of activities offered at Grand Slam, we have retained
the services of retail marketing agency Browne & Browne Marketing, to work
closely with local media outlets to most effectively communicate our special
events, promotions and seasonal messages to local residents.
Corporate offices for Grand Slam- Adventure World are located at 7901 Flying
Cloud Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344, (612) 943 -2033. The Duluth Grand Slam is
located at 395 Lake Avenue South, Duluth, MN 55802, (218) 722 -5667.
Grand Slam- Adventure World will be the recreational focal point of Plymouth
area athletic activities. We're not just baseball, but an entertainment center
that provides the kind of sports and fun that has wide community appeal.
We look forward to serving the City of Plymouth and adjacent communities with
this very exciting project. Thank You.
E-9 "_Mediate_ Release
Contact: Timothy Brownn
Browne & Browne Marketing Inc.
Press Release 612. 449 -5116
GRAND SLAM - ADVENTURE WORLD ADDS INDOOR F MILY
RECREATION CENTER TO DULUTH'S CANAL PARK
Minneapolis, Minnesota -- December 11, 1991 -- Grand Slam- Adventure World, a project of
Sports and Entertainment Concepts, Inc. of Minneapolis, will open the first complete indoor family
recreation and entertainment complex in the Duluth/Superior area this winter at 395 1 ake Avenue
South in Duluth's Canal Park. The multiple activity center combines baseball and fast and slow
Pitch softball ATEC Grand Slam batting ranges, 18 -hole miniature "Medieval Castle" golf course.
video arcade, Krazy Bumper Kars, Adventure Playland, basketball, billiards, Pro Shop, private
party and dancing rooms and Grand Slam Restaurant with indoor and outdoor seating. Open year-
round, the 30,000 square foot facility will be alcohol and smoke free.
We are real anxious for Grand Slam to contribute towards the business and recreational
environment of the Duluth /Superior area ". said Michael C. Bentzen, president of Sports And
Entertainment Concepts. "it offers a new and exciting recreational alternative to individuals, groulrs
and families. With youth baseball and adult softball such popular sports in the Twin Ports, our
training facility will be a major benefit to the many leagues in the area ", added BentVen.
The four batting ranges, part of franchise system A'IT.0 -the Athletic Training 1 iluipment
Company - offers the public, little leaguers, high school and college baseball teams, and
softball teams the opportunity to train year round with state -of -the -art batting cages, pitching
machines and a Pro Shop with a full -line of baseball and softball equipment. The "all strikes"
machines can be adapted to throw baseballs or softballs and either fast or slow pitch.
more...
Grand Slam - Adventure World Opening
Di lulh -Canal Park
Page Two (2)
All 26 Major League Baseball teams use ATEC equipment as their primary training 1(mis. A1 IV
national Coaches Advisory Board includes Jim Lefebvre, manager- Chicago Cubs and Jeff
Tottiorg, manager- Chicago White Sox. In addition to University of Minnesota Gopher Ilasch.ill
Coach John Anderson and his staff, other professional coaches and players will hold instncctional
little league clinics, group lessons, coaches clinics, summer camps at Grand Slam. Instruction is
available in baseball and softball through an academy curriculum designed by Gopher Cmch
Anderson and a National Baseball Coaches Advisory Board. Team discounts and group and
promotional packages will also be offered.
Grand Slam - Adventure World offers a new and safe alternative to the traditional birthday
party, youth league draft meetings, fund raisers, company outings, church functions, schw)l field
trips, and a variety of other organized group events. Additionally, the largest arcade in the Twin
Ports will feature over 100 different video, skill and sports games with a redemption gift shop. the
Medieval Castle" miniature golf will be the first of its design in the country. When the basketball
court isn't being use it can double for volleyball, aerobic classes, baseball card shows and clinics.
Duluth architect Robert A. Berquist and Q.W. Marble Construction Company are
developing the Grand Slam- Adventure World site at the intersection of Lake Avenue South and
Buchanan Street.'Ihe Grand Slam Restaurant will be presented through a partnership with
Grandmas, Inc. hours of operation are 10:00am- 10:00pm Sunday through Thursday and
10:O0pm to midnight Friday and Saturday. A grand opening announcement and date will be mace
in January, 1992.
Release no: 1291!7001
aaa
t
i
BUSINESS_.
uulutn News- I noune ;
Sunday, March 1, 1992
Page 5B
A waterfront area without pier
Changes will
boost tourism
at Canal Park
By Marianne Renner
News - Tribune business writer
I last year's street construction
kept people away from Canal
Park, they might want maps to get
around this summer.
A parking lot sits where an old
building used to be. A one -way
sign points traffic in a new direc.
tion. An old rust- colored building
Is bright blue, soon to become Ca-
nal Park's biggest family attrac-
tion. And what's that building
blocking the view of the lake? It's
a new hotel overlooking the Lake -
walk.
Soon, the sidewalks will be
wider, a seafood restaurant will be
in place. and new retail shops will
line the streets.
Canal Park has undergone some
changes since last year as public
and private groups try to enhance
the area's historical character and
attract even more tourists. Here's
what's new:
1 IOtels
Perhaps the most visible addi-
tion to Canal Park is the 83 -room
Comfort Suite inn at the site of the
Warehouse Bar used to stand on
Canal Park Drive.
The $4 million project is being
developed by St. Croix Inc., which
inchodes several local business
partners.
Next to the hotel, developers
plan to turn a former Jeep Engle
dealership into a public parking
lot.
Another hotel on Canal Park
11rive looks new but really isn't.
The Park Inn International under-
went a facelift and will continue
ranking changes both to its interior
and exterior.
It eventually will have an Mirk
um, nine upscale rooms, a new lob-
by, pool, hot tub and conference
room.
Restaurants
After keeping a close eye on the
success of Canal Park's restaurant
business, Red Lobster decided to
move into the Waterfront Plaza on
Lake Avenue South.
Duluth met all the demogra-
phic criteria," said Robbie Wins-
low, public relations representa-
tive for Red Lobster U.S.A. "It has
significant tourism, and eating and
IL
Steve Stearns /News - Tribune
The Comfort Suite Inn, (foreground) an 83 -room hotel, is being built on Canal Park Drive.
drinking sales are good in that
area."
The 11,1135- square -foot seafood
restaurant will seat 301 people
with 125 employees after its sched-
uled mid -.tune opening.
Another restaurant, Grandma's,
will extend its cooking operations
to nearby Grand Slam- Adventure
World.
Attractions, shopping
Grand Slam, on Lake Avenue
South and Buchanan Street, will
offer halting cages, bumper cars,
miniature golf, basketball, dialog.
video games and a sporting goods
shop.
Visitors can find a number of
new retail shops along Canal Park
Drive with services and Items
ranging from Interior design to an-
tiques and coffee.
Retail space in Hardee's restau-
rant will house a tailor, and the
DeWitt -Seitz building will have a
new children's bookstore.
To attract people to all the sites,
the city of Duluth spent $9 million
on a street plan routing Park Point
traffic down Lake Avenue and
slowing down traffic on Canal
Park Drive.
We wanted to turn (traffic)
into destination - oriented traffic —
slow people down," said Jill Fisher
from the city planning division.
r
USINESS
Niluth Nowe- Trihunn
uro1,1V. fVhjr:h 1, Ind?
Pago 5n
Ch•rN• Carta• /N•w• -THbw*
Michael Bentzen (left) and John Lahti looked over construction in the Canal Park warehouse
that's being converted Into Grand Slam- Adventure Works. Bentzen Is president of Sports and
Entertainment Concepts Inc. of Minneapolis, which is developing the indoor entertainment fa-
cility, and Lahti Is manager.
Grand Slam developer bets
batting cages will be a hit
By Marianne Renner GRAND SLAM-ADVENTURE WORLD
News- Triburm t wims• writer
A sawdust haze filled the air,
r
Whs t: Lake Avenue South and Buchanan Street.
and sounds of hammering echoed when: Scheduled to open mid- March; hours MH be 10 a.m. to 10
through the warehouse. p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 10 a.m. to midnight Friday and
Workers molded concrete Into Saturday.
the outline of a castle, while oth- Attractions: Four batting cages, 18 -hob miniature golf course, the outline .
n..s.. n,
while of 100 Video and Mxfrr nera e d.. b..... . _ . .
C -'
Bring the team, bring the family, everyone's
headed for Grand Slam = Adventure World
NY JAN nEJ5 tW2
Canal Park's new Grand
AwwAdventure World,
s a complete indoor enter -
ainrnent center for families,
schools, churches, colleges,
rxd people of all ages to en-
w. From basehall to golf,
umper cars to video games,
uilliards to dancing, this
recreation complex "offers a
eew and safe alternative to
o traditional birthday par-
r, youth league draft med-
ings, fund-raisers, company
outings, church functions,
hoot field trips, and a var-
ty of other organized group
611vents," according to
Timothy Browne, of Browne
Browne Marketing, Inc
Ian to attend its grand
pening in March 1992."
Sports and Entertainment
Concepts, Inc. has created
Pis multiple activity center
o house baseball and four
st and slow pitch softball
ATEC (Athletic Training
Equipment Company)
rand Slam bitting ranges.
tilting cages give the
looblic, little leaguers, high
school and coilege teams,
rd softhall teams the np
Ntunity to train year
wun d. All 26 Major League
liisebaill teams use ATEC
equipment as their primary
aining tools. The "all
rikes" machines can be
daplel to throw baseballs
or softhalls at either a last or
slow pitch. There will also
a Pro Stop with a full line
equipment.
Coach John Anderson, of
the University of Minnesota
S 'ophers, his staff and other
olessionals will host little
ague, group, and coach
clinics or summer camps at
Grand Slam- Adventure
urlJ. The exciting curricul-
n for these training ses
sions was designed by
Coach Anderson and the
National Coaches Advisory
Board. Jim Lefebvre, man-
ager of the Chicago Cuba,
and Jeff Torborg, manager of
the Chicago White Sox, are
both members of this advis-
ory board. Team discounts
and group promotional
packages will also be offer -
ed..
We are real anxious for
Grand Slam- Adventure
World to contribute towards
the business and recreation-
al. environment . of the
Duluth- Superior area," said
Michael C. Bentzen, Presi-
dent of Sports & Entertain-
ment Concepts.. "It offers a
new and exciting recreation-
al alternative to individuals,
groups and families. With
youth baseball and adult
softball such popular sports
in the Twin Ports, our train-
ing facility will be a major
benefit to the many leagues
in the area."
In addition to these sports
facilities there will be a bas
ketball court, which :will
double for volleyball and
aerobic classes when not In
use. Baseball card shows
and clinics will also be fea-
tured here. The largest ar-
cade the Twin Ports has ever
seen will contain over 100
different video games,
games of skill, and sports
games with a redemption
gift gyp•
The "Medieval COW" an
Mhole, indoor, miniature
golf course, H the first of its
kind in the country. It lol-
lows a middle ages motif,
when "knighthood was in
flower," and Robin Hood
reigned in Sherwood Forest -
Dads, Moms, Grandma and
Grandpa, too, will certainly
enjoy taking the children to
this magical land of dragons,
courageous kings, beautiful
ladies, and court jesters that
just might hinder your get-
ting "par" on this course.
4ow about a ride on the
azy Bumper Kars," and
be able to enjoy It year
round anytime you want?
What about all the activities
to do and see at "Adventure
Playland." Can you do it all
In one day? And a relaxing
game of billiards would be
nice before or after dinner.
The Grand Slam
Restaurant will host a delis
lots menu of favorites for all
ages at reasonable prices.
Taking a break here from all
the activities of the day will
in itself make lunch or sup.
per a gratifying experience.
This restaurant will be in
partnership with Grandma's
Incorporated. It and the en-
tire Grand Slam - Adventure
World complex will be open
from 10 a.m. to 10 P.M. Sun-
day through Thursday, and
10 a.m. to midnight Friday
and Saturday. The Grand
Slam Restaurant will have
both indoor and outdoor
seating, dining and dancing,
and private party rooms.
The Duluth architect
Robert A. llr•rquW awl t1.%%
Marble GnnmtN hon Con
parry are drvrlegring th
30,0(10 nrloare foot facility :.
the interveiioo of Isok.
Avenoe South and Ilochar
an Street. For yeem heald
safety, and enpoyneent Ili
entire complex will b
smxokedrre and no alroholi
beverages will IM served. It'
going to lie an exciting spt
ing in Canal park and If
many years to come. Brin
the whole "team!'
e Evening Telegram, Superior, Wis., Friday, December 13, 1991
MEN
ANA ,
rand Slam- Adventure. World- opening
Grand Slam - Adventure World, a project of Sports.and
E ertainment Concepts, Inc. of Minneapolis, will open the first
plete indoor family recreation and entertainment complex in
be Duluth- Superior area this winter at 395 Lake Avenue South in
Duluth's Canal Park The multiple activity center dbmbines baseball
ii fast and slow pitch softball ATEC Grand Slam batting ranges,
If ole miniature "Medieval Castle" golf course, video arcade, Kra -
y dumper Kars, Adventure Playland, basketball, billiards, Pro
ihop, private party and dancing rooms and Grand Slam Restaurant
v"" i indoor and outdoor seating. Open year- round, the 30,000
q ire foot facility will be alcohol and smoke free.
We are real anxious for Grand Slam to contribute towards the
ousiness and recreational environment of the Duluth - Superior
31 t," said Michael C. Bentzen, president of Sports And Entertain -
m it Concepts. "It offers a new and exciting recreational alterna-
tive to individuals, groups and families. With youth baseball and
adult softball such popular sports in the Twin Ports, our training
fa lity will be a major benefit to the many leagues in the area,"
aced Bentzen.
The four batting ranges, part of franchise system ATEC (Athlet-
ic Training Equipment Company) offers the public, little leaguers,
ni i school and college baseball teams, and softball teams the
it )rtunity to train year round with state-of-the-art batting cages, ...
pitching machines and a Pro Shop with a full -l!ne of baseball and
softball equipment. The "all strikes" machines can be adapted to
h w baseballs or softballs and either fast or slow pitch.
s
i
All 26 Major League Baseball teams use ATEC equipment as
their primary training tools. ATEC national Coaches Adivsory Board
includes Jim Lefebvre, manager- Chicago Cubs and Jeff Torborg,
manager - Chicago White Sox. In addition to University of Minnesota
Gopher Baseball Coach John Anderson and his stali', other profes-
sional coaches and players will hold instructional little league clin-
ics, group lessons, coaches clinics, summer camps at Grand Slam.
Instruction is available In baseball and softball through an academy
cirriculum designed by Anderson and a National Baseball Coaches
Advisory Board. Team discounts and group and promotional pack-
ages will also be offered.
Grand Slam- Adventure World offers a new and safe alternative
to the traditional birthday party, youth league draft meetings, fund
raisers, company outings, church functions, school field trips, and a
variety of other organized group events. Additionally, the largest
arcade in the Twin Ports will feature over 100 different video, skill
and sports games with a redemption gift shop. The "Medieval
Castle" minnature golf will be the first of its design in the country.
When the basketball court isn't being used it can double for volley-
ball, aerobic classes, baseball card shows and clinics.
Duluth architect Robert A Berquist and Q.W. Marble Constric-
tion Company are developing the Grand Slam- Adventure World site
at the intersection of Lake Avenue South and Buchanan Street. The
Grand Slam Restaurant will be presented through a partnership
with Grandma's Inc. Hours of operation are 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. Sun-
day thivugh Thursday and 10 p.m. to midnight Friday and Saturday.
A grand opening announcement will be made in January, 1992.
PAW
L F !
I ..:./ `
Y,
o!_j•y if_ i .fir j4'
Y•`ric'k'A' iv.4t 1:w . ! .tip
141 ,0 Imo:
1 \
f , " • {} -. •
i t' •'
I
ift• _ Fes i .t..•"'.'', '_'-•
I
far •r' €.:- - - a,1•x
Nf i fI -- $
rX.+
Y s-' -•'• -; zt ?s-- a+f C_
zt,•..+
s"<,s-..
t 3'as+ - - °,X a'S*9a i {iry. .•,eligt
f.
eb'-X • .5
y
t/ 'b yrsw ix` AN, tp',} t% >+v . - r e7•' y•JA4*
IJ.• L Pk .'Iwo
y e.
c'.:'jHil,J,
t , .
ts•°t< ``' .- ,_. < , 'z r.y ""- `"'Ii t _ w° 1` -.`?• -fix ;:a7 7w?
y .`.."
1. "°"""' r ' :r -3 F.n*xYr.': s. '", `. #..
s
pYT "
z" *'•' a-'t4i
1 1114 .3 iF
r .. -'' - n-..•] }-f: f.. - :'
y ',r..,; •`•s.rr'4 c'+ag?'
It I %• 'T.." r WO4 -tE-a
w. ^• Z I p7•tt}E a i_ 1-r 'i. i #
IN
iu {{Nfflil + I. ". _ '•i _, =ice' :- ' _ '+ =J` .ate -•3s k F_e
vft*'.
14 %.
utut lob cticer
ESTABLISHED 1931
READ Rq OVER 48,000 HOMES
NORTHERN MINNESOTA'S LARGEST CIRCULATION WEEKLY NEWSPAPER
Adventure World
More excitement is'. adds excitement
to Canal Park
set for Canal Park
Mlaaeopol4,MN— Dee.1I. —Grand .
SWWAdventure World, It project of
Sports and Entertainment Canoepta,
Inc. of Mlrmek'Als, will open its first
complete Indoor iamt>,y Notation
and entertainment oom In In the
DuluwSuperia area this wirdar at
W Iakke Avenue South in Dabs.
Canal Park. The multiple activity .
center combines baseball and test
and slow pitch sottball ATEC Grand
Slam batting ranges, 18 -hole
miniature "Medieval (Leslie" golf
course, video arcade, Krazy Bumps'
Kars, Adventure Playland, basket-
ball, billiards, Pro Shop, Pivots patty
and dancing roans and Grand Siam
Restaurant with irdoor and outdoes
seating. Open year - round, the 30,1100
square toot facility will be alcohol and
smoke free.
We are real aradous for Grand
Slam to contribute towards the
business and recreational envlra-
melt of the DuluWSuper for area," .
said Michael C. Bentre, prodded of
Please two to page 3
Continued frets page I
Sports And Entertainment Concepts.
It offers a new and exciting recrea-
tional alternative to individuals,
groups and familie& with youth
baseball and adult softball such
popular sports in the Twin Ports, our
training facilty will be a major benefit
to the many leagues in the area "
Bentzen Is shown, left, In photo with
John Anderson, University of Min.
nesota Head Basketball Coach.
Anderson and his staff, other pro-
fessional coaches and players will
hold instructional little league clinics,
group lessons, coaches clinics, sum
mer camps at Grand Siam. Instruc-
tion is available in baseball and soft-
bell through an academy curriculum
designed by Gopher Coach Anderson
and a National Baseball Coaches Ad-
visory Board. Team discounts and
group and promotional packages will
also be offered.
Grand Slam- Adventure world of-
fers a new and safe alternative to the
traditional birthday Party, youth
league draft meetings, fund raisers,
company outings, church functions,
school field trips, and a variety of
other organized group events. Addi-
tionally, the largest arcade in the
Twin Ports will feature over 100 dif-
ferent video, skill and sports games
with a redemption gift shop. The
Medieval Castle" miniature golf will
be the first of Its design in the country.
When the basketball court Isn't being
need It can double for volleyball,
aerobic classes, baseball card shows
and clinics.
NUMBER ONE
IN SPORTS AND FUNTm
METRWE
MAR 17 1992
CITY OF FLYMOUTH
OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEP.
GRAND SLAM- ADVENTURE WORLD
Plymouth Plaza - Plymouth, Minnesota
For the proposed Fall 1992 opening of Grand Slam- Adventure World in the City of
Plymouth, additional information is provided below that positively supports
customer traffic matters of the Plymouth Plaza indoor family entertainment and
recreation center as it relates to security, peak traffic times and our Restaurant
customer activity. This document, along with the Grand Slam- Adventure World
narrative description, specifically addresses the questions in Section 9 of the
Conditional Use Permit Standards.
Security:
Landlord (Outside Facility): Our landlord, Welsh Companies, will be responsible
for all security issues on the outside of the Grand Slam- Adventure World
facility, including areas such as parking lots and public areas. Please see
attached.
Grand Slam (Inside Facility): Grand Slam- Adventure World will be responsible
for all security matters inside the center. The on -sight full -time staff of the
manager, assistant manager and 20 part -time employees will be properly trained
to effectively handle all potential security issues. Specific training sessions by
professional consultants will be held for the staff prior to opening and
periodically on an on -going basis. Several of the part -time staff will be
specifically hired as security personnel and will work strictly as security
enforcers at all time the facility is open, increasing such staff during evenings
and weekends.
Peak Customer Traffic:
Weekends: It is expected the peak customer traffic to be on weekends. On
Saturdays maximum customer numbers would be 1,000 over a 14 hour day period.
Sundays could be 600 customers maximum over a 12 hour period.
Weekdays: Is it predicted that peak Monday through Friday weekday customer
traffic will be 200 -300 people.
On Saturdays and Sundays and weekdays, maximum traffic will not exceed 443
people per day on average for the seven days. An expected medium level of traffic
flow during the week would be 200 per day and an average of 600 per day on
weekends, or a medium traffic of 315 people per day on average for the 7 days.
Grand Slam- Adventure World® 395 lake Avenue South • Canal Park a Duluth, MN 55802 (218) 722 -5667
Grand Slam- Adventure World
Plymouth Plaza
Page two
Grand Slam Restaurant:
The Restaurant inside Grand Slam- Adventure World will serve the food and thirst
needs of only those customers who are already in the facility taking part in
recreational activities. They will use the Restaurant to "take a break' for a soda,
or have a sandwich and yogurt after working out in the batting cages, basketball
courts or hockey /soccer facilities. Families will use the Restaurant after
finishing their "family fun time" at Adventure Playland, Camelot Castle Golf, or
the Bumper Cars. The majority use the Restaurant will be by birthday parties,
private company events, church functions, school field trips, etc. The Grand Slam
Restaurant will not be a "destination" point for people to visit separate from a
recreational workout or family entertainment outing.
Summary:
These above mentioned standards and guidelines will help guarantee and maintain
a safe, healthy, comfortable and enjoyable recreational atmosphere for Plymouth
and surrounding community residents visiting Grand Slam- Adventure World. At
the same time, these factors will also help support the smooth flow of
neighborhood and adjacent business activities.
Surrounding property values improve as Grand Slam provides residents with an
activities extension of formal school activities, clinics and sports training.
Further, Grand Slam is actually a "community recreation center ", providing
convenient, no- admission -fee, affordable recreation to residents of all ages in
sports such as basketball, hockey, soccer, baseball, softball and golf. Grand
Slam also provides both private and semiprivate meeting rooms for local
community groups, churches, schools, team, clubs and social organizations.
Opportunities for improved public welfare and education is potentially improved
as well, as Grand Slam serves as a resource for informative, educational sports
training and clinics for the family and individuals. Groups can hold sessions on
specific educational topics, accessing the Grand Slam private meeting facilities
for their programs.
Grand Slam- Adventure World is an added -value addition to the City of Plymouth.
We look forward to becoming a significant contributor to the improved quality of
life for the residents of Plymouth.
WelshCompanies
March 19, 1992
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Attention: Council Members and Staff
RE: Grand Slam Entertainment Center
Plymouth Plaza Shopping Center
Plymouth, Minnesota
Dear Council Members and Staff:
Security of the shopping center and the affects on the rest of the tenants at
Plymouth Plaza is a major concern. We feel confident that the Grand Slam
Entertainment Center will be a well run family oriented operation. Before
agreeing to lease the space we spent time talking to the City officials in Eagan,
the site of the first Grand Slam, and they assured us that it was a well run
business and that the management was willing to do everything possible to insure
the safety of the customers both in and outside the facility.
As the owners and property managers, we will do whatever is necessary to
ensure the "quiet enjoyment" of the space and also the affects, if any, on the rest
of the tenants.
If extra security is needed, we will provide it, especially during peak use on
Saturdays and Sundays.
We feel the addition of the Grand Slam to the shopping center will be a
tremendous benefit to the center and the rest of the tenants. It will also provide
a drug free, smoke free family entertainment center for the Plymouth area.
We strongly urge your approval.
Sincerely,
E. Paul Dunn
Partner
Plymouth Plaza Partners
11 1 1i9t#t atu . $ kAtet RnC 'i'+?'°`t r HSraiii-no,vk .i" r. l Fd'" r) bipuT rA Fnt' shw3s' ++ e"!'; ti1 'f tslgvt``'Br ttH''`•
WelshCompanies
DATE: March 19, 1992
TO: All Merchants
FROM: Joann Holl
SUBJECT: New Tenant - I
j
Please be advised that a proposal is being submitted to the City of Plymouth to
grant a Conditional Use Permit to Grand Slam Entertainment Center which
would enable them to occupy the space formally occupied by the Country Store.
Grand Slam Entertainment Center is a family oriented entertainment center
providing a drug free and smoke free environment for children and adults of all
ages. The entertainment consists of. batting cages, miniature golf, golf practice
ranges and numerous other related indoor sports, all patterned after the very
successful Grand Slam location at Cedarvale Shopping Center in Eagan,
Minnesota. The same expert management and ownership will own and operate
the Plymouth Plaza location.
Super Valu, Welsh Companies, and the owners of Plymouth Plaza, all are in
favor of this new tenant occupying the space. If you would like more details
about Grand Slam, feel free to call David Brown at Welsh Companies at 829-
3449. Also, if you agree that the use is a favorable one, you might want to call
the City of Plymouth (550 -5000) and advise them of your favorable feelings.
11200 Wiest 7.1zi 1 Crrrrr, Fr,.,, r, %trti , Mi\\_wi N ;;:44 612 / Q44•-ti111 l,
a
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 4, Subdivision B
Clubs, sports, and fitness -- A l ace y where
membershin rected toward the general public with
Commercial Recreation -- A business directed toward the general public, not
requiring membership, that offers recreational entertainment such as
amusement centers, bowling alleys, billiard halls, miniature golf, movie
theaters, ballrooms and the like. (Amended Ord. No. 85 -18)
private, licensed by the Department of Corrections, including group foster
homes, juvenile halfway houses, adult, halfway houses, and shelter
facilities having a residential component, the primary purpose of which is
regrly
e persons placed therein by a court, court services department,
authority, or other correctional agency having dispositional power
rsons convicted of a crime or adjudicated to be delinquent, by
providing 24- hour -a -day care including food and lodging. (Ord.
Comprehensive \
ohe
series of maps, reports, statement of Goals,
Objectiveria; and documents prepared by the Planning Commission
and adopity Council to designate long -range orderly growth and
developmcommunity; including, but not limited to: a Land Use
Guide Ploughfare Guide Plan, Community Facilities Plan and
policies ecution.
Concept Plan -- A report i ma and text form submitted as the first stage of a
Planned Unit Developmen P.U.D.) proposal, depicting the location, general
purpose, general type land use and circulation pattern, primary
relationships between site lements and between the proposed development
and surrounding development, roposed general schedule of development, and
information on the proposed de loper.
Condominium -- A form of individual o rship within a building which entails
joint ownership and responsibility r maintenance and repairs of the land
and other common property of the buil 'ng.
Congregate Housing -- Senior Citizen housing re at least one meal per day is
prepared and served in a common dining face ty on the premises and where a
variety of common medical and social servJ s may be provided over and
above those typically provided in a senior itizen apartment building.
Such common amenities and services may be pr Wed in conjunction with
convalescent and /or nursing home facilities on same site. (Amended
Ord. No. 83 -12
Cooperative -- A multi -unit development operated for d owned by its
occupants. Individual occupants do not own their spec is housing unit
outright as in a condominium, but they own shares in the en rprise.
Correctional Facility (Adult) - -A facility which provides short -term
incarcerative sanctions imposed by the court for commission a gross
misdemeanor or felony and providing 24- hour -a -day lodging, food, are, and
security. (Ord. 89 -38)
4 -4
Plvmi outh City Code
Section 1103 - Amusement Centers
Ord. No. 82 -01)
1103.01
1103.01. Definitions. Subdivision 1. For purposes of this section the terms
defined in this subsection have the meanings given them.
Subd. 2. "Amusement :Machine" means, but is not limited to, a mechanical
amusement devise of any of the following types:
a) A machine or electronic contrivance, including "pinball" machines,
mechanical miniature pool tables, bowling machines, shuffle boards,
electric rifle or gun ranges, miniature mechanical and electronic
devices and games or amusements patterned after baseball, basketball,
hockey and similar games and like devices, machines or games which
may be played solely for amusement and not as a gambling device and
which devices or games are played by the insertion of a coin or coins
or at a fee fixed and charged by the establishment in which such
devices or machines are located, and which contain no automatic
payoff devices for the return of money, coins, merchandise, checks,
tokens or any other thing or item of value; provided, however, that
such machine may be equipped to permit a free play or game: the term
does not include coin - operated music machines.
b) Amusement devices designed for and used exclusively as rides by
children, such as, but not limited to, kiddie cars, miniature airplane
rides, mechanical horses, and other miniature mechanical devices, not
operated as a part of or in connection with any carnival, circus,
show, or other entertainment or exhibition.
Subd. 3. "Amusement Center" means a business at one location devoted:
a) primarily to the operation of amusement machines as defined above
and open for public use and participation or
b) locations with seven or more amusement machines as defined
above and open for public use and participation.
Subd. 4. "Licensed Premises" shall mean the room or rooms in which such
amusement machines are located and when such premises are part of a building
or structure in which other businesses are conducted, the licensed premise
shall not be connected by more than one interior doorway or passageway to
other parts of such building or structure. Such doorway or passageway shall
be provided with a metal gate or grating which can be locked to secure the
licensed premises during such time that use is not permitted.
1103.03. Licenses. Subdivision 1. General Rules. No person shall keep,
operate, maintain or permit to be operated or maintained upon premises within
his direct or indirect control an amusement center or any machine therein,
without having first procured an amusement center license under the provisions
of this Code.
Plymouth City Code 1103.01, Subd. 2
Subd. 2. Amusement Center License. No person shall own, operate or permit
operation of an amusement center on premises owned, leased, or operated by him
or engage in the business of operating an amusement center unless an annual
amusement center license has been obtained.
Subd. 3. Application. The application for an amusement center license
shall contain the following information:
a) Name and address of the applicant, age, date and place of birth.
b) Place where machine or device is to be displayed or operated, the
business conducted at that place, and the zoning classification.
c) If the interest of the applicant be that of a corporation or other
business entity, the names of any persons having a 5% or more
interest in said business entity shall be listed.
d) A management plan outlining the means by which the establishment
will be supervised, training provided to supervisory personnel and
methods for dealing with infringements of establishment rules.
e) All applications shall conform to the provisions of this Section, but
shall also include a statement that the applicant, if requested by the
City Clerk will permit a record of his fingerprints to be made by
the Police Department for the purpose of additional investigation
to determine whether or not the application should be granted.
Subd. 4. License Fees. The license fee for an amusement center license
is set by Chapter X and may be pro -rated for a partial year. The license fees
are in lieu of all other fees for amusement devices or machines under this Code.
Subd. 5. Council Approval. The application for an amusement center
license shall be presented to the City Council for consideration, and if
approved, the City Clerk shall issue the license to the applicant subject to
the provisions of subsection 1103.11, subdivision 9.
1103.05. Insurance. If the machines to be operated in the amusement center
are of the type described in subsection 1103.01, subdivision 2, clause (b),
the applicant shall also submit with his application a policy of liability
insurance applicable to death or injury caused by the operation of the
licensed machine, in the minimum amounts of $100,000 for injury to or death
of any person or $300,000 for one accident.
1103.07. Inspection. Subdivision 1. Police Review. Application for an
amusement center license shall be made in duplicate, and one copy shall be
referred to the Chief of Police, or his designated inspector, who shall
investigate the location wherein it is proposed to operate an amusement center,
ascertain if the applicant is a person of good moral character, and shall
recommend approval or disapproval of the application.
Plymouth City Code 1103.07, Subd. 2
Subd. 2. Duty of Police Department.. Each amusement center licensed
under this Section shall be inspected by the Police Department.
1103.09. Posting. An amusement center shall have permanently affixed on
its premises in plain view a decalcomania evidencing the issuance of its
license, together with a copy of the house rules and hours of operation in one
inch letters.
1103.11. Amusement Centers - Restrictions. Subdivision 1. Nuisance. No
amusement center shall be operated so as to constitute a public nuisance.
Subd. 2. Order. It shall be the responsibility of the licensee to
maintain order on the licensed premises at all times.
Subd. 3. Trash, Refuse Disposed. It shall be the responsibility of the
licensee to insure the proper and swift disposal of trash or refuse which
may accumulate on the site.
Subd. 4. Fire Hazards. It shall be the responsibility of the licensee
to see that the licensed premises does not become overcrowded so as to
constitute a hazard to the health or safety of persons therein. The Fire
Marshal shall designate and post the maximum number of persons to be permitted
on the licensed premises.
Subd. 5. Supervision. The licensee shall provide a full -time attendant
of 21 years of age or over upon the licensed premises during business hours.
The licensed premises shall be locked whenever such attendant is not present
thereon.
Subd. 6. Liquor, Beer, and Drugs. It is unlawful for any person operating
an amusement center to sell, offer for sale, or knowingly permit to be sold or
offered for sale, or to be dispensed or consumed or knowingly brought in the
amusement center any alcoholic beverages or narcotic drugs, or to knowingly
allow any illegal activity upon the licensed premises.
Subd. 7. Transferability. The license required by this Section is a
personal privilege and is not transferable.
Subd. 8. Hours. Amusement centers shall be closed by 1:00 a.m. each
night and may not open until 9:00 a.m. on weekdays or until 12:00 noon on
Sundays. At all other times the licensed premises shall be locked. Individuals
who are 19 years of age or less shall be prohibited in or around
such establishments during normal school attendance hours during the academic
year for the school district within which the amusement center is located.
Subd. 9. Restrictions on Conditional Use. The restrictions contained
in this section may be amended and additional conditions or restrictions may be
imposed as a part of a conditional use permit issued pursuant to the Zoning
Code. No license shall be valid until the City Council has issued a
conditional use permit for the operation.
Plymouth City Code 1103.11, Subd. 10
Subd. 10. Food and Beverages. There shall be no food or beverages allowed
on the site, except that which is sold by the establishment.
Subd. 11. Lighting. The interior of an amusement center shall be
illuminated as to insure proper and complete observation of patrons at all
times. The Building Inspector shall recommend standards for lighting levels to
carry out the intent of this Subdivision..
1103.13. Penalties. A violation of any provision of this section is a
misdemeanor. The licensee under this Section, whether or not in direct
control of an amusement center or the premises upon which said machines are
located, may be charged under this Section for any violation thereof, by virtue
of his responsiblity as licensee hereunder, and by virtue'of his indirect control
of the machines therein and premises, resulting from his being the licensee.
A
it PRO L'I W"N;.:
lM:
fp
i:
E*- p
oil
Ef
WO
ATI .
i I-A
3
E
Z5
cj
9Cy
F
AN and gm o"'YI
Ift *ON AYMNOw juvAS
H-11-HA I
4Ll-k,
L
Q-
i
CC
I
c
C i
I1 Ntl wM
NM1b
y Nll
ONq
1M MIOMO
1111
1
Mtl A/Y0 L
R
aa
L
Q-
i
CC
I
1 ;
p
p Si
a
to
q 4 D.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: April 9, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: April 22, 1992
FILE NO.: 92015
PETITIONER: Park Avenue of Wayzata, Inc.
REQUEST: Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Final Plat and Variances
for a 162 unit multifamily complex.
LOCATION: North side of 10th Avenue North, 1 block east of South
Shore Drive.
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -3 (High Medium Density Residential) and IP Planned
Industrial)
ZONING: R -3 (Medium Density Multiple Residence) and I -1 Planned
Industrial)
BACKGROUND:
On August 24, 1987, the City Council, by Resolution 87 -543 approved a
Preliminary Plat and General Development Plan for this site. The Preliminary
Plat depicted one 27 acre site for multifamily residential housing and one 16
acre industrial site. A condition of that Preliminary Plat approval was that
a Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Final Plat application would not be
accepted until a contract for the extension of 10th Avenue North improvements
was awarded. That contract has been awarded and the project has been
completed.
On September 25, 1989, the City Council, by Resolution 89 -565 approved a Final
Plat for the Twelve Oaks Addition and by Resolution 89 -567 approved a Site
Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a 168 unit multifamily complex. Grading
for this project was started but construction never took place.
By the terms of the :Zoning Ordinance both the Conditional Use Permit and Site
Plan approvals have expired.
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. The Physical Constraints Analysis shows this property to be located within
the Bassett Creek Drainage District. The site is not within a Shoreland
Management District, but does contain substantial wetlands, and does
contain some major woodlands, but no severe slopes. As it naturally
appeared, the site had substantial areas of poor soil. Grading work
accomplished since approval of the Preliminary Plat -- responsive to
1 -
PLANNING STAFF CObMENTS:
1. The Final Plat as submitted is consistent with the approved Preliminary
Plat for the site and meets the Subdivision Ordinance technical standards
for a Final Plat.
2. The Conditional Use Permit complies with the 6 Conditional Use Permit
standards of Section 9 of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The Site Plan, with the exception of the parking requirements, meets or
exceeds all City standards with respect to the design of multiple
residence projects in the R -3 Zoning District.
4. Since the project was originally approved for this site the offstreet
parking ratio of the Zoning Ordinance has been raised from 2 per unit to
2.5 per unit. Also - -and even more significant to this proposal - -is a
second 1990 Zoning Ordinance Amendment prohibiting use of the garage
apron" areas as parking stalls for calculation purposes. The previousl
approved Site Plan for this parcel liberally utilized those (then lega
apron spaces to meet the 2 spaces per unit offstreet parking standard that
then applied.
5. This site was and is substantially constrained by severe soils and
protected wetlands. The grading of the site has been completed responsive
to the plat, Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit approvals, all based on
a previous parking ratio and use of garage aprons for parking. Few, if
any, options exist to develop new areas of the site for parking. The only
option is to reduce the number of buildings /units - -which the developer
already proposes (168 units in 15 structures previously approved - -162
units in 14 structures now proposed).
6. While the Zoning Ordinance parking standards have changed since this
project was first designed and approved, the design /layout of the project
has not -- except elimination of one 6 unit structure. While they no longer
are "legal ", over 162 offstreet parking spaces remain on the garage
aprons.
1. We find the history of this site; the unique site constraints; and, a
project design that creates "defacto" offstreet parking opportunities in
excess of ordinance requirements combine to respond to the Variance
Criteria. The Variance can be approved with no precedential implications.
3 -
approved City of Plymouth Grading Permit- -has corrected the poor soils
situation over that portion of the site where the townhouse structures and
related roadways are proposed to be constructed.
2. The applicant proposes to Final Plat the entire 43 acre site into a 26
acre lot for the housing development, a 15.8 acre outlot and 1.2 acres of
right -of -way dedication. Less than one acre of the outlot is outside of
the designated wetland, and currently existing drainage easements. A very
small portion of the proposed outlot would be eligible for any future
development. In addition the outlot would require platting prior to any
future development taking place.
3. This request also includes a Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan and
Variances to construct 162 townhouse units in 14 buildings. The proposed
Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit is consistent with the General
Development Plan that was approved for this site in 1987. The Variance
request is to allow for the construction of 249 parking spaces versus the
405 spaces required by Zoning Ordinance Standards. Since this Site Plan
was originally submitted in 1989 the parking standards for multifamily
developments increased from 2 parking spaces per unit to 2 1/2 parking
spaces per unit to accommodate guest parking.
4. The new 1991 State wetland regulations do not apply to this site since
this property received Preliminary Plat, Conditional Use Permit and Site
Plan approval within the last five years. In addition site grading has
already taken place on this site.
5. With DRC corrections included the Site Plan meets or exceeds
specifications contained in the Zoning Ordinance development of R -3
property with the exception of parking standards. Specifically, the Site
Plan meets all building setback standards, trash containment will be
within the individual structures; no rooftop mechanical equipment is
proposed; and the Landscaping Plan will meet specifications of the
Plymouth Landscape Policy.
6. The applicant is proposing to construct 249 parking stalls, including 162
garage spaces and 87 surface spaces. The petitioner has proposed a
deferred parking area for 20 additional parking stalls. A total of 269
parking stalls could ultimately be constructed on this property, a ratio
of 1.7 stalls per unit.
7. The exterior appearance of the structures will be a split level design
with a peaked roof and horizontal siding. The appearance of the
structures is consistent with the City Council Policy regarding site and
building aesthetics and architectural design.
8. The Conditional Use Permit must be reviewed consistent to the six
standards for the Conditional Use Permit found in Section 9, Subdivision A
of the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of the standards and the applicant's
response to those standards is attached.
9. The Variance must be reviewed consistent to the six standards for
variances in Section 11, Subdivision C of the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of
the six criteria and the applicant's response is attached.
2 -
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of the attached resolutions providing for the
approval of a Fin t, Site Plan, C ional Use Permit and Variance.
Submitted by: (
I
A a
Char es E. Dilleru Com ity eve opment Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Final Plat
2. Resolution Setting Conditions Prior to Filing of the Final Plat
3. Resolution Approving Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variance
4. Engineer's Memo
5. Conditional Use Permit Criteria
6. Variance Criteria
7. Petitioner's Narrative
8. Location Map
9. Resolution 87 -543
10. Large Plans
pc /jk /92015:jw)
4 -
APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR PARK AVENUE OF WAYZATA, INC. FOR "TRENTON OAKS"
LOCATED NORTH OF 10TH AVENUE NORTH AND 1 BLOCK EAST OF SOUTH SHORE DRIVE
92015)
WHEREAS, has requested approval of a Final Plat for Park Avenue of Wayzata,
Inc. for "Trenton Oaks" located north of 10th Avenue North and 1 block east of
South Shore Drive; and,
WHEREAS, the City staff has prepared a Development Contract covering the
improvements related to said plat;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the Final Plat and
Development Contract for Park Avenue of Wayzata, Inc. for "Trenton Oaks"
located north of 10th Avenue North and 1 block east of South Shore Drive; and,
FURTHER, that the Development Contract for said plat be approved, and that the
Mayor and City Manager be authorized to execute the Development Contract on
behalf of the City.
res /pc /92015.fp:jw)
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO FINAL PLAT FOR
PARK AVENUE OF WAYZATA, INC. FOR "TRENTON OAKS" LOCATED NORTH OF 10TH AVENUE
NORTH AND 1 BLOCK EAST OF SOUTH SHORE DRIVE (92015)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the Final Plat and Development Contract
for Park Avenue of Wayzata, Inc. for "Trenton Oaks ";
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the following to
be met, prior to recording of, and related to said plat:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
City Policy in effect at the time of filing of the Final Plat.
3. 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.
4. No yard setback variances are granted or implied.
5. Submittal of required utility and drainage easements as approved by the
City Engineer prior to filing the Final Plat.
6. No building permits to be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
7. The Development Contract, as approved by the City Council, shall be fully
executed prior to release of the Final Plat.
res /pc /92015.sc:jw)
APPROVING SITE PLAN, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR PARK AVENUE OF
WAYZATA, INC. FOR "TRENTON OAKS" LOCATED AT THE NORTH SIDE OF 10TH AVENUE
NORTH AND 1 BLOCK EAST OF SOUTH SHORE DRIVE (92015)
WHEREAS, Park Avenue of Wayzata, Inc. has requested approval for a Site Plan,
Conditional Use Permit and Variance for property located at the north side of
10th Avenue North and 1 block east of South Shore Drive; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by
Park Avenue of Wayzata for a Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variance to
construct 162 townhouse units on property located at the north side of 10th
Avenue North and 1 block east of South Shore Drive, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
the Dedication Policy in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
3. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures on sites adjacent to, or containing any open storm
water drainage facility.
4. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement
for completion of site improvements within 12 months of the date of this
resolution.
5. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
6. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants and
fire lanes.
7. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within each building, and
no outside storage is permitted.
8. An 8k x 11 inch , "As Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior
to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy.
9. No building permit to be issued until the Final Plat is filed and recorded
with Hennepin County.
10. Approved Variance is for the construction of 249 parking spaces versus the
ordinance required 405 spaces based on the unique site characteristics;
and, the prior approvals of this project under less stringent parking
standards. Construction of an additional 20 stalls as depicted on the
Site Plan is deferred pending a demonstrated need as determined by the
City of Plymouth.
res /pc /92015:jw)
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: April 15, 1992
FILE NO.: 92015
PETITIONER: Mr. Richard Neslund, Park Avenue of Wayzata, 15500 Wayzata Blvd.,
1742, Wayzata, MN 55391
FINAL PLAT: TRENTON OAKS
LOCATION: East of South Shore Drive, north of 10th Avenue in the northwest 1/4
of Section 36.
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. _ X _ Have watermain area assessments been levied based on proposed use?
2. _ X Have sanitary sewer area assessments been levied based on proposed
use?
3. _ X _ Will SAC and REC charges 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: None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None.
31;1 DR b CTAI 4;1 v
6. X Complies with standard utility /drainage easements?
If "No" is marked, the City requires utility and drainage
easements ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six
feet (61) in width adjoining side and rear lot lines.
N/A Yes No
7. _ X — Are all standard util.ity easements required for construction
provided?
The City requires twenty foot (20') utility and drainage easements
where these utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has
been reviewed with the final construction plans and if "No" is
marked, the following changes are necessary:
Complies with ponding requirements?
The City requires the dedication of drainage easements for ponding
purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year high
water elevation in conformance with the City's comprehensive storm
water drainage plan. If "No" is marked, the following changes are
necessary:
9. X _ Have all existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way been
vacated?
If "No" is marked 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.
N/A Yes No
10. X _ _ Has 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 easement or vacation of unnecessary
easement.
11. _ JL _ Have all necessary permits for this project been obtained?
The developer must comply with the
If "No" the following permits must
DNR
Mn DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
2
conditions within any permit.
be obtained by the developer:
Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Wetland Conservation Act of
1991 from City
N/A Yes No
12. X _ _ Conforms with the City's grid system for street names?
If "No" is marked, the following changes will be necessary:
13. X _ _ Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided? If "No" is marked,
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection
of and
14. _ X _ Are all existing street rights -of -way the required width?
If "No" is marked, an additional feet of right -of -way
will be required on
N/A Yes No
15. _ X _ Will final plans be prepared by the Developer?
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 January 1
of the year in which the project is requested for construction, if
the developer is paying 1002 of the cost.
16. _ _ _.X_ Do final utility and street plans submitted comply with all City
requirements? If "No" is marked, the following are required for:
Sanitary Sewer
Watermain
Storm Sewer
Street /Concrete Curb & Gutter
3
N/A Yes No
17. _ X _ Do the construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Thoroughfare Guide Plan?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions must be made to conform
with the City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan:
18. _ X _ Do the construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Water Distribution Plan?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions will be required:
19. _ X Do the construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions will be required:
N/A Yes No
20. _ _ Is it necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's public utility
foreman, at 550 -74927
If "Yes" is marked 24 hours notice is required in advance of
making any proposed utility connections to the City's sanitary
sewer and water systems. All water connections shall be via wet
S
21. Is it necessary to contact Tom Vetsch, the City's Street Foreman,
at 550 -7493 for an excavating permit?
if. "Yes" is marked 24 hours notice is required before digging
wihin the City right -of -way.
4
Lem 0 ; r 4 uxe) wil \ • a i • • \ • \ + •
N/A Yes No
22. _ X _ Do the construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions are required:
23. _ X Does the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan comply with
the City's erosion control policy?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions will be required:
24. --- X _ Have minimum basement elevations been established? If "No" is
marked, they must be established for the following lots:
Buildings 8 through 14 shall have minimum basement elevations of
891. Buildings 1. 2. 3. 12. and 13 shall have minimum basement
elevations of 894.
Mole) \• 3 6 0 to) \ PE • ;
25. A. SDR 26 shall be used for the sanitary sewer between Manholes 3 and 4.
B. Where the drive is being relocated on 10th Avenue, the storm sewer shall be
extended and the catchbasin placed on the curb line along 10th Avenue.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
5
Doc. Format Rev. 2 -4 -92)
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: April 15, 1992
FILE NO.: 92015
PETITIONER: Mr. Richard Neslund, Park Avenue of Wayzata, 15500 Wayzata Blvd.,
742, Wayzata, MN 55391
SITE PLAN: TRENTON OARS - 14 MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS
LOCATION: East of South Shore Drive, north of 10th Avenue in the northwest 1/4
of Section 36.
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. _ X_ _ Have watermain area assessments been levied based on proposed use?
2. _ _Z_ _ Have Sanitary sewer area assessments been levied based on proposed?
use.
3. _ X _ Will 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.
W37WD!yN Zy vID 4 i M
6. _ _ X Is property one parcel?
If "No" is marked, the approval of the site plan as proposed
requires that a final plat be approved by the City Council. jLill
comply with the filing of the plat of Trenton Oaks.
N/A Yes No
7. _ _ X Complies with standard utility /drainage easements?
If "No" is marked, the current City ordinance requires utility and
drainage easements ten feet (101) 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.) See Item 6.
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. If "No" is marked, the
following changes are necessary: See Item 6-
9. _ _ X Are all standard utility easements required for construction
provided?
The City requires twenty foot (20') utility and drainage easements
where these utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has
been reviewed with the final site plan. If "No" is marked, the
following changes are necessary: See Item 6.
10. X _ _ Have all existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way been
vacated?
If "No" is marked, it will be necessary to vacate the obsolete
easements /right -of -way to facilitate the development. This is not
an automatic process, it is the owner's responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated.
11. _x_ _ _ Has 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 annly.
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 _ Have all necessary permits for this project have been obtained?
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
DNR
MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Wetland Conservation Act of
1991 from City
13. _ X _ Does the Site Plan comply with The City's Adopted Storm Drainage
Plan? If "No" is marked, the following revisions are required:
14. _ X _ Does the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan comply with the
City's erosion control policy?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions are required:
15. _ X _ Are necessary fire hydrants provided?
If "No" is marked, the City of Plymouth requires five hydrants be
spaced 300 feet apart. It will be necessary to locate hydrants in
such a manner that the site plan complies with Plymouth City Code
Section 905.05.
16. _ _ JL Is the size and type of material proposed in the utility systems
included on the utility plans?
If "No" is marked, the utility plan shall be revised to indicate the
size and type of material.
Sanitary Sewer
x Watermain
Storm Sewer
3-
N/A Yes No
17. _X_ _ _ Is the post indicator valve and fire department connection provided?
If "No" is marked, they shall be included in the site utility plan.
18. _ X _ Are hydrant valves provided?
If "No" is marked, all new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6"
gate valves per City Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W -2.
19. _ _JL Are sanitary sewer clean -outs provided?
If "No" is marked, it will be necessary to provide clean -outs on the
proposed internal sanitary sewer system at a maximum of 100 foot
intervals.
N/A Yes No
20. X _ Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided?
If "No" is marked, Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at
the intersection of
and
21. _ _ Are all existing street rights -of -way the required width?
If "No" is marked, an additional feet of right -of -way will
be required on
22. _ X _ Does the grading plan comply with site drainage requirements?
If "No" is marked, the City will not permit drainage onto a City
street from a private parking lot, the site plan shall be revised
accordingly.
23. _ _ X Is concrete curb and gutter provided?
If "No" is marked, 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 with this requirement. In addition to the B -612
concrete curb detail. a double line sgmbol shall be placed on the
site plan showing where all the curb and gutters are to be placed.
24. _ _X_ _ Does the site plan comply with parking lot standards?
The City requires 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. If "No" is
marked, the site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with
these requirements:
4-
N/A Yes No
N/A Yes No
25. Is it necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's public utility
foreman, at 550 -74927
If "Yes" is marked 24 hours notice is required in advance of making
any proposed utility connections to the City's sanitary sewer and
water systems. All water connections shall be via wet tjR.
26. _ X _ Is it necessary to contact Tom Vetsch, the City's Street Foreman, at
550 -7493 for an excavating permit?
If "Yes" is marked 24 hours notice is required before digging within
the City right -of -way.
27. _ X _ The City requires reproducible mylar prints of sanitary sewer, water
service and storm sewer As- Builts for the site prior to the
financial guarantee being released.
28. _ _ X Does the site plan comply with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual?
If "No" is marked, see Items 6. 7. 8. 9. 16. 23 and SFecial
Conditions.
29 A. All buildings shall be provided with an automatice fire suppression system
sprinklers) in conformance with the National Fire Protection Association
standards based on your submittal.
Submitted by:o
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
5-
Iii S=CN 9, MMIVISICN A
2. per. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Camnission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recce vendation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Camiission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) ccnpliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will pramote and enhance the general public welfare and will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or canfort.
3) The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the neighborinod.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and impzwement of surrounding
property for uses permitted in the district.
5) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress,
egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic
congestion in the public streets.
6) The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the
applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.
forns:o >pl /cup.stnd /s) 10/89
0 k, I 1 .1 'ego _.41 IN
1. That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, a
particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a
mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be
carried out.
2. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are
unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not
applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning
classification.
3. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire
to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land.
4. That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Ordinance and
has not been created by any persons presently having an interest in the
parcel of land.
5. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other land or improvsnents in the neighborhood in
which the parcel of land is located.
6. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light
and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of
the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public
safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the
neighborhood.
fonns:o >pl /zon.stnd /s) 10/89
JAMES P. LAN KIN
ROBERT L. HOFFMAN
JACK F. DALY
D. KENNETH LINDGREN
GERALD K FRI[D'LL
ALLAN E. MULLIGAN
JAMES C. ERICKSON
EDWARD J. DRISCOLL
GENE N. FULLER
DAVID C. SELLERGREN
JOHN O FULLMER
ROBERT C. FOYLE
FRANK I. HARVEY
CHARLES S. MODELL
CHRISTOPHER J. DIETIEN
JOHN R. BEATIE
LINDA K FISHER
THOMAS P. STOLTMAN
M ICNAEL C.JACKMAN
JOHN E - bit NL
JON S. SWIERZEWSKI
THOMAS J. FLYNN
JAMES P.OUINN
TODD L FREEMAN
STEPHEN R SOLOMON
PETER K BECK
JEROME K KANNKE
fH ERRILL R. OMAN
GERALD L.fECK
JOHN B. LUNDQUIST
DAYLE NOLAN CI LIBERTO•
THOMAS B. HUMPHREY, JR.
MICHAEL . MCKIM
JOHN A.CDT[R
BEATRICE A. NOTHW[ILER
March 19, 1992
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. PAUL W PLUNKETT
ALAN L. KILDOW
ATTORNEYS AT LAW KATHLEEN M. NEWMAN
MICHAEL B. LE BARON
GREGORY[. KORSTAD
GARY A. VAN CLEVE
DONNA L. ROBACK
1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER JEFFREY C.ANDERSON
DANIEL L. BOWLES
7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH TODD M. VLATKOVICH
TIMOTHY J. 8
BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 ROBERTAEGA. ROBERTSON
TELEPHONE 16121 835-3600
LOS^ LISA A
A. NGARYA. R[NNEK[
FAX 16121 696 -3333
OMAN NON K. MCCAMSRIDGE
CHRISTOPHER J. MARRISTMAL
MARIKAY CANADA LITEAU
TIMOTHY J. KEANE
WILLIAM C. GRIFFITH, JR.
JOHN kST[FFENMAGEN
DANIEL W. VOSS
MARK A. RURIK
JOHN R. WILL
JAMES K. MARTIN
THOMAS J. SEYMOUR
M IC.ArI J. SMITH
REMAY W. LEONE
D FREDERICK K. ID
MARY K. VOSM
rl G] LOR[N A.fIHO ICR [R
LARRY M MARTIN
OF COUNSEL '
WEND[LL R. ANDERSON
i G ! CMARLEO R.W[AVER
JOSEPH GITIS
RICHARD A. NORDBYE
F PLYMOUTHj \!A, `/jCITY0/ 1 ice` MOUTH ALSO ADMIT[D IN
XWUNITY DEVELOPMENT (YEP'
WISCONSIN
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
Director of Planning
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Re: Trenton Oaks Multi - Family Residential Project, Plymouth, Minnesota
Request for Approval of Final Plat, Site Plan, Conditional Use
Permit, and Variance From Minimum Parking Requirements for Project
in R -3 Zoning District
Our File No. 18,590 -00
Dear Chuck:
This letter- narrative is submitted on behalf of Richard and Mabeth
Neslund (the "Applicants ") in accordance with City of Plymouth (the
City ") zoning regulations regarding variance applications (Zoning
Ordinance, Section 11, Subdivision C(3)(a)). The narrative contains a
background description of the 1989 approval of the Trenton Oaks Multi -
Family Residential Project; a request for approval from the City
Council of a variance from the parking regulations of the Zoning
Ordinance, and of a final plat, site plan, and conditional use permit.
The narrative also sets out facts supporting the Applicants,
compliance with variance and conditional use permit (CUP) standards.
I.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND REGARDING PRIOR PROJECT APPROVAL
Trenton Oaks Multi - Family Residential Project (the "Project ") as
approved by the City on September 1989, is for 168 units in 15
buildings. The Project site is located generally northwest of the
intersection of Highways 55 and 169, south of Medicine Lake and
immediately west of Bassett Creek on approximately 27 acres of land
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
March 19, 1992
Pacte 2
the "Property "). The Property is zoned R -3, Medium Density Multiple
Residence District. The Comprehensive Guide Plan designates the
Property for LA -3, High Medium Density Residential development
consistent with the underlying zoning. The previously approved multi-
family use of the Property is consistent with the present zoning and
land use designation of the site.
On August 24, 1987, the Plymouth City Council approved a preliminary
plat and General Development Plan for the 27 -acre multi - family
development. One of the conditions of approval of the preliminary
plat.-and General Development Plan was that a site plan, conditional
use permit and final plat would not be accepted until a contract for
extension of 10th Avenue North and related improvements was awarded.
A staff report to the Planning Commission dated April 17, 1989
regarding the Trenton Oaks project noted the following:
1. The contract for construction of 10th Avenue, and related
improvements has been awarded.
2. A proposed conditional use permit and site plan to construct
168 rental townhouse units in 15 buildings is consistent with
the approval granted in 1987.
3. Grading work accomplished since approval of the preliminary
plat, pursuant to the grading permit approved by the City,
has corrected the poor soil situation over that portion of
the site on which the townhouse structures and related
roadways are to be constructed.
4. The final plat is consistent with the approved preliminary
plat for the site and meets the Subdivision Ordinance
technical standards for a final plat.
5. The site plan meets or exceeds the specifications contained
in the Zoning Ordinance for development of R -3 property.
6. The conditional use permit application is responsive to the
provisions of Section 9, Subdivision A of the Zoning
Ordinance. The applicant has provided a basis for
conformance of the site plan with the six criteria of the
Zoning Ordinance with respect to conditional use permits.
7. Staff recommended approval of the final plat, site plan and
conditional use permit for Trenton Oaks.
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
March 19, 1992
Page 3
The City Council approved the conditional use permit, site plan, and
final plat for the development of 168 multi - family units in 15
buildings on September 25, 1989. A development contract between the
City of Plymouth and Richard and Mabeth Neslund was executed on
September 25, 1989 providing, in part, for the construction of City
Project No. 648, which is the improvement of 10th Avenue North, and
installation of related utilities.
Pursuant to and in reliance on the City's 1989 approval of the
Project, the Applicants have expended substantial funds and taken the
following actions related to construction of Trenton Oaks:
1. The Applicants conveyed the right -of -way for 10th Avenue
North to the City.
2. The Applicants were assessed $142,137 for construction of
roadway improvements related to the 10th Avenue North
Project.
3'. The Applicants obtained a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit
to allow placement of fill in the designated wetlands on the
Property and provided on -site mitigation.
4. The Applicants obtained approval of the Project from the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
5. The Applicants obtained approval of the Project grading,
drainage and erosion control plans from the Bassett Creek
Watershed District.
6. The Applicants obtained approval of the Project from the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
7. The Applicants obtained a permit from the Minnesota
Department:of Health for the Project.
8. The Applicants, in addition to the 10th Avenue Project, was
assessed approximately $183,000 for watermain, sanitary sewer
and interior street and storm sewer improvements, based on
construction of 168 multi - family units.
9. The Applicants obtained a grading permit from the City and
completed extensive regrading of the site at a cost in excess
of $300,000. Due to unique soil characteristics, the
building pads for each of the 15 buildings had to be
carefully located, prepared, and compacted. Utility
corridors for each pad were located to fit each developed
pad.
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
March 19, 1992
Paae 4
Following City approval in 1989 and investments by the Applicants of
approximately $600,000 in reliance on such approval, the City Council
adopted Ordinance 90 -38 on December 10, 1990, which, in part, changed
the off - street parking requirements related to multi - family
developments (the "Ordinance Amendment "). As a result of the
Ordinance Amendment, Section 10, Subdivision B(5)(a)(2) was added to
the Zoning Ordinance providing, "[g]arage aprons and driveways
providing access to garages shall not qualify as off - street parking
spaces." When the Project was approved in 1989, garage and driveway
spaces did qualify as off - street parking in spaces. The Ordinance
Amendment resulted in a 55 -space parking deficit for the Project.
II.
REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF VARIANCE /CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Market conditions postponed further construction of the multi - family
buildings beyond the site grading, and.careful preparation of building
pads and the preparation of street and utility corridors, and
construction of 10th Avenue North. The Applicants' construction and
substantial expenditure was in reliance upon Project approvals. The
Applicant, in consultation with staff of various alternatives, is
applying for approval of a variance from the parking requirements of
the Zoning Ordinance to approve construction of 269 spaces with the
Project. The application for a conditional use permit is for the
multi - family residential project within the R -3 zoning district at a
density of 162 units. A final plat for Trenton Oaks is also proposed.
The Applicants' revision of the site plan reduces the total number of
units from 168 to 162, and the total number of buildings from 15 to
14. The revision results in decreased density, increased open space,
and increased parking area.
III.
COMPLIANCE VARIANCE /CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
A. COMPLIANCE WITH VARIANCE
The Applicants' request for approval of a variance from parking
requirements of Section 10, Subdivision B of the Zoning Ordinance
meets the City's standards for approving variances at Section 11,
Subdivision C(2)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance, as follows:
1. Standard: That because of the particular physical
surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the
specific parcel of land involved, a particular hardship to
the owner would result, as distinguished from a more
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
March 19, 1992
Page 5
inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were
to be carried out.
Response: The Projects topographical and physical
conditions were carefully engineered when the site was
graded. Each pad was strategically located to take into
consideration the peat soils, high organic conditions, and
pockets of poor quality soil, combined with the high water
table in the area. Any deviation of the already engineered
pads would require a complete regrading of the entire site.
The existing building pads are in locations as shown on the
approved site plan and aerial photographs submitted with the
application. Such extensive work was in reliance upon the
Project approval of September 25, 1989, at substantial cost
to the Applicants. If the new and amended parking provisions
are applied to the Project, the entire site plan must be
changed and investments made to date would be lost. The
grading was essentially "custom- made" for the building to
conform to existing soil conditions. A grading shift of less
than two feet would require a new grading plan and complete
revision to the soil correction work completed on the site.
Because of unique site soil conditions related to the
Property, strict application of the parking regulations would
result in a particular and significant hardship to the owner.
2. Standard: That the conditions upon which a petition for a
variation is based are unique to the parcel of land for which
the variation is sought and are not applicable, generally to
other property within the same zoning classification.
Response: No other property in the same zoning
classification can demonstrate the unique conditions
characteristic of this parcel of land. These unique
conditions include the previous approval of the conditional
use by the City, dedication of street right -of -way by the
owner, assessments to the owner for street improvements,
complete site grading and carefully engineered building pads,
approval by the Bassett Creek Watershed District, approval by
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, a U.S. Army Corps of
Engineer permit, a Minnesota Department of Health permit, and
expenditures of in excess of $600,000 for improvements to the
site. The unique soil conditions, the high water table, and
the wetland constraints do not allow flexibility in the
revision of the site plan. Therefore, the conditions are
unique to the Property, and are not applicable, generally to
other property within the same zoning classification.
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
March 19, 1992
Page 6
3. Standard: That the purpose of the variation is not based
exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or income
potential of the parcel of land.
Response: The variance request is not to increase the value
of the parcel of land, but is to avoid the loss of several
hundreds of thousands of dollars already expended. The
variance is based on soil and water conditions and the City's
amendment of the zoning ordinance regarding driveway parking.
4. Standard: That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused
by this Ordinance and has not been created by any persons
presently having an interest in the parcel of land.
Response: The hardship is caused by the December 10, 1990
amendment of the Zoning Ordinance regarding use of garage
aprons and driveways when calculating off - street parking
space for a project. Except for that Ordinance Amendment,
the Project would comply in all respects with the existing
zoning standards.
S. Standard: That the granting of the variation will not be
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land
or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of
land is located.
Response: The Applicants have actually reduced the density
of the Project by six units and one building. The multi-
family use of the Property, consistent with zonings and the
Comprehensive Plan is not changed by the variance. The
reduced density will result in a reduction of approximately
70 daily vehicle trips from the Project site.
6. Standard: ,That the proposed variation will not impair an
adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or
substantially increase the congestion of the public streets,
or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public
safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values
within the neighborhood.
Response: The Project will not impair an adequate supply of
light and air to adjacent property because the previously
approved compacted building pads remain the same. The
Project will not substantially increase the congestion of the
public streets because the City previously approved more
units on the site and adequate roadway improvements have been
constructed in anticipation of the Project. The Project will
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
March 19, 1992
Page 7
not increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public
safety because it will meet or exceed all applicable state
and local fire and building codes. The Project should
improve, not diminish, property values in the neighborhood
because it is an improvement over the existing graded, but
incompleted, building site.
B. COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT STANDARDS
The Applicants request approval of a conditional use permit to
construct 162 units of multi - family housing is in compliance with the
City's criteria for such conditional use permits at Section 9,
Subdivision A(1), as follows:
1. Standard: Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive
Plan.
Response: The Project is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan for the City of Plymouth. The building site is guided
LA -3 for high to medium density residential development. The
Project is a medium density multi - family residential project
of 162 units.
2. Standard: The establishment, maintenance or operation of the
conditional use will promote and enhance the general public
welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public
health, safety, morals or comfort.
Response: The development of the Project will complete
construction on a site which has already been approved and
graded for such development. The completion of a partially
constructed project will enhance property values in the area.
The Project will not be detrimental to the public welfare
because adequate infrastructure and roadway improvements have
been constructed in anticipation of construction of the
Project. The Project will comply with all applicable state
and local building and fire codes.
3. Standard: The conditional use will not be injurious to the
use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity
for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially
diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood.
Response: The Project has been previously approved at a
higher density by the City in 1989 and was found not be
injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the
immediate vicinity. The Project is located on an isolated
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
March 19, 1992
Pace 8
site and has been designed to be compatible with surrounding
properties.
4. Standard: The establishment of the conditional use will not
impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of
surrounding properties for uses permitted in the District.
Response: The previous approval has not impeded the normal
and orderly development and improvement of surrounding
properties.
5. Standard: Adequate measures have been or will be taken to
provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to
minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
Response: The previously approved site plan ensures adequate
ingress and egress. The interior street layout and driveways
have been previously approved by the City. The reduction in
Project density is designed to minimize traffic congestion in
the public streets.
6. Standard: The conditional use shall, in all other respects,
conform to the applicable regulations of the district in
which it is located.
Response: The City Planning Staff, Planning Commission and
City Council specifically found, as part of the City's
September 25, 1989 approval of the Project, that the Project
complied with applicable regulations of the Zoning Ordinance
with respect to conditional use permits. Subject to the
parking variance, the Project will again conform in all other
respects to the applicable regulations of the district in
which it is located.
The variance and CUP requests are consistent with, and advance the
objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The
requested variance is based on a hardship created by amendment of the
Zoning Ordinance regarding parking following the Project approval in
1989, unique site conditions, and substantial expenditures on
commencement of construction in reliance on Project approval.
Completion of the Project as planned will serve a demonstrated demand
for such housing in Plymouth.
U
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
March 19, 1992
Page 9
Please contact me with any questions or comments regarding these
requests.
Sincerely,
Robert L. Hoffman, for
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd.
cc: Richard and Mabeth Neslund
Greg Frank
Ray Carlson
WCG:BJ9
OTOCA- 1*
ILI 0 yj F.! DOM ipi
M -.. his
MN -nRl W
Ismil
1' y 4t rk:
7 •
i,: - i•, -'`F. .
ice
gyp'
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a special meeting of the City Council of the
City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 24th day of August
for two lots.
following members were present: Mayor Schneider, Councilmembers Vasiliou, :it 7.
for an Industrial building on property located north of 10th Avenue
heCginandSisk
the following conditions:
7ollowing members were absent: None
a a+ 00
4ounjilmember Sisk introduced the followlnq Resolution and moved Its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 87 543
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR RICHARD NF.SLUND FOR "TRENTON OAKS" (87069)
WHERL AS, Richard Neslund has requested approval for a Preliminary Plat for "Trentoo
Oaks" for one lot for multi- family residential hocFsinq: and, one lot for an Industrial
building on propertylocated north of 10th Avenue North and one block east of South
Shore Drive; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed Vie request at a duly called Public Hear -
Ing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, NF IT HFREBY RLSOLVED BY THI. CITY COUNCIL OF THE. CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MIN-
NESOTA, that It should and hereby does approve the Preliminary Plat for "Trenton Oaks"
for Richard Neslund for two lots. One lot Includes multi- family residential housing,
the second lot for an Industrial building on property located north of 10th Avenue
Nortn, east of South Shore Drive, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Removal of all dead or dvinq trees from the property at the owner's expense.
3. The Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Final Plat applications will not he
accepted until the Contract for the extension of 10th Avenue and related
improvements is awarded.
4. Payment of perk dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication In accordance with the
Dedication Policy In effect at the time of issuance of the initial Buildinq
Permit In each District.
5. Street names shal_1 comply with the City Street Naming System.
6. Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 79 -80 regarding minimum floor elevations for
ne,h structures In subdivisions adjacent to, or containing any open storm water
drainage facility.
7. Eligibility for Building Permits will he contingent upon approval of Conditional
Use Permits and Site Plan; and, upon verificatton that the Final Plat has heel)
filed and recorded with Hennepin County.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Councilmember :itur , and upon vote being taken thereon, the o ow nq
voted in favor thereof: ,favor Schneider Councitmemhers Vaciliou, Zitur, Crain
and Sisk The f ol low—rn—q
voted against or abstained: None Whereupon the
Resolution was declared duly passe—d—and adopte
L140 ot
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: April 13, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: April 22, 1992
FILE NO.: 92012
PETITIONER: Goff Homes, Inc.
REQUEST: Rezoning of 16.11 acre site from the FRD (Future Restricted
Development District) to the R -4 (High Density Multiple
Residence District); a Site Plan for 13 multiple family
buildings with a total of 156 units; and, a Conditional Use
Permit for attached housing.
LOCATION: West side of Xenium Lane at 37th Avenue North.
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -4 (High Density Residential)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development)
BACKGROUND:
On February 6, 1984, the City Council, by Resolution 84 -74 approved a Lot
Division and Variance for this property.
On March 7, 1988, the City Council, by Resolution 88 -153 approved set
conditions prior to approving zoning of this site from the FRD to R -4
District, by Resolution 88 -154, approved a Preliminary Plat for this site, and
by Resolution 88 -155, approved a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for 152
units consisting of 62 coach house units, 55 townhouse units and 35 apartment
units. This project was never constructed. Consistent with the terms of the
Zoning Ordinance, the Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit approvals expired
when no building permits were applied for within 12 months.
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. While we have referenced rezoning from FRD to R -4 in the published Public
Hearing Notice and in the property owner's letters, our subsequent file
research reveals rezoning to R -4 was approved by the City Council on March
7, 1988. Since the publication of the rezoning ordinance - -the effective
execution of the rezoning direction - -was subject (only) to recording of
the Final. Plat with Hennepin County, no City rezoning action appears
necessary at this time. Because of the passage of time we recommend the
rezoning be simply reaffirmed at this time. The R -4 zoning continues to
be consistent with the LA -4 (High Density Residential) classification of
this site by the Land Use Guide Plan Element of the Plymouth Comprehensive
Plan. The LA -4 classification of this site was reaffirmed by the City
Council on December 1989 with the approval of the new City -wide Land Use
Guide Plan Element.
1-
s
2. The petitioner is also requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit and
Site Plan for a 13 building multifamily residential development totaling
156 units. The proposed development will have two access points onto
Xenium Lane; at 37th Avenue North and 36th Avenue North. The petitioner
is proposing to have 156 garage units and 234 surface parking spaces in
this complex.
3. The Physical Constraints Analysis shows this property to be located within
the Bassett Creek Drainage District. The site is not within the Shoreland
Management District, but does contain wetland areas in the north edge of
the property. There are no significant woodlands on this site. There are
some slopes in excess of 12 percent on the eastern portion of the site.
There are no physical constraints to urban development with public sewers
on this site.
4. At the present time, Xenium Lane has not been constructed to intersect
with County Road 9 as is proposed by the Thoroughfare Guide Plan. A dirt
road extends north from Xenium Lane connecting to County Road 9 in the
vicinity of the Cottonwood Plaza Shopping Center. The extension of Xenium
Lane to County Road 9 and 38th Avenue North to Northwest Boulevard is part
of Year 1992 Capital Improvement Program.
5. The Planning Commission must find the Conditional Use Permit consistent
with the six standards for Conditional Use Permits found in Section 9,
Subdivision A of the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of the standards and the
applicant's narrative is attached.
6. Development of this site as proposed is responsive to the conventional
development standards of Section 7, Subdivision E of the Zoning Ordinance.
Dwelling unit density is determined by the requirement of 4,000 square
feet per dwelling unit. With adjustments being responsive to lot area
credits and allowances provided by the ordinance, the minimum lot area may
be reduced in size. The petitioner is not proposing any credits or
allowances for this site. The petitioner is proposing 4,498 square feet
per dwelling unit.
7. The Site Plan proposed meets or will exceed standards of the Zoning
Ordinance and other ordinances and policies governing development of sites
in the R -4 Zoning District. Specifically, offstreet parking is consistent
with the Zoning Ordinance in regard for multiple family dwellings; parking
areas and driveways will be constructed to the standards of the City
including construction and ease of circulation; trash containment will be
handled internally on a unit -by -unit basis; proposed signage meets Zoning
Ordinance standards for residential developments; the Landscape Plan is
consistent with the Landscape Policy; and, no rooftop mechanical equipment
are proposed.
8. The exterior appearance of the structures will be a 12 -Unit building with
a breezeway in the center of the building. The buildings will be two
stories with a peaked roof and horizontal lapped siding. The appearance
of the structures is consistent with the City Council Policy regarding
site and building aesthetics and architectural design.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The rezoning from the FRD (Future Restricted Development District) to R -4
High Density Multiple Residence District) is consistent with the Land Use
2 -
Guide Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council approved
the rezoning of this site to R -4 in 1988 but the development was not built
and the Zoning Ordinance was not published.
2. The Site Plan meets or exceeds all City standards with respect to
development of multiple residence projects in the R -4 Zoning District.
3. Based primarily on consistency with the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan and
applicable City policies, ordinance and standards regarding land
development we find the application consistent with the Conditional use
Permit Standards of Section 9, Subdivision A, Paragraph 2a of the Zoning
Ordinance -- assuming execution of the 1992 Plymouth Capital Improvements
Program regarding construction of Xenium Lane to County Road 9 and /or 38th
Avenue North to Northwest Boulevard.
4. While it does not appear to have been an issue during 1988 discussion of
development of this site, we now find the completion of an all weather
north and /or east secondary access to this neighborhood to be a prudent
condition to later stages of this development.
The 1992 -1996 CIP has been approved by the City Council to include the
Xenium Lane /38th Avenue North extension as a 1992 project. Staff has
requested the City Council to order the engineering study at the April 20
meeting. These actions are the result of requests by residents of this
neighborhood at the CIP Public Hearing February 26, 1992, and the
subsequent Planning Commission recommendation to move this project ahead
of the proposed schedule.
5. A limitation should be included in the Conditional Use Permit regarding
the number of units to be constructed until Xenium Lane is completed to
County Road 9 or 38th Avenue North is completed to Northwest Boulevard.
Based on the likely timing of the road improvement and the applicant's
statements on staging, the southerly five structures (60 units) may be a
logical limitation.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for the
approval of a rezoning from the FRD (Future Restricted Development District)
to R -4 (High Density_ Multiple ResidenceDistrictj_.Ceedii, Tonal Use Permit, and
Site Plan. 7 7/
Submitted by: /
Char s E. Dil eru Co unity Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit
2. Resolution Setting Conditions Prior to Publication of Rezoning Ordinance
3. Ordinance Rezoning from FRD (Future Restricted Development District) to R-
4 (High Density Multiple Residence District)
4. Engineer's Memo
5. Conditional Use Permit Standards
6. Petitioner's Narrative
1. Minutes of February 26, 1992 Hearing on the CIP
8. Communications
9. Location Map
10. Site Graphics
3-
pc /jk /92012:jw)
APPROVING SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GOFF HOMES, INC. LOCATED AT
THE INTERSECTION OF 37TH AVENUE NORTH AND XENIUM LANE (92012)
WHEREAS, Goff Homes, Inc. has requested approval for a Site Plan and
Conditional Use Permit for a 156 unit multifamily project located at the
intersection of 37th Avenue North and Xenium Lane; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by
Goff Homes, Inc. for a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a 156 unit
multifamily project located at the intersection of 37th Avenue North and
Xenium Lane, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
T the Dedication Policy in effect at the time of recording of each Final
Plat stage.
3. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures on sites adjacent to, or containing any open storm
water drainage facility.
4. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement
for completion of site improvements within 12 months of the date of this
resolution.
5. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
6. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
7. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants and
fire lanes.
8. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within each building, and
no outside storage is permitted.
9. An 8h x 11 inch "As Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior
to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy.
10. No building permit to be issued until the Final Plat is filed and recorded
with Hennepin County.
11. Compliance with the provisions of Resolution 89 -439 regarding tree
preservation.
12. Building permits for Phases 3 and 4 shall not be issued until Xenium Lane
is extended to Vinewood Lane or Northwest Boulevard; and, existing Xenium
Lane is vacated. Phases 1 and 2 include the southerly 5 structures (60
total units).
13. No setback variances are approved. All setbacks for structures and
parking /drive isles shall comply with Zoning Ordinance standards. The
Site Plan shall be modified to comply with this condition.
res /pc /92012:jw)
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE REZONING LAND
FOR GOFF HOMES, INC. (92012)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved an Ordinance rezoning certain land
located on the west side of Xenium Lane and 37th Avenue North from FRD (Future
Restricted Development District) to R -4 (High Density Multiple Residence
District) in conjunction with approval of the Site Plan for Rockford Estates;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does direct the Final Plat for
Rockford Estates to be filed with Hennepin County prior to the publication of
said Ordinance.
res /pc /92012.sc:jw)
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
ORDINANCE NO. 92-
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO CLASSIFY CERTAIN LANDS LOCATED
WEST OF XENIUM LAND AND 37TH AVENUE NORTH AS R -4 (HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE
RESIDENCE DISTRICT) (92012)
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 District) to R -4 (High Density Multiple
Residence 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 accor ante with the Plan approved for the
File No. 92012.
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 this
ATTEST
City Clerk
cc /jk /92012:jw)
day of .
Mayor
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: April 15, 1992
FILE NO.: 92012
PETITIONER: Mr. Pat Goff, Goff Homes, Inc., 865 Aspen Circle, Little Canada, MN
55109
SITE PLAN: ROCKFORD ESTATES
LOCATION: West Xenium Lane, east of 494 in the south 1/2 of Section 15.
N/A Yes No
1. _ _ x
2. _ _ X
Have watermain area assessments been levied based on proposed use?
Have Sanitary sewer area assessments been levied based on proposed
use?
3. _ , X _ Will 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:
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None.
Is property one parcel,?
If "No" is marked, the approval of the site plan as proposed
requires that a final plat be approved by the City Council.
N/A Yes No
7. _ _ X Complies with standard utility /drainage easements?
If "No" is marked, the current City ordinance requires utility and
drainage easements ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and
six feet (61) 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.) Will comply when the final
plat is recorded with Hennepin County.
e. _ _ X Complies with ponding easement 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. If "No" is marked, the
following changes are necessary: For the Rand in the north portion
of the site.
9. X Are all standard utility easements required for construction
provided?
The City requires twenty foot (20') utility and drainage easements
where these utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has
been reviewed with the final site plan. If "No" is marked, the
following changes are necessary:
10. _8_ _ _ Have all existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way been
vacated?
If "No" is marked, it will be necessary to vacate the obsolete
easements /right -of -way to facilitate the development. This is not
an automatic process, it is the owner's responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated.
11. _X_ _ _ Has the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to
the City with this application? If it is subsequently determined
that the subject psonerty is abstract property. then this
requirement does not anuly.
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-
UTILITIES AND TRAFFIC:
N/A Yes No
12. _ _ -X-
13. _.X _
14. —_X
Have all necessary permits for this project been obtained?
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
DNR
X MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
JL Wetland Conservation Act of
1991 from City
Does the Site Plan comply with The City's Adopted Storm Drainage
Plan? If "No" is marked, the following revisions are required:
Does the Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan comply with the
City's erosion control policy?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions are required: Silt fence
or hay bales shall be provided around the catchbasins. A crushed
rock berm shall be constructed in the driveways until the area is
paved -.
15. _ X _ Are necessary fire hydrants provided?
If "No" is marked, the City of Plymouth requires five hydrants be
spaced 300 feet apart. It will be necessary to locate hydrants in
such a manner that the site plan complies with Plymouth City Code
Section 905.05.
16. _ _ X Is the size and type of material proposed in the utility systems
included on the utility plans?
If "No" is marked, the utility plan shall be revised to indicate the
size and type of material.
Sanitary Sewer
x_ Watermain
Storm Sewer
3-
N/A Yes No
17. X _ _ Is the post indicator valve and fire department connection provided?
If "No" is marked, they shall be included in the site utility plan.
18. _ _X_ _ Are hydrant valves provided?
If "No" is marked, all new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6"
gate valves per City Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W -2.
19. _ X _ Are sanitary sewer clean -outs provided?
If "No" is marked, it will be necessary to provide clean -outs on the
proposed internal sanitary sewer system at a maximum of 100 foot
intervals.
N /A Yes No
20. X Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided?
If "No" is marked, Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at
the intersection of
and
21. _ _ X Are all existing street rights -of -way the required width?
If "No" is marked, an additional 23.5 feet of right -of -way will
be required on Xenium vane making the total distance from center
line 40 feet.
22. _ X _ Does the grading plan comply with site drainage requirements?
If "No" is marked, the City will not permit drainage onto a City
street from a private parking lot, the site plan shall be revised
accordingly.
23. _ X _ Is concrete curb and gutter provided?
If "No" is marked, 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 with this requirement.
24. _ X _ Does the site plan comply with parking lot standards?
The City requires 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 100x 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 100x crushed base and two inch bituminous mat. If "No" is
marked, the site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with
these requirements:
4-
N/A Yes No
N/A Yes No
25. _ X _ Is it necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's public utility
foreman, at 550 -74927
If "Yes" is marked 24 hours notice is required in advance of making
any proposed utility connections to the City's sanitary sewer and
water systems. All water connections_ shall be via wet tan.
26. _ X _ Is it necessary to contact Tom Vetsch, the City's Street Foreman, at
550 -7493 for an excavating permit?
If "Yes" is marked 24 hours notice is required before digging within
the City right -of -way.
27. _ X _ The City requires reproducible mylar prints of sanitary sewer, water
service and storm sewer As- Builts for the site prior to the
financial guarantee being released.
28. _ _ X Does the site plan comply with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual?
If "No" is marked, see Items 1. 2. 7. 8. 12, 14, 16. 21 and Special
Conditions.
e) z0 w awxlem 1zi q
29 A. A detail for the catchbasins shall be provided on the grading plan or utility
plan.
B. The revised storm drainage calculations are in the process of being reviewed.
C. The B -612 curb detail shall be dimensioned
D. Building permits for Phases 3 and 4 shall not be issued until Xenium Lane is
extended to Vinewood Lane or Northwest Boulevard and existing Xenium Lane is
vacated.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
5-
FRO14 SUMON 9, SUBDIMICK A
NIIN
2. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Catmission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a motion to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Commission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
i) Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will prawte and enhance the general public welfare and will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or comfort.
3) The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the neighborhood.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and in vvement of surrounding
property for uses permitted in the district.
5) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress,
egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic
congestion in the public streets.
6) The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the
applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.
forns:o >pl /cup.stnd /s) 10/89
p 2l- l
MAR 6 1992
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
GENERAL STATENENT OF bEVELOPMENT coNc-F,- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DE!plr
FOR ROCKFORD ESTATES
a m ily E.
of Sec. 15. TN',FIIH'('. 1-112, IN!,
in j-' -c-ullt, City of Plymouth, minnesc)tE.
nc
C
1'2 2,21 -,- C 7, i-, 7
Existing Conditions
FROF-TZI-ED CIONCEFT
L, e a d e d to P r C, d U,:: i r1l S
cl mf
n S
6
of Loth avinue N, and snr z the devolsomznt.
n trla 01 Town 55 1- I a on Lhe WOO_,
2- Xtni.m Lana ot who intoroactiam of Zotin A zon"-`
inrow,h nwrvi g tn: davc1womant and CQnn,:c ZOO-
into tna 21' main extending straight north from Xenium Lane.
4th this jtilit. ds&lon, according to the asbuiltz. therc.
sMuld to no in =treat conatpuction or repairs needed t,--,
Ynni .
s rcw3y layout is designed to function as a fire lane
ms -oil zs acccas for rcsidents and visitors. All turns
45 radius ano tho drive has a consistent 26' width.
there is a tydrmnt located at each enc,'
W1101 "I Slaswing no -Inr inside or out Lidn of a02
ln nn -arthu !non 150' from a hydrant. it Wa..:
this owtior of firz nrotrotion rathar th ,
to aac
Proposed Development
to onD, ho mrvocrty to R-4 under the Pro vii iono.
the sonnny ordinance, for conventional multifamii;a
L, olat the or,-o- rtv -7i Lot n7 21vc:,
unh th,
12 =it
will 4z fr7n
ni oill
075VIII
0 111=1
K! Mist
T"Z
Or Z L Z
7V 1
1M, nt lr7 7
17
Z- wsl. 5VO,
dc7IQUO"! VOnWLWV
ireo" _r no"M
trtoW,
t5v avezGreen trC"S will aclimpl;Sh thn LOWV__-
a widing color. vn. lety and meatino Me reqUirzmw:,tz_
0 1wnancawo Do- mot, ancc. The choica of anins all
i:.tory troes is bnz.d on exwzriencz of being ira-1vtd
wiwh 1-valwoment aLaaciations and the lack a* attantion for
A :&aj _ant inqz as the evelopmart ages.
Proposed Development
to onD, ho mrvocrty to R-4 under the Pro vii iono.
the sonnny ordinance, for conventional multifamii;a
L, olat the or,-o- rtv -7i Lot n7 21vc:,
unh th,
12 =it
will 4z fr7n
W O astiv. are t all! id o-,
7n. 0012m Wili be Vapy wimllop to ths Xiwtino
Forntruan Manor development on Fernbrook Lane ant Oath Place
NS71. Tho tuAdInos will have m conrzoting canopy over a
c7r:o7 ovcn air walk with six names on cither side of t0z
ncrtcr walk. Each homy s will have two private entrances, one
from their own Ivmte garage and the front entry from the
W:AAa. 7n,i± are three floor plans to aelect from, two
i= 1015 square feet and one with 1100 square feet. MCI-)
K nan two bedrooms and one full bath. The inside of each
F is fi5ished with oak woodwork and cabinets. Standard
FeLturs: include _antral air conditioninw. refrigerator,
w2sher and drisr. The snownd floor homn-
and "Kylinht" qI stwns=-
Lr Lwon fnannh UZ an
nAa r-Df Stv! - . Sif fnrn t Sart!--
tair
OrL;O i= zn 0; ;VP znpra 7-t MO.
ThL& .00 V.r.vwur nonzidc7=tion of thia proposed
invo;cvmint, if any additional infarmzwion will be helsful,
I , — -1 La nrny to provide it.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 1992
Page 29
Commissioner Zylla stated that the decision on Fernbrook
Lane should be decided now, whether it be to remove the
street or construct it. He said the City Council needs to
make the decision as the controversy creates problems for
developers who wish to build,in this area.
Commissioner Scherer stated that it is good planning to
have alternate parallel roadways to the major highways to
aid the flow of traffic around the community.
Commissioner Scherer stated that he had been a member of
the Metropolitan Council and that he doubted that the
Metropolitan Council would approve the removal of
Fernbrook Lane as part of the Plymouth Thoroughfare Guide
Plan, and they can overrule the City Council's decision.
He said that one of the Metropolitan Council's main
objectives is to prevent the overcrowding of the major
highways in cities with the traffic from subdivisions.
Roll Call Vote. 6 Ayes, Commissioner Scherer voted Nay. VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
MOTION carried on a 6 -1 vote.
MOTION by Commissioner Wigley, seconded by Commissioner MOTION TO AMEND
Albro to recommend that the City enter into, discussion
with land owners to develop Xenium Lane to Northwest
Boulevard and the Vinewood extension, and move these
improvements to 1992.
Commissioner Zylla stated he would like to see the Xenium
Lane project done in 1992. He suggested using tax
increment funding and assessments to the land owners to
fund this project.
Roll Call Vote. 7 Ayes. MOTION carried on a unanimous
vote.
Commissioner Albro asked why Zachary Lane was planned as a
4 lane roadway and said he would like it to remain a 2
lane street.
Director Moore responded that he does not know if Zachary
Lane will need to be 4 lanes, but traffic projections at
the present time indicate 4 lanes will needed in the
future. He stated that the High School is a major
generator of traffic. He said detailed traffic studies
will be done as this project nears 1994 when it becomes
closer to time to be developed.
Commissioner Albro stated that the Goals, Objectives and
Criteria of the Comprehensive Plan state that a major
collector street not be placed in a school area.
Director Moore responded that the roadway was built in
1960 and needs to be improved. He said there are many
minor roadways that feed into Zachary Lane.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 1992
Page 22
developments and neighborhoods which did not want the
major thoroughfares in their neighborhoods.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Steve Offerman of 1135
Fernbrook Lane.
Mr. Offerman stated he lives just north of Luce Line;
stated the roadway is not needed, and he doesn't want to
have to pay for it. Mr. Offerman said he does not
understand why staff continues to recommend the completion
of Fernbrook Lane when no one wants it. He said he would
like decision made on this issue soon, preferably to not
complete Fernbrook Lane.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Rick Murray of Builders
Development, Inc.
Mr. Murray stated he wanted the Northwest 19 Sewer
District service available as soon as possible.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Tom Loucks representing
the Craig Scherber Development.
Mr. Loucks stated that the Scherber development was
recently approved by the City Council and they would like
the extension of the watermain for Dunkirk Lane from
County Road 9 to County Road 24 done in 1992 rather than
1993 as proposed and Dunkirk Lane added to the program for
1992.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. William Pritchard of
Orrin Thompson Homes.
Mr. Pritchard stated he would like to see the Dunkirk Lane
improvements moved up to 1992 from 1993.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Ms. Bev Kottas of 3380
Sycamore Lane.
Ms. Kottas stated that she was representing Heritage
Estates Homeowners Association.
Ms. Kottas stated that the Homeowners Association would
like to see traffic signals at both 34th and 37th Avenue
and Northwest Boulevard. She said she had talked to the
County about installing traffic lights and they said there
were no plans for installing them. She also indicated that
the Homeowners Association would like curb cuts on the
east side of Northwest Boulevard at 34th and 37th Avenue
North for bikes, baby carriages and walkway.
Ms. Kottas stated that the Homeowners Association would
like to see Xenium Lane connected to Northwest Boulevard
but that this connection would increase the problems of
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 1992
Page 23
exiting from 34th and 37th Avenue North onto Northwest
Boulevard. She explained that if Vinewood Lane was
extended to Xenium Lane it would relieve some of the
traffic at 34th Avenue North. She said she realized that
there has been no development proposed along Vinewood Lane
which would warrant its completion but wondered if the
City would look at this possibility and possibly be able
to complete it with the land owners consent.
Commissioner Wigley asked Ms. Kottas to explain the
Vinewood Lane extension she was proposing.
Ms. Kottas indicated her suggestion on a map shown on the
overhead projection screen.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Jim Hartman of 1140
Harbor Lane.
Mr. Hartman stated that he was in agreement with others
who spoke regarding his opinion that Fernbrook Lane is not
needed and not wanted. He said that City staff are the
only ones who wants Fernbrook Lane extended. He said he
did not feel City staff are serving the community's best
interests with this proposal. He said he thought City
staff would notify the property owners in this area when
the discussion of Fernbrook Lane came up.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Ms. Bonnie Friedmeyer of
14425 -13th Avenue North.
Ms. Friedmeyer stated she lived north of the Luce Line and
she did not see a benefit for the extension of Fernbrook
Lane.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Jeremy Wilson - Dandos of
14400 -4th Avenue North.
Mr. Wilson - Dandos stated he was speaking as a
representative of the Harbor Place Homeowners Association,
and they do not want Fernbrook Lane extended. He said the
Fernbrook Lane extension would be a safety hazard, and no
one wants this extension.
Chairman Stulberg recognized Mr. Peter Pflaum who spoke
earlier.
Mr. Pflaum stated he would like to see the Northwest 19
District Sewer moved up to 1992.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Ms. Susan Green of 700 Harbor
Lane.
Ms. Green asked who would pay for the special assessments
to construct Fernbrook Lane.
0
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 1992
Page 24
Chairman Stulberg recognized Ms. Bev Kottas who spoke
earlier.
Ms. Kottas stated that she was speaking now as a
developer. She asked when the traffic signal at Fernbrook
Lane and Harbor Lane would be installed since it is not
indicated on the CIP.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Larry Wood of 1125
Fernbrook Lane.
Mr. Wood stated that property owners were not notified of
this Public Hearing. He said he would like to know who
will be assessed for the street extension. He said he
would like to have a final decision made on the Fernbrook
Lane issue.
Mr. Wood stated that signs that had been posted for
jogging and bicycle trails on the Luce Line Trail have
disappeared.
Chairman Stulberg responded that the Public Hearing Notice
for the Capital Improvement Program 1992 -1996 was
published in the Official City Newspaper as required by
State Law. He said that the CIP affects every property
owner in the City and therefore individual property owners
are not sent individual notices.
City Manager Willis stated that City's Thoroughfare Guide
Plan was adopted in 1971 and 72. He said the Carlson
Company proposal for Harbor Woods has brought the
Fernbrook Lane roadway extension to the forefront, from
the previous anticipated time of 1994. He said the
Thoroughfare Guide Plan will need to be amended by the
City Council and if this amendment is approved it will
also need to be approved by the Metropolitan Council. Mr.
Willis stated that the Metropolitan Council does not want
to see metropolitan highways overburdened with local
traffic.
He stated that City Council options are to amend the
Thoroughfare Guide Plan and to have Fernbrook Lane end in
a cul -de -sac with emergency access; construct Fernbrook
Lane as shown in the Guide Plan; or temporarily end the
street in a cul -de -sac with it extended at some time in
the future. He said that if the street remains in the
1992 CIP, then the adjacent property owners would be
notified and a Public Hearing would be held for the street
improvement project.
Chairman Stulberg closed the Public Hearing.
Chairman Stulberg asked Director Moore to respond to the
questions raised during the Public Hearing by citizens.
Planning Commission Minutes
February 26, 1992
Page 20
Chairman Stulberg introduced Ms. Alice Williams of 14325-
12th Avenue North.
Ms. Williams stated that it would not be safe to complete
Fernbrook Lane and it is not needed. She said there are
other north /south roads already complete such as Vicksburg
Lane, portions of Fernbrook Lane, I -494 and Xenium Lane
which move the traffic out of the neighborhoods. She said
the Planning Commission previously recommended that
Fernbrook Lane not be completed, the neighborhood is
against it, and they she would like this issue resolved as
soon as possible, one way or the other.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Paul Vincent of 12800 -34th
Avenue North.
Mr. Vincent stated he would like to see curb cuts on east
side of Xenium Lane at 34th and 37th Avenue to allow the
public access for bikes and baby carriages to the park
trail. He said he would like to see Xenium Lane extended
to Northwest Boulevard but would also like to see it
connected to Vinewood Lane. He said he would like to see
a stoplight installed at 34th Avenue and Xenium Lane
because of the heavy traffic, and would like his proposals
done in 1992, if it is practical.
Chairman Stulberg introduced Mr. Richard Schmidt of 14310-
13th Avenue North.
Mr. Schmidt stated that he wished property owners had been
notified of the Public Hearing on the CIP. He said that a
previous Planning Commission recommendation of the
Fernbrook Lane extension was to not extend it. He said he
thought the City Council had agreed with the Planning
Commission recommendation.
Chairman Stulberg explained that the City Council did not
act on the Planning Commission's recommendation to amend
the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan by
removing Fernbrook Lane from the Plan.
Commissioner Zylla asked if the Harbor Woods development
had been approved.
Associate Planner Keho stated that the Preliminary Plat
has been approved, and staff recently received the
application for the Final Plat.
Director Moore stated that City Council approval of the
Harbor Woods Preliminary Plat and General Development Plan
stated that the right -of -way be granted for Fernbrook
Lane.
Apri 1 16, 1992
APR 16 WZ
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
I r, Plymnuth Planning Commission. COMMUNlTY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
i am writing on t)ehalf of our neighborhhod action committee in
regard to the proposed development on Xenium Avenue by Goff Homes. We
are aaamently opposed to the current plan presented by Gott Homes
our group feels the plan is not consistent with the existing
neighborhoods near the site. Further, we have serious questions regarding
increased traffic patterns on the area, possible effects on crime in the
neighborhoods, coverage of the site and the consequent impact on
drainage, and the overall quality of design. This development, as currently
proposed, is not only an eyesore, it is entirely too dense.
Our group wil be presenting a comprehensive report of our views at
the April 22nd meeting. We ask you to consider carefully our concerns
when investigating the proposal by Goff Homes and urge you to vote
against it!
Sincerely,
Sharon 5, Maslow
1,3210 35th Ave. N.
Plymouth, MN. 55441
cc (.1vick Uillerude
Maria vasiliou
Coll
Yll
r