Loading...
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