HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 08-26-1992CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 1992, COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 26, 1992
FILE NO.: 92063
PETITIONER: John Ryan
A 0
REQUEST: Amended Planned Unit Development Plan and Conditional Use
Permit for a 3- season porch in "Cimarron Ponds ".
LOCATION: 1025 Yuma Lane North
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -3 (High Medium Density Residential)
ZONING: RPUD 76 -3
BACKGROUND:
The Cimarron Ponds RPUD was approved as a Preliminary Plan /Plat by City
Council Resolution 76 -680 on November 15, 1976. The plan called for 228 patio
homes and 18 single family homes. The project has been constructed basically
as approved in 1986. Since 1981 the City Council has approved 12 Conditional
Use Permit Amendments to the RPUD to allow construction of additions to patio
homes within this project. The most recent Conditional Use Permit Amendment
was approved by the City Council on August 3, 1992 by Resolution 92 -445.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the Official City
Newspaper and notices have been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The proposed 14 foot by 18 foot 3- season porch is a type common throughout
the community. The porch is similar to those constructed previously
within this development. The porch is designed to be constructed to match
existing residences as to design and construction materials.
2. A RPUD Final Plan /Plat for the Cimarron Ponds Addition depicted exact
structure footprints within the confines of the platted lots. The plan
approval, in that case, establishes setbacks, lot coverage and related
matters based on the plan rather than on numeric standards in the Zoning
Ordinance. A feature of each of the patio homes is a concrete patio 10
feet by 14 feet, constructed on the side of some homes and at the rear of
others. In the case of this parcel, the patio is constructed on the side.
Various nonstructural enclosures have been constructed to cover those
patio areas where no building permits have been required in locations
throughout this development.
3. The location of the proposed 3- season porch would result in approximately
252 square feet of additional lot coverage beyond that established by the
PUD Plan building footprint.
4. Most of the preceding requests in the Cimarron Ponds Conditional Use
Permits were to allow construction of 3- season porches as merely a
substitute for the existing concrete patio. Here, additional coverage is
Page Two, File 92055
proposed. A screened porch is currently located on the approved patio.
The petitioner has indicated that the screened porch is to be removed if
the 3- season porch is approved.
One of the previous applications was for a 3- season porch in addition to
the concrete patio. Staff recommended against allowing the 3- season porch
and retention of the concrete patio based on resulting increased structure
coverage as this could set a precedent for the rest of the PUD. The
Planning Commission recommended approval of the retention of the concrete
patio in addition to the 3- season porch.
5. The City has received a letter from the Cimarron Ponds Homeowners
Association which indicates that the Homeowners Association did approve
the plan for this 3- season porch. The City of Plymouth is not a party to
the Homeowners Association and the Homeowners Association does not govern
with respect to the zoning regulations.
6. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider a
Conditional Use Permit on this in terms of the six criteria found in
Section 9, Subdivision A, Paragraph 2a. I have attached a copy of the
ordinance citation together with the petitioner's response to those
criteria.
7. The Planning Commission must also consider this particular Conditional Use
Permit in terms of the Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plat /Plan
review criteria found in Section 9, Subdivision E, Paragraph 5j of the
Zoning Ordinance. I have also attached a copy of this ordinance citation.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
I. We find the proposed PUD Plan Amendment is responsive to the Planned Unit
Development criteria.
2. We find that the proposed PUD Plan Amendment is responsive to the
Conditional Use Permit criteria.
3. The proposed 3- season porch will be 13.97 feet from the north property
line at its closest point.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend adoption of the attached draft resolution approving the Amendment
to the PUD Plan and Conditional Use Permit for "Cimarron Ponds" to permit
construction of anon porch.
Submitted by:
a
ejzv_a)
es t. uiiierua, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
I. Resolution Approving Amended Planned Unit Development Plan and Conditional
Use Permit
2. Conditional Use Permit Criteria
3. PUD Plan- Criteria
4. Petitioner's Narrative
5. Homeowners Association Approval
6. Location Map
7. Site Graphics
APPROVING AMENDMENT OF RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR JOHN RYAN FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1015 YUMA LANE
92063)
WHEREAS, John Ryan has requested approval for an Amendment to the Planned Unit
Development Plan and Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a 3-
season porch in "Cimarron Ponds" for property located at 1025 Yuma 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
John Ryan for an Amendment to the Planned Unit Development Plan and
Conditional Use Permit to allow the construction of a 3- season porch in
Cimarron Ponds" for property located at 1025 Yuma Lane, subject to the
following conditions:
1. No other amendments or variances are granted or implied.
2. All applicable requirements of the City and State Building Codes shall be
implemented and enforced; no Code requirements are waived by this
approval.
3. The granting of the Permit is responsive to criteria of the Zoning
Ordinance for Conditional Use Permits and PUD Plans.
4. The size of the porch shall be 14 feet by 18 feet.
5. The 3- season porch may encroach to within 13.97 feet of the north property
line.
6. The 3- season porch is in addition to an existing 10.6 foot by 17.42 foot
patio.
7. The existing screened structure shall be removed prior to issuance of
building permits for the 3- season porch.
res /pc /92063:jw)
FR M S=CN 9, SLMDIWSICN A
2. Procedure . Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning C mtission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recam idation 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:
1) Conpliance with and effect upon the Camprehensive 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 improvement 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
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
P.U.D. CRITERIA
The Planning Commission, after holding the public hearing, shall make its
recommendations to the City Council for approval; approval with conditions;
or denial of the Conditional Use Permit for a P.U.D., preliminary plat and
rezoning if considered.
The Planning Commission shall forward to the City Council its recommendations
based on and including, but not limited to the following:
1) Compatibility with the stated purposes and intent of the Planned Unit
Development.
2) , Relationship of the proposed plan to the neighborhood in which it is
proposed to be located, to the City's Comprehensive Plan and to other
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3) Internal organization and adequacy of various uses or densities;
circulation and parking facilities; recreation areas and open spaces.
conventions:pl /jk /pud)
Sky ineftw
Desioon,lnc.
BUILDERS 1111d REMODELERS
7620 KALK ROAD • HAMEL, MINNESOTA 55340
Dear Plymouth Planning Commission Members,
Z
June 30, 1992
We are requesting issuance of a Conditional Use Permit for the
construction of a permanent three - season porch located at 1025
Yuma Lane, in the Cimarron Ponds Patio Homes development.
The proposed porch is 14' x 18' (252 sq. ft.), will be located on
the north side of the building and will be approximately 14 feet
from the lot line. The addition is also in compliance with the
guidelines which have been established by the Homeowner's
Association of Cimarron Ponds (see attached). There have been
approximately 10 other porches constructed in this development.
The construction of the porch will take approximately 3 weeks.
During the construction period there will be 2 to 3 trucks at the
site. There is adequate parking on the street for these vehicles
without minimizing parking in the area.
If you have any further questions, please call me at 420 -3177.
Sincerely,
n ` -
cy Y
Ron Splett
Skyline Design, Inc.
612- 420 -3177 • VOICE PAGER 538 -2650
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
SECTION 9, SUBDIVISION A
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
2.a. (1) This addition is in compliance with the comprehensive
plan and will have no detrimental effect upon the
comprehensive plan.
2) The addition will enhance the appearance of the patio
home, and will not endanger the public health, safety,
morals or comfort of others.
3) The addition to this property will not harm the use and
enjoyment of the surrounding properties, and will add
to the property value.
4) The addition will not effect any development or
improvements of surrounding properties because the
surrounding properties are fully developed.
5) This is a small addition with very few workers at the
site at one time, with approximately 2 to 3 vehicles.
Parking will not effect surrounding properties or
traffic in this area.
6) The Conditional Use will comply with all building
codes, zoning ordinances, and guidelines set by
Cimarron Ponds Homeowner's Association. .
UMARROR Ponos Home ftimrs Association. im.
July 2, 1992
John & Frances Ryan
1025 Yuma Lane
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Dear John $ Frances,
P.O. Box 26
Hopkins. Minnesota 5534-1
Your plans for a permanent 3- Season porch have been approved by
the Architectural Control Committee. The maintenance of this new
structure will be your responsibility.
We would like to bring to your attention the City of Plymouth's
requirement in the Cimarron Pond's development regarding
additions to the patio homes. Persons seeking additions to their
homes must first receive Conditional Use Permit approval through
the City of Plymouth. A Conditional Use Permit is required to
allow these homes to exceed the setback limitations and the
maximum lot coverage.
The following information is required for each homeowner to
provide to the City of Plymouth to make complete application for
a Conditional Use Permit.
1) Proof of Homeowner Association approval.
2) Site Plan of the proposed addition, including elevations. w
3) A written description of the addition and its conformance
with the standards in Section 9 of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance.
4) Labels, list and map from Hennepin County of all property
owners within 500 feet of the boundary of your home located at
1025 Yuma Lane
5) A signed application and the appropriate fee for the
Conditional Use Permit.
Please find attached a copy of the Conditional Use Permit
checklist, application and fee schedule. The Conditional Use
Permit takes approximately 45 -60 days to process due to legal
notice and public hearing requirements.
Sincerely,
CIMARRON PONDS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
By: Lynne R. Taylor
President
V-) , . LOCATION MAP 9
SIT
lfwl
k r GO/T LOT 5 "e
1.615. PES
n err rf nr >afl ra rr rr Ixr
t9) lUl I , ' 4 (991 - f =
f
4'1 ,, 'rrm • 13 ,
r tit (9{1 lH) r ({{) ' ' (i1l n. • {S) l[r ' ({91 (70) - • .(7t» - nt (hl r_
t7u
951 1 yr .
y
a •
n a n __ • 1
N 'M.•1
r
rT
791 : •rors, t + , .'7 ( 4" f
mY
f Ir n 141 11 u 1 r '
r'1 r)1 f nt _ IH a a i t lY
s, a7.»I 4flu maul" f 111) A (p (•) ' (SI _ (7' v,. Ir i z " 1 N- D G" S r r•.. ; 62 • Y^ 1 ,Ir w l sf4 , Irr fj(j : In
OI- __.____. 1 (bll T i . ,J,1a. f N 1 u ;- IH r 1 • w li
t
n
py ~Ir e r j, r Ini f,,, ~ ..
IGI r 1 • i -'• ( n + n n ra s 7r nl [% 1-
1
4
i a rr•( /.. _ . , (11m 19• F 1 u , f Y 1O
Ir„ _ / r +" .
et9 +.. g
ii,,jr • . rC • ' 1 w n (
teas
Is1 f • -' - 11r 1 ,+, In n
If
1- ,
r <if) v1 n
IwIr1
rcr n•fr I
N p,>7 •
LI' (1,37 1 r in IfNI
flr Ir
A*
A lAil I il . a f 1- 1 ° (Y) • s f f Ij ®
r9)
21 A •.• . p
1 f i ., - ..
If
Is In r °
r•1•'9/'
n ,.
n
1
W (l)
I
13•
f `t_i- ntLAN)
I) {
r \
PII In r •R Ir Y to i w w /r S ,naw .,
1
Ir
l / /
I \
VI-L•t ,Y A l CHI 41r1
n
4, !1 1+- N)
t . A Ir •
l '. Z
Irl 1°Ir f 11
r 1141
I• . ++ r" .
Ir•
7 1•° I ~
144 ,
r f ,H
t 1 , ao1 f
ZS I
T !
In a •
Inn N Ir 4 /HI 1
d I Ir ,• < , Ir .,1 v rl,r la r 2,
an
IT s i Ir f f 71 / f' f a Irr
r a Y- • ,1f ' T— M
1.4 V Im , • I:Y lr l,r Y r rrY'M raf (,)
r
4 L
o(o'• (n1)f. • e ` fly) '
i
M 'r•. (S) (71 .'r/ (IS) _ .(K) on rl• 2 _
4 .r.n 'et •li (u7 r ;.., ` P - .__ • ltf
eP A f*• !
9 •• ° t.. 's {ttOj,.......5 r
9 . '
r
rr (N) (7i) w _
ir... .. ... n......... !
s1 '+° • • + G- sL
w v1 J .rr 071 CA
3 (161 -.' '5 • . >9
i
1301 •)I1f.19rc'In
t{
M
t
I un (12• 1 1,.t 4 _ 7i73 St r , t• i
C n . '.
AVE .,r, ^y ?3 +r
Lot.) (ts) iA) r191', (t7) (10) *
9ti •i. 4• r9
1.1
t0e.{ w....... r, 4 ' n _4i' 't•' n vim•(}
4'4't1
r (t7) lam) ..
a .71 ( {. ,
a ( (]I l )) (1t)
lA - (
r)
lI
I
Will
t{I n
sj . +11' ,'(
h) (ni: ' ' +
rfl. ("
r '..
t10I
r :
v ., ,
s .• . •
1
sm. IS ets 40.
GOVT LOT 6 GOVT LOT 6
34 +
f
9 4
STORY SEWER DISTRICT BOUNDARY HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA
cet AGE . ......... SCHOOL DISTRICT BOUNDARY BUREAU OF PUBLIC SERVICE
if 1" L['EMO ................... WATERSHED DISTRICT BOUNDARY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAX
11 1 11 IL INCREMENT BOUNDARY AND PUBLIC RECORDS
SURVEY DIVISION
40150
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 17, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 26, 1992
FILE NO.: 92065
PETITIONER: Anthony Louis Center /On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc.
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for an adolescent outpatient
treatment program (day care center).
LOCATION: 105 Forestview Lane North
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential)
BACKGROUND:
On September 17, 1973, the City Council, by Resolution 73 -375 approved a
Conditional Use Permit for a Community Hall for 16 retarded children to be
located on this site. That Conditional Use Permit expired on November 15,
1977.
On July 11, 1977, the City Council, by Resolution 77 -346 approved a
Conditional Use Permit for a day care center to be located within St. Marys of
the Lake Catholic Church. The day care center expanded on this site and
eventually moved. The Conditional Use Permit for the day care center expired
on July 16, 1991.
On December 3, 1979, the City Council, by Resolution 79 -785 approved a
Conditional Use Permit for an adolescent chemical treatment center for the
Anthony Louis Center. This Conditional Use Permit was for inpatient treatment
of no more than 15 residents.
On March 17, 1986, the City Council, by Resoluiton 86 -144 approved a Final
Plan which created 6 lots out of the St. Marys of the Lake Church site.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the Official City
Newspaper and all property owners with 1,320 feet have been notified. A
development sign has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The petitioner is requesting to add an outpatient treatment program to an
existing inpatient program for the treatment of adolescents with a
chemical abuse problem. The proposal is for group and individual
counseling for an average of 3 -5 clients who would be coming to the center
2 -4 times a week between the hours of 5:30 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. The target
population would be individuals between the ages of 13 and 20, both male
and female.
Page Two, File 92065
2. Outpatient treatement facilities of this type are considered by the ZoningOrdinancetobeadaycarefacilitybydefinition. This request is
therefore an application for a day care facility to be located at the
Anthony Louis Center. I have attached a copy of the definition of daycarefacilitiesforyourreview.
3. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the Planning Commission
must review the requested proposal for purposes of evaluation for
compliance with the standards set forth in Section 9, Subdivision A,
paragraph 2a of the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of the Conditional Use
Permit standards is attached along with the petitioner's narrative.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The request is limited in scope with only a proposed 3 -5 clients per week
attending this site. This limited clientele should not generate any
appreciable increase in traffic to this site. Monitoring of the activity
level to assure this minimal scale of operations will be problematical.
2. The proposal does not include any exterior improvements or additions to
the existing facility.
3. Staff finds the proposed request for a day care facility for up to 5
patients in an out patient treatment facility program meets the standards
of the Zoning Ordinance for Conditional Use Permits.
4. We recommend this Conditional Use Permit be reviewed in one year to
evaluate the impact, if any, of this facility on surrounding property.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a day carefacilityattheAhyLouisCentgr. , --1
Submitted by:
arses t. Uillerud, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
I. Draft Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit
2. Conditional Use Permit Standards
3. Day Care Center Definition
4. Resolution 79 -785
5. City Council Minutes of December 3, 1979
6. Planning Commission Minutes of November 14, 1979
7. Location Map
8. Petitioner's Narrative & Graphics
It
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ANTHONY LOUIS CENTER /ON -BELAY OF
MINNESOTA, INC. LOCATED AT 105 FORESTVIEW LANE (92065)
WHEREAS, the Anthony Louis Center /On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc. has requested
approval for a Conditional Use Permit for a day care facility for property
located at 105 Forestview Lane North; 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 the
Anthony Louis Center /On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc. has requested approval for a
Conditional Use Permit for a day care facility for property located at 105
Forestview Lane North, 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 Anthony Louis Center /On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc.
for an outpatient day care facility 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. No signage is allowed relative to the use.
6. The permit shall be reviewed in one year to reassess the operation of this
facility.
7. All parking shall be off - street in designated areas which comply with the ,
Zoning Ordinance.
8. The outpatient day care facility is limited to a maximum of 5 clients per
week.
9. Hours of operation shall be 5:30 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
10. The clientele shall be between the ages of 13 and 20.
11. No increase in scale or scope of the existing inpatient care facility for
15 patients is hereby approved.
res /pc/92065)
i• -M' Zo LM •. V 1 W Z - %,
FROK SHMCN 9, SUEDMSICN A
2. i Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Commission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recommendation 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:
1) Compliance 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
in pair property values within the neighborhood.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and imprvvenent 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
Section 4, Subdivision B
Day Care facility -- A facility licensed by the State Department of Human
Services, public or private, which for gain or otherwise, regularly
provides one or more persons, as defined by the State Human Services
Licensing Act, with care, training, supervision, habilitation,
rehabilitation, or developmental guidance on a regular basis, for periods
of less than 24 hours per days, in a place other than the person's own
home. Day care facilities include, but are not limited to: family day
care homes, group family day care homes, day care centers, day nurseries,
nursery schools, developmental achievement centers for children, day
training and habilitation services for adults, day treatment programs,
adult day care centers, and day services. (Amend. Ord. 89 -38)
dwellings to an acre of land.
Disp de -- A class of storage outside the principal building where
se is visible and may involve active sales as well as passive
ere items can
spl
be taken inside for actual purchase). Outside
f merchandise may be temporary or per manent depending upon thesofthepermitissuedpursuanttothisordinance. (Ord. 90 -38)
District -- Sect' ns of the City for which the regulations governing the
height, area, se of buildings and premises are the same.
Dog Kennel -- Any pr\
parded,
three (3) or more dogs, over four (4) months
of age, are ownebred or offered for sale.
Dwelling, At tached ing where a Dwelling Unit is joined in a
horizontal fashr more Dwelling Units by party wall or walls.
Amend. Ord. 89
Dwelling, Detached -- A Dwellir Unit entirely surrounded by open space.
Amend. Ord. 89 -38)
Dwelling, Multiple Family -- An attac d dwelling designed for occupancy by
three (3) or more families in Dwel g Units joined in a vertical and /or
horizontal fashion. (Amend. Ord. 89-3
Dwelling, Single Family -- A building designe for and occupied exclusively by
one (1) Family. (Amend. Ord. 89 -38)
Dwelling, Two Families -- A building designed or occupancy by two (2)
families.
Dwelling Unit -- Any building or portion thereof Ikich contains living
facilities, including provisions for sleeping, ting, cooking and
sanitation for not more than one family. (Ord. 89 -38)
Equal Degree of Encroachment -- A method of determining the loca 'on of
encroachment lines so that the hydraulic capacity of flood pN4in lands on
each side of a stream are reduced by an equal amount when cal lating the
increases in flood stages due to flood plain encroachments.
4 -5
CITY OF PLYMOUTH •
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof. a rAgular meeting of
the City Council J the City of Plymouth, Minnesota was a on The
Qrd day of nPrpmher , 1 , The following members were
present: mayor Hunt. Councilmembers Hoyt. Neils and Spaeth .
The follow -ing were absent: Ceuncilmember Davenport •
ss• t• tsi
ouncilmember Spaeth introduced the following Resolution and
moved is adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 19- 785
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BILL SOMMERS REPRESENTING ON- BELAY, INC.
TO OPERATE AN ADOLESCENT CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY TREATMENT CENTER LOCATED AT ST.
MARY OF THE LAKE CHURCH AT 115 FORESTVIEW LANE (79074)
WHEREAS, Bill Sommers representing On- Belay, Inc. has requested a condi-
tional use permit to operate an adolescent chemical dependency treatment
center to be located at St. Mary of the Lake Church at 115 Forestview Lane;
and,
WHEREP., the Planning Commission has reveiwed said request and recommended
approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ply-
mouth, Minnesota, that it should and hereby does approve the request of
Bill Sommers representing On- Belay, Inc. for a conditional use permit to
operate an adolescent chemical dependency treatment center to be located at
St. Mary of the Lake Church at 115 Forestview Lane subject to the following
conditions:
I. Permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations,
violation of which shall he grounds for revocation.
2. A copy of the current state license for the facility shall be on file with
the City.
3. A maximum number of residents of the facility shall be fifteen (15).
4. The conditional use permit shi " ho reviewed on alt annual basis.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Councilmember Ho t , and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following vo e in favor thereof: Mayor Hunt, CounciImembers Hoyt, Netls
and •
The following voted against or a sta ne -None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and a op e .
Regular Council Meeting 0December3, 1979
Page 385
MOTION was made by Councilmember Neils, seconded by Council- RESOLUTION NO. 75-
member Hoyt, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 79 -782, A RESOLUTION WING CONDITIONS
SETTINr4,CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING LOT CONSOLIDATION FOR LOT CONSOLIDATIO
FOR VOLP t TRUCTION FOR HOLSUM BAKERY COMPANY 79076). HOLSUM BAKERY CO.
VOLP CONSTRUCTION
Motion carried on a-4Z911 Call vote, four ayes. 79076) Item 74-2
MOTION was made by Councilmeknber Neils, seconded by Council- RESOLUTION NO. 79 -7F
member Hoyt, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 79 -783, A RESOLUTION DENYING CONDITIONAL
DENYING CONDITIONAL USE FERMIT FOR RETAIL BAKERY OUTLET FOP USE PERMIT FOR RETAI
HOLSUM BAKERY COMPANY AT NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF RANCHVIEW LANE BAKERY OUTLET FOR
AND 30TH AVENUE NORTH (79076). HOLSUM BAKERY CO.
79076) Item 7 -B -2
Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, four ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Hoyt, seconded by Council -., RESOLUTION NO. 79 -78
member Spaeth, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 79 -784, APPROVING APPROVING SITE PLAN
SITE PLAN tXENDMENT FOR HENRY HAYDEN REPRESENTING METROQULP, ,METROQUIP, INC.
INC. FO -PROPOSED ADDITION TO SALES /RENTAL /SERVICE FACILIY (A.,Z46) Item 7 -B -3
AT N HEAST QUADRANT OF FERNBROOK LANE AND 23RD AVENUE NORTH
a ding Condition 3 by adding the words "by August 15, 198'."
Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, four
rcaY ,. ..r'Yii
MOTION was made by Councilmember Spaeth, seconded by Council -
member Hoyt, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 79 -785, A RESOLUTION
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ON- BELAY, INC. TO OPERATE
AN ADOLESCENT CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY TREATMENT CENTER LOCATED AT
ST. MARY OF THE LAKE CHURCH AT 115 FORESTVIEW LANE (79074).
Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, four ayes.
Manager Willis introduced request for conditional u!e permits
r Zachman Homes, Inc. for a model home and a temporary real
es to office in a construction trailer on the Fox Glen site
at 39th Avenue and Fernbrook Lane.
Stephen Pan, representing Zachman Homes, Inc., requested
approval of a construction trailer for a temporary real estate
office for a 90 -day period at which time they expected to have
completed the model home on the site. They plan to resolve the
parking problems on the site by bringing gravel in this week to
make the interal streets available for parking.
Tern Mahoney, Sales Manager for petitioner, stated at present
the nearest model they have to show customers is in Chanhassen,
18 miles away from the site. They would like to use the trailer
as a s,,Ifs office until the model home is completed, at which time
they,ewould remove the construction trailer from the site and use
t basement of the model as a construction office.
385-
RESOLUTION NO. 79
APPROVING COND MU
USE PERMIT FOR
ON- BELAY, INC. AT
ST. MARY OF THE LAY.
CHURCH (79074)
Item 7 -C -1
CONDITIONAL USE PERT
ZACAMAN HOMES
FOX GLEN (A -814)
Item 7 -C -2 .
Z
0
PLANNING COMMISSION MI A S -2- • November 14, 1979
Bill Sommers for On-Belay, Inc. 9 Similar Use Determination/
Conditional Use Per..+it
This item was introduced by Staff who reviewed the November 8, 1979 staff report.
The petitioner proposes to have an adolescent chemical dependency treatment center
on the site of the St. Mary's of the Lake Church at 115 Forestview Lane.
Chairman Schneider recognized Mr. Bill Sommers who spoke representing On- Belay,
Inc. Mr. Sommers stated that the proposed facility was not a detox center, and
the clients would be there because they wanted help, not because they had to he
there. He stated that they had held a neighborhood meeting on October 23, 197Q
which was attended by approximately 25 people, who were notified of this public
hearing along with property owners within 500 feet of the property. He stated
that the clients would he approximately 13 -1R years in age and there would not he
a client admitted over the age of 1R. Older family members who needed treatment
would he referred elsewhere.
Chairman Schneider opened the public hearing.
Mr. Ron Jacobson of 11605 - 3rd Avenue North was present and spoke as a concerned
neighbor reqarding the outside activities of the clients and effect upon the Neigh-
borhood. He inquirec as to whether they were planning on fencing in the
area, and what, if any, recreational facilities would be provided.
Mr. Don Anderson of Wayzata High School representing the petitioner responded
indicating that there would he some field trips, and some outdoor recreational
activities olanned. However, the clients will be closely supervised at all
times, and they do not anticipate any problems in this area. Commissioner
Steigerwald stated that if Mr. Jacobson has any problem, with the use or the
treatment facility that he should notify staff and they would review
the conditional use permit if sufficient grounds were given.
Chairman Schneider commented that whereas this was a large site, other smaller
and similarly zoned sites in the City could be problematical in terms of
accommodating such uses. Commissioner Threinen observed that such uses
requ-re a conditional use permit_ and thus each would he evaluated on its
merits, a it this case.
Chairman Schneider closed the Puhlic hearing.
MOTION by Commissioner .fire, seconded by Corinissioner Steigerwald to 11ct on this
petition this evening.
MOTION CARRIFD 5 -0 -0 All in Favor
MOTION by Commissioner Vasiliou, seconded by Commissioner Steigerwald to recommend
approval if this conditional use permit subject to the following conditions:
1. Permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations,
violation of which shall be grounds for revocation.
2. A copy of the current state license for the facility shall be on file with
the City.
3. A —ximum number of residents of the 'acility shall he fifteen (15).
MOTION by Commissioner Threinen, seconded by Commissioner Wire to add the
following condition N4:
PLANNING COMMISSION MIN ES -3- November 14, 1979
4. The conditional use permit shall he reviewed on an annual basis.
MOTION CARRIED 5 -0 -0 All in Favor
Chairman Schneider called for a vote on the main motion as once amended.
MOTION CARRIED 5 -0 -0 All in Favor
C
Th item was introduced by staff who reviewed the November 9, 1979 staff report.
The titioner proposes to construct an office /warehouse to accomodate the
office, sales and warehouse uses of the owner, Pan -O -Gold Holsum Baking Compa
Staff ex, aina_d a conditional use permit is required for the proposed retai
outlet fo akery products on the north end.
Chairman Schn er recognized Mr. Glen Burnett who was present repre ting the
petitioner. Mr. urnett F "ated that if the retail sales of "day o bakery goods
did not prove to h a pr,,itahle venture, then the owners would ove it to a
different location, ile retaining the space for warehouse an ffice uses.
Chairman Schneider declaALi the public hearing open.
C,orx- issioner Threinen noted NNI t there was no sign pl suhmitted with the
petition, and inomired as to h t ype of signage t intended to have. Mr.
Burnett responded that they had m no deteriina n regarding signage as of
this ti, ^e, hut would submit Sign pl later for pproval.
Chairman Schneider noted the large glas in ws which face Highway 51;, and he
said that. in all the "day old" hakery s he had seen they put up large
Paper banners to advertise daily special since the ordinance does not
cover signage inside a building, the H sump ie could do the same thing in
this case, and s!,cn signage was deem ,estheti lly r-oper for this area.
r'hoir -an ` chneider closed the puhZc hearing.
MriTl011 ny oruiss,nner Threin seco pled by C,gmmissior Wire `.o act on this
jet it ion this eveni,q- \
MOT I O?`; LAPP I FD / 5 -t1 -O Ai t i n Favor
Substantial discus/
n'the '
ensued relative to the retail sales opera 'on and its
af,propriateness gi Ordinance Standards for such uses in th -1 Zone and
given concerns r ative to signage of a retail nature. Mr. Burnett tated the
project was vi a without the retail facilit,, which could he locate n a
properly zon ' ocation off site.
MOTION h ommissioner Threinen. Seconded by Commissioner Wire to rec
approv of the site plan only suhject to the followinq conditions:
1. /Compliance with'the City Fngineer's Memorandum.
Payment of park dedication fees in lieu of dedication in an amount deter- `
mined according to verified acreage and r; cording to the dedication policy
Y
i. .."(` ,, : \ i jibI' C _ iii \ ,,
mob— : _L \ 1 I -- .. j =AIL V 1 0
i.
Ws
XA
WAYZATA EAST •
SCHOOL
LIMITS
own
awl `
it-
q4 do
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 17, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 26, 1992
FILE NO.: 92066
PETITIONER: John Day on behalf of other owners within the "Downtown
Plymouth" area
REQUEST: Mixed Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan and
Conditional Use Permit Amendment
LOCATION: The northeast quadrant of Vicksburg Lane and Highway 55
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CC (Community Shopping Center)
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
MPUD 78 -2
On March 21, 1977, the City Council, by Resolution 77 -139 approved the General
Development Plan for the "Plymouth Hills" Mixed Planned Unit Development
involving this Planned Unit Development.
On August 28, 1978, the City Council, by Resolution 78 -530 approved a Revised
General Development Plan for the Plymouth Hills Company for the "Plymouth
Hills Addition ".
Since 1978, there have been several revisions to the General Development Plan
for site specific projects. To date, a small retail /service building, drive
up bank, cable television hub facility, full service bank, and full service
grocery store have been constructed within the Plymouth Hills Addition.
Also on the August 26, 1992 Planning Commission agenda are two other -
applications for site specific projects within the "Downtown Plymouth area.
They are a request by the John Day Company for an automobile service center
92070) and a request by Rademacher for a shopping center, liquor store and
gas station (92068). File 92068 is unrelated to either of the other two cases
and is not included as part of the overall MPUD Preliminary Plan Amendment
proposed--by this file (92066).
Notice of this Public Hearing was published in the Official City Newspaper and
mailed to all property owners within the appropriate quarter quarter sections.
A development sign has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The petitioners are proposing to amend the Mixed Planned Unit Development
for the "Plymouth Hills" Mixed Planned Unit Development to allow for a
greater flexibility in uses within the development. The proposed plan
Page Two, File 92066
divides the development into 3 areas; North, Central and South. The
proposal is to provide a gradual transition from a wider variety of uses
allowed in the south area to more limited uses in the north area. The
proposal is to allow for all B -1 and B -2 permitted or conditional uses in
the South Area; and a mixture of B -1 and B -2 permitted and conditional
uses in the Central Area, while specifically excluding specified allowable
uses not deemed appropriate. The North Area would be limited to those B -1
uses (permitted and conditional).
2. The Land Use Guide Plan for this site is CC, City Center. The CC
classification is found in only one location in Plymouth, the Plymouth
Hills Addition. Uses allowed by this guiding include all permitted and
conditional uses in the B -1, B -2, and B -3 Zoning Districts based on the
approved PUD Preliminary Plan (copy of the Land Use Guide Plan text
attached).
3. Development standards, such as building setbacks and allowable signage,
are based on the use shown on the PUD Preliminary Plan. As an example, a
site proposed for retail would follow B -2 zoning guidelines and an office
site would follow B -1 guidelines.
4. The current MPUD Preliminary Plan provides for a much more limited range
of uses in both the area identified as the Central and North Area. Those
two areas are shown as providing for only office, bank or medical uses.
Individual buildings in the south area are proposed for either restaurant,
banks, retail sales or liquor stores. It has been the City's policy in
the past to require that any deviation from the approved plan be required
to submit for a PUD Preliminary Plan approval on a case by case basis.
5. The Planning Commission must review every PUD Preliminary Plan in relation
to the specific items found in Section 9, Subdivision B, 5j of the Zoning
Ordinance. I have attached a copy of those criteria for your review.
The petitioner has addressed each of the requirements identified in
Section 9, Subdivision 5j in their narrative.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The petitioner's proposal to eliminate any use designation on the building
footprints of the MPUD Preliminary Plan will allow for individual project
approval without also having to amend the Preliminary Plan to replace a
use designation. This will make the development of the Downtown Plymouth
easier for both staff review and for the petitioner applications.
2. Staff finds that the proposed stair stepping of allowed uses from the
south to north is compatible with the original intent and purposes of the
PUD Plan which originally called for a clear separation of uses. This
proposal will continue to buffer the previously developed residential
areas to the north from retail uses.
3. Staff finds that the proposal to prohibit transient merchants and produce
sales from the list of allowed uses in the central area will only result
in additional research on staff's part and increased review time prior to
Page Three, File 92066
issuance of these permits. Transient merchants and produce sales have not
been a problem in the past. Staff finds that this use should not be
addressed by the PUD but left to the regulations set forth in the Zoning
Ordinance.
4. Staff finds that the internal relationship of this plan remains consistent
with the original plan and is also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
and its interrelationship with surrounding neighborhoods.
5. The purpose of creating a Mixed Planned Unit Development for Plymouth
Hills was to create a "Downtown" for Plymouth. While the residential
areas within the PUD have almost been fully developed, the commercial
areas have not seen the same level of development. Since the PUD was
originally approved in the 1970's, there have been many changes in
development strategies, government regulations, and market demands for
commercial property. It is unlikely that the office area will develop
with the number of banks as was originally anticipated or that the office .
uses will be constructed in the near future due to the over supply of
office space in the Metro area.
The proposed plan to allow for a mixture of office and retail uses could
enhance the development opportunities in the area. This mixture of office
and retail uses is commonly associated with "Downtowns" and would be
somewhat unique in Plymouth. This uniqueness would help reinforce the
concept of "Downtown" Plymouth.
6. Staff finds that the internal organization of the various uses and
resulting circulation of traffic still complies with the original purposes
of the PUD for this area.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the request for a Mixed Planned Unit ,
Development Preliminar Plan subject to the conditions of the draft
resolution.
Submitted by:
Charles E. Dill-erud—,Td-WhTffity Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Mixed Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan
2. PUD Preliminary Plan Criteria
3. Land Use Guide Plan Element "CC"
4. Location Map
5. Petitioner's Narrative and Graphics
APPROVING AN AMENDED MIXED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR JOHN DAY ON BEHALF OF SEVERAL PROPERTY OWNERS
92066)
WHEREAS, John Day On Behalf of Several Property Owners has requested approval
for an Amended Mixed Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan and
Conditional Use Permit for property located northeast of the intersection of
Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane North; 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
John Day On Behalf of Several Property Owners for an Amended Mixed Planned
Unit Development Preliminary Plan and Conditional Use Permit for property
located northeast of the intersection of Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane North,
subject to the following conditions:
I. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
3. Approved uses within the Plymouth Hills Mixed Planned Unit Development
shall be in accordance with the Amended PUD Preliminary Plan dated July,
1992, except that transient merchants and produce sales shall be permitted
in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance regulations.
res /pc/92066)
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
P.U.D. CRITERIA
The Planning Commission, after holding the public hearing, shall make its
recommendations to the City Council for approval; approval with conditions;
or denial of the Conditional Use Permit for a P.U.D., preliminary plat and
rezoning if considered.
The Planning Commission shall forward to the City Council its recommendations
based on and including, but not limited to the following:
1) Compatibility with the stated purposes and intent of the Planned Unit
Development.
2) Relationship of the proposed plan to the neighborhood in which it is
proposed to be located, to the City's Comprehensive Plan and to other
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3) Internal organization and adequacy of various uses or densities;
circulation and parking facilities; recreation areas and open spaces.
conventions:pl /jk /pud)
LAND USE GUIDE PLAN ELEMENT
OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 12/18/89
The intent of this classification is to provide for specialized needs within
convenient driving distance of residents in the primary.geobase, i.e., the
community. This is a unique classification intended to provide for planned,
unified development in the City Center area.
Limited commercial service and retail uses and a variety of public and
institutional uses should develop according to an approved Planned Unit
Development plan.
Maximum Lot or Area Coverage
of All Buildings:
Minimum Area for Each Lot
in the Development:
Public Utilities:
Corresponding Zoning Designation:
Type of Development:
Development Locational Criteria:
Per the respective classification and
zoning district standards for the site.
Per the respective classification and
zoning district standards for the site
and the approved Development plan.
Required in all areas.
All Business Districts, subject to the
approved Development Plan.
Planned, unified civic and commercial
center.
Unique criterion places development "
around and focused upon municipal City
Center.
31
rm
T0."' E-j ["
0.".. ,
w,','
i
IN .f o -1r . ... },
a
i%
lie
M
r
y
l
ii
D.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 17, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 26, 1992
FILE NO.: 92068
PETITIONER: William C. Rademacher
REQUEST: Amended Mixed Planned Unit Development Plan; MPUD Final
Site Plan; and Conditional Use Permit for an automobile gas
station.
LOCATION: Northeast corner of 36th Avenue North and Vicksburg Lane
North.
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CC (City Center)
ZONING: MPUD 78 -2
BACKGROUND:
On March 21, 1977, the City Council, by Resolution 77 -139 approved the General
Development Plan for the "Plymouth Hills" Mixed Planned Unit Development
involving this site.
On August 28, 1978, the City Council, by Resolution 78 -530 approved a revised
General Development Plan for the Plymouth Hills Company for the "Plymouth
Hills Addition ".
Since 1978, there have been several revisions to the General Development Plan .
for site specific projects. To date, a small retail /service building, drive
up bank, cable television hub facility, full service bank, and a full service
grocery store have been constructed within the Plymouth Hills Addition (also
know as "Downtown Plymouth ").
Also on the August 26, 1992 Planning Commission agenda are two other
applications within the "Downtown" Plymouth area. They are a request by John
Day Company for an automobile service center (92070), and a request by John
Day on behalf of others, for a MPUD Preliminary Plan Amendment for the
Plymouth Hills PUD (92066). The subject application (Rademacher) is unrelated
to either of the other two cases and this site is not included as part of the
overall MPUD Preliminary Plan Amendment (92066).
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 a PUD Preliminary Plan Amendment
to allow for a 29,000 square foot shopping center which will include a
1 -
liquor store, strip mall; and, a Conditional Use Permit for a
convenience /gas station. The site is a platted 174,225 square foot lot.
2. The Land Use Guide Plan classification of this site is CC, City Center.
The CC classification is found in only one location in Plymouth, the
Plymouth Hills Addition. Uses allowed by this guiding include all
permitted and conditional uses in the B -1, B -2, and B -3 Zoning Districts,
based on the approved PUD Preliminary Plan.
3. The uses proposed by this application are compatible with the CC guiding
but not with the approved PUD Preliminary Plan. The Planning Commission's
review of this request involves the location of the proposed uses and the
relationship of the uses with the surrounding property.
Development standards, such as building setbacks and allowable signage,
are based on the use shown on the PUD Preliminary Plan. As an example, a
site proposed for retail would follow B -2 zoning guidelines and an office
site would follow B -1 guidelines. The uses proposed by this application
fall under the B -2 zoning classification and were reviewed for compliance
with those standards.
4. This site is currently designed for office uses by the Mixed Planned Unit
Development General Development Plan for "Plymouth Hills ". The petitioner
is proposing to amend the MPUD to allow for commercial retail uses on this
site. Automotive uses are allowed in the B -2 Zoning District upon
It, approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
5. The Planning Commission must review every PUD Preliminary Plan in relation
to the specific items found in Section 9, Subdivision B, 5j of the Zoning
Ordinance. I have attached a copy of those criteria for your review.
6. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the Planning Commission
must review the requested proposal for purposes of evaluation for
compliance with the standards set forth in Section 9, Subdivision A,
paragraph 2a. A copy of the Conditional Use Permit standards is attached
along with the petitioner's narrative.
7. The Site Plan presented complies with the minimum standards of the Zoning
Ordinance and other City Codes, policies, and standards including proposed
PUD Plan amendments with respect to: setbacks, internal circulation;
parking requirements; signage (1 freestanding sign is proposed); site
illumination; all rooftop equipment is proposed to be screened;
engineering details (as conditioned by the City Engineer's_ memorandum);
and, landscaping.
8. The design of the structure includes a burnished masonry and a glass block
strip on all four elevations. The design is not compatible with the
recently constructed Cub Food Store which was required to have brick face
on all four elevations.
The majority of the non - residential structures in the "Plymouth Hills" PUD
have included brick face on all wall elevations. Most recently, the Amoco
and Cub Food Store were constructed with brick face. Staff has also
recommended brick face on the proposed John Day Automobile Service Center
92070).
2 -
The requirement for brick face on all wall elevations is in response to
the City's Policy on Building Aesthetics and Architectural Design. The
policy includes a recommendation that appropriate building material be
used which would be compatible with adjacent structures. Through recent
City approval of Final PUD Plan, brick face on all wall elevations have
been determined to meet this policy.
9. The approved Mixed Planned Unit Development Plan for "Plymouth Hills"
specifies installation of concrete sidewalks on the entire periphery of
this site. The approved Development Plan specifies that no credit for
park dedication requirements shall be available to the. developer for
installation of this required concrete sidewalk. The petitioner is
proposing to install the concrete sidewalk as required, along 37th Avenue
North and Vicksburg Lane North.
10. The petitioner is proposing (to construct) only the liquor store at this
time. The Conditional Use Permit for the gas station is only valid for
one year after approval. It is the petitioner's responsibility to request
extensions for the Conditional Use Permit if they have not acted on the
Conditional Use Permit within the one year period. The petitioner must
also apply for and receive MPUD Final Plan approval prior to issuance of
any building permits for either the gas /convenience station or the strip
mall.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The Conditional Use Permit application for the convenience
store /automobile gas center complies with the Conditional Use Permit
standards.
2. Compliance with the provisions of the City Council policy regarding
architectural appearance will be assured by a condition specifying an
exterior wall treatment of brick material only.
3. The Final Site Plan meets the standards of the Zoning Ordinance and other
applicable ordinances, policies, and standards on the City of Plymouth
regarding development in the MPUD 78 -2, except as noted.
4. MPUD Preliminary Plan Amendment Findings
a. Staff finds that the proposed MPUD Preliminary Plan amendment to `
allow for commercial /service uses in this vicinity does meet the
intent of the PUD to provide for a "downtown" for Plymouth.
b. Staff finds that the proposed uses are compatible with the anticipated
uses in the area as well as the existing Cub Store south of this site.
c. Staff finds the internal organization of the site to be acceptable.
5. The intersection of 36th Avenue North and Vicksburg Lane will, eventually,
be signalized. This location is therefore an appropriate site for uses
such as the proposed gas /convenience store which will generate significant
traffic.
6. Staff recommends that 100 percent brick face be required on all 4
elevations of each building to ensure continued aesthetic compatibility
within the PUD.
3 -
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend adoption of the attached resolutions providing for the approval of '
an Amended Mixed Planned Unit Development Plan; MPUD Final Site Plan; and,
Conditional Use Yejpqit for a cogxgnience /gds center.
Submitted by:
es t. u m erua, community uevelopment uirector
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution Approving Amended Planned Unit Development Plan, Site
Plan, and Conditional Use Permit for a gasoline service station
2. Engineer's Memorandum
3. Applicant's Narrative
4. Conditional Use Permit Standards
5. Location Map
6. Site Plan Graphics
7. Current Approved PUD Preliminary Plan for this Site
4 -
APPROVING AMENDED MIXED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN; MPUD FINAL SITE PLAN;
AND, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR WILLIAM C. RADEMACHER FOR A LIQUOR STORE,
SHOPPING CENTER, AND CONVENIENCE /GAS STATION LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER
OF 36TH AVENUE NORTH AND VICKSBURG LANE NORTH (92068)
WHEREAS, William C. Rademacher has requested approval for a Mixed Planned Unit
Development; MPUD Final, Site Plan; and, Conditional Use Permit for a liquor
store, shopping center, and convenience /gas station for property located at
the northeast corner of 36th Avenue North and Vicksburg Lane North; 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
William C. Rademacher has requested approval for a Mixed Planned Unit
Development; MPUD Final Site Plan; and, Conditional Use Permit for a liquor
store, shopping center, and convenience /gas station for property located at
the northeast corner of 36th Avenue North and Vicksburg Lane North, 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 Phase I site improvements within 12 months.
5. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
6. Any subsequent phases, including Phase II and Phase III, 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 the approved trash
enclosures, and no outside storage is permitted.
9. 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.
10. Exterior wall finishes of the shopping center, liquor store and
convenience /gas station shall be 100 percent brick.
11. The MPUD Plan Amendment is to change the approved use on this parcel from
Office to Retail /Service Sales and to provide for 2 structures on one lot
per plans dated August 18, 1992.
12. A Conditional Use Permit is approved for a gas station per plans dated
August 18, 1992.
res /pc/92068)
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: August 19, 1992
FILE NO.: 92068
PETITIONER: Mr. William C. Rademacher, 6272 Boone Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, MN
55428
SITE PLAN: RADEMACHER /G -WILL LIQUOR /CONVENIENCE CENTER
LOCATIGN: North of 36th Avenue, east of Vicksburg Lane in the Southwest 1/4 of
Section 16
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 will be payable at the time building
permits are issued? These are in addition to the assessments shoes
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
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. _ _ 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 (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.) Six feet along the north and
east property line.
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. XX _ _ 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. 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.
XX 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 apply.
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
A ' _ ? ";* (M
N/A Yes No
12. _ _ 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
X 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: Silt fence
is required wherever drainage leaves the site. Hay bales shall be
placed around the catch basins during construction. A crushed rock
dike shall be placed at the entrance to the site from 36th Avenue
during construction.
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 on the site plan 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.
X Sanitary Sewer
x Watermain
x 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.
The post indicator valve shall be placed on the service line into
the building not at the "T" as shown on the site 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. The clean -outs shall also be shown on the site plan.
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. Catch Basin 2 -B as identified on the utility plan
shalt be constructed along with the storm sewer to Catch Basin 1 -B.
Overland drainage from the edge of the proposed drive aisle parkin¢
i
lot will not be allowed to the existing catch basin at the future
shared drive entrance at the southeast corner of the site.
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 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: A detail for the drive aisle and parking areas
shall be included on the site plan or on the detail sheet.
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 -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 tap.
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 7 11 12, 14, 16, 17, 19, 22, 24, 28,
29.A. 29.B. and 29.C.
29. A. A detail shall be provided for the silt fence.
B. Either the site plan shall identify all utilities to be constructed by size
and type of material or the utility plan shall be revised to indicate what is
going to be constructed at this time.
C. The drainage calculations are being reviewed at this time. Changes. to the
storm sewer system may be required.
D. The median on 36th Avenue shall be modified to create a left turn lane into
the retail site. Plans shall be submitted for approval.
E. A stop sign shall be installed at the main exit to 36th Avenue. Also, the
entrance shall be "striped" with traffic markings as indicated on the site
plan.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
5-
204M e. R440WAM & Ads
6272 -74 BOONE AVENUE NORTH
BROOKLYN PARK, MINNESOTA 55428 -2793
Phone (612) 536 -9600 • Fax (612) 536 -1198
JUL 22 1992
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE CITY Or PLYMOUTH ^,
OMMUNITY DEVROPMEW DEPT
AND CONFORMANCE WITH STANDARDS
This application is for a conditional use permit, which will allow us to dispense
gasoline, motor fuels and propane, on Lot 3, Block 2, Plymouth Hills. We propose
to do so on connection with a Bill's Superette, which is part of our proposal to
develop the entire four (4) acre site.
The use is in compliance with and has a positive effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan encourages groupings of compatible businesses, in the form
of shopping centers, that are more convenient to use, easier to provide with suitable
access; economically more sound; and properly related to abutting residential
development. The property is located within an area which land use is classified as
CC" or City Center. This area is located within a large planned unit development,
which permits retail uses, as well as residential and office uses. The Comprehensive
Plan encourages commercial development at a rate consistant with development of other
aspects of community growth, in order to provide for a wide variety business uses to
meet shopping, professional, or personal service and employment opportunities. This
proposed use will employ approximately ten (10) people. The completed shopping center
will employ approximately seventy (70) people.
The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional use will promote and
enhance the general public welfare by offering a convenient source of everyday goods
and services to the community. The purchase of motor fuels and gasoline, at
competitive prices, is important to the people in this community. Some of the
people in the community will be employed to offer these goods and services, for sale.
The conditional use will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or comfort.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED USE AND CONFORMANCE WITH STANDARDS (CONT'D)
The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property
in the immediate vacinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish
and impair property values within the neighborhood. The use will enhance the uses and
enjoyment of other properties in the area by assisting them in servicing this underserved
area. This development will be done in extremely good taste and will enhance property
values and stimulate additional quality development.
The establishment of this conditional use will not impede normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district.
This conditional use will be properly screened with landscaping and properly lighted
so as not to impede any other development. It will act to stimulate more quality
development and this use is always well received by neighboring developments.
Adequate measures will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking designed to
minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. We are utilizing the access
points already in existance. These access points are in alignment with our neighbor
to the south, Cub Foods. Our on site parking is designed to accomodate all of our
customer and employee requirements, as well as fire and safety requirements.
The conditional use shall in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations
of the district in which it is located.
i
pR M SHLMCN 9, StIDP ' VISICN A
2. Procedure. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Commission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a reccmme:dation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Cc mission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) Carpliance 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 kmediate 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 i rovernnt 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
ldom
IN P
EM
hl-
M-M
4
r Bi
a
I
10
J!
F7
CY, -
c='D
Cl
PE JIMIL
J"fl
PLYMOUTW WILL.
4. E.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 17, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 26, 1992
FILE NO.: 92069
PETITIONER: Dale S. Bachman
REQUEST: Land Use Guide Plan Amendment, Preliminary PUD Plan
Amendment, Final PUD Plan, Site Plan and Conditional Use
Permit for a Bachman's Garden Center
LOCATION: Northeast quadrant of 6th Avenue North (Highway 55 north
service drive) and Revere Lane (the former "DeVac site ")
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CL (Limited Business)
ZONING: MPUD 86 -1
BACKGROUND:
In June, 1988, by Resolution 88 -308, the City Council approved a Planned Unit
Development Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit for Ryan
Construction Company for "Waterford Park Plaza" including this site as an
office site.
In August, 1988, the City Council, by Resolution 88 -508 approved a Planned
Unit Development Final Plat and Development Contract which included this site
as an outlot, and therefore subject to future replatting.
The foregoing MPUD Plan approvals were responsive to a MPUD Concept Plan,
including this site, that was approved in August, 1987 which include an
Amended Land Use Guide Plan for this vicinity. The Land Use Guide Plan
Amendment changed a portion of this site from I -P (Planned Industrial) to CS
Service Business) and a portion from I -P (Planned Industrial) to CL (Limited
Business).
On September 10, 1990, the City Council, by Resolution 90 -545 denied a Land
Use Guide Plan Amendment for the Ryan Construction Company or an Arby's
Restaurant located on a 1.2 acre portion of this site. The denial was based
on the finding that the proposal did not respond to the specific "gateway"
characteristics for this location; that there was not a lack of undeveloped
land in a CS classification; that undeveloped and developed land in both the
CS and CR classification would be negatively impacted by the proposal; that
this request would result in a "spot" guiding and therefore "spot" zoning;
and, that the proposal was not the highest and best use of the property.
On July 1, 1991, the City Council, by Resolution 91 -364 and 91 -365 approved a
Land Use Guide Plan Amendment, Mixed Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan
and Conditional Use Permit for Ryan Construction Company on the site
immediately west of this site. The request reguided Outlot B from CL (Limited
1 -
Business) to CS (Service Business) and resulted in the construction of an
Arby's Restaurant in that location.
The Land Use Guide Plan approval previously granted for this MPUD ( "Waterford
Park Plaza ") amended the Land Use Guide Plan classification from the previous
I -1 (Planned Industrial) to specifed portion of CL (Limited Business) and CS
Service Business). Subsequent PUD Plans for this site have rotated the
actual usage approximately 90 degrees, but the portion of CS classified
property to CL classified property remains the same as was originally
reflected in the approved development plan. A "balance" has been retain
consistent with the intent of the Land Use Guide Plan. The proposal to
reclassify a portion of the CL property will in effect, change the "balance"
that was created with the original reclassification of the entire PUD site.
What is proposed, is, an addition to the 90 degree juxtaposition of uses that
had been permitted as being consistent with the Amended Land Use Guide Plan,
the applicant now proposes to increase the actual amount of CS classified
land_
Notice of this Public Hearing was published in the Official City Newspaper and
mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. A development sign has been
placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The petitioner is requesting approval of a Land Use Guide Plan Amendment
from CL (Limited Business) to CS (Service Business), a PUD Preliminary
Plan Amendment, a PUD Final Site Plan and a Conditional Use Permit to
allow for the construction of a 32,000 square foot Bachman's Garden Center
which would include 50,000 square feet of outside storage display and
sales.
2. The site is located within the Bassett Creek Drainage District; contains
no Flood Plain or Shoreland Overlay District; contains no Department of
Natural Resources, City ponding or Federally protected wetlands; contains
no woodlands of significance; contains no slopes in excess of 12 percent;
and is compatible with urban public sewers. The site is the location of
the former Devac window factory which was relocated to Medina in 1990.
3. The Land Use Guide Plan Amendment checklist requires both the petitioner
and staff to review the proposal regarding specific concerns. The
petitioner's response is included in their attached booklet. Staff's
response is found under the comments section of this report. A copy of
the checklist is also attached for this report.
4. The current PUD Preliminary Plan for this site proposes office
development. The petitioner is proposing to construct a garden center in
place of the office building. Modifications to the PUD Preliminary Plan
includes permitting outdoor storage and sales to be located within the
required front and rear yards, which is not allowed by the Zoning
Ordinance; to allow for a pylon sign of 163 square feet versus the Zoning
Ordinance allowed 96 square feet; and to allow wrought iron fencing around
the outside sales and storage area in lieu of a 90 percent opacity screen.
5. The Planning Commission must review the Preliminary Plan Amendment for
compliance with the criteria set forth in the Zoning Ordinance regarding
PUD Preliminary Plans. I have attached a copy of those criteria.
2 -
6. The PUD Final Site Plan proposes a structure which is similar to the
Bachman Garden Center which was recently constructed in Apple Valley. The
building is sited at an angle on the property due to the placement of a
privately enforced sight line restriction. This sight line restriction
was placed on the site to ensure visibility of the Waterford Park Shopping
Center from Highway 55.
7. The garden center will consist of 10,200 square feet of garden center,
4,000 square feet of floral and gift sales, 10,300 square feet of atrium
and greenhouse and 50,000 square feet of outdoor sales. A shade structure
is also proposed to be located within the outdoor sales area. The
petitioner is also requesting that the outdoor sales not be screened from
the surrounding property.
8. Access to the garden center will be through a shared access between this
site and the Waterford Park shopping center. The entrance to the shopping
center is required to be relocated eastward with the development of this
site.
9. The exterior of the Bachman's Garden Center is proposed to be constructed
of various block facing including decorative block, rock face block and
square block.
10. Parking requirements for this facility have been determined based on the
shopping center classification of this site as the site will function as
part of the existing shopping center.
11. The Conditional Use Permit for outdoor storage and sales must be found to
be in compliance with the 6 standards found in Section 9, Subdivision A of
the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of those standards is attached.
12. This site is currently an outlot and therefore must be final platted into
a lot /block prior to issuance of building permits. The Final Plat was
submitted for City review on August 18, 1992. If there are no Subdivision
Ordinance Variances proposed, the Final Plat will go directly to the City
Council concurrent with these PUD applications.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. Land Use Guide Plan Amendment
a. The applicant checklist for a Land Use Guide Plan Amendment specifies
several items to be addressed by the staff for each application to
amend the Comprehensive Plan as follows:
1) Are the locational criteria of both the existing and proposed
classification satisfied by the specified site?
A key element of the CL location criteria is a "gateway" component.
This site continues to function as one of the premier "gateways" to
the, City of Plymouth. The proposed location of this garden center
can be considered a gateway type facility since the proposed use will
function as an anchor to this shopping center, and draw customers
from a large area.
3 -
2) Can the site be reasonably developed under the current
classification?
The site can be reasonable developed under the current classification
for office uses. The timing of any new office construction can not
be determined but the guiding classification of property should not
be based on when development will occur but on what is the most
appropriate use for that site.
3) Is there a lack of developable property in the same classification as
that which is being proposed? If so is the proposed expansion
supported by the Comprehensive Plan and community structure concept?
There is undeveloped or underdeveloped land available within the CS
classification existing north of Highway 55 between South Shore Drive
and West Medicine Lake Boulevard. In addition, there is undeveloped
property in the CS classification at the northwest corner of State
Highway 55 and I -494. Finally, there are substantial areas of
undeveloped land, both north and south of Highway 55 with a CS Land
Use Guide Plan classification west of Vicksburg Lane and north of
County Road 24.
This proposal is supported by the Comprehensive Plan community
structure concept in that this guide plan change would be in addition
to an existing CS guided property that was developed as the Waterford
Park Shopping Center.
4) Will other undeveloped property, in the classification proposed for
this site be adversely affected by this action? Will other-Property
in the proposed classification, which might be subject to
redevelopment rehabilitation, be adversely affected by this action?
As noted above several areas of both undeveloped and underdeveloped
property within the CS Land Use Guide Plan classification exist west
of the site along State Highway 55. This development or
redevelopment of these areas currently guided CS may be negatively
impacted by the reclassification here proposed simply through the
mechanics of supply and demand. This request however, is for the
development of a large single tract of land for a single user and
there are not other similarly sized properties guided CS available at-
this time.
5) How does the proposal demonstrate merit beyond the interest of the
owner, proponent, or prospective developer of this site?
The applicant states that this garden center use is needed in the
community and is usually considered an asset to a community. As
such, the applicant contends that the reclassification demonstrates
the matter beyond the interest of the proponent. It is difficult to
measure the "adequacy" of a garden facility in the neighborhood.
6) How does the. ro osal demonstrate that the new classification would
Fe the highest and best use of the site? What is the public nee or
community benefit?
4 -
The applicant states that this is an area suitable for high exposure
retail uses and that this garden center is a retail use which would
be consistent with the adjoining commercial development.
What impact will the proposed use change have on several
Comprehensive Plan elements?
The Traffic Study perpared by Strgar- Roscoe- Fausch, Inc. states that
this request will result in increased traffic, although the increase
will not significantly impact the street system. The report includes
roadway and traffic control improvements to ensure that the roadway
system can support the Bachman's development. These improvements
include two alternatives for redesigning the main entrance to
Waterford Park from the frontage road, redesigning internal
circulation in Waterford Park, extending Revere Lane North to 10th
Avenue North, and closing the most westerly driveway into the Bachman
site.
The petitioner received their copy of the Traffic Report on August
18, 1992. As of the writing of the staff report, we have not
received a response from the applicant.
No significant impacts are anticipated for the proposed amendment
relating to other elements of the Comprehensive Plan including
sanitary sewers, water distribution, housing, parks and open space,
and the current Capital Improvement Program.
The Engineer's Memo will address issues related to storm water
drainage.
2. Amended MPUD Preliminary Plan
a. The proposed CS (Service Business) is compatible with the adjacent CS
uses to the north however this proposal will result in the complete
elimination of any office uses in this area of the original MPUD
proposed for the Waterford Park Shopping Center.
b. The proposed CS uses is compatible to the adjacent surrounding
neighborhoods and is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan and other
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
c. The internal organization proposed for the use does provide for
adequate traffic circulation, assuming compliance with the City
Engineer's recommendations, and access to the property to the north.
d. Staff finds that the proposed provision of the PUD to allow for retail
sales and storage within the required yards is compatible with the
proposed use. The plant material nature of the sales and storage will
be of an aesthetically pleasing nature.
e. The proposed PUD Plan Amendment to allow for increased signage does not
follow with the previously approved PUD Plan Amendment for increased
signage. In other PUD plans, increased signage was tied with a
decrease in allowable signage in other portions of the PUD. In this
PUD, increased signage has been allowed on the shopping center for
Waterford Park Plaza (up to 10 percent from the previously allowed 5
5 -
percent) without any other trade -offs. The City Council at their
August 3, 1992 Council meeting denied a request for an additional
freestanding sign for the Waterford Park Shopping Center which was to
be located adjacent to Revere Lane.
3. Staff finds that the proposed PUD Final Site Plan meets the City's policy
regarding aesthetic standards and all other Zoning Ordinance requirements
regarding landscaping, parking, rooftop equipment, and building setbacks.
4. Staff finds that the proposed Conditional Use Permit for outside sales and
storage meets the criteria of the Conditional Use Permit.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend adoption of the attached resolutions providing for the approval of
a Land Use Guide Plan from CL to CS, a MPUD Preliminary Plan Amendment, Final
Plan and MPUD Final Site Plan and a Conditional Use Permit for outside sales
and storage. The approval of the MPUD Preliminary Plan includes a requirement
that the proposed signage be reduced in size to that allowed in the standard,
B -3 Zoning District,. _ 11
Submitted by:
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
arles E. Dillerud, Community Development Director
Resolution Approving Land Use Guide Plan Amendment
Resolution Approving MPUD Preliminary Plan
Resolution Approving MPUD Final Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit
Engineer's Memo
Strgar- Roscoe- Fausch Traffic Study
Conditional Use Permit Standards
Preliminary PUD Criteria
Location Map
Petitioner's Narrative and Graphics
APPROVING LAND USE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR DALE S. BACHMAN FROM CL (LIMITED
BUSINESS) TO CS (SERVICE BUSINESS) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST
QUADRANT OF REVERE LANE AND 6TH AVENUE NORTH (DEVAC SITE) (92069)
WHEREAS, Dale S. Bachman has requested approval for a Land Use Guide Plan
amendment to reclassify property located at the northeast quadrant of Revere
Lane and 6th Avenue from CL (Limited Business) to CS (Service Business); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the request following a duly
scheduled Public Hearing and has recommended approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the
reclassification of land use guiding for Dale S. Bachman for 4.79 acres
located at the northeast quadrant of Revere Lane and 6th Avenue from CL
Limited Business) to CS (Service Business), subject to the following
conditions:
1. Concurrence of the Metropolitan Council.
2. The development shall take place consistent with the plans approved for
this site as MPUD 86 -1 and the Preliminary Plan related to File 92069.
3. This Land Use Guide Plan Amendment is contingent upon filing of the Final
Plat with Hennepin County.
4. The Final Plat shall be recorded; a building permit issued for the garden
center as approved, including traffic and roadway recommendations of the
City Engineer; and all City fees for development paid by December 31,
1993, or this resolution shall become null and void.
res /pc /92069.lugp)
APPROVING AMENDED MIXED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR DALE S.
BACHMAN LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF REVERE LANE AND 6TH AVENUE NORTH
DEVAC SITE) (92069) (MPUD 86 -1)
WHEREAS, Dale S. Bachman has requested approval for an Amended Mixed Planned
Unit Development Preliminary Plan to change the use of Outlot A "Waterford
Park Plaza" in the northeast quadrant of Highway 55 and Revere Lane from
office" to "garden center "; 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
Dale S. Bachman for an Amended Mixed Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan
to change the use of Outlot A "Waterford Park Plaza" in the northeast quadrant
of Highway 55 and Revere Lane from "office" to "garden center ", 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. Any signage shall be in compliance with the B -3 Zoning Ordinance
standards.
5. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to- required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
6. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants and
fire lanes.
7. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the structure.
8. No building permit to be issued until the MPUD Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
9. Outside storage and sales is allowed in the required front and side yard
as shown on the approved PUD Preliminary Plan.
10. The outside storage and sales is not required to be screened from public
view.
res /jk /92069.pp)
APPROVING FINAL SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DALE S. BACHMAN
LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF REVERE LANE AND 6TH AVENUE NORTH (DEVAC
SITE) (92069) (MPUD 86 -1) FOR
WHEREAS, Dale S. Bachman has requested approval for a MPUD Final Site Plan and
Conditional Use Permit for a Bachman's Garden Center and outside sales and
storage for property located at the northeast quadrant of Highway 55 and
Revere 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
Dale S. Bachman for a MPUD Final Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a
Bachman's Garden Center and outside sales and storage for property located at
the northeast quadrant of Highway 55 and Revere 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
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.
5. Any signage shall be in compliance with the B -3 Zoning Ordinance
standards.
6. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
r
7. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants and
fire lanes.
8. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the structure, and
no outside storage is permitted.
9. 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.
10. No building permit to be issued until the MPUD Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
11. A Conditional Use Permit is approved for outside sales and storage.
12. Outside sales and storage is not required to be screened from public view.
13. Consistent with the recommendation of the City Engineer traffic generated
by this use may trigger completion of Revere Lane to 10th Avenue North
consistent with previously approved Development Agreements.
res /pc /92069.sp)
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: August 20, 1992
FILE NO.: 92069
PETITIONER: Mr. Dale Bachman, 6010 Lyndale Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55419
FINAL PLAT: BACHMANS PLYMOUTH
LOCATION: North of 6th Avenue, East of Revere Lane in the Southeast 1/4 of
Section 36
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. X —
2. — X —
3. — X —
4.
5.
Have watermain area assessments been levied based on proposed use?
Have sanitary sewer area assessments been levied based on proposed
use?
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 than
in effect at the time of final plat approval.
Area assessments: None
Other additional assessments estimated: None
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 (6') in width adjoining side and rear lot lines.
N/A Yes No
7. 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 construction plans and if "No" is
marked, the following changes are necessary:
8. X Complies with ponding easement 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. XX 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.
of . -. . MWOMM
11. X_ _ Have all necessary permits for this project been obtained?
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
If "No" the following permits must be obtained by the developer:
DNR Bassett Creek
Mn DOT Minnehaha Creek
Hennepin County Elm Creek
MPCA _ Shingle Creek
State Health Department _ Army Corps of Engineers
Wetland Conservation Act of
1991 from City
2
N/A Yes No
I2. X --
13. XX —
14. X—
N/A Yes No
15. XX —
16. XX —
Conforms with the City's grid system for street names?
If "No" is marked, the following changes will be necessary:
Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided? If "No" is marked,
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection
of and
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
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 100X of the cost.
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-
19. X—
N/A Yes No
Do the construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Water Distribution Plan?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions will be required:
Do the construction plans conform to the City's adopted
Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan?
If "No" is marked, the following revisions will be required:
20. 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
21. XX Is it necessary to contact Tom Vetsch,
at 550 -7493 for an excavating permit?
If "Yes" is marked 24 hours notice
within the City right -of -way.
4
the City's Street Foreman,
is required before digging
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:
9) z 103 0 0 to ; • ; •
Submitted by: -4reu
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 O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: August 19, 1992
FILE NO.: 92069
PETITIONER: Mr. Dale L. Bachman, 6010 Lyndale Ave. S., Minneapolis, MN 55419
SITE PLAN: BACHMAN'S
LOCATION: North of 6th Avenue, east of Revere Lane in the southeast 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 will be payable at the time building
permits are issued? These are in addition to the assessments shown
in No. 1 and No. 2.
s
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
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. _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.)
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. 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 apply.
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
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.
X DNR
MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
X 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: Hay bales
shall be placed around catch basins during construction. A crushed
rock dike shall be built at the driveway off of 6th Avenue. Silt
fence shall be placed where the drainage leaves the site.
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. _ XX 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. XX 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. See Special Conditions
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. _ XX 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
STANDARDS:
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. A11 water connections shall be via wet tap.
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, 22, 28._ 29.A and 29.B.
29. A. The existing storm sewer in the rear of the shopping center does not have the
capacity to handle the drainage off the Bachman site. A parallel pipe will be
required or some other satisfactory means designed for handling the runoff
from the site. The plans shall be revised and resubmitted for approval.
B. The developer's engineer shall verify that there is adequate stopping sight
distance for traffic exiting the driveway in front of the building and
eastbound traffic on 6th Avenue. This may require a modification to the
proposed berm and landscape plan if there isn't adequate sight distance. t
C. A traffic study was prepared in conjunction with this site plan application.
The traffic study was required because of the proposed reguiding. To provide
for adequate capacity and traffic circulation the following changes to the
site are required:
1. The existing main access to Waterford Park Plaza on 6th Avenue
shall be relocated to the previously recommended location, 400 feet
east of Revere Lane and opposite the existing Arby's access. As
part of the traffic study, Figures 4 and 5 show two acceptable
revisions. This relocation shall be done concurrently with this
development in order to eliminate the future requirement to
reconstruct the private driveways and parking lots if the driveway
is not relocated at this time. This requirement is in accordance
with the development contract for Waterford Park Plaza.
2. The major internal intersection (northwest corner of this site)
located north of the main Waterford Park Plaza entrance from 6th
Avenue shall also be reconfigured as shown in Figures 4 and 5.
This is necessary due to the traffic operation problems caused by
the existing large uncontrolled intersection area just northwest of
the proposed Bachmans site driveway.
5-
3. The west driveway proposed to serve the Bachman site from 6th
Avenue does not comply with the City's driveway spacing
requirements with the main access to the Waterford Park Plaza being
relocated. The west driveway shall be omitted from the plan.
4. The required future improvement /extension of Revere Lane North to
connect to 10th Avenue based on the revised 1995 traffic forecast
full development of the shopping center) will be required by 1995.
This extension is required in order for the main access to
Waterford Park Plaza on 6th Avenue to operate at acceptable levels
of service. Provisions for this extension are provided for in the
Waterford Park Plaza development contract.
Traffic Study Attached)
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
so
SRFSTRGAR - ROSCOE- FAUSCH, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & PLANNERS
TRANSPORTATION CIVIL STRUCTURAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAND SURVEYORS
SRF No. 0921712
August 18,1992
Mr. Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
RE: WATERFORD PARK PLAZA UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY
FOR PROPOSED BACBMAN'S DEVELOPMENT
Dear Dan:
As you requested, a traffic study and analysis has been completed for the above referenced
project, located in the northeast quadrant of Highway 55 and Revere Lane in Plymouth (see
Figure 1). Based on this study, the following comments and recommendations are offered for
your consideration:
Summary of Findings
In order to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed Bachman's retail development (see
Figure 2), trip generation estimates were calculated using the proposed development land use
assumptions which include 82,000 square feet of nursery/garden center (this includes 50,000
square feet of outdoor sales area).
Based on the stated land use assumptions and the 1991 ITE average trip generation rates (see
Table 1), the average daily trips generated by the proposed development would be
approximately 2,900 vehicles. During the p.m. peak hour, the proposed development would
generate approximately 400 trips. Since these forecasts were developed assuming the 50,000
square feet of outdoor sales area would generate trips at the same rate as building square
footage, these forecasts could be considered conservatively high.
A comparison of the traffic generated by the previous site land use (85,000 square feet of
office on the subject site) versus what would be produced by the proposed land use (82,000
square feet of nursery/garden center on the subject site) indicates the following:
Suite 150, One Carlson Parkway North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447
612/475 -0010 FAX 612/475 -2429
SRF MGAR- ROSCOE- FAUSCR INC CITY OF PLYMOUTH FIGURE
CONSUL'IWC ENCWEERS &PLANNERS
PROJECT LOCATION 1
SRF No. 09n7l2 I WATERFORD PARK PLAZA UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY
W
N
w
f------ - - - - -- -------- - - - - -- ---------------------------------
Wis '
Q F-
Cl)
UzLLa
LL
Y.
W* ,.a :
L
H 2S Q
C
LO
L-
W
e$
o H
J
uj
CL
D4 _ _
Y a Q
LL > N
W g
LLJ
cn
cp--
a LLo W
a QP
2
a
a¢
za
m C • w
s q w
t1L
a
3NvI383n38 g N
p N
zz
y
TABLE ONE
WATERFORD PARK PLAZA TRAFFIC STUDY
TRIP GENERATION RATES
WATERFORD PARK PLAZA TRAFFIC STUDY
TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES / PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
TRIP GEN. RATE TRIP SEN. RATE ;
MEASURE FOR A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR ;
LAND USES ; TRIP GEN. RATE IN OUT IN OUT ;
NURSERY(GARDEN CENTER) ; sq. ft. 2.29 1.11 2.51 2.41
NOTE: THESE RATES APPLY ONLY TO THE SPECIFIC FOOTAGES LISTED BELOWSQUARE
WATERFORD PARK PLAZA TRAFFIC STUDY
TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATES / PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
TRAFFIC GENERATED TRAFFIC GENERATED
DAILY A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR
LAND USES SIZE VOLUMES IN OUT IN OUT
NURSERY(GARDEN CENTER) ; 82,000 S.F. ; 2,959 188 174 206 198
TOTALS 92,000 S.F. ; 2,959 188 174 206 198
NOTE: ALL TRIP GENERATION RATES ARE AVERAGE RATES FROM THE 1991 I.T.E.
TRIP GENERATION REPORT , 5TH EDIIION.
Mr. Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E. -5- August 18, 1992
a. Daily trips to and from the study area increase from 33,848 to 35,574 ( +5.1 percent).
b. P.M. peak hour inbound trips increase from 1,062 to 1,240 ( +16.8 percent).
c. P. M. peak hour outbound trips increase from 2,915 to 2,926 ( +1.83 percent).
Generally, these increases are not significant and will have little impact to the overall
operation of the adjoining roadways. The higher percentage increase in the p.m. peak hour
inbound traffic volume reflects the retail nature of the proposed nursery/garden center versus
the employment center characteristics of the office (see Table 2).
In the event that the subject site would be converted to a retail/commercial land use in the
future, trip generation estimates were calculated using 1991 I.T.E. Shopping Center Trip
Rates for the proposed 32,000 square foot building. A retail land use would generate 584
more daily trips then the proposed nursery land use. However, a retail land use would
generate 59 less p.m. peak hour trips than the proposed nursery/garden center development.
In order to analyze the capacity of the existing and proposed roadways to accommodate
traffic from the proposed development, a traffic analysis has been completed using existing
peak hour traffic volumes, the proposed development plan, updated data on future
background traffic and a micro- computer application of the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual.
The directional trip distribution for the proposed development (see Figure 3) was estimated
based on the regional distribution of population and employment.
Year 1995 traffic forecasts for Sixth Avenue North and the main access to Waterford Park
Plaza were developed for the proposed plan based on the latest 1995 traffic forecasts from
previous SRF, Inc. traffic studies for the Waterford Park Plaza site. Based on these forecasts,
a year 1995 capacity analysis of the existing unsignalized intersection indicated that
southbound left turns from this intersection would operate at a Level of Service F during the
future p.m. peak hour with the proposed development. (See Appendix A for description of
Levels of Service, 1995 Traffic Forecasts and Capacity Analysis worksheets.) Based on the
findings of this capacity analysis, the intersection of Sixth Avenue North and the main access
to Waterford Park Plaza may experience traffic operations difficulties in the future, especially
for the left turns into and out of the site at this location.
These heavy southbound left turns at Sixth Avenue and the main access to Waterford Park
Plaza could be reduced significantly by the completion of Revere Lane north to Tenth Avenue.
With Revere Lane extended north to Tenth Avenue, many or most of these left turns would
divert to Revere Lane and Tenth Avenue to travel north versus using Sixth Avenue. With a
significant reduction in these southbound left turns, traffic operations at the intersection of
Sixth Avenue and the main access to Waterford Park Plaza would be improved.
TABLE 2
WATERFORD PARK PLAZA SITE NURSERY /GARDEN CENTER /OFFICE DEVELOPMENT/TRAFFIC IMPACT REVIEW
TRIP GENERATION UPDATE FOR NEW SITE PLAN /LAND USE - AUGUST 1992
values in parentheses reflect the revised site plan land use)
Trip Generation Rates Trips Generated
P.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
A.D.T. In Out A.D.T. In Out
Waterford Park Plaza Site Land Use
All Phases (393,000 s.f.) 16.31 0.35 1.86 6,410 138 731
Retail /Shopping Center 30,000 s.f. 112.63 5.39 5.83 3,379 182 265
Supermarket 95,000 s.f. 125.5 4.5 4.3 11,923 428 409
Typical Fast Food Restaurant 3,490 s.f.) 832.13) 16.96) 16.30) 2,206 59 57
w /Drive Through -
1,062 2,892
REVISED SITE PLAN 35574) 1240) 2945)
Original Trip Generation Rates from data contained in the 1982 Institute of Transportation
Apply 15% Multipurpose
Engineers Trip Generation Report. Where the 1987 ITE Generation Report has updated rates,
1,875 50 48
Trip Reduction Factor
Notes: Estimated year of completion is shown in brackets. Proposals for a quality restaurant
and office/warehouse have been dropped in the revised site plan.
Office 85,000 S.F. 14.5 0.33 1.71 1,233 28 145
Nursery (Garden Center) 82,000 S.F.) 36.09) 2.51) 2.41) 2959) 206) 198)
Subtotals 18,410 668 867
20,136) 846) 920)
Groves Office Park
Phase 1 (1990) 250,000 s.f.GFA 12.5 0.28 1.8 3,125 70 450
Phase 2 3 3 (1995) 400,000 s.f.GFA 10.9 0.24 1.8 4,360 96 720
Subtotals 7,485 186 1,170
Prime West Office Development
All Phases (393,000 s.f.) 16.31 0.35 1.86 6,410 138 731
Adjacent Vacant Development Parcels
R3 -15 Acres Mod -High Density Residential 8.1 0.4 0.2 915 60 30
10 DU /Acre - 150 D.U. (1985)
IP -10 Acres - Planned Industrial (1990) 12.8 3 9.4 628 30 94
Subtotals 1,543 90 124
STUDY AREA TOTAL - ORIGINAL SITE PLAN 33,848 1,062 2,892
REVISED SITE PLAN 35574) 1240) 2945)
Original Trip Generation Rates from data contained in the 1982 Institute of Transportation
Engineers Trip Generation Report. Where the 1987 ITE Generation Report has updated rates,
they are shown in parentheses and were used.
Notes: Estimated year of completion is shown in brackets. Proposals for a quality restaurant
and office/warehouse have been dropped in the revised site plan.
4
ww.. ... z 1 25th AVE.M \\
i i 2st rM= NEDLr i V RD Sf !AV $
g
JON ELL N LA.
AVE. CT. f
23rd 2J rd =J NYNW000 RD K
rte kt AVE.
2NOAVE 16 ELGIN PL.1 > Q
2 ie DULUTH ST, u S tl WT KA HE1GH
AVE A z EL PL. -1 CR ` r
j z i 4 ° z z ii
EDICINE ` EA RL ST DuLUTH >
1LAKE i t WHEEL < PATSY
v
LA.
fIES
IltE
NAPER ST, JULIANNE a TER iE. 980 POP. 419 >
AVE. N w > ; > mfr m DR.
OLY MP IA ST.
i a t i Sp'
x"25%
S SDALE .
zt. `
ST •
S T.
qQV LA z
w ,/ `
JJt^
ST. WINS AL ST. KIID Q
4 0 r KN(
J 8w /1 OrLOIeLL CDL
r
k g zi PC Y'' AVE
W _ 1`i
H_(dd _ {
12th AVE. '
y =
5 O /0tN C ORK( J
EVE FNDE NIX 57
Ith AVE. N. OR.
j 1 5% AVE! oth N,
h
AVE. N.
AVL K z 9th AVE. N. ` S R'
13 oEN 3ppyc CITY
Tom"
s5 *
SITE
A TM
o
AVE.
T : WREN LA. HALL
TR
w QUAKER LA w
OEN vALLEY f is Q
K • 1JN> SERVICE
AyE, r•
v
f j i WALLY ST. 5%j
y
p
N tQ a
16
LINT AYE y v1
Rt OR WESTE
ft
L
Cl PKWT.
s
ap.
V, v FORD LA
Y
N
4. CY r3• 300/OOBERLIN- R0.
4 Fad
2l.CREGORY 80. RIDGE WAY
d
FAIRFIELD RD. o
W J94
fyl¢ 1? WAYZATA
aL v0.
O OL N
W 29
LA'
Q
c
7 W f i r
e
MILLER
i Sc
OR. s S N:13t L
CRESTRIO
14th IJYt
W.14ih
g 16th
TEXAS
IN 16th ST. C R.
y
OAK KNOLL TER. S
gLMONT
i •L\
FM
E, "
t ST.
11ESTYed 3J
T S. DAK KNOLL TER.
aJOY .LA. j
fi RIMR'M EADEPI I.A. v \,. Fa eILTN AVE•
ST. °'°• n;
E 1NEatAaTi11Wo Wl vm =1" RLRM Y
LOUIS
Ci.
M' c`
E Ev1
LA!
8
ITNDS
LAK
vl PARK
S i773Cz OUM.Y
o'
C
9 et atD u Q ei W. 22nd sT. W 1980 POP. 42931 a
u HILLSIDE s °LA.t. A Ro rW. 22.0 LA.
22.d ST. C C OR, 3t A
p
g FETfERIY LA. AMQ yI" W. J23rdST. 3 Au
i "
FETTERLY RD.
Anil dz z iil_
23rd ST. W
i
14. 24th ST.
VIRGINIA C1R. N. W
Cie 1 e.+ t. 1hS4 .1 S 1
STRGAR- ROSCOE- FAUSCR INC CITY OF PLYMOUTH FIGURE
SRF cONSInTwcEvGINEExs&rwvrrExs
DIRECTIONAL TRIP DISTRIBUTION 3
WATERFORD PARK PLAZA UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDYSRFNO. 0921712 1
Mr. Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E. -8- August 18, 1992
The current location of the main access to Waterford Park Plaza from Sixth Avenue
approximately 300 feet east of Revere Lane) does not comply with the previously
recommended location of 400 feet east of Revere Lane. The Arby's driveway on Sixth
Avenue is at the recommended location, therefore, an intersection jog condition exists. This
intersection jog condition is not desirable since it results in more complex intersection
movement conflicts. The 400 foot recommended separation between Revere Lane and the
main access to Waterford Park Plaza is required to accommodate the future design queues on
the westbound approach of Sixth Avenue to Revere Lane. These westbound queues would be
primarily caused by the traffic generated by the full development of the future office towers
area to the east of the subject site. Without this recommended 400 foot separation, peak hour
queues will block the main access on Sixth Avenue on a regular basis when full development
of the study area has been completed.
Primary access to the Bachman's development is proposed at two locations from Sixth
Avenue east of Revere Lane. Year 1995 traffic forecasts for the Sixth Avenue and the east
access to Bachman's were developed based on the proposed development land use plan.
Based on these forecasts, a year 1995 unsignalized intersection p.m. peak hour capacity
analysis (see Appendix) indicated the southbound left turns from Bachman's would operate at
a Level of Service E. Based on this capacity analysis, traffic operations for most movements
at the North Frontage Road and the east access to Bachman's would fall within acceptable
levels (except the southbound to eastbound left turns out of the site may experience some
difficulties during the peak hours).
The west driveway to the subject site on Sixth Avenue would be too close to the relocated
main access (400 feet east of Revere Lane) to Waterford Park Plaza and would not comply
with the City's driveway spacing requirements.
In addition to analyzing the traffic impacts of the proposed land use for this site, we have also
reviewed the proposed layout of the roadways and parking areas. One area of particular
concern for potential traffic operation problems is in the vicinity of the Sixth Avenue North
access to the Waterford Park Plaza (see Figure 2). This concern is based on the offset
locations of the driveway /parking aisles on the site access/circulation roadway, and the large
uncontrolled intersection area just northwest of the proposed Bachman's site driveway.
Mr. Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E. -9- August 18, 1992
Summary of Recommendations
Based on these findings and analysis, it is concluded that land use proposed in the Bachman's
development plan could be supported by the adjacent roadway system if the following
recommended roadway/intersection and traffic control improvements are implemented as part
of the proposed development or as otherwise applicable:
1. The main access to Waterford Park Plaza on Sixth Avenue should be relocated to the
previously recommended location 400 feet east of Revere Lane and concurrent with
the Arby's access to Sixth Avenue.
Two alternative concepts to accomplish this access relocation are shown on Figures 4
and 5. The alternative shown on Figure 4 results in some fairly tight turning radni but
does not encroach on the subject site. The alternative shown on Figure 5 would be
easier to drive but does not result in significant impacts to the subject site.
2. The major internal intersection located at the main Waterford Park Plaza entrance from
Sixth Avenue should also be reconfigured, as shown in Figures 4 and 5, due to traffic
operation problems caused by the large uncontrolled intersection area just northwest of
the proposed Bachman's site driveway.
3. The future improvement/extension of Revere Lane North to connect to Tenth Avenue
will have a positive effect on traffic operations generally concerning Waterford Park
Plaza. Patrons with origins or destinations north of the site will not have to depend so
heavily on the intersections of Highway 55/Revere Lane, Revere Lane/Sixth Avenue,
and Sixth Avenue and the main access drive. Based on the revised 1995 forecasts for
the site, this extension is recommended to be completed by 1995 in order for the main
access to Waterford Park Plaza on Sixth Avenue to operate at acceptable levels of
service.
4. The west driveway proposed to serve the Bachman's site from Sixth Avenue would not
comply with the City's driveway spacing requirements once the main access to
Waterford Park Plaza is relocated. It is recommended that this west driveway be
omitted from the plan.
Should you have any questions or comments concerning this traffic study and analysis, please
contact Denny Eyler or Jeff Bednar.
Sincerely,
STRGAR - ROSCOE- FAUSCH, INC.
4&ifT. W;-"-4
Peter A. Fausch, P.E.
Senior Vice - President
PAF:mdg
C
W
11
1 1
1 1
1 -J
W
ly • O`h f•'
Y.
LL
U-
Cl) Q
Uj
O fl
1J
3 Q
LU
ul
CL
c
W
cc
LLaa:
tW
Ice .. ..
1I
r
y OGwi
OGiLii
O
V
N
JA
3
I
U
N
6.
a
W
I U3
1 i
li'
77-71% .
1 _
1
1 W
Z1r
11
111 j1
11 of f'
1 1
iSS =•
r1Ly
Ir5
V
0 1
I
W
U)
w
04
L
J
0.
U-
0
U Z
W
J
Q
z
Lu
z
OV
oc z
cG F
CA
O
vT
C J V J
VJ
U
U-
U-
Q
W
Q
CL
Q
N
CL
Y
CL
0
O
w
n
P
pN
O
Z
46
i • .'1' ' ;H•• 1 V '.
FRCM SOCTICN 9, SLIED SICK A
2. Procedure. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Camtission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recommendation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Caimission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) Compliance with and effect upon the Carprehensive 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 improvement 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
s
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
P.U.D. CRITERIA
The Planning Commission, after holding the public hearing, shall make its
recommendations to the City Council for approval; approval with conditions;
or denial of the Conditional Use Permit for a P.U.D., preliminary plat and
rezoning if considered.
The Planning Commission shall forward to the City Council its recommendations
based on and including, but not limited to the following:
1) Compatibility with the stated purposes and intent of the Planned Unit
Development.
2) Relationship of the proposed plan to the neighborhood in which it is
proposed to be located, to the City's Comprehensive Plan and to other
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3) Internal organization and adequacy of various uses or densities;
circulation and parking facilities; recreation areas and open spaces.
conventions:pl /jk /pud)
iF
s,
1 a
916-WA 9 1
Tyi
LM
ll ilellil
ONO. a"
0, _ =!_
l
PF
emu//
Armi"i
rU B
AID
Tyi
LM
ll ilellil
ONO. a"
0, _ =!_
l
PF
emu//
Armi"i
5 0
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 18, 1992 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 26, 1992
FILE NO.: 92070
PETITIONER: John Day Company
REQUEST: Amended Mixed Planned Unit Development Plan; MPUD Final
Site Plan; and Conditional Use Permit for an Automobile
Service Center.
LOCATION: Southeast corner of 35th Avenue North and 34th Avenue North
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CC (Community Shopping Center)
ZONING: MPUD 78 -2
BACKGROUND:
On March 21, 1977, the City Council, by Resolution 77 -139 approved the General
Development Plan for the "Plymouth Hills" Mixed Planned Unit Development
involving this site.
On August 28, 1978, the City Council, by Resolution 78 -530 approved a revised
General Development Plan for the Plymouth Hills Company for the "Plymouth
Hills Addition ".
Since 1978, there have been several revisions to the General Development Plan
for site specific projects. To date, a small retail /service building, drive -
up bank, cable television hub facility, full service bank, and a full service
grocery store have been constructed within the Plymouth Hills Addition (also
known as "Downtown Plymouth ").
On January 27, 1992, the City Council, by Resolution 92 -73 denied an identical
request by John Day Company. The denying resolution stated that the
automotive service center was incompatible with the retail uses to the north,
and the proposed library to the southwest. The automotive service was also
found to impede the normal and orderly development of permitted uses in the
MPUD.
Notice of this Public Hearing was published in the Official City Newspaper and
mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. A development sign has been
placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The petitioner is requesting approval of a 13,000 square foot Automobile
Service Center on an existing site of 65,230 square feet. This facility
will have 25 bay doors and is proposed to be occupied by five separate
tenants. Uses currently proposed for the project include 2,500 square
Page Two, File 92070
feet for tune up services, 2,500 square feet for transmission services,
4,000 square feet for muffler and brake services, and 4,000 square feet
not yet assigned.
2. This site is located in the Bassett Creek Watershed District and contains
no Shoreland or Flood Plain Overlay Districts; no wetlands or woodlands;
no slopes over 12 percent; and, is designated by the Plymouth Physical
Constraints Analysis to be suitable for urban development with municipal
utilities, which are available.
3. The Site Plan presented complies with the minimum standards of the Zoning
Ordinance and other City codes, policies, and standards with respect to:
setbacks; internal circulation; parking requirements; signage (no
freestanding signs are roposed and wall signage will meet the Zoning
Ordinance specifications; site illumination; all rooftop equipment is
proposed to be screened and painted to match the face brick; and site
engineering details (as conditioned by the City Engineer's memorandum);
and, landscaping.
4. The petitioner has submitted a letter stating that the building elevations
will be revised in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance regulations on
wall signage. The signage proposed will not exceed the 5 percent wall
coverage allowed for signs.
5. The design of the structure includes brick face on all four elevations.
This design is compatible with the recently constructed Cub Food Stores,
which was required to have brick face on all four elevations.
6. The approved Mixed Planned Unit Development Plan for "Plymouth Hills"
specifies installation of concrete sidewalks along the entire periphery of
this site. The approved development plan specifies that no credit for
park dedication requirement shall be available to the developer for
installation of this required concrete sidewalk. The petitioner is
proposing to install the concrete sidewalk, as required, along both 34th
Avenue North and 35th Avenue North.
7. This site is currently designated for retail sales by the Mixed Planned
Unit Development General Development Plan for "Plymouth Hills ". The -
petitioner is proposing to amend the MPUD to allow for automotive
services. The zoning classification which permits retail uses - -B -2, also
permits automotive services upon approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Both uses are allowed under the CC (Community Shopping Center) which is
intended to provide for limited commercial services and retail uses.
8. The Zoning Ordinance directs the Planning Commission to consider the
Conditional Use Permit in terms of the six criteria found in Section 9,
Subdivision A, Paragraph 2.a. We have attached a copy of the referenced
citation along with the applicant's narrative.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The Conditional Use Permit application for the automobile service center
complies with the Conditional Use Permit standards.
Page Three, File 92070
2. Compliance with the provisions of the City Council policy regarding
architectural appearance will be assured by a condition specifying that
the exterior wall treatment of the facility be of brick material only.
3. The Final Site Plan will meet the standards of the Zoning Ordinance and
other applicable ordinances, policies, and standards of the City of
Plymouth regarding development in MPUD 78 -2.
4. The location proposed for this facility does concern staff. Many
automobile service uses are located in a high visibility location to
attract drive -by traffic. This site will not be easily visible from
either Highway 55 of Vicksburg Lane and must rely on business more
specifically drawn to this site. Staff does, however, accept the
petitioner's indication that his site is suitable for their needs.
5. Approval of the PUD Plan and Conditional Use Permit Amendment proposed by
File 92066 (Day- Downtown Plymouth) will eliminate the need to specifically
amend the Plymouth Hills PUD Plan and Conditional Use Permit for this
proposal. The overall PUD Plan for Plymouth Hills will be consistent with
the auto service use proposed. A separate Conditiona -Use Permit for auto
service under standard zoning provisions will continue to be required,
however, as well as PUD Final Site Plan action. Condition #11 of the
approval resolution may not be required.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend adoption of the attached resolutions providing for the approval of
an Amended Mixed Planned Unit Development Plan; MPUD Final Site Plan; and,
Conditional Use Pemr t for an Automtpbile Seexx4tt.\Center.
Submitted by:
s L.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution Approving
Conditional Use Permit
2. Engineer's Memorandum
3. Applicant's Narrative
4. Conditional Use Permit
5. Location Map
6. Site plan Graphics (Large
eruct; Community Development Director
Amended Planned Unit Development, Site Plan and
Plans)
APPROVING AMENDED MIXED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN; MPUD FINAL SITE PLAN
AND, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR JOHN DAY COMPANY FOR AN AUTOMOBILE SERVICE
CENTER (92070)
WHEREAS, John Day Company has requested approval for an Amended Mixed Planned
Unit Development Plan; MPUD Final Site Plan; and, Conditional Use Permit for
an Automobile Service Facility for property located at the southeast corner of
35th Avenue North and 34th Avenue North; 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
John Day Company for an Amended Mixed Planned Unit Development Plan; MPUD
Final Site Plan; and, Conditional Use Permit for an Automobile Service
Facility for property located at the southeast corner of 35th Avenue North and.
34th Avenue North, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Park dedication requirements have been previously met.
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 approved Site Plan. Wall
signage shall not exceed 5 percent of the surface area of the wall.
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 the structure, and
no outside storage is permitted.
9. An 82 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. Exterior wall finishes of the automobile service center shall be brick.
11. The MPUD Plan Amendment is to change the approved use of this parcel from
Retail Sales to Automotive Service per plans dated September 11, 1991.
res /pc/92070)
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: December 31, 1991
FILE NO.: 91099
PETITIONER: Mr. John Day, Plymouth Service Center, 3300 Bass Lake Road, 1114,
Minneapolis, MN 55439
SITE PLAN: PLYMOUTH SERVICE CENTER
LOCATION: North and east of 34th Avenue, south of 35th Avenue
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _ X _ Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X _ SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No. 1 and
o. 2
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Site Plan approval:
4. Area assessments estimated - None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None
LEGAL/EASEMENTS/PERMITS:
N/A Yes No
6. _ X _ Property is one parcel -
The approval of the site plan as proposed requires that a lot
consolidation be approved by the City Council and the necessary
resolution should be processed at the same time as the site plan
approval.
N/A Yes No
7. _ _ X Complies with standard utility/ drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining 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. A 6 foot drainage and utility easement along the
east property line shall be submitted in recordable form.
g. 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.
9. X All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities.
N/A Yes No
10. X _ _ All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above. For a
trail easement at the northwest corner of the site.
IWAS
1-)
N/A Yes No
12. _ _ X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
DNR
MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
X Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
13. _ X _ Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The site plan will be submitted to the City's consulting engineer
for review to see if it is in conformance with the City's
Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All of their recommendations
shall be incorporated in a revised plan. The grading and drainage
plan shall also indicate proposed methods of erosion control,
including the placement of silt fence in strategic locations.
Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary:
N/A Yes No
14. _ _X_ _ Necessary fire hydrants provided -
The City of Plymouth requires that all parts of a building such hs
the one proposed be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. It will be
necessary to locate hydrants in such a manner that the site plan
complies with this section of the City Ordinance.
15. _ X _ Size and type of material proposed in utility systems has been
provided
The utility plan shall be revised to indicate the size and type of
material required in the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain services
and storm sewer.
16. _ X _ Post indicator valve - fire department connection
It will be necessary to locate the post indicator valve in such a
manner that it will not render any of the existing fire hydrants
inoperable.
3-
N/A Yes No
17. _ X — Hydrant valves provided -
All new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6" gate valves per City
Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W -2. This plate should be
referenced on the site plan.
18. _ X — Sanitary sewer clean -outs provided -
It will be necessary to provide clean -outs on the proposed internal
sanitary sewer system at a maximum of 100 foot intervals.
19. XX _ _ Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
N/A Yes No
20. _ X _ All existing street right -of -ways are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on
21. _ X — Complies with site drainage requirements -
The City will not permit drainage onto a City street from a private
parking lot; therefore, the site plan shall be revised accordingly.
4-
N/A Yes No
22. _ X _ Curb and gutter provided -
The City requires B -612 concrete curb and gutter at all entrances
and where drainage must be controlled, Curb Stone may be used where
it is not necessary to control drainage. For traffic control either
B -612 or curb stone is required around the bituminous surfaced
parking lot. The site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance
with this requirement.
23. _ X _ Complies with parking lot standards -
The City will require that all traveled areas within the parking
lot, as well as the proposed entrances, shall be constructed to a
7 -.ton standard City design with six inches of Class 5 10OX 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. The site
plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with these
requirements.
N/A Yes No
24. _ X _ It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's utility
foreman,
24 hours in advance of making any proposed utility connections to
the City's sanitary sewer and water systems. The developer shall
also be responsible for contacting Jim Kolstad of the Public Works
Department for an excavating permit prior to any digging within the
City's right -of -way. All connections to the water system shall be
via wet tap.
25. _ X _ The City will require reproducible mylar prints of sanitary sewer,
water service and storm sewer As- Builts for the site prior to
occupancy permits being granted.
26. _ _ X The site plan complies with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual. See Item Nos. 7 and 12 and Specie
Conditions.
5-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
27. A. A detail shall be provided for the connection to the existing hydrant lead at
the southeast corner of the property.
B. The fire hydrant in the southwesterly comer of the property will need to be
relocated out of the trail.
C. Include a concrete sidewalk detail on Sheet 2.
D. Note that pedestrian ramps are required for the trail at the driveway and the
intersection of 34th and 35th Avenues.
E. Show that the telephone box at the northeast corner of the site will be
relocated out of the trail.
F. Provide a radius for the trail at the northwest corner of the site.
G. The site plan and drainage, grading and utility plan shall be consistent.
H. A double line symbol shall be used for all B -612 curb and gutter on the site
plan.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. L. aulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
6-
g s
John Day Company
3300 BASS LAKE RD. SUITE 114
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55429
612) 560 -7993
October 17, 1991
Mr. Charles E. Dillerud
Commercial Development Coordinator
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
11099
N PFM,r,/'r;'
r E
1
09 171991
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
EMUND DEY OMM DEPT,
We are requesting Planning Commission approval to construct an
auto - oriented commercial building at this location. The
building will contain 13,000 square feet and will be built in
two stages. Phase I will contain an auto tune -up shop, a brake
and muffler shop, and a transmission servicing shop. This phase
will contain 9,000 square feet. The second phase will be
developed as leasing occurs and will contain an additional 4,000
square feet and will also be auto - oriented with contemplated
businesses such as auto glass, car upholstery, etc.
This facility will be first class in all respects with an all -
brick exterior, attractive overhead doors for the various
service bays and will contain parking for 46 cars. All trash
receptacles will be located within the building. The site will
be aesthetically pleasing with berms and much landscaping. A
lawn maintenance contract with a reliable lawn service company
will be maintained at all times.
At the present time the subject site is under a Planned Unit
Development classification. We respectfully request release
from this P.U.D. and further. request B -3 zoning so as to
accommodate the proposed auto service shops.
We are not seeking any variances from the Plymouth Zoning
Ordinance Conditional Use Standards.
John Day Company is an experienced developer in this type of
commercial construction. The company has developed a Crown Auto
store in New Hope, a Meineke Muffler shop in Crystal and three
additional commercial garages in Medina and Crystal. It
previously was a part owner of a service station in Minneapo-
lis leased to Mobil.
We strongly believe there is an unfulfilled need for this type
of facility in Downtown Plymouth and market studies by our
proposed tenants corroborate this statement.
S
October 17, 1991
Page 2
Thank you for your consideration of this request. We will make
ourselves, our architect and our engineer available for any
questions you might have.
Sincerely,
J"ohnJ. Day, President
John Day Company
Encls.
FF M S=GN 9, &MIMIQ4 A
2. Procedure. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Camiission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recamendation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Camassion shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) Compliance 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 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 neighborhood.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding
property for uses permitted in the district.
S) 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