HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 08-14-1991PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
WEDNESDAY, August 14, 1991
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
WHERE: Plymouth City Center
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed with an asterisk ( *) are considered to be routine by the
Planning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no
separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner, citizen or
petitioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the
consent agenda and considered in normal sequence on the agenda.
PUBLIC FORUM 6:45 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M.
2. ROLL CALL
3.* CONSENT AGENDA
4.* APPROVAL OF MINUTES 7/24/91
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. United States Postal Service. Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit
and Variances for a new post office building located at the south
side of 45th Avenue North and west of Highway 169 (91041)
B. Hartford Investments Inc. Preliminary Plat, Site Plan for a 72
l i3/ e b unit rental complex, Rezoning from FRD to R -2, and a Conditional
Use Permit for attached housing located at the intersection of 44th
Avenue North and Fernbrook Lane (91044)
C. Lowry Hill Construction Company. Preliminary Plat and Rezoning
from FRD to R -1A for a 54 lot single family development located at
the northeast corner of Holly Lane and County Road 9 (91047)
D. John Henning. Amended Preliminary Plat, Final Plat and Subdivision
Variances for Sunset Valley Homes 2nd Addition located north of
Sunset Trail at 3rd Avenue North (91051)
E. Graybow Daniels. Amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for
outdoor storage at 2400 Xenium Lane (91058)
F. Robert Walz. Conditional Use Permit for a Home Occupation for a
travel agency at 9600 -17th Avenue North (91061)
6. NEW BUSINESS
A. Tim Reese. Division of Platted Property, Subdivision Variance and
Shoreland Overlay District Variances in Elmhurst Addition located
at 2365 Hemlock Lane and 2360 Ives Lane (91053)
7. OTHER BUSINESS
8. ADJOURNMENT
5.A-
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: July 30, 1991 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 14, 1991
FILE NO.: 91041
PETITIONER: United States Postal Service
REQUEST: Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variances for a new
Post Office Building
LOCATION: South side of 45th Avenue North and West of Highway 169
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CL (Limited Business)
ZONING: B -1 (Office Limited Business District)
BACKGROUND:
In June, 1981, the City Council, by Resolution 81 -371 approved a Preliminary
Plat and General Development Plan together with the rezoning to B -1 (Limited
Business) of 15 acres including this site. The General Development Plan
specified five lots. In July, 1982, the City Council adopted Resolution 82-
348 and 82 -349 providing for approval of the Final Plat for the "Meyer /Gonyea
Addition" and setting conditions prior to recording of that Final Plat,
including this site.
On July 2, 1990, the City Council, by Resolutions 90 -396 and 90 -397 approved a
lot division /consolidation and an amended General Development Plan for the
Meyer /Gonyea Land Development Company, which adjusted property lines among the
previously platted lots within the "Meyer /Gonyea Addition" to increase the
size of some lots and decrease the size of others. The number of lots was not
changed nor was the plat expanded in size. All lots, after the Lot
Consolidation /Division remained in excess of standards for the B -1 Zoning
District.
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 applicant proposes construction of a postal facility of 34,204 square
feet on a site of 4.21 acres. The proposed facility will be similar in
design and function to the existing Plymouth postal facility at the
southeast corner of Plymouth Boulevard and 34th Avenue North, but larger
in size. Approximately half of the structure will be used for customer
service and mail sorting functions and the other half of the facility will
be used for the enclosed storage of mail delivery vehicles.
see next page)
Page Two
File 91041
2. The site is located in the North Branch Storm Water Drainage District and
contains no Flood Plain or Shoreland Management Overlay District areas.
The site contains no wetland protected by State or Federal agencies or
City of Plymouth storm water drainage facilities. The site contains no
woodlands of significance, but does contain slopes that are in excess of
12 percent, which will be graded out as a feature of the proposed grading
plan. The site is generally suitable for urban development with municipal
sewers, which are in place to the site. The grading of the slopes in
excess of 12 percent will not be detrimental to the physical resources of
the site, and therefore, the site does not present physical constraints
for the development as proposed.
3. The Site Plan has been reviewed by the Development Review Committee for
compliance with the City ordinances policies and standards regarding
development in the B -1 Zoning District. Specifically, the Site Plan
complies with City standards with respect to landscaping, trash
containment and screening (exterior location with appropriate masonry
screening); painting of rooftop mechanical equipment; setbacks are
consistent with zoning standards; and, offstreet parking, loading and
circulation is consistent with proper design and Zoning Ordinance
standards, except as noted below.
4. The exterior of the structure is proposed to be of decorative face block
combined with glazed masonry and anodized aluminum standing seam roof.
5. Review of the Site Plan by the Development Review Committee has identified
the following inconsistencies of the plan with standards of the Plymouth
Zoning Ordinance:
a. The "courtesy mail" drive lane proposed parallel to 45th Avenue North
is shown as 12 feet in width versus the ordinance standard of a 14
foot minimum width.
b. The proposed lighting of the site will result in the .5 foot candle
contour extending beyond the property lines into 45th Avenue North at
two locations. The Zoning Ordinance standard for nonresidential uses
and related activities from Section 8, Subdivision G, Paragraph 2 of
the Zoning Ordinance is that any lights used for exterior lumination
shall not be visible to any property line. The practice of the
Development Review Committee has been to define this standard by
specifying that no light in 'excess of .5 foot candles at eye level
shall extend beyond the site property line.
6. The applicant has been advised of the noted inconsistencies of their Site
Plan with the provisions of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance, and has been
requested to either amend their plans to comply with the Zoning Ordinance
or provide the necessary documentation. The Postal Service, in a letter
of July 11, 1991 (copy attached), has advised the City that they will not
see next page)
Page Three
File 91041
apply for the Zoning Ordinance Variances required. No additional plans
have been submitted with modifications to bring the items noted above into
compliance with the Zoning Ordinance either.
7. The current facility at 34th Avenue North and Plymouth Boulevard is
approximately 22,000 square feet in size, including the inside vehicle
storage area. It appears from aerial photos that a total of 57 offstreet
parking spaces are provided at that facility, yielding a parking ratio of
1 parking space for each 385 square feet of overall floor area of the
facility. The proposed new facility would have 34,200 square feet of
floor area (including inside vehicle parking) and is proposed to have 88
total offstreet parking spaces, yielding a parking ratio of one parking
space for each 389 square feet of floor area.
8. A postal facility has been previously considered (at 34th Avenue North and
Plymouth Boulevard) to be a governmental office with merchandising
services, and therefore allowed in a B -1 (Limited Business) Zoning
District with a Conditional Use Permit. The Postal Service has made
application for a Conditional Use Permit consistent with this finding.
9. All Conditional Use Permits approved by the City of Plymouth must comply
with the six standards found in Section 9 of the Zoning Ordinance
regarding Conditional Use Permits. A copy of those six standards is
attached to this staff report. The applicant has not provided a narrative
response to those Conditional Use*Permit standards.
10. The City Attorney has advised that the Postal Service is not liable for
payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu.
PLANNING STAFF COhMENTS:
1. Except with respect to the noncompliant design features of the Site Plan
noted we find the Site Plan to be consistent with the City of Plymouth
standards policies and ordinances regarding development of facilities of
this type in the B -1 Zoning District.
2. The Conditional Use Permit for a governmental office with merchandising
services in the B -1 Zoning District is responsive to the six Conditional
Use Permit standards of Section 9 of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. While the applicant continues to refuse to modify its plans for compliance
with the Zoning Ordinance with regard to drive aisle width, and site
lighting or apply for Zoning Ordinance Variances in regard to those design
features, those items should still be considered Variances from Zoning
Ordinance standards and addressed in terms of the six Zoning Ordinance
criteria found in Section 11 of the Zoning Ordinance.
see next page)
Page Four
File 91041
4. Offstreet parking is a significant concern at the current Plymouth postal
facility located at 34th Avenue North and Plymouth Boulevard. Employees
of that facility regularly park on- street along 34th Avenue North. A
hazard to the public travelling on 34th Avenue North clearly exists as a
result of both on- street parking and poor circulation at the current
facility.
5. If parking is deficient at the current faci1*t at 34th Avenue North and
Plymouth Boulevard (which it is definitely is , we find parking may be
equally deficient at the new facility on the assumption that the
operations of the facilities are similar in nature. We cannot recommend
approval of a Conditional Use Permit to provide parking at a similar
standard for the new facility on that basis.
5. We find sufficient site area exists to accommodate the "courtesy mail"
lane to be constructed at the 14 foot ordinance standard versus the
proposal for a 12 foot width. We find no hardship or unique
circumstances, and the Variance criteria are therefore not complied with.
We find no basis for a Variance.
6. The Zoning Ordinance standard with respect to the exterior lighting of a
site could be interpreted that no light whatsoever would extend beyond the
property lines. In practice the City has used the standard of .5 foot
candles at the property line to quantify the term "no light ". We find the
applicant, by proper shielding of its exterior lighting, can easily
accommodate compliance with the .5 foot candle standard without creating a
hardship. No unique circumstances exist to support the Variance requested
and the general public travelling on 45th Avenue North will be adversely
affected by the proposed lighting that would result from the approval of a
Variance.
RECOMMENDATION:
While modification of plans to widen the "courtesy service lane" 2 feet and
screen outdoor lighting to provide retention of the .5 foot candle contour
with the site are not complex in nature, and can be accomplished by a simple
condition of approval, the design of the site to accommodate additional
offstreet parking spaces, although possible in my opinion, will result in a
Site Plan design that will differ significantly from that which the Planning
Commission has before it. The Commission may wish to consider tabling of this
matter with direction to the applicant to return to the staff and the Planning
Commission with a site design incorporating additional offstreet parking
spaces.
I have attached resolutions that will provide for approval of the requested
Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit excluding the variances that are required
but for which no specific application has been made.
see next page)
Page Five
File 91041
Also attached is a resolution providing for the approval of Site Plan and
Conditional Use Permit including the two variances for which no application
has been made but which would be a requirement if the site design is to remain
as now presented, in noncompliance with the Zoning Ordinance standards.
It is my recommendation that the Variances not be approved, and that the
Planning Commission reach a consensus as to whether to table the matter for
redesign with regard to offstreet parking; or whether the plan modifications
can become conditions of the approval resolution with staff to monitor for
redesign followin ncil action.
Submitted by:
C ar es E. Di eru , Community Deve opment Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit with Direction
for Redesign Eliminating Zoning Ordinance Variances
2. Resolution Approving Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variances
3. Engineer's Memo
4. Applicant's Letter of July 11, 1991
5. Location Map
6. Site Graphics
pc /jk /91041:dh)
APPROVING SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE UNITED STATES POSTAL
SERVICE LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF 45TH AVENUE NORTH AND WEST OF HIGHWAY 169
91041)
WHEREAS, the United States Postal Service has requested approval for a Site
Plan and Conditional Use Permit to construct a postal facility with
merchandising services for property located at the south side of 45th Avenue
North, west of Highway 169; 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
United States Postal Service for a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit to
construct a postal facility with merchandising services for property located
at the south side of 45th Avenue North, west of Highway 169, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. 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.
3. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement
for completion of site improvements within 12 months of the date of this
resolution.
4. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
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 enclosure, and
no outside storage is permitted.
8. An 8k x 11 inch "As Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior
to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy.
9. No variances are approved or implied. The Site plan shall be redesigned
to eliminate the following deficiencies:
a. The "courtesy lane" parallel to 45th Avenue North shall be increased
in width from 12 feet to the Zoning Ordinance minimum standard of 14
feet.
b. Site lighting shall be modified to retain the .5 foot candle contour
within the site boundaries.
New Site Plan graphics shall be submitted for review and approval of the
City Development Review Committee prior to issuance of a building permit.
APPROVING SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL 'USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR THE UNITED
STATES POSTAL SERVICE LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF 45TH AVENUE NORTH AND WEST
OF HIGHWAY 169 (91041)
WHEREAS, the United States Postal Service has requested approval for a Site
Plan and Conditional Use Permit to construct a postal facility with
merchandising services for property located at the south side of 45th Avenue
North, west of Highway 169; and,
WHEREAS, staff has identified design deficiencies requiring Variances from
Zoning Ordinance standards; 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
United States Postal Service for a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit and
Variances identified by staff to construct a postal facility with
merchandising services for property located at the south side of 45th Avenue
North, west of Highway 169, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. 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.
3. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement
for completion of site improvements within 12 months of the date of this
resolution.
4. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
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 enclosure, and
no outside storage is permitted.
8. An 8k x 11 inch "As Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior
to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy.
9. Zoning Ordinance Variances are approved based on compliance with the
Variance Criteria, as follow:
a. Drive lane width of 12 feet versus the Zoning Ordinance standard of 14
feet.
b. Setting lighting in excess of .5 foot candles crossing the property
line onto 45th Avenue North.
res /pc /91041:jw) 2 res
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: August 2, 1991
FILE NO.: 91041
PETITIONER: Mr. Bruce Davison, U.S. Postal Service, 20051 Rilibrew Drive,
No. 620, Bloomington, MN 55425 -1974
SITE PLAN: U.S. POST OFFICE
LOCATION: South of 45th Avenue, west of Highway 169, east of Nathan Lane in the
northeast 1/4 of Section 13
N/A Yes No
1. _ X _ Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _ X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No. 1 and
No. 2.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Site Plan approval:
4. Area assessments estimated - None
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None
LEGAL /EASEMENTS /PERMITS:
N/A Yes No
6. _ X _ Property is one parcel -
The approval of the site plan as proposed requires that a lot
consolidation be approved by the City Council and the necessary
resolution should be processed at the same time as the site plan
approval.
N/A Yes No
7. _ X _ Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (101) in width adjoining all streets and six feet (61) in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any
building permits.)
8. _ X _ Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100
year high water elevation and conformance with the City's
comprehensive storm water requirements.
9. _ X _ All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities.
N/A Yes No
10. _ X _ All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is 'their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
11. X _ The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
N/A Yes No
12. _ _ X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
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 as
the one proposed be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. It will be
necessary to locate hydrants in such a manner that the site plan
complies with this section of the City Ordinance.
15. _ 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. X _ Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
N/A Yes No
20. _ X _ All existing street right -of -ways are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on
21. _ X _ Complies with site drainage requirements -
The City will not permit drainage onto a City street from a private
parking lot; therefore, the site plan shall be revised accordingly.
4-
N/A Yes No
22. _ X _ Curb and gutter provided -
The City requires B -612 concrete curb and gutter at all entrances
and where drainage must be controlled, Curb Stone may be used where
it is not necessary to control drainage. For traffic control either
B -612 or curb stone is required around the bituminous surfaced
parking lot. The site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance
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.
5-
26. X The site plan complies with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual. See Item No. 12,
swell] z 11 a] ZIM
Lf Submitted by: ,1,z,
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
6-
4 pTES POSTq_
N Y
C _ TW
Z
D LLS.MAIL In
t t
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
Facilities Service Office
2051 Killebrew Drive, Suite 620
Bloomington, MN 55425 -1874
July 11, 1991
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
ATTN MR JOHN KEHO AND CHARLES DILLERUD
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD
PLYMOUTH MN 55447
Re: Mpls., MN /Medicine Lake (Plymouth) Br. 55441 -9998
New Owned Postal Facility
s iie
ET
JUL 12 1991
CITY 0;,PUiAWffN
Thank you for your phone call of July 10, 1991 concerning your request
that the postal service apply for two variances on the quantity of on site
parking, and the stated width of the drive through /drop off lane.
It is postal service policy that we do not apply for ordinance variances,
just as we do not as a rule, pay plan review fees, building permit fees,
etc.
However, we do comply with local governments codes, ordinances, and
requirements, to the greatest extent practicable which I hope we have
shown to you as evidenced by the additions, and changes we have made in
our project based upon your input and suggestions to date.
We will continue to consider any, and all recommendations the City of
Plymouth makes, but must stop short of formally applying for any variances.
Sincerel,,
i
EVEN A. HUSTAD
Program Manager
Design and Construction Branch
cc: TC Div /Sup Ser Larry Cruse
Rogers, Perlenfein Asso. Attn:
R. Bruce Davison, RE Mgr., TCFSO
D &C Project File
FS0102:SAHustad:ckk:1874
Wayne C Perleinfein
dr
7I
w
OF . Vo
Foolofill
MVP
lowli
3
N
lvC M
a nr
Lu
N
x
9
d`
M
x
VP
k
9m
61n)
1-
2
obr 3
K
111
W m
N
z
v
N
v
u_
1-
Ill
Z
b
1-
U, v
rV- fl
o
clf
bt
Alp
F V 1--
Y Q
IL
00
F
vdzi
111
N 4.il0
vi
w
I
W
Q
G
x
n i
W
M
x
VP
k
9m
61n)
1-
2
obr 3
K
111
W m
N
z
v
N
v
u_
1-
Ill
Z
b
1-
U, v w
rV- fl
o
clf
3 J tv Alp
xx
7 y1
a p i C
0) C
CO N
J1
Q [1 d 4 'r, z
1 i ~ 18
11 1l> 3
y'7.
fl rZ u0
rl
NV a_o
QNd'
d' ld ll',i 03
w
A
a
z
D _— 3 U'
V__
aD 17 L? _z
7
lL
eta
cL Z i1 cJ f- 6
cr3J0 i
Q
v
H
d
Y
N
Is °
2
v
W
N, y
v
0 d
0
11
7
G
C OW1i €lE 6,1R09p0,5
BITUMINOUS SURFASE ; ^ A r, -rLJ
R 909 '
910. 3K
CC
L_
9099
r
i 910.1 1.910.6 ,
K910J
19-
R 909,2 `\
goo
90791
ICJ 90[1
906
o
clf
w
cP
000
aC) U w
IL
00
F
vdzi
111
N 4.il0
vi
w
I
W
Q
G
4d A
W
000 o
I
oo
0 j
645 !MM 9
I I
w-
2
z
1 904.4 1 9019 1
C S
1906.4
a
0
q U
Z
m
1
10 10
W
LC
0
1v m
0
s
A
111
z
ZONE B -I
a a
N
PIN. 13- 118 -22 -11 0010 IAT l BLOCK 1,
TAXPAYER: MEYER GONYEA MEYER GONYEA 10
N
ADDITION
7
00
okv
7,5, E
259,95
N 89.34' 50" W
V_
0A
1 G
x _ate
Q
4aZ.
tl I
a
IJ p04
o
j
el rr
Z m w \L
3>
at 30
A O
o
clf
w
cP
000
aC) U w
IL
00
F
vdzi
111
N 4.il0
vi
Z
N_
d
fQ
Cp
IL 1 l I -I 11 r IWlr I I iIIvIil.l I l I Ill_ t
1 4
z
1
its
v
c=
i}
d
N
p ?
4LL11U
eJ
a
ZONE B -1 ........- -
PIN. 13-118-22-117-1606-11 LOT 1 BLACK 2,
TAXPAYER: MEYER GONYEA MEYER GONYEA
ADDITION
S 89° 35' 17" E 326.91
w
II
c
w
cP
000
aC) U w
IL
00
F
vdzi
111
Q
n o vi
w
w W
Q
G
q
4d A
W
000 o
3
oo
0 j
645 !MM 9
41
e
UT
w-
000
2
z
g C SZ
3
a
0
q U
Z
m
m
0
Q
100
U,
W
LC
0
1v m
0
s
A
111
z
a a
N
W%
Q
v w N
IU
Ma a
N
7
00
okv
N
J flo00000(
0100
d N
1p
I
o
cA in m mn
v
700
II
c a cP
000 u ou7
IL
00
fE:
vdzi
111
z
000
W
w
w W
Q
Lo O c
q
4d A
W
000 o
V P
ail
a oo
V
645 !MM 9 0
w-
000
2
z
4t
W7 1
100 a
a q U
Z
w
C/3
u a
4
Q
a
4
100
U, 0
1v m
0
s
A
111
z
O
N F fo
Q
v w N
IU
Ma a
7
okv
N c,
w d N
1p
I
o z w
P J w00WU
a a_F v
F_
m mN r
az
of
0Z a--
V_
z
Z U J U
1 '1' Z t0
4 a y
Iii r 11 K
1v
Zw
W n LY
Qdz
A i
v a
wvl 0Z wa' >_0
r
m
i
WW2
c z
z
t
s
I%
1I
a° L
W Z
el
Q
p
41
CD
r-
a
0
U dddJ
1p
F
a m
z
LL]
m
Q i
000
s s
o
N N 000
341 C3
N 000
s
3
IN
co a
z iii 1'
000
yes
V J f
J z t
000 c 1
0 Q r 7 J
p s O
Q
000
y
t[1
ILL
C
W
000
1
Q m
O O C
z
11
J
a-
m
000?
vJ
000
yj v
o o o
D S
tv
r
1IL W.J
r) 000
p
Q
f/1C0
Ooo
l
700
II
c a cP
000 u ou7
IL
00
fE:
vdzi
z
000
W
w
wo¢
Q
Lo O c
q J
4d A
W
000 o
V P
ail
a oo
V
645 !MM 9 0
w-
000
2
z
4t
W7 1
100 a o 040
0 0 0 w
C/3
u a
1-- tk y'
100 i 1
o -I
II
4..
Q
1
v v
D
IL
Q)
fE:
z
W
3
C
905 4
i
Q
µq
J 4d
A
W
mQ 11 DIr• Nw rgmU
1w V
P
ail
m
N
V 645 !MM 9
0
9
IC-' 0-
2
n. 4
t v
q
9
a
C o -
I
y
4..
Q
1
r
D
IL
Q)
fE:
z
W
3 I
I 991 r\
I
n 911,4A( I
j I I
1 I
I 1
W54.
I
I I
I
I 911.1
Y
LT A 905,
4 I I
I
II II
IIII
I'
I 910.9Y
1
I
I
I I I
I I 1
I I
I
909
1 I I
1 3 I I
1 I I
1 CU I
1 29
9
I I I x
11906.: z(
1
I I
I
I
IF
y
4..
Q
1
r
IL
fE:
1
W
3
C 905
4
i
Q
µW SURFAC r 4d A
NO
ioa mQ 11 DIr• Nw rgmU 1w
1 m
CONCRETE
Cull/
N V 645 !MM
9
0 9
I I 991
r\
I n 911,4A(
I j I
I 1
I I
1
W54.
I I
I
I I 911.
1
Y LT A
905,4 I
I
I II
III
III
I' I 910.
9Y
1
I
I I I
I I I
1 I
I
I
909 1 I
I 1 3 I
I 1 I
I 1 CU
I 1
29
9 I I I
x 11906.:
z(
1 I
I
I
I
IF y
C
Q
1
r
IL
fE:
1
W
3 C
l
ti.
Q
µ
d
mQ
ll
S zz
m
d
N V
t11
d 9
IC-'
0- 2
n.
4
t
wz
9
a C q°
rC/
3 u a
1-- tk
y' t
Q
1v
m
0
s
A 111 z B I T U M I N
O U
S9
9047 2 L P A R K
I N
G 904.
6 I
I1
I I I
I III I
I I
I
I
I I
JJ I
1
1 I I
I I I
I
I I
0 I
0 1
I
I I I
906!
7 I I S U R F
A C E
4
904.1
Z
Lu
z Slot, NQ
avlca ID V
firpa -A -
z
44zj
F-
w
U
C
z IL } Q Q E
n Z F
A 4, 5l 1
z Q t-
y: ` --3
L dQmvTT
ZEZ
4
1 - 7
F--
z Z vIIIQi
w
1 w Z 4,. to p
t-- z
IL w x of z od UG
O Za, F- CN
Cie (
aQOZ
m~
0
4Z ul 4
Im y:I
I11
dIL_St- III) y
CV
1
C lu
l6 Z
its
U fE:
1 W
nJ,
l
ti.
Q
CI)
7
ll
S
oaf fur
m
d
N V
t11
d 9
IC-'
0-
2 n. w'
U
9 c q°
r C/3
1--
tk
y'
N
w :
itt 0 OAQQ
3
11_ 3IUMa
a o
kv
N
c, 1p
I
w
F_
of H
V_ zL1 '
1' Z t0
4
a
y
d 1v Zw
W
n LY
Qdz A
i aG
i c z z s
Q
a°
L i 0
g
z
elQ
O r-
0U
dddJ 1
p
d z W
Q i
U
s s
o
341
C3
s 3
IN co a
z
iii 1' yes
V J f J
z t 9 0 Q
r 7 J
p s O Q
y
N
ILL C
W 1 1
Q
m
ai
z
J a-
m vJ
r
yj
v ul 4
Im y:I
I11
dIL_
St-
III)
l lu
l6 Z
its U
fE: W nJ, l
ti.
Q
CI)
ll
S
oaf fur w
tr
d N V
9
d 9
IC-' 0- 2 n. Q
U
9 c q°
r C/3
1--
tk
y' N
w : itt OAQQ
3
11_ 3IUMa a
o
kvD
1pw F_ H 1 '
1'
Z t01v
c
z i
W
s s
o
341 C3 C)
V J f
p s O Q
y N ILL
C
1 1 z
vJraau7
C1,
D
S tv r 1
IL
W.
J pQ
f/1 C0 l
AI
ili 0 A d1d
fly
CIA
lb ul 4
Im y:I
I11
dIL_
St-
III)
l lu
l6
W
nJ, U
I
h
V
G
r
V ul 4
Im y:I
I11
dIL_
St-
III)
a
Z
a
fl
111
U,
I
O
7I
W
U
HUaC)
Uz
am
m zC) I
w It
w3Z c9
U Z Z
t waa: U z
U w Da
r U 1 4
w 0 Z Ec x
Q Q
w
0UA isZ
O
Z
0w
l
h
V
r
V
q° j A 1-- 7
1-- tk y' A Q Q 3 11_
3
U-
C1
a
Z
a
fl
111
U,
I
O
7I
W
U
HUaC)
Uz
am
m zC) I
w It
w3Z c9
U Z Z
t waa: U z
U w Da
r U 1 4
w 0 Z Ec x
Q Q
w
0UA isZ
O
5C•
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: July 30, 1991 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 14, 1991
FILE NO.: 91047
PETITIONER: Lowry Hill Construction Company
REQUEST: Approval of a 54 lot single family Preliminary Plat,
Variance to permit a 1,050 foot cul -de -sac street length
versus 500 feet, and Rezoning of a 39.8 acre site from the
FRO (Future Restricted Development District) to the R -1A
Low Density Single Family Residential District)
LOCATION: Northeast corner of Holly Lane and County Road 9
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Single Family Residential)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development)
BACKGROUND:
On August 10, 1964, the City Council denied an application to rezone a parcel
that includes the subject site. A mobile home court of 327 units was proposed
for this location.
On November 15, 1971, the City Council denied a request by Lowry Hill
Construction Company from R -0 (identical to the current FRO) to R -4 to permit
the construction of a townhouse /apartment development of 592 units. The basis
for the denial was both the lack of land use guiding for this area of the
City, and a concern as to whether this site could be served by public
utilities.
On August 6, 1990, the City Council, by Resolution 90 -467, approved a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment for this site relating to the Sanitary Sewer Plan
Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The amendment was to redirect the
flow from a portion-of sewer district NW -17 to sewer district NW -18.
Resolution 91 -205 orders the project to install the sewer on a condition that
the owners of this pare agree to be assessed for the area changes and to pay
for extra depth charges. Municipal water service is available to the site.
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.
see next page)
Page Two
File 91047
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. This site is located in the Bassett Creek Storm Water Drainage District
and contains no Floodplain or Shoreland Overlay Districts, but does
contain Federally designated Wetland and City of Plymouth Storm Water
Drainage areas parallel to the north property line and in the extreme
northeast corner of the site. No development or grading activity is
proposed to encroach upon those wetland and storm ponding areas.
The site does contain significant. woodland areas over the north and east
one -third and a area of existing steep slopes paralleling the north
property line, and in the northeast corner. Preservation of these
forested and steep slope areas is a major component of the subdivision
development and grading plan. By roadway location and extra depth on lots
adjoining these significant natural resources areas, maximum preservation
of those areas has been addressed. The site is suitable for urban
development with municipal sewers.
2. The Development Review Committee has recommended to the applicant that a
temporary emergency access be provided to the east portion of the site off
the end of the proposed Comstock Lane cul -de -sac to Rockford Road as
mitigation for the variance requested for cul -de -sac length. In a letter
of July 10, 1991 (copy attached) the applicant's engineer objects to the
emergency access recommendation on the basis of preserving existing trees.
He suggests an alternative, where Dunkirk Lane would become the cul -de -sac
street and Comstock Lane would be extended southerly to County Road 9.
This suggestion would result in public road intersections to Rockford Road
spaced approximately 375 feet, center to center, and would place the
Comstock Lane intersection with Rockford Road near a curvature in Rockford
Road.
3. The Development Review Committee has also recommended redesign of the
southwest portion of the plat to provide access to the exception parcel at
the northeast corner of Holly Lane and Rockford Road. The Transportation
Element of the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan, adopted December 18, 1989,
states in the Appendix that it should be the policy of the City of
Plymouth to not create any parcels zoned for single family or duplex
residential uses fronting on an arterial and Major Collector street. The
Transportation Plan also states that residential driveway access to
arterial and Major Collector streets should not be permitted except for
major multiple family "cluster" developments.
4. The Development Review Committee has advised the applicant that both Holly
Lane and Rockford Road are designated by the Transportation Plan as "Major
Collectors ". The intersection of two Major Collectors, both of which are
forecast to carry approximately 10,000 vehicles per day ultimately, will
create the need for a signalized intersection. It has been recommended
that the proposed plat be redesigned to provide internal access to the
exception parcel via Garland Lane.
see next page)
Page Three
File 91047
The applicant's engineer in the July 10, 1991 letter states that he
believes the exception parcel to'be adequately served at present, and the
applicant does not support extending an internal street to serve that
property.
5. The review of a conventional Preliminary Plat is, in part, guided by the
provisions of Section 500.15 of the City Code (the Subdivision Ordinance).
The code specifies the Planning Commission in its review of a Preliminary
Plat will take into consideration the requirements of the City with
particular attention given to such factors as Comprehensive Plan
requirements, including "highways ". The Transportation Element of the
Plymouth Comprehensive Plan is the source of guidance with respect to
highway planning within the City.
6. No details have been provided regarding the "entrance monuments" proposed
on the Preliminary Plat. There has been no Development Review Committee
analysis of any signage proposal for the plat.
7. Mayor Bergman has recently addressed the Planning Commission concerning
the need to better address the long -term maintenance of rear yards that
backup to Thoroughfare streets. He has suggested that the Planning
Commission consider use of easements or common area over a portion of
those rear yards running to a Homeowners Association for the development,
providing for the perpetual maintenance of those rear yards - particularly
where a berm is to be constructed parallel to the Major Thoroughfare. The
grading plan proposed for this plat suggests continuous berm treatment in
the yards paralleling Rockford Road of this proposed plat. No Homeowners
Association is at this time proposed.
8. The applicant, in the letter of his engineer dated July 10, 1991 proposes
a total of 60 feet of - right-of-way- from the center line of Holly Lane to
be dedicated with this plat versus the recommendation of the City Engineer
and Parks Director for 40 feet of right -of -way for Holly Lane plus 30 feet
of outlot to accommodate the trail running east of and parallel to Holly
Lane - for a total of 70 feet of right -of -way. The City Engineer and
Director of Parks and Recreation continue in their recommendations with
regard to right -of -way required parallel to Holly Lane.
9. This site is wi thin an area that was included in the series of Land Use
Guide Plan amendments adopted by the City Council on December 18, 1989 as
part of the City -wide review of the Land Use Guide Plan Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. The site was reclassified from the previous LA -2 (Low
Medium Density Residential) to LA -1 (Low Density Residential). Approval
of those Land Use Guide Plan amendments, including this site, must be a
condition of rezoning and Preliminary Plat approval, and no activity,
including grading, or tree removal can take place until Metropolitan
Council approval of the Land Use Guide Plan amendments is granted.
10. Final plans and specifications for trunk sanitary sewer service extensions
to this site are currently in preparation by City's engineering
consultant. The City Council has not approved those plans and
specifications, or awarded a contract for the construction of the sanitary
sewer. Plans and specification are to be complete and the project is
scheduled for construction this year, per the City Engineer.
see next page)
Page Four
File 91047
Approval of a Preliminary Plat for this site will be subject to award of a
contract for a trunk sanitary sewer extension, and no Final Plat approval,
tree removal, or grading will be permitted on the site until a sewer
extension contract has been awarded by the City Council.
11. The Subdivision Ordinance in Section 500.41 addresses procedures and
findings required for the approval of variances for the Subdivision Code.
A copy of the Subdivision Variance Criteria is attached together with the
letter of the applicant's engineer dated July 10, 1991 which addresses the
basis for the variance proposed: for cul -de -sac length together with
reasons the applicant is opposed to the mitigation of emergency access
proposed by the Development Review Committee. The applicant also suggests
an alternative subdivision design that would eliminate the need for the
variance.
12. The rezoning of the site from FRD (Future Restricted Development) to R -1A
Single Family Residence District) is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan subject to the approval of the amendment to the Land Use Guide Plan
Element by the Metropolitan Council involving this site and the award of a
contract for trunk sanitary sewer to serve this site.
13. The Preliminary Plat complies with the Subdivision Ordinance standards for
the R -1A Zoning District, including Section 500.15 regarding preservation
of natural environment, except as noted.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. It is the responsibility of this developer to so design the Preliminary
Plat that public street access to the exception parcel at the northeast
corner of Holly Lane and Rockford Road is provided internally through this
development. The approval of a Preliminary Plat that, by its design,
creates a parcel that would require direct access to Major Collector
street by individual homes is inconsistent with the design policies
regarding streets and highways of the Transportation Element of the
Plymouth Comprehensive Plan.
2. The variance requested for cul -de -sac length in excess of the 500 foot
maximum length standard of the Subdivision Ordinance is not responsive to
the Subdivision Variance Criteria without the mitigation of an emergency
access from Comstock Lane to Rockford until such time as Black Oaks Lane
is completed southerly to Rockford Road through the adjoining property to
the east.
3. The developer's proposal to cul -de -sac Dunkirk Lane within his plat and
instead extend Comstock Lane south for a public street intersection with
Rockford Road will result in an inadequate intersection spacing with
Rockford Road between Dunkirk Lane and Comstock Lane; and, will result in
the creation of an intersection with Rockford Road at an unsafe location
due to the curvature of Rockford Road at the point that Comstock Lane
would intersect.
see next page)
Page Five
File 91047
4. An alternative approach to the emergency access or the reconfiguration of
the public road system to overcome the excessive length cul -de -sac would
be prohibition of the Final Platting of Comstock Lane and all lots east
and south of proposed Lot 16, Block 1 until such time as Black Oaks Lane
is completed through the adjoining property to Rockford Road. A temporary
cul -de -sac to 45th Avenue North in the vicinity of proposed Lot 16, Block
1 would result in a cul -de -sac length consistent with the 500 foot maximum
provided for in the Subdivision Code.
5. Consistent with the recommendation of the City Engineer and the Director
of Parks and Recreation we find the dedication of road right -of -way not
less than 40 feet east of center line for Holly Lane and 30 foot wide
outlot for trail purposes parallel to Holly Lane necessary and required
for consistency with the Transportation Element and the Parks and Trails
Element of the Comprehensive Plan. We do not support a reduction of the
total right -of -way required from 70 feet to 60 feet as proposed by the
applicant in the letter of his engineer dated July 10, 1991.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommendation for redesign of the plat to accommodate access to the
exception parcel at the northeast corner of Holly Lane and Rockford Road, if
concurred in by the Planning Commission, will result in amended plat graphics.
The Planning Commission may thus wish to consider deferral of their action on
this plat pending redesign by the petitioner.
Should the Planning Commission determine that redesign is required to provide
access to the exception parcel, and deferral for redesign is not found to be
appropriate I recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for the
denial of the Preliminary Plat based on noncompliance with the Comprehensive
P a n, specifically the Transportation Element with respect to a plat design
creating a hazardous collector street access, and inadequate right -of -way
dedication for Transportation Plan and Parks and Trail Plan purposes along
Holly Lane.
I have also attached a resolution providing for the approval of the
Preliminary Plat, as designed, including a variance for the length of cul -de-
sac of Black Oaks Lane, as requested. A condition is included that provides
for the emergency s from Com to ane so ly to Rockford Road.
Submitted by: (Tv avl,
Cha . Dillerud, mmunity Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Denying Preliminary Plat
7. Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat
3. Engineer's Memo
4. Subdivision Ordinance Variance Criteria
5. Transportation Plan Collector Street Access Policy
6. Petitioner's Letter of July 10, 1991
7. Location Map
8. Site Graphics _.
pc /jk /91047:dh)
DENYING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LOWRY HILL CONSTRUCTION FOR .GOLFVIEW ESTATES
91047)
WHEREAS, Lowry Hill Construction has requested approval for a Preliminary Plat
and Subdivision Variance for Golfview Estates, a plat for 54 lots on 39.8
acres located at the northeast corner of Holly Lane and County Road 9; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it hereby does deny the request by Lowry Hill
Construction for a Preliminary Plat and Subdivision Variance for Golfview
Estates for 54 lots located at the northeast corner of Holly Lane and County
Road 9, based on the following findings:
1. Failure to provide access to PIN 17 -21 -0001 at the northeast corner of
Holly Lane and Rockford Road through the Preliminary Plat is noncompliant
with Section 500.15 of the City Code regarding conformity of the plat
design with the Transportation Plan Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Failure to provide right -of -way for Holly Lane of 40 feet from center line
consistent with the City design standards for a Major Collector street and
the recommendation of the City Engineer.
res /pc /91047.pp:dh)
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LOWRY HILL CONSTRUCTION FOR GOLFVIEW ESTATES
91047)
WHEREAS, Lowry Hill Construction has requested approval for a Preliminary Plat
and a Subdivision Variance for Golfview Estates, a plat for 54 lots on 39.8
acres located at the northeast corner of Holly Lane and County Road 9; 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 hereby does approve the request by Lowry Hill
Construction for a Preliminary Plat -and Subdivision Variance for Golfview
Estates for 54 lots located at the northeast corner of Holly Lane and County
Road 9, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's
expense.
3. No building permits shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for
sewer and water.
4. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
the Dedication Policy in effect at the time of filin the Final Plat with
credit for the dedication of Outlot A (30 feet width and construction of
a trail to City Standards in Outlot A.
5. Street names shall comply with the City Street Naming System.
6. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor
elevations for new structures in subdivisions adjacent to, or containing
any open storm water drainage facility.
7. No building permits shall be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
8. Incorporation of tree protection provisions in the Final Plat and
Development Contract approval.
9. A variance is approved for a cul -de -sac length of 1050 feet for Black
Oaks Lane versus the Subdivision Code standard of 500 feet maximum based
on compliance with the Subdivision Code variance criteria and subject to
a condition that a temporary emergency access, approved by the City
Engineer, extend south from the Comstock Lane cul -de -sac to Rockford
Road.
10. Right- of-way width dedicated for Holly Lane shall be 40 feet from center
line.
Page Two
File 91047
11. Subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council of the Land Use Guide
Plan amendment including this site adopted by the City Council on
December 18, 1989. No site grading or tree removal shall be undertaken
on the site prior to the Metropolitan Council approval.
12. The Final Plat shall not be approved nor shall grading or tree removal
take place on the site prior to award of a contract by the City Council
for sanitary sewer trunk service to this site.
res /pc /91047.pp:dh)
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Plymouth, Minnesota was held on the 22nd day of April ,
1991. The following members were present: Mayor Bergman, Councilmembers Helliwell ,
Ricker Vasiliou and Zitur
The following members were absent: None
Councilmember Vasiliou introduced the following Resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -205
ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
NW -17 TRUNK SANITARY SEWER
CITY PROJECT NO. 040
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 90 -762 of the City Council adopted the 19th day of November,
1990 fixed a date for a public hearing with respect to Trunk Sanitary Sewer
Improvements to serve District NW -17; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project includes the installation of a 15" trunk sanitary sewer
and 8" lateral sanitary sewer improvement in Sanitary Sewer Drainage District NW -17;
and
WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing through two weekly publications of
the required notice was given and the hearing was held thereon the 17th day of
December, 1990, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an
opportunity to be heard thereon;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
MINNESOTA;
1. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the Council resolution
adopted November 19, 1990.
2. Short, Elliott, Hendrickson, Inc. is designated as engineer for the
improvement. They shall prepare plans and specifications for the making
of such improvement.
3. Before proceeding with plans and specifications, Lowry Hill Development
Company shall `enter into an agreement with the City agreeing to be
assessed for sewer and water area charges and extra depth sewer costs.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
fn,mrilmember Ricker , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted
in favor thereof: May-or Beronan, Councilmembers Helliwell, Ricker, Vasiliou, ,
The following voted against or abstained: None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
DATE:
FILE NO.:
PETITIONER:
PRELIMINARY PLAT:
LOCATION:
N/A Yes No
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
August 6, 1991
91047
Mr. Bernard Barr, Lowry Hill Construction Company, 6150 Hemlock
Lane North, Plymouth, MN 55442
GOLFVIEW ESTATES
East of Holly Lane, north of County Road 9, wrest of Vicksburg Lane
in the north 1/2 of Section 17.
1. _ _ _X_ Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No. 1 and
No. 2•
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of final plat approval.
4. Area assessments: W to retain area based on 39.8 acres - 9.32 acres
ponding - 30.48 acres x 91.580 per acre - S48.158.40. Sanitary sewer
Area based on 39.8 acres - 9.32 acres _ nondinQ - 30.48 acres x S880
per acres - S26.822.40.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: The developer will be
responsible for the cost of concrete curb and gutter along County
Road 9 and Holly Lane.
N/A Yes No
6. _ _ -2- Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The City will require utility and drainage easements ten feet (101)
in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in width adjoining
side and rear lot lines.
El
n N/A Yes No
7. X All standard utility easements required for construction are provided
The City will require twenty foot (20') utility and drainage
easements for proposed utilities along the lot lines where these
utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has been reviewed
with the final plat and final construction plans.
8. _ _ X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's comprehensive
storm water drainage plan.
Drainage eassments for 11ondina purposes will be required for Pond BC-
P5 to the 100 year elevation of 968.0. For the pond in Block 3 it
will be 989.0. For the pond within Lots 12. 13, 14, 16. 17 and 18.
Block 2 to an elevation of 986.0. For the pond within Lots 5. 6. 7.
8- 9 and 10. Block 2 to an elevation of 974.0.
9. X _ _ All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way to
facilitate the development. This is not an automatic process in
conjunction with the platting process. It is the owner's
responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal descriptions of
easements proposed to be vacated.
10. X _ _ The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application - If it is subsequently determined that
the subject property is abstract property, then this requirement does
not apply.
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
11. _ X _ All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
DNR
MnDOT
X Hennepin County
X MPCA
X State Health Department
X Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
X Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with --the conditions within any permit.
2 -
N/A Yes No
M
12. X _ Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to the
City grid system for street names. The following changes will be
necessary. This will be reviewed by the Building Department.
13. _ X _ Conforms with the City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan -
The following revisions must be made to conform with the City's
adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan.
14. _ _ X Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
15. _ _ X All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on An additional 7 feet of
right -of -way will be required along County Road 9. making the total
distance from center line 40 feet.
N/A Yes No
16. _ _ X Conforms with City standards requiring the developer to construct
utilities necessary to serve this plat -
In accordance with City standards, the developer shall be responsible
for constructing the necessary sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer and
streets needed to serve this plat. A registered professional
engineer must prepare the plans and profiles of the proposed sanitary
sewer, watermain, storm sewer facilities and streets to serve the
development. See Item No. 17.
3 -
N/A Yes No
17. _ _ X Preliminary utility plans submitted comply with all City requirements
The developer has submitted the required preliminary plans for the
proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities.
The sanitary sewer on 45th Avenue North shall be extended west to
Holly Line. A 16 inch watermain shall be constructed from County
Road 9 north on Holly Lane to the north plat line. The City will
reimburse the developer for the cost of construction of the 16 inch
watermain.
18. _.X _ _ Per developer's request a preliminary report and plan . will be
prepared by the City -
If it is their desire to have the City construct these facilities as
part of its Capital Improvements Program, a petition must be
submitted to the City. The cutoff date for petitions is October 1,
of the year preceding construction.
19. _ _ X Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots.
The minimum basement elevation for Lots S. 6 T S. 9 and 10 Block 2
shall be 976 For Lots 11 12 13 14 16 17 and 18. Block 2.
988.0. For Lots 1 7 and B. Block 3 991.0. For Lots 5 through 11.
Block 1 970.0. For Lots 18 through 22. Block 1. 970.0.
N/A Yes No
20, _ X _ The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
21. _ _ X The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan -
The following revisions will be required: The sanitary sewer on 45th
Avenue shall be extended to Holly Lane.
4 -
N/A Yes No
22. _ 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 right -of -way. All water connections shall be via
wettan.
23. _ _ X Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been submitted to
the City's Consulting Engineer for review to see if it is in
conformance with the City's Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All
of their recommendations shall be incorporated in a revised plan.
The grading and drainage plan shall also indicate proposed methods of
erosion control, including the placement of silt fence in strategic
locations. Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary:
Shall com ly with all agency ner its-
24. A. A 30 foot trail outlot will be required along Holly Lane for trail purposes.
B. The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City for area charges and
over depth costs for Project No. 040 (N.W. Trunk Sewer - Area 17).
C. Internal access shall be provided for the lots in the southwest corner of the
plat adjacent to Holly Lane.
D. Fire flow calculations will be required with the final plans showing that all
fire hydrants are capable of handling 1,250 gallons per minute for fire flow.
E. The survey and preliminary plat must show all existing easements.
F. The developer shall obtain an easement from the property to the north for the
extension of the sanitary sewer.
G. Neither the rate of runoff nor the volume can exceed the current rate since
there is no easement for Pond BC -P5.
H. The Fire Department is requiring an emergency access roadway 15 feet wide, 7-
ton design from Comstock Lane to County Road 9. Easements will be required to
cover this access.
I. A temporary cul -de -sac will be required at the end of Black Oaks Lane. An
easement will be required for the temporary cul -de -sac.
J. Indicate a proposed grade for the extension of Black Oaks Lane to County Road
9.
5 -
0
K. An easement for access along the south line of Lot 22, Block 1 shall be granted
to provide access to the trunk sewer manhole on the south line of Lot 22 for
maintenance purposes.
L. No grading and /or utility work will be approved prior to the City awarding the
contract for Project No. 040.
M. The final plat shall not be submitted to the City Council prior to the contract
being awarded for Project No. 040.
N. The existing right -of -way on Holly Lane will be adequate for the proposed
collector street.
Submitted by: <
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
6 -
1 V's •+ •'
1. General Conditions . 7he Planning Commission may Seca m end a variance from
the provisions of this Section (500.41) as to specific properties when, in
its judgment, an unusual hardship on the land exists. In granting a
variance, the Commission may prescribe conditions that it deems necessary
or desirable in the public interest. In making its findings, as required
below, the Commission shall consider the nature of the proposed use of the
land and the existing use of land in the vicinity, the number of persons
to reside or work in the proposed subdivision, and the probable effect of
the proposed subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. No
variance shall be granted unless the CcnT fission finds:
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the
specific property such that the strict application of the provisions
of this Section would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of
the land.
b. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant.
c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in
which the property is situated. .
The Commission findings in granting or denying a variance shall be in
writing and filed with the City Clerk.
2. AWlication Required. Applications for any variance under this Subsection
shall be submitted in writing by the owner or subdivider at the time the
preliminary plat is filed for consideration by the Planning Commission,
and shall state all facts relied upon by the applicant, and shall be
supplemented with maps, plans or other additional data which may aid the
Cc mission in the analysis of the proposed project. The plans for such
development shall include such covenants, restrictions or other legal
provisions necessary to guarantee the full achievement of the plan for the
proposed project.
forms:o >pl /sub.stnd /s) 10/89
January 1990
APPENDIX
RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES FOR DRIVEWAY AND
ACCESS ORDINANCES IN PLYMOUTH
ACCESS CONTROL
The key distinguishing features of a functional system of
roadways are the degree of access control, intersection spacing,
and intersection type. A major purpose of relating access
control to roadway purpose is to protect continuous routes and
important corridors to the extent possible and to prevent undue
restriction of access to those routes where access is
appropriate. Adequate control of access on routes designed to
provide mobility prevents the necessity of expending additional
public funds to buy new rights -of -way and establish new corridors
as existing corridors become congested. On the other hand,
access should be permitted on minor collector or local roadways.
Excessive protection or acquisition of access along these
facilities adversely affects desired development potentials and
could result in inappropriate public expenditures for access
control. Determination of roadway purpose permits applying
access, intersection, and design standards appropriate to the
need.
Driveway access to arterial and major collector streets is of
primary concern. The long -term effects of poor access management
are (1) erosion of roadway capacity and (2) high accident
frequency. Traffic engineers and planners have for some time
recognized the need for control of driveway access. However,
since every parcel abutting an arterial or minor collector street
must be provided access, control of driveway access is often
difficult. The methodology to follow provides a means not only
to control driveway location and design for each parcel, but also
to limit the number of driveways.
It is estimated that under average conditions, the capacity of a
four -lane arterial or major collector street with a 45 mph speed
limit will be reduced by over one percent for every two percent
of the traffic that turns between the right lane and driveways at
unsignalized driveway locations. For example, if a street
carries 1,200 vehicles per hour in a direction and 120 turn into
driveways and 120 turn out of driveways per mile (20 percent
turns), then the capacity in that direction will be reduced by 10
percent. Currently, over 30 percent of the traffic along
arterials or major collectors with strip commercial development
may turn to and from driveways. As the level of design of the
driveway is increased (allowing turns to be made at higher
speeds), the capacity loss is reduced. Thus, it is desirable to
limit driveways to a minimum number with a high -type design.
a
January 1990
In addition to the impact they have on roadway capacity,
driveways also introduce conflicting traffic movements which
affect roadway safety. Right turns into and out of driveways
have the least impact, requiring only a speed change (creating
rear -end accident potential), a merge or demerge, and a turn
which may or may not cause encroachment on an adjacent traffic
lane. Left turns cause more conflicts. They require a speed
change, a merge or demerge, and the crossing of opposing traffic.
A study of accidents in suburban areas has indicated that over 11
percent of all accidents on major streets in municipalities
involved driveway maneuvers. Hence, it would appear to be in
Plymouth's best interest to have a policy which accomplishes the
following:
1. Limits the number of driveways to those which are actually
needed to safely accommodate the traffic generated by each
development.
2. Provides adequate spacing between driveways so conflicts
and resulting accidents) between vehicles maneuvering at
adjacent driveways do not arise.
3. Ensures proper design to accommodate driveway traffic and
minimize vehicle conflicts without significantly reducing
roadway capacity.
There are a number of cost - effective ways of controlling access
to preserve roadway capacity and enhance roadway safety. Some of
them are listed in Table A, and many of them can be used to both
improve existing conditions and plan for new driveway access.
Verification of warrants for special access features such as
multiple driveways or separate turn lanes, etc., will require
estimation of future non -site traffic volumes on the arterial or
major collector and site traffic volumes moving to and from the
proposed development. Four steps are necessary to determine the
driveway access needs of a site:
1. Estimate site traffic generation and future non -site
traffic.
2. Determine directional distribution of trips.
3. Estimate turning movements at driveway.
4. Analyze access requirements -- current and future.
T
ITT
G'4,FRS P P
July 10, 1991
SATHRE - BERGQUIST, INC.
150 SOUTH BROADWAY
612) 476 -6000
Mr. Charles E. Dillerud
Community Development Coordinator
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
SUBJECT: Lowery Hill Development Co.
GOLFVIEW ESTATES
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
6
WAYZATA, MN 55391
FAX 476 -0104
JUL 15 1991
CITY L.. .:-,vJTF
pMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT
Enclosed with this letter are revised GOLFVIEW ESTATES plans. The plans
have been revised to respond in part to comments and questions raised by
the development review committee and communicated to us in your letter
dated July 5, 1991. Issues raised which we differ with you on or wish
to provide further comment on are addressed in this letter. We are
responding to each item addressed in your letter so that you might
continue the processing of the application and schedule a public hearing
before the Planning Commission to consider the preliminary plat and the
rezoning.
Point #1 of your letter concerns the platting of 30 foot wide outlots
along Holly Lane for use as public trail corridors. We have revised the
plans and preliminary plat to show the 30 foot outlot easterly of Holly
Lane. We have also shifted the residential lot lines easterly as
necessary to maintain a 110 foot lot width and 18,500 square foot lot
minimum areas as required for R -1A zoning district standards. We
discussed by phone whether the residential lots nearest to Holly Lane
would be required to have a 35 foot setback from the trail corridor
outlots or whether since the outlots have been introduced between the
public street right -of -way and the lots that they are now not corner
is and would have only the ordinance required 15 foot side yard
setbacks. We propose that the nearest homes to Holly Lane would be 15
feet from the trail corridor and 45 feet from the right -of -way of Holly
Lane. You indicated to me that the City's recent policy has been to
require a full front yard street setback of 35 feet where a trail
corridor lies between a street right -of -way and a lot. We also
discussed the fact that if a trail corridor was introduced between two
lots in the middle of the block that the normal side yard setback would
still be employed. I believe that the City's policy should be
reconsidered.
Your Point *2 discusses the fact that park dedication requirements would
be satisfied in part by the dedication of the trailway outlots and
further by the construction of the trailways within the outlots and
further that the remaining balance of the park dedication requirements
will be satisfied by cash fees in lieu of land. We acknowledge this.
Point *3 of your letter requests that we show house pads on the lots on
the Grading plan drawing. On the Development Plan for the GOLFVIEW
ESTATES project we have shown a representation of homes and how they
might be sited on each lot. We have not depicted an actual house pad or
tentative building footprint on the grading plan for each lot but our
intent is that when the Final Site Grading Plan is prepared that we
would show a graded building pad where soil corrections are necessary
and where compacted fill would be brought into the building site area to
achieve the finished subgrade elevations for each hone. -I believe this
information should satisfy the Engineering Departments concern.
Point #4 indicates that a temporary cul-de -sac shall be constructed at
the end of Black Oaks Lane. This is our intent.
Point #6 of your letter deals with the right - of-way width for Holly Lane
and indicated that the City wishes to obtain 40 feet of right -of -way
east of the center line of the road. We have proposed that a 30 foot
right -of -way would be dedicated on the plat paralleled by the 30 foot
Outlot corridors. It is our position that the taking of more than 60
feet of land from our clients for road and trail purposes would not be
reasonable and so we are opposed to this extra right -of -way dedication
unless compensation is granted. We would encourage you to consider what
a total width of 70 feet of dedicated land would result in when extended
across the 2 small parcels that the Deziel's own at the corner of
Rockford Road and Holly Lane. The land area that they currently own is
two tax parcels at present and under R -1A standards could conceivably be
reconfigured into two normal residential lots if the City is not too
aggressive in its taking of road and trailway corridor. It is entirely
possible that if the City is too demanding there may only be one
building site left and I am sure that Deziels would oppose that taking
of their land as well. The Parks Department may wish to consider (1
hope) moving the trailway in closer to the roadway and a much narrower
road and trail corridor.
Point *6 of your letter indicates that the Engineering Department is
requesting that a temporary emergency access roadway be provided between
the Comstock Lane cul-de -sac and County Road #9 and that this access
would remain open until the Black Oaks Lane temporary cul-de -sac was
eliminated and the road was constructed through to County Road #9. We
are opposed to the creation of a temporary access in this location for
several reasons:
1. Between the cul-de -sac terminus and County Road *9 a stand
of trees exists which would have to be breached for the
temporary access. We do not intend to take these trees down
as a part of the development process and therefore this
temporary access would create a hardship on the land that is
avoidable.
2. The period of time that this temporary access would exist is
undetermined. It is certainly conceivable that the
temporary access could be in place for two or three or five
years. In any of these situations a terrible imposition
would be made on the adjoining homes.
3. We would oppose this temporary access road from a traffic
safety stand point. Presently our main entrance is at the
Intersection of Dunkirk Lane and County Road #9. If
Comstock Lane is extended to County Road #9 the intersection
of Dunkirk Road and this temporary road at Comstock Lane
would be very close. I believe the proximity is not
appropriate.
I hope that the Planning Staff and Planning Commission will concur that
the road pattern that is envisioned on our plat is the best one to
pursue. If however the City Staff feels very strongly that too many
homes and too much dead end would exist under the temporary condition;
we would suggest that the Dunkirk Lane through street could be turned
into a cul-de -sac with no County Road #9 access and that the Comstock
Lane cul -de -sac then could be extended through to County Road #9 and
become the main entrance into GOLFVIEW ESTATES. If this alternative was
favored the trees between the Comstock cul-de -sac and County Road #9
would be breached. Attachment A to this letter shows the
reconfiguration of lots on Dunkirk Lane and Comstock Lane to push the
access through in the Alternate location. We would appreciate it if
this alternate was presented to the Planning Commission, if the Staff
wishes to continue it's desire for the emergency access corridor.
In Point #7 of your letter you indicate that the Staff would like the
GOLFVIEW ESTATES property owners to limit the rate of discharge of storm
water from the property, and the volume of runoff from the property, to
the pre - development rates and volumes (for that portion of the water
that would drain into future stormwater pond BC -P5.) BC -P5 is the large
wetland area that stretches north from County Road #9 up through the
eastern and northern edges of the GOLFVIEW ESTATES site into the
Hollydale Golf Course and also between the GOLFVIEW ESTATES property and
Northfork, Fawn Creek and Oxbow Ridge. You indicated that the City has
not obtained all-'the easements for BC-P5 and so you are concerned about
flooding. In the subdivisions that have been platted adjacent to and
into BC -P5 easements have been created. We are proposing to dedicate
drainage for ponding easements across that portion of the wetland which
extends onto the GOLFVIEW ESTATES property.
I know that the basis for the Staff's drainage concerns are a reaction
to the calls that have been received by the City over the last several
years from the Hollydale Golf Course owners, the Deziel's, expressing
concern over the flooding of their holes numbered 6 and 7 which adjoin,
or are in, the wetland. I talked to Rich Deziel by phone several days
ago about his concern over whether the GOLFVIEW ESTATES subdivision
would result in a increase in water draining into the wetland. He
indicated that even in normal rainfalls water stands on parts of holes 6
and 7 and that it can interrupt the play of the holes and the operation
of the Golf Course. The fact that the Golf Course experiences such
frequent flooding (not just in extreme rainfall events) indicates that
one or two problems exist.
1. Mr. Deziel believes that the down - stream ditch and culvert
system (towards Plymouth Creek) needs to be cleaned out to
allow quicker passage of water out of the wetland.
Apparently Mr. Deziel has talked with representatives of the
City about this cleaning, but todate nothing has been done,
and /or
2. The reason for the frequent flooding is that the golf holes
actually encroach into what was once part of the wetland and
the golf holes were not filled high enough to protect them.
As a part of the GOLFVIEW ESTATES subdivision our goal in the
Engineering and Planning design has been to provide upland ponding
basins for several purposes:
1. To provide for sedimentation of stormwater runoff pollutants
prior to ultimate discharge into BC -P5 which is also a
federally protected wetland.
2. These basins provide a place for evaporation to occur
thereby decreasing the total volume of water which is moving
downstream.
3. A third goal and benefit of the basins is to provide a place
for water to be trapped long enough so that some of it can
seep into the upland ground water system.
4. A tremendous benefit of these basins is to provide a place
for attenuation of the peak runoff rates and a temporary
storage of portions of the volume of runoff from any given
rainfall event. Our intent in the design is to limit the
runoff of stormwater in a 100 year rainfall event to the
pre - development rate of runoff. We are not however
proposing to be able to limit the volume of runoff to the
pre - existing condition. This would be impractical. We
would support Mr. Deziel in his request to the City and
County to clean and maintain the downstream drainage
facilities so that the normal rainfall events do not result
in damage to anyone in the watershed.
Point #8 of your letter indicates that the Engineering division requests
a 16" watermain be extended along Holly Lane to provide for a future
trunk watermain loop north of County Road #9. While my clients only own
a small portion of the Holly Lane frontage north of-County Road *9 they
would be willing to cooperate to assist in this trunk extension.
We understand that the cost of the extension would be reimbursed to the
developer. We have not shown this construction on our preliminary plans
and have a couple of questions:
1. Does the City have or will they acquire a utility easement
from the Deziel's to allow construction to pass through
their property?
2. Would this watermain extension be a more appropriately a
City public improvement project?
We would propose that these questions and the City's desire to install
this water system should be worked out prior to final approval of the
construction plans and specifications for the utility system.
Point #9 of your letter indicates that you expect the Lowry Hill
Development Company to obtain utility easements across the property to
the north of the subdivision for the extension of sanitary sewer. We
propose to ask the northerly property owner (which is Hollydale Golf
Course) to provide this easement at no cost to Lowry Hill Development
Co. nor to the City. If they refuse to grant the easement under those
terms and conditions, we would propose to move the alignment of the
sanitary sewer southerly so that it is entirely within the boundaries of
GOLFVIEW ESTATES. The reason that we have shown the sewer aligned as we
have was to go around the wooded hillside which crosses slightly on to
the golf course property and basically to run the sewer line along the
wetland edge and below the mature tree line.
Point #10 of your letter indicates that the Engineering department
wishes us to show the sanitary sewer elevation for the sewer to serve
the golf course property to be at elevation 952. I intend to meet with
the City Engineer and his representatives to work through the details of
sewer elevations. We would not be changing the preliminary plan at this
time.
Point #11 of your letter indicates that the developer will be
responsible for the costs of curb and gutter on County Road #9 and Holly
Lane. Do you intend to upgrade these roads soon or are you merely
indicating that the future lot owners in GOLFVIEW ESTATES (that border
on these roads) should be aware of a future assessment. As a part of
the development of the GOLFVIEW ESTATES subdivision we do not propose to
upgrade either County Road #9 or Holly Lane. If improvements on these
roadways are necessary we would encourage the City to undertake a public
improvement project and to determine the assessments and relative
benefits to the properties along the roadways at that time.
Point #12 indicates that the developer shall enter into a agreement with
the City to pay for area charges and over depth costs for project #040.
At the hearing for the trunk sanitary sewer, the Lowry Hill Development
Co. agreed to pay for over depth costs to extend the sewer to their
property deeply enough to gravity service the golf course property.
They would also certainly accept assessments for normal sewer trunk and
water trunk for their property at the time of final plat approval.
Point #13 indicates the City wishes the sanitary sewer line extended
westerly all the way to Holly Lane. We will work with the Engineering
department to work out the logistics of the utility configurations as we
proceed into the final design of the utility and street portions of the
project.
Point #14 requests that the plat be redesigned to provide internal
access to the exception parcels at the corner of Holly Lane and Rockford
Road. As I have pointed out earlier in this letter the Deziel family
owns two parcels that total about 1 acre of land. Neither parcel has a
structure on it at present. If the City is not too aggressive with its
demands for additional street right -of -way and trail corridor it would
be possible to redivide the Deziel parcels to allow two R -1A stanch*
residential lots. Both of these lots could be adequately served by
direct driveway access to Holly Lane in the same manner that the other
homes along Holly Lane are presently served. We show a sanitary sewer
line extended to the Deziel property. This coupled with the watermain
that would be built in Holly Lane would provide full sewer and water
service for the land. We are not supportive of extending an internal
street to serve the Deziel property. We think it is adequately served
at present. We are very concerned that if this 1 acre parcel had street
right -of -way on three sides of it that it would be a mistake.
Point #15 of your letter requests that we provide all fire hydrant
Engineering details on these plans. We have not added these details to
the preliminary stage plans but fully intend to do so in the final
construction set of plans. Please carry this item forward in the
engineers memo and we will pick it up later.
Point #16 requests that we note fire department requirements on the
plans relative to temporary access and water supply and the details for
hydrant and gate valve installation. As in #15 we have not added this
information in the Preliminary Engineering plans as it has a better
place on the final construction plans and I would reiterate that it is
our intent to comply with established City Standards for the future
publicly owned facilities.
In Point #17 you indicate that you wish us to specify that all fire
hydrants are capable of handling a flow of 1250 gallons per minute. As
in the preceding points we fully intend to specify City approved
equipment for sewer, water, storm sewer and street construction.
Point #18 points out that a maximum of two development "signs" or
entrance monuments are permitted in the project with a total surface
square footage of 32 sq.ft. The exact location, design and material
construction for these signs would be determined following preliminary
stage approvals. We understand that the City is interested in reviewing
the easements that would be created for the signs to sit on and
interested in how the long term maintenance would be handled. These
details will be worked out in the future and presented to the City for
consideration.
Point #19 indicates that this property was part of the Comprehensive
Plan Review. The land use designation of this parcel changed from LA2
to LA1 at that time. This plat is being presented in conformance with
densities anticipated under the LA1 guiding and our requested rezoning
of R -1A is consistent with this I.A1 guiding as well. Hopefully the
Metropolitan Council will soon approve your comprehensive plan, I
frankly can not understand them taking so long. Please continue to
press for the necessary Metropolitan Council approvals.
In Point #20 you indicate that you have determined that the Lot width
for Lot 5, Block 1, and Lot 6, Block 3, are substandard and you indicate
the plans must comply with the 110 foot lot width minimum requirement.
Lot 5, Block 1 has been redesigned as a part of the installation of the
30 foot trail corridor along Holly Lane. This and other lots in the
subdivision are intended to be 110 feet wide at the building setback
line as per the ordinance. As part of the final plat computation
process we will check each lot for minimum width at the 35 foot front
yard setback line and also check each lot to assure that they contain at
least 18,500 square feet.
In your Point #21 you indicate that you wish a more detailed tree
preservation plan be submitted. All trees that meet the minimum
standards are to be shown. This request presents a hardship. The
easterly portion of this property is so densely treed that the location
of the trees are nearly impossible to determine without some tree
removal or brushing of lines that would be harmful to the trees. We
have located the free standing trees and the less dense groups of trees
and shown them on the plan. The very dense easterly growth is an old
nursery area that has run wild. It seems to me that the City should
wait until the individual lot surveys come in to determine which trees
are outside the construction zone on each lot. The location of the road
and house placements along it (in the densely treed area) in my opinion
does not matter tremendously. Whether you move the road 10 feet this
way or 10 feet that way you would impact basically the same number of
trees. I hope that the Staff and Planning Commission and Council will
find this approach to be logical. If not I am certainly open to
suggestions.
Your Point #22 indicates that our survey should to be revised to show
all existing easements. We are showing all easements that we are aware
of. Once a title opinion has been completed any additional easements
which are found to exist will be added to the survey and or the final
plat.
Finally Point #23 of your letter indicates that you have sent the
Hennepin County Public Works Department comments on the plat. Just a
few comments relative to their requests. As they indicate our
preliminary plat indicates a dedication of a total of 40 feet from
centerline of County Road #9 northward for public right -of -way which
they concur is correct. The County has approved of the location of our
main entrance point opposite Dunkirk Lane, which we are pleased with.
Thirdly they indicate that the Holly Lane access to County Road #9
should have a minimum throat of 26 feet and 30 foot radii, and the
County is recommending that this access point include a right turn and
by -pass lane. As you known we are not proposing any improvement in
front of the Deziel property nor are we proposing improvements in the
way of street widening for Holly Lane or County Road #9, so this point
seems to be directed towards the City and not specifically this plat.
The developer is required to obtain an approved entrance permit for the
entrance. We are aware of this requirement and would pursue the
entrance permit prior to construction start. The County indicates that
all other access to County Road *9 must be via the existing or proposed
City street system. We would concur that this is appropriate. You
should note that they are not aware of the Staff's consideration of a
temporary access so close to Dunkirk Dane. I am not sure they would
support that temporary access. In Point *6 the County reminds us that
any work in their right -of -way requires a permit, both for utility and
for roadway construction of an entrance. Again our intent would be to
pursue these permits prior to construction start. Lastly the County
indicates that any disturbed areas within their right -of -way must be
restored. Our construction plans would speak to this restoration.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment about the OOLFVIEW ESTATES
project. We hope that the Staff can proceed to prepare reports and
schedule a public hearing. Should you take exception to our position on
any of these points, please let me know so we can sit down again and
work things through.
Sincerely,
SATHRE- BERGQUIST, INC.
Richard W. Sathre, P.E.
RWS /dm
attachments
cc: Lowery Hill Development Co.
PLYuOUT"
GUN
Ue
104 -
Z -- A
T. P A u
1
i
J7 1
L
1
i
I
1
1
7
J I
A - i
I
PLYMOUTH CREEK
SCHOOL
1 II
1
1N3WdO13A30 ,nw Ammol
JCS °[• • ib[SC '.n .l.'•.N • •..O.OUe .n(`= OLI
ONI 1smoowa8-3k1H1VS 931V1S3 M31A:11OD
1`•,• kYW LOIEdOl0A30 O 1Vld AmVNINrUmd
s
i
of ass
1
n n'
1N3WdO13A30 ,nw Ammol
JCS °[• • ib[SC '.n .l.'•.N • •..O.OUe .n(`= OLI
ONI 1smoowa8-3k1H1VS 931V1S3 M31A:11OD
1`•,• kYW LOIEdOl0A30 O 1Vld AmVNINrUmd
s
i
of ass
1
or —
I
r i• °jF
t_ !L•9E
7
q5
2
EA,
ElF6j3;l ltj y e3"
JS Ftt:: S E OIL ::iF+F
55 af
f%15.sjl t +F .EFFF if
tr
i 0 r
06FFW = U D
M t
Coto C 0
O.R. 0 0
ow t rA
0 t 0
w a
0
r l o FF o c
2 2 Z .07.07CC 0
N N } z2f.
wmzr i < pi
go •= i i m H u a i
I ' It1t11ttEN!!t!1!1
liyl 9
i!
it ! !! #1!lEtll!!!!t!!!!E! IltitlillttAl4
W « i t !lLis£iiii!!f
F •r... Ir II _••••••••sLriz :lLlslLa - ••••••••sLSS:
I '
II'I
III
I1
1
I
r i• °jF
t_ !L•9E
7
q5
2
EA,
ElF6j3;l ltj y e3"
JS Ftt:: S E OIL ::iF+F
55 af
f%15.sjl t +F .EFFF if
tr
i 0 r
06FFW = U D
M t
Coto C 0
O.R. 0 0
ow t rA
0 t 0
w a
0
r l o FF o c
2 2 Z .07.07CC 0
N N } z2f.
wmzr i < pi
go •= i i m H u a i
I ' It1t11ttEN!!t!1!1
liyl 9
i!
it ! !! #1!lEtll!!!!t!!!!E! IltitlillttAl4
W « i t !lLis£iiii!!f
F •r... Ir II _••••••••sLriz :lLlslLa - ••••••••sLSS:
I '
II'I
III
I1
1
tr
i 0 r
06FFW = U D
M t
Coto C 0
O.R. 0 0
ow t rA
0 t 0
w a
0
r l o FF o c
2 2 Z .07.07CC 0
N N } z2f.
wmzr i < pi
go •= i i m H u a i
I ' It1t11ttEN!!t!1!1
liyl 9
i!
it ! !! #1!lEtll!!!!t!!!!E! IltitlillttAl4
W « i t !lLis£iiii!!f
F •r... Ir II _••••••••sLriz :lLlslLa - ••••••••sLSS:
I '
II'I
III
I1
1
I ' It1t11ttEN!!t!1!1
liyl 9
i!
it ! !! #1!lEtll!!!!t!!!!E! IltitlillttAl4
W « i t !lLis£iiii!!f
F •r... Ir II _••••••••sLriz :lLlslLa - ••••••••sLSS:
I '
II'I
III
I1
1
z.
fitF
i f it
I
T
7- 7i
t
M
N
SCA" cw WILts
E
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION NOTICE TO USERS +
PMvd me** Mclw comemm
1. Ift coy Co6ovd way OU"%"*
affm,o -a - to VaptrOroo A s
soma or omvnomwft a
inWmodicft Ano-ob MIXX CO"c"s
non%~ by vo cafty"-dv NOTE
Mw= Aftdoft 0 EftvV weRzong- Deve6opffore Dopo"ont. THIS PLAN IS USED TO GUIDE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
PO-*o hvemrmnq" 2. Rely to Convearo" Plop THOROUGHFARE SYSTEM. ACTUAL ALIGNMENT AND
for expoma-cn of Vcrougmt" DESIGN WILL BE A FUNCTION OF SPECIFIC PLANS
OAOO ox)A APPROVED BY THE CITY ODLWCL
S RFr 1990 THOROUGHFARE PLAN
Pumoum
13
l... 3: j 3•rZi•i:.L i. 1 s.. i S:I• ;fIij'.
s saai s3 3 : osD ;'3 3Y$= #i s ia 3i•a t t t: f I :...:. t t t
i
t CO. RD. 47 -
4010w
an an o9oftol —
4SOTOAge
4W r. sa.w---- t - - - --
Y
a Toawe
01.01.. Z Z ,
o
i0101.
SITE - :: _ , i -
i 0101 r
O .. da ,
0101_,
e
as TO •.t i ~ 1 0101 -
w • • •.
ROCK RD
ODD
do TO awe
P"
0101.
0101 _— ... -- — -• '--''
N TO •vt
No
a 01.01
J s
CO
Ilk-
Ol
X11 _ _ • t -. 1 / _ — .' - — -- - _ ,
January 1990
3. Whenever possible, arterials should be laid out in a grid
pattern. At the same time, however, the arterial pattern
should be sensitive to prevailing environmental concerns and
constraints to create parcels of land that are easily
platted, and to create intersections where adjacent legs are
at right angles to each other.
4. Arterials should provide continuity, because the primary
function of an arterial is to provide for the through
movement of traffic.
5. Each link in the arterial system should be designed to
perform its specific function within the total
transportation system. In other words, the design should
match the anticipated load.
6. Arterials should respect the integrity and stability of
neighborhoods.
7. Arterials should be fully integrated with existing and
planned mass transit systems.
S. Roadway widths are a function of traffic demand not
classifications. A roadway is not built to four lanes
because it is an arterial, but it is built to that width to
accommodate the volume of traffic it is expected to carry
see Table 7). The length of trips that are served is more
a determining factor for roadway classification.
1. In general, major collector streets should only provide
access to abutting properties that are major traffic
generators (shopping centers, office parks, etc.).
2. Access to other abutting properties should be provided from
local streets and minor collectors.
1 3. Major collectors should serve trip lengths of between three
to five miles.
4. The intersections of major collectors with arterials will
likely be signalized. Major collectors should not intersect
minor arterials at less than one quarter mile spacing.
Intersections of major collectors with principal or
intermediate arterials should generally be no less than at
one half mile intervals.
5. The design of major collectors should reflect the function
of providing a more mobility and less land access.
6. The design of major collectors should provide for medium
range speeds (40 mph) to attract traffic from local streets.
32
January 1990
b. Access to the lot is provided jointly with other lots
created as part of the same subdivision such that
minimum driveway spacing, corner clearance, and (pre -
subdivision) property clearance requirements (specified
elsewhere) are met.
c. Access to the lot is provided jointly with adjacent
lot(s) not part of the same subdivision such that no
additional driveways are created, and provided that, to
the extent possible, minimum driveway spacing, corner
clearance, and (combined) property clearance
requirements are satisfied by the combination of lots
served by the existing or relocated joint access
driveway.
d. Access to the lot is ultimately to be provided from $a
frontage or service road (paralleling the arterial)
which has been planned and officially approved by the
participating agencies, and right -of -way dedication
along the arterial adjacent to the lot totals at least
100 feet from the arterial street centerline or any
other distance designated on the approved plans.
2. No new subdivision shall create any parcels zoned for
single - family or duplex residential uses fronting on an
arterial or major collector street. Subdividers should be
encouraged to have all of these lots front on local streets
or minor collectors. To the extent possible, lots abutting
arterial or major collector street rights -of -way should have
their back yards face the arterial or major collector.
oning Ordinance Provisions
Front Yards - -To ensure that joint access ultimately can be
provided to parcels of substandard width along arterial and major
collector streets, front yards of all parcels abutting a
designated arterial or major collector street except those in
single - family and duplex residential zoning districts should be a
minimum of 100 feet.
Other Provision - -The zoning ordinance should also incorporate the
other arterial and major collector driveway access guidelines
which follow or refer to a separate driveway ordinance, if one is
enacted.
Driveway Ordinance Provisions
Internal Design and Access Review - -When processing site plans and
plots, city staff should review not only the driveway location
and design, but also the internal site plan.
For any development for which more than one driveway is being
requested, the applicant should be required to submit a brief
report justifying the need, describing the internal circulation
f
January 1990
Driveway Access Control Policy
Driveway access to abutting parcels is generally regulated by the
agency which has jurisdiction over the roadway. Effective
control of driveway access on the entire street system of a
community usually requires cooperation of municipal, county, and
state officials.
At present, access control of arterial and major collector
streets and highways by most agencies is weak or ineffective.
Often policies are not written, making application inconsistent
and difficult to enforce. Agencies operating in a common area
also usually have differing policies, making uniform control
difficult and permitting undesirable precedents to be
established.
However, by adopting ordinance standards for arterial and major
collector driveway access control, Plymouth can extend its
policies to all arterial and major collector streets in the
community, regardless of jurisdiction. The policy also becomes
legally enforceable.
Driveway access standards could be incorporated into the Code or
the zoning ordinance.
Ordinance Provisions -- General
Neither a building permit nor a driveway permit should be issued
unless and until all zoning and driveway requirements are met and
site plans approved.
Subdivision Code Provisions - -Lot Widths
The minimum desirable widths for lots fronting on an arterial or
major collector should be about 20 to 30 percent greater than the
minimum driving spacing shown in Table B. Hence, the Subdivision
Code should incorporate the following provisions:
1. No lot having a width parallel to the arterial or major
collector street right -of -way line of less than 200 feet
should front on a designated arterial street (example for 30
mph arterial or major collector), unless one of the
following conditions is met:
a. Access to the lot is limited to streets other than
arterial and major collector streets (commercial and
industrial districts should not be given access on
residential streets).
5•D.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: July 30, 1991 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 14, 1991
FILE NO.: 91051
PETITIONER: John Henning
REQUEST: Amended Preliminary Plat /Final Plat and Subdivision
Variances
LOCATION: North of Sunset Trail at 3rd Avenue North
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential District)
BACKGROUND:
On June 7, 1982, the City Council, by Resolution 82 -264 approved a Preliminary
Plat for a 32 lot single family subdivision known as "Hennings 1st Addition ".
Subsequent to that action Final Plats for the seven lot first phase and 15 lot
second phases were approved as Final Plats.
On November 20, 1989, the City Council, by Resolution 89 -747, approved an
eight lot Final Plat known as "Sunset Valley Homes 2nd Addition" for this
site. The Final Plat mylars were not recorded at Hennepin County.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the Official City
Newspaper, and all property owners within 100 feet have been notified. A
development sign has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Proposed is an amendment to the design for the final phase of the Sunset
Valley Homes residential subdivision to increase the number of lots from
eight to nine. . Both the previously approved Preliminary Plat and Final
Plat must be amended to accomplish the design change now proposed.
2. The proposal to add one lot to this phase of the subdivision results in
two proposed lots that would have a lot width at the front setback line of
less than the 110 foot standard for single family detached lots in the R-
lA Zoning District. Also, three lots of the previously approved
Preliminary Plat were less than 110 feet in width at the front setback
line and therefore are noncompliant with the Zoning Ordinance.
No variance was applied for or approved at the time of the original
Preliminary Plat for this area was processed in 1983. Lots for which
variances are now applied for from the Zoning Ordinance standard of 110
feet width at the front setback line are as follows:
see next page)
Page Two
File 91051
a. Lot 4 - 105 feet versus 110 feet
b. Lot 5 - 80 feet versus 110 feet
c. Lot 6 - 94 feet versus 110 feet
d. Lot 7 - 86 feet versus 110 feet
e. Lot 8 - 93 feet versus 110 feet
Proposed Lots 7 and 8 are the "new" lots for which variances are
requested. Proposed Lots 4, 5, and 6 are identical to the previously
approved Preliminary Plat for which variances should have been applied
for.
3. A variance is also requested to allow the lot width at the rear property
line for proposed Lot 9 to be zero versus the Ordinance Standard of 30
feet. Configuration of this lot has not changed (although the size has)
since the original Preliminary Plat, and therefore, this variance should
have been applied for at that time as well.
4. The additional lot is proposed to be situated on the east side of proposed
Kirkwood Lane resulting from the adjustment of property lines for the
three previous lots on that side of the street to now create four. The
lot areas for all lots within the proposed subdivision will remain in
excess,of 18,500 square feet, the R -1A Zoning Ordinance Standard.
5. In all other respects the proposed amended Preliminary and Final Plat
meets or exceeds Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance standards for
single family residence lots in the R -1A Zoning District.
6. Dimensional standards for proposed lots in a subdivision Preliminary Plat
must meet Zoning Ordinance requirements as to minimum lot area, width and
depth. Variances proposed to those standards are reviewed subject to the
provisions of Section 500.41 of the City Code where three findings are
specified that must be made by the Planning Commission before any variance
is approved. A copy of those three findings together with the applicant's
narrative in support of the variances, and in response to the findings is
attached.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. Except with respect to the variances noted, the Preliminary and Final Plat
comply with the provisions of the Subdivision Code, Zoning Ordinance, and
other related codes, policies and ordinances of the City of Plymouth
related to conventional platting in the R -1A Zoning District.
2. The proposal to add one lot to the plat will not result in the dwelling
unit density, based on land area of the plat, exceeding R -IA district
standards. All lots will remain in excess of 18,500 square feet.
3. The variances requested, both the four which were a part of the earlier
plat, and the two that result from the current proposal to add one more
lot to the plat are at least partly a result of the unusual shape of the
parcel proposed for platting, and the difficult topographic relief of the
site.
see next page)
Page Three
File 91051
4. The sum of the frontage at the 35 foot front setback line along both sides
of the proposed Kirkwood Lane when divided by the nine lots now proposed
yields an average lot width at the front setback line approximately 120
feet. While the Zoning Ordinance does not speak in terms of avera'ej such
a calculation does suggest that the developer, if the shape of the parcel
and topographic conditions of the site would permit, could rearrange lot
lines to create lots with a standard width at the front setback line.
4. Due partly to the varied topography of this site we do not find that the
variance requests for lot widths at the setback line, or lot width at the
rear property line in the case of Lot 9, will result in an appearance of
development inconsistent with the R -1A standard.
5. We find the variance requests comply with the findings the Planning
Commission must make consistent with Section 500.41 of the City Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend adoption of the attached resolutions providing for the approval of
the amended Preliminary Plat including lot width variances; amended Final
Plat; and, an amended Resolution Setting Conditions prior to recording of the
Final Plat.
Submitted by:
ity Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Amended Preliminary Plat and Approving Variances
2. Resolution Approving Amended Final Plat
3. Resolution Setting Conditions Prior to Recording
4. Engineer's Memo
5. Subdivision Variance Criteria
6. Applicant's Narrative in Support of Variances
7. Location Map
8. Amended Preliminary Plat
9. Amended Final Plat
10. Previously Approved Final Plat
pc /jk /91051:dh)
APPROVING AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SUBDIVISION VARIANCES FOR JOHN HENNING
FOR SUNSET VALLEY HOMES 2ND ADDITION (91051)
WHEREAS, John Henning has requested approval for an amended Preliminary Plat
and Subdivision Variances for Sunset Valley Homes 2nd Addition, a plat for
nine lots on 5.05 acres located North of Sunset Trail at 3rd Avenue; 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 hereby does approve the request by John Henning
for an amended Preliminary Plat and Subdivision Variances for Sunset Valley
Homes 2nd Addition for nine lots located North of Sunset Trail at 3rd Avenue,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's
expense.
3. No building permits shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for
sewer and water.
4. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
the Dedication Policy in effect at the time of filing the Final Plat.
5. Street names shall comply with the City Street Naming System.
6. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor
elevations for new structures in subdivisions adjacent to, or containing
any open storm water drainage facility.
7. No building permits shall be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
8. Incorporation of tree protection provisions in the Final Plat and
Development Contract approval.
9. Compliance with applicable terms of conditions of City Council Resolution
82 -264 (Preliminary Plat of Henning's 1st Addition).
10. Subdivision Variances are found to comply with the criteria of the
Subdivision Ordinance and are approved as follows:
a. Lot 4 - Lot width at the front setback line of 105 feet versus 110
feet Ordinance Standard.
b. Lot 5 - Lot width at the front setback line of 80 feet versus 110 feet
Ordinance Standard.
see next page)
Page Two
File 91051
c. Lot 6 - Lot width at the front setback line of 94 feet versus 110 feet
Ordinance Standard.
d. Lot 7 - Lot width at the front setback line of 86 feet versus 110 feet
Ordinance Standard.
e. Lot 8 - Lot width at the front setback line of 93 feet versus 110 feet
Ordinance Standard.
f. Lot 9 - Lot width at the rear property line of 0 feet versus the
Ordinance Standard of 30 feet.
res /pc /91051.pp:dh)
APPROVING AMENDED FINAL PLAT FOR JOHN HENNING FOR SUNSET VALLEY HOMES 2ND
ADDITION (91051)
WHEREAS, has requested approval of an amended Final Plat for Sunset Valley
Homes 2nd Addition to increase the number of lots from 8 to 9 located North of
Sunset Trail at 3rd Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, the City staff has prepared a Development Contract covering the
improvements related to said plat;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the amended Final
Plat and Development Contract for Sunset Valley Homes 2nd Addition located
North of Sunset Trail at 3rd Avenue; and,
FURTHER, that the Development Contract for said plat be approved, and that the
Mayor and City Manager be authorized to execute the Development Contract on
behalf of the City.
res /pc /91051.fp:dh)
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO THE AMENDED
FINAL PLAT FOR SUNSET VALLEY HOMES 2ND ADDITION (91051)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the amended Final Plat and Development
Contract for Sunset Valley Homes 2nd Addition;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the following to
be met, prior to recording of, and related to said plat:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. The Ordinance rezoning the property shall be published upon evidence that
the Final Plat has been filed and recorded with Hennepin County.
3. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
City Policy in effect at the time of filing the Final Plat.
4. No building permits shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for
the construction of municipal sewer and water.
5. Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's
expense.
6. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures in subdivisions adjacent to, or containing any open
storm water drainage facility.
7. No yard setback variances are granted or implied.
8. Approved variances are:
Lot 4 - Lot width at the front setback line of 105 feet versus 110 feet
Ordinance Standard.
Lot 5 - Lot width at the front setback line of 80 feet versus 110 feet
Ordinance Standard.
Lot 6 - Lot width at the front setback line of 94 feet versus 110 feet
Ordinance Standard.
Lot 7 - Lot width at the front setback line of 86 feet versus 110 feet
Ordinance Standard.
Lot 8 - Lot width at the front setback line of 93 feet versus 110 feet
Ordinance Standard.
Lot 9 - Lot width at the rear property line of 0 feet versus the Ordinance
Standard of 30 feet.
9. Submittal of required utility and drainage easements as approved by the
City Engineer prior to filing the Final Plat.
see next page)
Page Two
File 91051
10. No building permits to be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
11. Access shall be limited to internal public roads and prohibited from
Sunset Trail.
12. The Development Contract as approved by the City Council, shall be fully
executed prior to releaW of the Final Plat.
res /pc /91051.sc:dh) i'
l
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: August 6, 1991
FILE NO.: 91051
PETITIONER: Mr. John Henning, Sunset Valley Homes, 11425 Highway 55, Plymouth, MN
55441
FINAL PLAT: SUNSET VALLEY HOMES SECOND ADDITION (REVISED)
LOCATION: North of Sunset Trail, west of Jonquil Lane in the southwest 1/4 of
Section 35.
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. _ia_ Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _ X _ Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits
are issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No.
1 and No. 2.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are
reviewed annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that
in effect at the time of final plat approval.
4. Area assessments: None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None.
N/A Yes No
6. _ X _ Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The City will require utility and drainage easements ten feet
101) in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in width
adjoining side and rear lot lines.
N/A Yes No
7. — -X —
8. — X —
9. X — —
All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The City will require twenty foot (20') utility and drainage
easements for proposed utilities along the lot lines where these
utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has been
reviewed with the final construction plans and the following
changes are necessary:
Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100
year high water elevation and conformance with the City's
comprehensive storm water drainage plan.
All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. This is not an automatic process
in conjunction with the platting process. It is the owner's
responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal descriptions
of easements proposed to be vacated.
10. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to
the City with this application - If it is subseguently 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
11. — X — All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
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
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
2 -
N/A Yes No
12. X_
13. — _X_ —
14. X _
15. X_
UTILITIES:
N/A Yes No
16. X _
Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to the
City grid system for street names. The following changes will be
necessary.
Conforms with the City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan -
The following revisions must be made to conform with the City's
adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan.
Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection
of and
All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on
Conforms with City standards requiring the developer to construct
utilities necessary to serve this plat -
In accordance with City standards, the developer shall be
responsible for constructing the necessary sanitary sewer, water,
storm sewer and streets needed to serve this plat. A registered
professional engineer must prepare the plans and profiles of the
proposed sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer facilities and
streets to serve the development.
3 -
N/A Yes No
17. _ X _ Final utility plans submitted comply with all City requirements -
The developer has submitted the required construction plans for
the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities;
and has also furnished profiles of these utilities as well as the
proposed street system (public and private).
18. X _ Per developer's request final plans will be prepared by the City.
If it is their desire to have the City construct these facilities
as part of its Capital Improvements Program, a petition must be
submitted to the City. The cutoff date for petitions is October 1
of the year preceding construction, if the developer is paying
1002 of the cost.
19. _ x Minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots. The minimum basement elevations shall be 910.7 for Lots 4.
5 and 6. Block 1.
20. _ X The construction plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
21. _ X _ The construction plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
4 -
N/A Yes No
22. _ X It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's public
utility foreman, 24 hours in advance of making any proposed
utility connections to the City's sanitary sewer and water
systems. The developer shall also be responsible for contacting
Jim Kolstad of the Public Works Department for an excavating
permit prior to any digging within the City right -of -way. All
water connections shall be via wet tap.
N/A Yes No
23. _ X _ Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been submitted
to the City's consulting engineer for review to see if it is in
conformance with the City's Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan.
All of their recommendations shall be incorporated in a revised
plan. The grading and drainage plan shall also indicate proposed
methods of erosion control, including the placement of silt fence
in strategic locations. Additionally, the following revisions
will be necessary:
Submitted by: '-
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
5 -
1. General Conditions. The Planning Commission may recommend a variance from
the provisions of this Section ( 500.41) as to specific properties when, in
its judgment, an unusual hardship on the land exists. In granting a
variance, the Commission may prescribe conditions that it deems necessary
or desirable in the public interest. In making its findings, as required
below, the Commission shall consider the nature of the proposed use of the
land and the existing use of land in the vicinity, the number of persons
to reside or work in the proposed subdivision, and the probable effect of
the proposed subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. No
variance shall be granted unless the Commission finds:
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the
specific property such that the strict application of the provisions
of this Section would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of
the land.
b. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant.
c. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in
which the property is situated.
The Commission findings in granting or denying a variance shall be in
writing and filed with the City Clerk.
2. Lpplication Rem. Applications for any variance under this Subsection
shall be submitted in writing by the owner or subdivider at the time the
preliminary plat is filed for consideration by the Planning Commission,
and shall state all facts relied upon by the applicant, and shall be
supplemented with maps, plans or other additional data which may aid the
Commission in the analysis of the proposed project. The plans for such
development shall include such covenants, restrictions or other legal
provisions necessary to guarantee the full achievement of the plan for the
Proposed project.
form:o >pl /sub.stnd /s) 10/89
Refer 1. Lot 9 Block 1 SSVH
Request a variance for Lot 9 because it does not meet
Sub division Ordinance for a 30 foot minimum width at the
rear lot line.
At the present design - lot 9 has the required
minimum 18,500 sq feet.
To change the design would alter the required minimum
square feet needed.
It is requested that lot 9 block 1 remain as redesigned
and that the variance be for the required 30 foot minimum
width at the rear lot line.
Re Variance Standards
a) Strict application of the Ordinance would
deprive us the use of this lot.
b) The variance is necessary to allow us normal
property use.
c) The granting of the variance will not be
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property in this development or neighborhood.
LI
Refer 2. Lots 4 - 5 - 6 and 7 Block 1 SSVH
Request a variance for lots 4 - 5 - 6 and 7 of Block 1,
SSVH because these lots do not meet the Zoning Ordinance
for minimum width at the front yard set back line.
A 110 foot width is required at the 35 foot front yard
setback on each of these lots.
Request that the variance be granted to permit these
lots to be as redesigned.
These lots as originally designed do not meet the required
measurements because of all of these lots being on a
cul de sac in a pie shape figuration.
Re Variance Standards
1. Using a cul de sac to gain excess to all parcels
results in this particular physical shape.
2. The variation is based upon the unique shape due
to a cul de sac.
3. The purpose of using a cul de sac is to gain excess
to all parcels of the property.
4. The hardship relief is a needed variance from the
Ordinance requirements.
5. By granting the variance the public welfare and
the neighborhood will be improved as well as the areas
adjacent to them.
6. This variation will not impair:
a) supply of light
b) air to adjacent properties
c) increase congestion of public streets
d) increase danger of fire or public safety
e) diminish or impair property values
in the neighborhood.
Refer 2. Lot 8 Block 1 SSVH
Request a variance for lot 8, block 1, SSVH
This lot does not meet the Zoning Ordinance for minimum
width at the front yard set back line. A 110 foot width is
required at the 35 foot front yard setback on this lot.
Request that a variance be granted to permit this lot to
be as redesigned.
Re Variance Standards
1. The size of this parcel has been designed to meet
the minimum of 18,500 sq ft.To change the design of this
lot would effect adjacent lots to be deficient in size or
sq ft area. The variance is to permit the minimum width to
be less than 110 feet wide.
2. This variance is requested due to the same as
stated in (1) above.
3. The purpose of the variation:
Originally lot 8 which has been redesigned into
lots 8 and 9 was the site of the Farm Home of John L. Henning
the project developer. This home was situated so that it
occupied more land space then a normal size lot would and
Jack Henning planned to Remodel this old farm home to
look modern.
The builders today refuse to build an expensive
new home amongst an old remodeled farm home and convinced us
to destroy the farm home. We have done this.
Another objection was that the lot is a corner
lot with a lot of square footage on Sunset Trail as well
as on the cul de sac - Kirkwood Lane. The real estate taxes
of a lot - twice the size of other lots may cause an excess
amount of real estate taxes for a new owner compared to
adjacent lots.
Continued -
Refer 2. Lot 8 Block 1 SSVH - Continued
It appears that the lots as redesigned overcome
these major objections to the orignal design.
The redesign was not to increase income potential
but is for the purpose of obtaining builders willing to build
on these lots so as to complete the development and to be an
improvement overall.
4. The hardship relief is a needed variance from the
Ordinance requirements.
S. By granting the variance the public welfare and the
neighberhood will be improved as well as the areas adjacent
to them.
6. This variation will not impair:
a) supply of light
b) air to adjacent properties
c) increase congestion of public streets
d) increase danger of fire or public safety
e) diminish or impair property values
in the neighborhood.
1
MIA
SMBRIMI
I KID
JUNIOR -M
HIGH SCHOCX-
111= =1 =_
WON
r•.1ice - -
som- 'i
0 all
KIRZOOD
Ilkfill,
if 0-4
Is
7
Si4iRE
n
ti
0
a
c
Z
n
0
n
0
n
s fill 1i
1
Ir
I.
C
o 1 BENS
Im
1
3RC AVENUE t NOM • ` ,, {. :. Z
1 r 1
i
s
1
frlr, !fir• 1 tl II•• is I''
fill
it:11,
t
t •
1 I 1. l tt .• i . i
t
1
1
V! 1
1 Cy
1 1.y1
z,^ 1
1
VI1
1
3
O
J
W
y
t
C7
0
X
0
1
f
n
ti
0
a
c
Z
n
0
n
0
n
s fill 1i
1
Ir
I.
C
o 1 BENS
Im
1
3RC AVENUE t NOM • ` ,, {. :. Z
1 r 1
i
s
1
frlr, !fir• 1 tl II•• is I''
fill
it:11,
t
t •
1 I 1. l tt .• i . i
t
1
1
V! 1
1 Cy
1 1.y1
z,^ 1
1
VI1
1
3
O
J
W
y
t
C7
0
X
0
1
5•E•
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: July 30, 1991 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 14, 1991
FILE NO.: 91058
PETITIONER: Graybow Daniels
REQUEST: Amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for outdoor
storage for redesign of the site to accommodate outside
storage
LOCATION: 2400 Xenium Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: IP (Planned Industrial)
ZONING: I -1 (Planned Industrial District)
BACKGROUND:
On February 28, 1972, the City Council, by Resolution 72 -73, approved a Site
Plan and Conditional Use Permit for construction of a manufacturing building
on this site for Litton Microwave Products. By Resolutions 73 -46 and 73 -133,
the City Council, approved two expansion phases for this structure in 1973,
resulting in the existing 210,300 square foot structure.
On November 7, 1977, the City Council, by Resolution 77 -627, approved a lot
division for this property, detaching the southerly two acres of what was then
a 14.17 acre parcel. The remaining 12.17 acre parcel was of sufficient size
to accommodate the Site Plan for Litton.
In 1983 occupancy of the site and building changed from the manufacturing
operations of Litton Microwave to the distribution operations of Target
Stores. At that time the external and internal appearance of the site and
building did not change but the use characteristics for the site changed from
a predominately manufacturing (employee- based) use to an exclusive
office /warehouse (storage based) use. The most significant operational change
was a substantial reduction in the number of employees at the site and the
resulting need for off - street parking.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the Official City
Newspaper, and all property owners within 500 feet have been notified.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The applicant proposes utilization of approximately 70,000 square feet of
the paved surface of the site (north and south of the existing building)
for outside storage of pipe and plumbing fixtures in the same manner as
they now store these same items at their facility at 9700 13th Avenue
North. Screening of the outdoor storage is proposed by installing P.V.C.
plastic slats in the existing seven foot chain -link fence that surrounds
the portion of the site proposed for use for outdoor storage.
see next page)
Page Two
File 91058
2. The Plymouth Zoning Ordinance, in Section 8, specifies that any outdoor
storage of materials or equipment in the I -1 Zoning District is allowed
only after approval of a Conditional Use Permit for such storage. The
Zoning Ordinance also prescribes in Section 10, Subdivision C, Paragraph
4, that any such outdoor storage must be located and screened according to
plans approved by the City so as not to be visible from any classes of
residence district; from adjoining property; or, from the public street.
The Zoning Ordinance also provides that screening of outdoor storage from
adjoining properties and from the public street may be waived totally or
partially by the City Council in conjunction with the Conditional Use
Permit for the outdoor storage.
3. The materials to be used for the screening of outdoor storage are not
specified by the Zoning Ordinance except that, if landscape materials are
proposed they must provide at least 90% opacity year - round. The applicant
has been advised by staff that the standard that has been applied for
Conditional Use Permits to allow outdoor storage has been that screening
of that storage should be, if by fencing, either vertical board or a
masonry. While screening by use of metal or plastic slats in a chain -link
fence may exist elsewhere in the City (such as at the current Graybow
Daniels facility on 13th Avenue North) all Conditional Use Permit
approvals for outdoor storage in recent years have been for fencing of
either masonry or vertical board design.
4. The applicant proposes outside storage on bituminous areas of the site
that already exist. The occupancy of the site by Litton Industries in the
1970's was manufacturing- intensive, resulting in the layout and surfacing
of the site to accommodate 419 off - street parking spaces (well in excess
of the Ordinance requirement for that use at that time). The use of the
site by Target as a distribution center was exclusively office /warehouse
in nature and our review of aerial photos taken during the Target
occupancy reveals automobile parking only in the spaces in front of the
building (Xenium Lane side), with the asphalted areas on the north and
south sides of the building used for semi - trailer circulation and
overnight storage.
5. This applicant proposes to utilize the building in a manner similar to
that of the Target occupancy - primarily for warehousing. They propose to
retain as automobile parking a 11existingspaceswestofthefenced -in
area along Xenium Lane and to add 41 spaces of diagonal parking along the
north property line, for a total of 206 off - street parking spaces, the
Zoning Ordinance standard for 'warehouse /office occupancy of the mix
proposed.
6. The applicant has also presented a "proof -of- parking" plan showing the
capability of the site to accommodate 447 off - street parking spaces if
required, but without use of the site for outdoor storage as now proposed.
Current Zoning Ordinance requirements are that a building designed to
accommodate uses that may require two or more different parking standards
see next page)
Page Three
File 91058
based on potential occupancy must have offstreet parking responsive to the
standard providing the greatest amount of parking. The applicant states
that 180,000 square feet of the existing structure can be classified as
having the potential for either manufacturing or warehousing use.
Therefore, the manufacturing parking standard (the greater of the two) is
applicable.
Using the manufacturing standard for the multiple use potential portion of
the building and the office parking standard portion of the building
designed to used be exclusively as offices results in an off - street
parking requirement for this site of 647 spaces.
7. The Zoning Ordinance also provides that the Planning Commission may
recommend and the City Council may approve a "proof -of- parking" plan which
proposes to initially install only a portion of the required parking but
demonstrates that the full complement of the required parking could be
installed on the property w— it h an Ordinance Standards at a later date as
determined by the City.
The applicant has provided a proof -of- parking plan, as noted above, that
shows how 447 cars could be accommodated on the site versus the 647 cars
that proof -of- parking plan should show responsive to the Zoning Ordinance
Standards.
8. A Conditional Use Permit for any purpose must be consistent with the six
standards found in Section 9 of the Zoning Ordinance. A copy of those
standards and the applicant's response to standards is attached.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. Outdoor storage, particularly of raw materials or manufactured products,
is, essentially, a method to increase site utilization without the expense
of constructing a building. Certain products can be warehoused without
regard to protection from weather, while others can not. In terms of
zoning impacts resulting from site utilization, whether a product stored
on the site is inside or outside the building makes little difference.
The zoning issues are the same regarding the coverage of the site;
appearance to the public and adjoining property owners of the site; and,
number of employees required to operate the site and their required off -
street parking. The 70,000 square feet proposed as outdoor storage by
this applicant is little different than proposing 70,000 square feet of
additional building.
2. There are physical reasons for our preference for the screening of outdoor
storage to be either vertical board or masonry, beyond the fact that all
such fences have been of those materials in recent years. From our
observation, plastic slats in chain -link fences neither are initially as
appealing in appearance, nor retain appearance as well over time as does
masonry or vertical board screening. The plastic slat screening also
appears more conducive to damage by weather or contact by vehicles than
masonry or vertical board fencing.
see next page)
Page Four
File 91058
3. This site was not originally designed in terms of the site area available
for off - street parking in proportion to the square footage of the
structures on the site to accommodate off - street parking at grade that
would be required to support 100% utilization of the multi -use portion of
the structure as manufacturing. The proposed Conditional Use Permit for
outdoor storage utilizing approximately 70,000 square feet of site would
work to further limit the capability of the site to accommodate parking
sufficient to support a future manufacturing use - if that outdoor storage
is retained as a part of that future manufacturing use.
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend that a condition of a Conditional Use Permit clearly specify that
any change in use of the structure invalidate the Conditional Use Permit for
outside storage.
I recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for the approval of
a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage on this site, as requested
by the applicant, but subject to the standard conditions regarding such
outdoor storage and conditions related to the type of screening to be used for
the storage and prohibiting a change of occupancy for the structure.
Submitted by:
erua, community ueveiopment Loorainator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for
Outdoor Storage for Redesign
2. Zoning Ordinance Excerpts
3. Petitioner's Communication
4. Location Map
5. Site Graphics
pc /jk /91058:dh)
APPROVING AMENDED SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GRAYBOW DANIELS
91058)
WHEREAS, Graybow Daniels has requested approval for an amended Site Plan and a
Conditional Use Permit for outdoor storage for property located at 2400 Xenium
Lane; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by
Graybow Daniels for an amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for
outdoor storage for property located at 2400 Xenium Lane, 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 Graybow Daniels for outdoor storage 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. The permit shall be renewed annually to assure compliance with the
conditions.
6. All parking shall be offstreet in designated areas which comply with the
Zoning Ordinance.
7. The Conditional Use Permit is for outdoor storage on portions of the site
that would be required for offstreet parking should use of the building be
changed from 180,000 square feet of warehousing in the future. Any change
of use in the portion of the building designated for warehouse resulting
in a more intensive use shall invalidate the Conditional Use Permit for
outdoor storage. A revised p a n may then be submitted that shows
additional parking in lieu of same or all of the outdoor storage.
8. Screening of outdoor storage hereby approved shall be only by vertical
board or masonry fence of sufficient height to completely screen all items
stored outside.
res /pc /91058.cup:dh)
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 10, Subdivision C
c. In determining the depth of rear yard for any building where the rear ya
opens into an alley, one -half (1/2) of the width of the alley, but no
exceeding ten (10) feet, may be considered as a portion of the re and
subject to the following qualifications:
1) The depth of any rear yard shall not be reduced to s than ten (10)
feet by the application of this exception.
2) If the door of any building or improve men except a fence, opens toward
an alley., it shall not be erected or a lished closer to the center
line of an alley than a distance o fteen (15) feet. (Amended Ord.
No. 85 -07)
Yard Landscaping:
In all classes of business industrial districts, all required yards shall
either be open landscap nd green areas or be left in a natural state, except
as provided by Subdi ion B, paragraph 5(f) of this Section. Yards to be
landscaped shall andscaped attractively with lawn, trees, shrubs, etc., in
accordance wi he adopted landscaping standards and criteria policy. Any areas
left in a ural state shall be properly maintained in a sightly and well -kept
conditi . Yards adjoining any of the Classes of RESIDENCE DISTRICTS shall be
lan ped with planting buffers or other screens. Plans for such screen shall
ubmitted as a part of the application for site plan approval and building
4. Outside Storage and Display: (Amend. Ord. 90 -38 & Ord. 91 -14)
a. In all classes of business districts and the Industrial District, outside
storage in any required front, side or rear yard shall be prohibited.
b. Any other outside storage shall be located and screened per plans approved by
the City so as not to be visible from any classes of Residence District, from
adjoining property or from the public street. The screening of outside
storage from adjoining property and from the public street in the Business
District and in the Industrial District may be waived totally or partially by
the City Council in conjunction with a Conditional Use Permit for the outside
storage.
c. Outside storage of materials involving an enclosure of up to 120 square feet
properly located on a site in accordance with plans approved by the City may
be allowed in the B -2 and B -3 Districts with an administrative permit issued
in accordance with the requirements of this subdivision.
d. Outside display of merchandise may be allowed in the B -2 and B -3 districts by
administrative permit issued pursuant to the requirements of this subdivision
subject to the following:
1) Automotive products may be displayed in the pump island area of service
stations which have a current operating license.
2) Vending machines accessory to and under the management of the principal
allowable use.
10 -43
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 10, Subdivision C
3) The maximum amount of outside display allowed is 50 percent of the
linear structural frontage on the main entrance side of the principal
building; a maximum 4 feet depth measured from the exterior wall of the
building; and a maximum height of 6 feet.
4) Outside display of merchandise shall involve no additional signage other
than for price of the product where the package of the merchandise
itself has sign value.
No lot shall be so reduced that the area of the lot or dimensions of the open
LDace shall be smaller than herein prescribed.
6. Acce'%ary Uses:
a. The owing accessory uses, in addition to those herein before specified
shall be rmitted in any RESIDENCE DISTRICT, if the accessory uses do not
alter the racter of the premises in respect to their use for the purposes
permitted in District.
1) The renting o oms or the providing of table board in a dwelling as an
incidental use to at of its occupancy as a dwelling of the character
permitted in the re tive District, but not to the extent of
constituting a hotel a efined in this Ordinance, unless permitted in
the District.
2) The operation of necessary fac 'ties and equipment in connection with
schools, colleges, universities, pitals and other institutions
permitted in the District.
3) News and refreshment stands and restaur s in connection with passenger
stations.
4) Recreation, refreshment and service buildings i ublic parks and
playgrounds.
5) Fallout shelters.
b. The following accessory uses, in addition to those hereinbefore s ified
shall be permitted in any NON- RESIDENCE DISTRICT, if the accessory u do
not alter the character of the premises with respect to their use for e
purposes permitted in the District.
10 -44
91057
7. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
We would request that a conditional use permit be granted to the Graybow
Daniels Company for the outside storage of materials used in their everyday
business. The type of material that would be stored are as follows:
PVC Pipe 1 -V? to 15" (10-20 foot) - to be stored horizontally
ABS Pipe 1 -V2" to 6" (10-20 foot) - to be stored horizontally
Large diameter PVC fittings (6" to 15 ") in racks
Large diameter steel pipe (6" to 8 ")
Cement air conditioning pads (24x24, 3000)
Coils of polyethylene flexible pipe
Cast iron soil pipe 1W to 10' (5 and 10 foot) - horizontally stored
Cast iron soil fittings for above (crates in racks)
We would propose to utilize the existing chain link fence that surrounds the
property with the addition of seven (7) foot high P.V.C. plastic slat screening.
The slats are channeled through the fence so that air can pass through the slats
but will not allow the stored materials to be seen by the public. The screening is
available in seven (7) different colors which allows the choice of a color that
provides the most favorable aesthetic look in relation to the building. The entire
surface area proposed for the storage has existing blacktop.
JUN 21 M
CITY C;-- .y AAOUTH
tx} ONVINITY DEVEit MENT DEPT
Section 9 Conditional Use Permit Standards
1) This use should have no significant impact on the comprehensive plan.
2) The conditional use will not be detrimental, nor will it endanger public
health, safety, morals, or comfort.
3) The use will not be injurious to the use or enjoyment of other property in
the vicinity. The use of screening that we have proposed is intended to
prevent the perceived impairment in property values.
4) The use should not impede the development or improvement of
surrounding properties or those properties in the area.
5) No immediate impact whatsoever on ingress, egress, or parking.
6) The use shall conform to the regulations, or the imposed regulations placed
on it.
Zoning Ordinance Variance Standards
We propose to utilize the existing chain link fence that surrounds the property with the
addition of seven (T) foot high P.V.C. plastic slat screening channeled through the fence.
1) There is no hardship relative to the shape or condition of the parcel of
land. We already have the fence in place surrounding the property. We
have planned to screen the entire chain like fence area. A significant cost
increase would be incurred should we have to reconstruct another type of
fence or screen around the property.
2) The conditions are unique as the fencing is already in place as is the
blacktop area.
3) The purpose is not to increase the value or income potential of the parcel
of land. The purpose is to satisfy the needs of a potential tenant along
with trying to keep their business and employees within the City of
Plymouth.
4) The difficulty or hardship is caused by the ordinance only. It has not been
created by anyone that has an interest in the parcel of land.
5) By granting the variation, the use will not be detrimental to the public
welfare nor the land or improvements in the neighborhood. We are
making every effort to make the variance and conditional use be
nondescript and aesthetically pleasing so as not to disturb the surrounding
neighborhood and to maintain the quality and value inherent in our
building and other buildings in the area.
6) The variation will have no impact on the supply of light or air to any
adjacent property, will not increase traffic congestion, or increase the
danger of fire or public safety. Furthermore, I feel strongly that with the
proposed screening, and the fencing that surrounds the property, the
property values of within the neighborhood will not substantially diminish
in any way.
ol
Ah
w k . Vol Ul
M
4
Qg4
4
R
a •
4R
91
I
I i /
NY
1 ~
O
N r
p Op b p wP N
N 1IN/I/n
PROPOSED STE PLAN
D GRAYBOW - DANIELS ......+..... ,
I
o e.d .. ..h..r..r
2400 XENIUM LANE R f' .a +•
9 PLYMOUTH, MM•ESOTA
i
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: July 30, 1991 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 14, 1991
FILE NO.: 91061
PETITIONER: Robert Walz
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit for a Home Occupation for a Travel
Agency
LOCATION: 9600 11th Avenue North
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -1 (Low Density Single Family Residential District)
BACKGROUND:
There are no Community Development files on this property.
Notice of this Public Hearing has! been published in the official City
newspaper, and all property owners within 500 feet have been notified.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The applicant proposes the use of 72 square foot portion of his home for
travel agency services to the general public. The area proposed to be
utilized for the travel agency business is 9 percent of the total usable
area of the existing home.
2. A finding has been made that the proposed use is a "Home Occupation
Conditional" due to the keeping on the premises of stock -in- trade,
represented by the travel agency brochures and marketing materials. The
description of the use provided by the applicant in his two letters
attached) is consistent with the definition of "Home Occupation
Conditional" found in Section 4, Subdivision B of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The home is located on a lot directly fronting 17th Avenue North. 17th
Avenue North at this location also functions as the direct public street
service to office building directly across the street to the south;
parking lot for a manufacturing facility southeast of the site of the lot;
and the East Medicine Lake park owned by the City of Plymouth.
Significant nonresidential traffic already utilizes this street on a
regular basis.
4. The Zoning Ordinance provides that 6 standards be met prior to issuance of
any Conditional Use Permit. A copy of those standards is attached,
together with a letter from the applicant in which he provides evidence of
his use complying with those standards.
Page Two
File 91061
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The proposed Home Occupation meets the definition of "Home Occupation -
Conditional" of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance.
2. The proposed Home Occupation meets the 6 standards of the Zoning Ordinance
specified for any Conditional Use Permit.
3. The proposed Home Occupation is secondary and incidental to the primary
use of the single family residence.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for the approval of
a Home Occupation - Conditional for the ope tion of a travel agency, as
requested.
CSubmittedby:
Cha es E. illerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit Home Occupation
2. Zoning Ordinance Definition of Home Occupation - Conditional
3. Conditional Use Permit Standards
4. Petitioner's Letters Describing Use and Responding to the Conditional Use
Permit Standards
5. Location Map
6. Structure Use Graphics
pc /jk /91061:dh)
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ROBERT WALZ FOR A TRAVEL AGENCY AT 9600-
17TH AVENUE NORTH (91061)
WHEREAS, Robert Walz has requested a Conditional Use Permit for a travel
agency for property located at 9600 -17th 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
Robert Walz for a travel agency for property located at 9600 -17th Avenue
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 Robert Walz as operator of the facility and shall
not be transferable.
3. The site shall be maintained in a sanitary manner.
4. There shall be no signage allowed on the property relative to the use.
5. There shall be no outside display, sales, or storage of merchandise or
related materials.
6. The permit shall be renewed annually to assure compliance with the
conditions.
7. Compliance with applicable Building and Fire Code requirements shall be
verified by the City prior to permit issuance.
8. All parking shall be off - street in areas which comply with the Zoning
Ordinance.
res /pc /91061:jw)
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
DEFINITION OF A HOME OCCUPATION
SECTION 4, SUBDIVISION B AND
SECTION 7, SUBDIVISION C OF ZONING ORDINANCE
OCCUPATION -- Any gainful occupation or profession engaged in by t e
occup the dwelling unit within the dwelling unit which Is Fly
Incidental an ondary to the residential use of the pr provided,
such activity does no duce light, glare, n odor, or vibration
perceptible beyond the boun of the es; does not involve the use
of accessory structures or an following: Repair, service, or
manufacturing which req . quipment othe that customarily found in
a home; over -the- er sale of merchandise produce the premises; or,
the em of persons on the premises other that stomarily
useortloing on the premises. This type of Home Occupation is a permit e.
HOME OCCUPATION - CONDITIONAL -- Any gainful occupation or profession,
approved pursuant to the Conditional Use Permit provisions of this
Ordinance. engaged in by the occupant of the dwelling unit within the
dwelling unit or within not more than one accessory structure permitted by
the Zoning Ordinance, and which involves any of the following: Stock -in-
trade incidental to the performance of the service, repair or manufacturing
which require equipment other than that customarily found in a home; the
employment on the premises, at any one time, of not more than one person who
is a non - resident of the premises; the teaching of more than one but not
more than four non - resident students at any given time; or the need for not
more than two parking spaces in addition to spaces required for the persons
residing on the premises. The activity shall be clearly incidental and
secondary to the residential use of the premises, including the dwelling and
permitted accessory or installations thereon; and shall not produce light,
glare, odor, or vibration perceptible beyond the boundaries of the premises;
and not consist of over - the - counter sales of merchandise produced off
the premises. This type of Home Occupation requires a Conditional Use
Permit to be approved prior to operation of any business from a _
residentially zoned property.
FKM ==ON 9, SUBDIVISIC K A
1.1 • . • 11 • •.t 1 r• eg
2. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning C=(ission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and develop mt of a reeommidation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Conmission shall review the application and consider its
confornance with the following standards:
1) Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will prcmote 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 improvernnt 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
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
THIS IS IS REGARDS TO A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT/HOME OCCUPATION. THE LOCATION IS
9600 17 AVE. NORTH PLYMOUTH, MN. 55441
LEGAL DESC. LOT 12 BLOCK 2 INGLEBRAE
ADDITION.
HENN. CTY. PROP. I.D. # 25-118-22-41-0021
OWNER:ROBERT JOSEPH WALZ.
PURPOSE'`. TO OPERATE A TRAVEL AGENCY OUT OF MY HOME
I WILL BE USING A SMALL PORTION OF MY HOME
FOR AN OFFICE TO OPERATE A TRAVEL AGENCY.
MOST OF THE CUSTOMER CONTACT WILL BE OVER THE
TELEPHONE. 2, CUS rnC,^s FEf o2e(G
THERE WILL BE NO IDENTIFYING SIGNS.
TRAFFIC WILL BE MINIMAL, WITH MOST OF THE
CUSTOMER CONTACT DONE AT THEIR HOME.
PARKING IS ADEQUATE ON THE STREET.
BUSINESS WILL BE CONDUCTED AFTERNOONS AND
EARLY EVENINGS.
I WILL BE USING A 6 FOOT BY 12 FOOT PORTION
OF A 12 FOOT T LAY 17 FOOT ROOM AS AN OFFICE:.
THERE WILL BE NOTHING PHYSICALLY CHANGED ON THE
PROPERTY. (ie. landscaping ,sidewalks,walls,fences,etc.)
THIS BUSINESS PROPOSES NO HEALTH RISKS AND WILL NOT
ENDANGER THE PUBLIC IN ANY WAY.
THIS BUSINESS WILL NOT DIMINISH PROPERTY VALUES WITHIN
THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
DEVELOPMENT IN THE DISTRICT WILL CONTINUE AS NORMAL.
I MAKE THIS PROPOSAL ON 25 JUNE 1991.
ROBERT" JOSEPH WALZ.
fi p
Co n rehevY2 t,!1v1 2*Nf-'
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN ^
SUBJECT:ROBERT WALZ. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
mot `==
FOR HOME OCCUPATION FOR TRAVEL AGENCY BUSINESS WIN 100, IT
91061)
THIS IS TO INFORM YOU OF THE AMOUNT OF MATERIAL
oW
KEPT ON MY PROPERTY TO SUPPORT MY TRAVEL BUSINESS.
I WILL BE STORING A SMALL AMOUNT OF BROCHURES AND
FLYERS FOR ADVERTISING PURPOSES. NOT TO EXCEED ONE SMALL
BOX. THERE WILL BE NO TICKETING MATERIAL STORED ON
THE PREMISES.
IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, YOU MAY CONTACT ME
AT #546-0642.
THANK YOU,
ROBERT JOSEPH WALZ
SUBMITTED:23 JULY 1991
m •v = & a _
OEMi f k
t
elk
M
ii "' ice'rl. ' :'
1
n
V
o
U
VJ
O O
J
Prozo
or rc
I N 1Q,
v o0
Oki
i u
gbo0
I - Rv-- 1o2+h
o. At
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 2, 1991 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 14, 1991
FILE NO.: 91053
PETITIONER: Tim Reese
REQUEST: Division of Platted Property; Subdivision Variance for
minimum lot area and lot width; and Shoreland Overlay
District Variances for lot area and lot width in the
Elmhurst Addition
LOCATION: 2365 Hemlock Lane and 2360 Ives Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Single Family District)
BACKGROUND:
No specific Community Development applications are on file with respect to
this parcel. The original Elmhurst Addition substantially predates the
records now available within the Community Development Department.
Several parcels in the immediate neighborhood were originally developed with
more than one principal structure on a single parcel of record, and have
subsequently been divided, as here proposed. There have also been a number of
consolidations of lots in this neighborhood of parcels of record which were
created prior to contemporary Zoning Ordinance standards with regard to lot
area and lot width.
On August 6, 1990, by Resolution 90 -464 and Resolution 90 -463, the City
Council approved a lot division for the property abutting this site to the
south. That action resulted in the creation of lots of 6,184 square feet each
and lot widths at the setback of 37.5 feet and 58 feet respectively.
Notice of Planning Commission consideration of this application has been
mailed, as a courtesy, to all property owners within 100 feet of the site.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The applicant proposes the division of an existing parcel of record of
13,720 square feet into two new parcels which will be of 5,874 snare feet
west parcel) and 7,846 square feet (east parcel). Two houses principal
structures) now exist on the combined parcel as a legal nonconforming use.
The Zoning Ordinance specifies that no more than one principal structure
may be located on a single parcel of record. This nonconforming use would
be eliminated by the proposed lot division.
2. The applicant also requests Subdivision Ordinance Variances for the two
lots that would result from the division of platted property, as follow:
see next page)
Page Two
File 91053
M
a. Lot area in the R -1A Zoning District of 5,874 square feet (west
parcel) and 7,846 square feet (east parcel) versus the ordinance
standard of 18,500 square feet.
b. Lot width at the 35 foot front yard setback line of 40 feet (west
parcel) and 62 feet (east parcel) versus the ordinance standard of 110
feet.
c. Lot area in the Shoreland Overlay District of 5,874 square feet (west
parcel) and 7,846 square feet (east parcel) versus the Zoning
Ordinance standard of 10,000 square feet.
d. Lot width in the Shoreland Management Overlay District of 40 feet
west parcel) and 62 feet (east parcel) at the "building line" versus
the Zoning Ordinance minimum of 75 feet.
3. Existing structures on the parcel include the two principal dwelling units
and a "shed" on the west parcel. All existing structures noted are
nonconforming as to setbacks, in addition to the nonconformity with
respect to two structures on the same parcel. No Variance action with
respect to the nonconforming setbacks is applied for nor addressed by this
action. Those setbacks will remain nonconforming, and therefore the
structures are subject to compliance to Zoning Ordinance standards should
the nonconforming structures cease to exist under the terms of the Zoning
Ordinance.
4. If the division of platted property and dimensional variances which have
been applied for are approved, nonconforming status of the site with
respect to principal structures will be eliminated, and additions to the
structures, within the limits of the Zoning Ordinance dimensional
standards will be possible. Without the division of property as requested
no additions to the structure or new structures may be permitted on the
parcel and the loss of either structure by greater than 50 percent for any
cause would extinguish the nonconforming use status. The balance of the
damaged structure would be required to be removed and no second principal
structure would thereafter be permitted on the parcel.
5. The application for division of platted property is responsive to the
provisions of Section 500.37 of the City Code (the Subdivision Ordinance)
where the City Council may approve the division of platted property based
on a survey without the benefit of a full subdivision plat.
6. The request to create lots that are substandard in lot area and width is
in variance with Section 500.21 of the Plymouth Subdivision Code. Section
500.41 of the Plymouth Subdivision Code provides three findings that must
be made by the Planning Commission and City Council prior to approval of
any Subdivision Variance. The applicant in a letter of July 18, 1991 has
responded to the Variance standards. Copies of the referenced City Code
sections and the applicant's responses are attached.
see next page)
Page Three
File 91053
7. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources was notified of this
requested Variance from Shoreland Management Overlay District standards on
July 10, 1991. On Augus 6, 1991 the City received a response from DNR
recommending denial of th request. (copy attached)
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The application for divis on of platted property meets the requirements of
Section 500.37 of the Subdivision Code, provided the dimensional variances
resulting from such a division are approved.
2. Staff generally is not in support of the creation of individual parcels of
the size here proposed. The unique situation presents itself here,
however, since principal structures already exist on both of the lots
proposed to be created as a result of two houses being previously
constructed on the single parcel. No change would result in the
residential density of the immediate neighborhood as a result of the
division action proposed.
3. With a clear understanding that any future redevelopment of either of the
parcels created by this action would be consistent wiffi the dimensional
standards of the Zoning Ordinance, without exception, staff can support
the action requested. A memorial on the title of each of the newly
created lots to this effect would advise all future purchasers of the
property of the intent of the City with this division action.
4. The requested variances to create parcels substandard in size; substandard
in width at the setback line; and substandard in minimum width per
Shoreland Overlay District standards is responsive to the Variance
standards of the Subdivision Ordinance. This finding is based on the
unique nature of the property created by the historic action of permitting
two principal structures to be constructed on the same parcel of land. A
hardship would result by not dividing the property as requested because
the nonconforming status that exists precludes substantial improvement to
the property. No negative impact results to the surrounding neighborhood
or the public welfare as a result of the division action requested.
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for the division of
platted property; and, the resolution providing for the setting of conditions
prior to recording,: and approving variances as requested based on compliance
with the Variance,s'tendards of the Subdivision —Qrdinance.
Submitted by:
arles E. Dillerud, Community
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Division
2. Resolution Setting Conditions
Ordinance Variances
3. Engineer's Memorandum
4. DRN Letter of August 5, 1991
5. Location Map
6. Site Graphics
pc /jk/91053)
nator
of Platted Property
Prior to Recording and Approving Subdivision
APPROVING LOT DIVISION OF PLATTED PROPERTY AND VARIANCES FOR TIM REESE FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2365 HEMLOCK LANE AND 2360 IVES LANE (91053)
WHEREAS, Time Reese has requested approval for a lot division of platted
property and variances for the creation of two lots located 2365 Hemlock Lane
and 2360 Ives Lane;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the lot division
of platted property and variances for the creation of two lots located 2365
Hemlock Lane and 2360 Ives Lane.
EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
Lot 5, Block 2, Elmhurst, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
To be divided and consolidated as follows:
PARCEL A
That part of Lot 5, Block 2, "Elmhurst" lying Westerly of the following
described line and its Northerly and Southerly extensions: Beginning at
a point on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 5 distant 131.55 feet
Southwesterly along said Southeasterly line from the most Easterly corner
of said Lot 5; thence Northwesterly to a point on the Northwesterly line
of said Lot 5 distant 139.08 feet Southwesterly along said Northwesterly
line from the most Northerly corner of said Lot 5 and there terminating.
PARCEL B
That part of Lot 5, Block 2, "Elmhurst" lying Easterly of the following
described line and its Northerly and its Southerly extensions: Beginning
at a point on the Southeasterly line of said Lot 5 distance 131.55 feet
Southwesterly along said Southeasterly line from the most Easterly corner
of said Lot 5; thence Northwesterly to a point on the Northwesterly line
of said Lot 5 distant 139.08 feet Southwesterly along said Northwesterly
line from the most Northerly corner of said Lot 5 and there terminating.
FURTHER, that the City Manager be authorized to make the necessary special
assessment corrections based upon City Policy when the division /consolidation
is approved by Hennepin County.
res /pc /91053.1d:jw)
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO LOT DIVISION OF
PLATTED PROPERTY AND SUBDIVISION VARIANCES FOR TIM REESE (91053)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved a Lot Division and Subdivision
Variances for Tim Reese located at 2365 Hemlock Lane and 2360 Ives Lane;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does direct the following
conditions to be met prior to recording of, and related to said lot division.
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. No yard setback variances are granted or implied.
3. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication on 2 parcels prior
to recording of the division resolution.
4. Submittal of all necessary utility easements prior to filing with
Hennepin County.
5. Variances are approved as follow based on compliance with the
Subdivision Code Variance Criteria:
a. Lot area in the R -1A Zoning District of 5,874 square feet (west
parcel) and 7,846 square feet (east parcel) versus the ordinance
standard of 18,500 square feet.
b. Lot width at the 35 foot front yard setback line of 40 feet (west
parcel) and 62 feet (east parcel) versus the ordinance standard of 110
feet.
c. Lot area in the Shoreland Overlay District of 5,874 square feet (west
parcel) and 7,846 square feet (east parcel) versus the Zoning
Ordinance standard of 10,000 square feet.
d. Lot width in the Shoreland Management Overlay District of 40 feet
west parcel) and 62 feet (east parcel) at the "building line" versus
the Zoning Ordinance minimum of 75 feet.
6. Submission by the petitioner and approval /recording by the City Attorney
of a memorial on the title of each parcel that future development of the
parcels will not require dimensional variances from the Zoning Ordinance.
res /pc /91053.sc:jw)
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: August 6, 1991
FILE NO.: 91053
PETITIONER: Mr. Tim Reese, 1800 East Medicine Lake Boulevard, Plymouth, MN
55441
LOT DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION: LOT 5, BLOCK 2 ELMHURST
LOCATION: East of Ives Lanes, nest of Hemlock Lane, north of 23rd Avenue in
the northwest 1/4 of Section 26.
N/A Yes No
1. _ JL _ Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _ _ Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
xse.
3. _ X _ SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Lot Division /Consolidation approval:
4. Area assessments: None.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None.
V
6. _ _ _X_ Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required,
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any building
permits.)
N/A Yes No
7. 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 Drainage Plan.
8. _ JL _ Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots: Homes are eristina.
q. X _ _ All standard utility easements required for construction
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities
10. _X.. _ _ All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way to
facilitate the development. This vacation is not an automatic
process in conjunction with the platting process. It is entirely
dependent upon the City receiving a petition for the vacation from
the property owner; therefore, it is their responsibility to submit a
petition as well as legal descriptions of easements proposed to be
vacated.
X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
12. _ X _ All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on
Submitted by: GG•.t•C /
1 -
Llti
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
2
t
PASTATE
OF /
H CE Z (0 7L/&
F A KT ,' 1200
PHONE NO.
772 -7910
August 5, 1991
Mr. Charles Dillerud
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Warn'e*M V RA Pfuk S M' S AS
RE: VARIOUS ITEMS FOR REVIEW
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
Tf
f 1
AU6 6 .
FILE NO.
We have reviewed the documents noted and have the following
comments to offer.
Ringswood Farms Conditional Use Permit Amendment; your file 91045
received July 3, 1991): Richard Steiner at 120 Holly Lane is
requesting a C.U.P. amendment for a 10' x 2618" addition on a 9,684
lot within the Gleason Lake shoreland district. The percentage of
impervious surface on this lot already exceeds the city's standards
and we see no justification for exacerbating this nonconformity.
No hardship has been demonstrated; the city should deny the
reguest.
Tim Reece. Lot Subdivision in Elmhurst Addition located at 2635
Hemlock Lane; your file 91053 (received July 11, 1991): Tim Reece
is requesting subdivision of a 13,720 square foot lot into two
lots: a 5,874 square foot parcel "A" and a 7,846 square foot parcel
B ". The minimum lot size for a nonriparian lot in the shoreland
district of Medicine lake is 10,000 square feet. This subdivision
would create two nonconforming lots from a lot that currently does
conform. We see no justification for allowing this subdivision;
the city should deny the request.
You are reminded that, in accordance with city ordinance, a copy of
the final decision on the above matters should be sent to this
office within one week of the final action. Please contact me at
772 -7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments.
Sincerely,
Ceil Strauss
Area Hydrologist
cc: Gleason Lake file (27 -95P)
Medicine Lake file (27 -104P)
Ed Fick, Shoreland Hydrologist
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
C..
NI(:0HjiI`\
C]
N W- K LANE
HEMLO
1 I
a
01 Z
OWN
W z
51 w
ui
ID•D
o
I/ ' Ib•I Ss
W .
GG
31.
Jr
j r
ou•.
7 orlt
o° ow5
een
MtLNMf O W
4a pip
e
t 9.4,
8
b N
e N L • n6
ty
e e
11 10.3 i e0v
w e
tit°p b+
ve
a W Vf
Op
1,0 v e .•ti i. O v s
O
Oti "+i'^ O O
A
Cud
a F V O -- a o$ N
O
I
m
0
Z
d
4a0.
gbggo
eI:
ga O
o o a. .
r$
OVe P' „
N
N a
e e w
u ow
e Vy aop
Na 0 of u
in 0 ow%, + MtrN t
iiv ea.biN wa
A
4 o
o4g:oM
a
w 1c 1s
P. v -C 6.62
4.1 .
r.r N
a
LANE
i
41E- (
P
MINUTES
PLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 5, 1991
The regular meeting of the Plymouth City Council
was called to order by Mayor Bergman at 7:00 p.m.
in the Council Chambers of the City Center, 3400
Plymouth Blvd., on August 5, 1991.
PRESENT: Mayor Bergman, Councilmembers Helliwell,
Ricker, Vasiliou, Zitur
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Willis, Assistant
Manager Boyles, Community Development Director
Tremere, Public Works Director Moore, Finance
Director Hahn, City Attorney Thomson, and City
Clerk Rauenhorst
Manager Willis introduced Barry Warner
representing Barton - Ashman Architects.
Mr. Warner presented the concept plans and budget
for 10th Avenue Park, Gleanloch Park and Shiloh
Park. He stated that 10th Avenue Park is a new
site, while the Shiloh and Gleanloch parks were
originally constructed in 1979 and are proposed
for equipment replacement and reconstruction.
Mr. Warner stated the concept plan for 10th
Avenue Park includes a multi -use
soccer /ballfield, a free skating area, picnic
area, warming house, tot lot, and hard surfaced
shuffleboard /basketball area.
Gleanloch Park is proposed for renovation by
improving the existing play equipment and hard
court area. The play area would be reoriented
and the trail would be extended in order to loop
around the entire park.
Mr. Warner stated that drainage problems have
been a significant problem at Shiloh Park. As
part of the improvements, play area would be
relocated to a higher area and buffered with
vegetation. The hard court would remain in its
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 287
present location, and a multi -use
soccer /ballfield and double tennis court are
proposed to be added. A trail link is proposed
to the pond area to encourage skating.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated there are concerns
that no parking installation is proposed at
Shiloh Park, particularly with tennis courts
planned.
Mr. Warner responded that abutting neighborhood
residents indicate they do not desire additional
parking.
Councilmember Vasiliou clarified that her concern
is that the tennis courts become perceived as
private" -- only serving the immediate
neighborhood. Installation of parking would make
the parks more usable to residents not living in
the immediate vicinity.
Manager Willis stated the neighborhood parks, by
definition, are intended to serve a "walking
neighborhood" of about a mile perimeter, although
each park is available for use by all residents
of the City. He stated that the neighbors are
aware there will be on- street parking by park
users.
Teresa Grandprei, stated she supports the plan
for the 10th Avenue Park. She asked if
neighborhood Children could submit possible names
for the park.
Park and Recreation Advisory Committee (PRAC)
Chairman Freels stated PRAC would consider
recommendations for the park name submitted by
residents.
Councilmember Helliwell asked if the residents in
the vicinity of 10th Avenue want the existing
shelter replaced with a warming house.
Ms. Grandprei stated that residents would prefer
a sheltered picnic area, rather than an enclosed
warming house, to avoid misuse.
Councilmember Ricker asked Community Development
Director Tremere to comment on the possible use
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 288
of CDBG funds for the 10th Avenue Park
construction, as outlined in the staff report.
Director Tremere stated that development of a
park in this area appears to be an eligible CDBG
activity based on the demographics and income
characteristics of the area and persons to be
served. It is a Council policy decision as to
whether to allocate funds for this activity in
lieu of or in addition to others funded. The
Council may be faced with competing requests for
the CDBG funds.
Councilmember Ricker stated he supports the
project but not the proposed use of CDBG funding.
He stated that park dedication funds can be used
exclusively for parks, but CDBG money can be used
and may be needed for other purposes.
Manager Willis stated that prior to the award of
bids the Council will need to designate funding.
Councilmember Vasiliou concurred, but stated that
she may be willing to consider CDBG funding.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -421 APPROVING CONCEPT PLAN FOR 10TH AVENUE
PARK.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated that one person
attending the information meeting on the proposed
improvements to Gleanloch Park indicated there is
no need for an upgraded park and the existing
play equipment is adequate.
Mr. Warner stated that a number of families that
attended the Gleanloch Park meeting stated they
go to another park because there were more
facilities. They believed the use of Gleanloch
Park would increase with upgraded facilities.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell;
seconded by Councilmember Zitur; to adopt
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -422 APPROVING CONCEPT PLAN FOR
GLEANLOCH PARK.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -421
APPROVING CONCEPT
PLAN FOR 10TH
AVENUE PARK
Item 4 -A
RESOLUTION 91 -422
APPROVING CONCEPT
PLAN FOR GLEANLOCH
PARK
Item 4 -A
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 289
Tim Dunnigan, 17330 38th Avenue North, supports
the proposed upgrading of the Shiloh Park field
to make it more usable for soccer, but opposes
the installation of a backstop. He stated a
backstop will attract older Children and create a
danger of balls striking someone in their yard,
on the proposed hard court, or on the trail.
Joann Dunnigan, 17330 28th Avenue North, agreed
that a backstop should not be erected. She
suggested that if it is included in the
improvements, a sign be erected to prohibit use
of the field for adult baseball.
Si Matthies, 17220 27th Avenue North, supported
the Shiloh park improvements.
Wayne Stevens, 2635 Holly Lane, stated that
residents are overwhelming in favor of the
improvements. The danger of being struck from a
baseball in the park is not significant. Safety
may be improved because an area for soccer and
baseball will be designated.
Margaret Hurst, 2625 Holly Lane, stated the
majority of people using the Shiloh Park will
walk or bike to the park. Residents in the area
do not want additional parking constructed and
understand there will be on- street parking. She
requested the Council adopt the plan as
recommended by PRAC.
Mary Hustad, 17200 27th Avenue North, supported
the plan. She said the park is currently
underutilized, and the existing on- street parking
is adequate. The area residents want the
backstop installed because it will designate the
area where Children should play ball in order to
make it safer for everyone using the park.
Graham Norberg, 17120 28th Place North, stated
twelve years ago he requested that the drainage
problem in the park be corrected. For a number
of months during the year, the trail is not
usable. He believes that installation of tennis
courts will increase the drainage problems. He
requested that the Council reject development of
tennis courts in the northern portion of the
park, until the drainage problem is corrected.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 290
Mr. Norberg stated his home would face the tennis
courts with no trees to buffer the view or noise.
The area proposed for tennis court installation
is currently used for soccer, sliding, and kite
flying. The Council would limit the use of the
area if tennis courts were installed.
Director Moore responded to a Council question
that there is no storm sewer currently installed
in Shiloh Park.
Mr. Warner stated the play structure would be
relocated to a higher area, and the existing play
structure area would be returned to a natural
state. He stated he was not aware of all of the
concerns expressed by Mr. Norberg, but stated
that the plan could be modified to add a swale
adjacent to the trail to draw water away from
residences abutting the park.
MOTION was made by Mayor Bergman, seconded by RESOLUTION 91 -423
Councilmember Ricker, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 91- APPROVING CONCEPT
423 APPROVING CONCEPT PLAN FOR SHILOH PARK, PLAN FOR SHILOH
amending the proposed plan to delete the tennis PARK
court installation, and to correct the existing Item 4 -A
drainage problems.
Councilmember Helliwell suggested that the
backstop installation remain in the plan, and she
encouraged area residents to notify the City if
there are problems.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
CONSENT AGENDA
Items 8 -D, 8 -E, and 8 -W were removed from the Consent Agenda
Consent Agenda.'' Item 5
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt the Consent
Agenda as amended.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 291
MINUTES
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to approve the July
22 minutes.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Mayor.Bergman opened the public hearing on 15th
Avenue Improvements, Project 945, at 8:11 p.m.
Director Moore stated this is a joint project
between the cities of Plymouth and Medicine Lake.
The construction ordered about a year ago
included a storm sewer into Medicine Lake. The
City has obtained the easements necessary for
installation of the project drainage. Drain the
and an open swale is proposed and not the storm
sewer. Nine property owners would be affected by
the project. The estimated cost per property for
the improvements is $4,012.
No one appeared for the hearing, and the hearing
was closed at 8:13 p.m.
Minutes
Item *6
MOTION was made by Councilmember Vasiliou, RESOLUTION 91 -424
seconded by Councilmember Zitur, to adopt ORDERING PROJECT
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -424 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND NO. 945
PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, 15TH Item 7 -A
AVENUE - NORTH OF SOUTHSHORE DRIVE - STREET AND
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT NO. 945.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -425
by Councilmember Vasiliou, to adopt RESOLUTION INSTALLATION OF
NO. 91 -425 INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGN at Old STOP SIGNS
Rockford Road and Larch Lane /41st Avenue "All Item 8 -A
Way" stop.
Councilmember Zitur stated he appreciates staff
input on this issue, but supports the stop sign
installation based on citizen requests. He
stated the stop signs are needed for traffic
control at the intersection; not for speeding.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 292
Councilmember Vasiliou stated that
received phone calls about a year
residents that the intersection is
Councilmember Helliwell stated she
with the intersection and the stop
needed.
she had
ago from area
dangerous.
is familiar
sign is
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Finance Director Hahn presented the Council with
additional information requested at the previous
Council meeting relating to the award of the
towing contract.
Risk Management Coordinator Pemberton stated that
proposals for the towing service were requested
rather than bids because several factors were
important: size of lot, response time, general
ability to serve the needs of the City, and cost.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Vasiliou to
award the towing contract to Dick's Towing.
Motion failed for lack of a second.
Councilmember Ricker stated that Dick's Towing
has the lowest cost on an average tow basis, but
Plymouth Automotive has the lowest total cost
when storage is considered.
Coordinator Pemberton stated that storage and
response time has been adequate with the current
towing contractor - Dick's Towing.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated there is a benefit
to awarding the proposal to a firm with storage
in the City so that Plymouth residents do not
have to go out of the City to pick up their towed
vehicle.
Police Lieutenant Saba stated over the last three
years, 57% of vehicles towed were for traffic
arrests; 26.9% resided in Plymouth; the remainder
were non - Plymouth residents. He stated that
convenience for the police officers and the
people picking up vehicles, size of the storage
facility, towing staff and vehicles, and the
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 293
process for vehicle release should also be
considerations in the award. He stated that
during the time Dick's Towing has held the
contract, the process for vehicle release has
changed from having the officer going to the lot
to release the vehicle, to having the towing
company release most vehicles. This has saved
substantial police officer time.
Councilmember Vasiliou asked whether this
criterion was shared with the towing companies
who submitted proposals. Coordinator Pemberton
stated that the companies were informed that the
service cost was not the only factor to be
considered. A number of factors would be
considered.
Chuck Hendricks, 330 Ranchview Lane North,
requested that the Council award the contract to
his business - Plymouth Automotive. He stated
that his storage lot is adequate in size and the
City should deal with Plymouth businesses
whenever possible.
Councilmember Vasiliou asked if Plymouth
Automotive currently tows for other cities. Mr.
Hendricks stated Plymouth Automotive tows for the
City of Wayzata but does not have a contract to
do so.
In response to a question by Councilmember
Ricker, Mr. Hendricks stated he could offer
vehicle release service identical to that
currently provided by Dick's Towing.
Dick Hughes, 900 NE 2nd Street, Hopkins, thanked
the Council for the opportunity to serve the City
for the last three years. He requested that the
contract be awarded to Dick's Towing.
Attorney Thomson recommended that whichever firm
is selected that the contract term be awarded
from August 6, 1991, through July 31, 1994.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 294
MOTION was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded
by Councilmember Vasiliou, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -426 ACCEPTING TOWING PROPOSALS FOR YEARS
1991 -1994, awarding the contract to Plymouth
Automotive, Inc.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -4
AWARDING TOWING
PROPOSAL TO
PLYMOUTH
AUTOMOTIVE INC.
Item 8 -B
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -427
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION AMENDED CUP AND
NO. 91 -427 APPROVING AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE SITE PLAN FOR
PERMIT AND SITE PLAN FOR DELTAK CORP. (91052). DELTAK CORP.
91052)
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes. Item *8 -C
Councilmember Helliwell asked if Mr. LaTour
intends to notify potential homeowners in his new
subdivision, Greenwood Ponds, of the light glow
emitted from Len Busch Roses.
Mr. LaTour stated that he intends to properly
notify potential homebuyers.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell,
seconded by Councilmember Zitur, to adopt
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -428 APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT,
VARIANCES, AND GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
WILLIAM LA TOUR FOR "GREENWOOD PONDS" (91057).
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -428
APPROVING PREL.
PLAT, VARIANCES,
AND DEVELOPMENT
PLAN FOR GREENWOOD
PONDS (91057)
Item 8 -D
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, ORDINANCE 91 -23
seconded by Councilmember Zitur, to adopt REZONING FOR
ORDINANCE NO. 91 -23 AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE GREENWOOD PONDS
TO CLASSIFY CERTAIN LANDS LOCATED SOUTH OF (91057)
GREENWOOD SCHOOL AND WEST OF COUNTY ROAD 101 (AT Item 8 -D
APPROXIMATELY 35TH AVENUE NORTH EXTENDED) AS FRD
FUTURE RESTRICTED DEVELOPMENT) (91057).
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, RESOLUTION 91 -429
seconded by Councilmember Zitur, to adopt SETTING CONDITIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -429 SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE TO BE MET PRIOR TO
MET PRIOR TO PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE REZONING PUBLICATION
LAND FOR WILLIAM LA TOUR FOR GREENWOOD PONDS (91057)
91057). Item 8 -D
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 295
Councilmember Vasiliou asked if the Site Plan
Amendment request of Len Busch Roses for four
additional greenhouses will complete the
expansion of greenhouses on this site for the
next ten years, as stated in the staff report.
She stated that there is still a problem with
light emitted from the gable ends of the existing
greenhouses and she asked how this would be
addressed.
Manager Willis stated there is no feasible
shading technology to address the gable ends, and
this problem is not contemplated in the agreement
except that the now approved berming along Medina
Road should provide effective screening.
Pat Etzel, a representative of Len Busch Roses,
stated that this request will conclude the
expansion for production on the site. Any
further production would be in another area. He
stated there is no technology available to limit
the light emitted from the ends of the
greenhouses, but he stated the berm construction
and additional trees should help. If that does
not work, Len Busch Roses will continue to try to
address the issue.
Len Busch Roses
Site Plan
Amendment (91043)
Item 8 -E
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, RESOLUTION 91 -430
seconded by Councilmember Zitur, to adopt APPROVING SITE
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -430 APPROVING SITE PLAN PLAN AMENDMENT FOR
AMENDMENT FOR LEN BUSCH ROSES FOR CONSTRUCTION OF LEN BUSCH ROSES
FOUR ADDITIONAL GREENHOUSES LOCATED NORTH OF (91043)
MEDINA ROAD, WEST OF COUNTY ROAD 101 (91043). Item 8 -E
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember'Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -431 APPROVING LOT DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION
FOR CALIBER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR CHESHIRE
BUSINESS CENTER LOCATED AT 2600 FERNBROOK LANE
91059) .
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -431
APPROVING LOT
DIVISION /CONSOLIDA
TION FOR CALIBER
DEVELOPMENT
91059)
Item *8 -F
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 296
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -432
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION SETTING CONDITIONS
NO. 91 -432 SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO TO BE MET PRIOR TO
FILING OF AND RELATED TO LOT FILING (91059)
DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION FOR CALIBER DEVELOPMENT Item *8 -F
COMPANY FOR CHESHIRE BUSINESS CENTER LOCATED AT
2600 FERNBROOK LANE (91059).
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -433 APPROVING SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR
CALIBER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR CHESHIRE BUSINESS
CENTER LOCATED AT 2600 FERNBROOK LANE (91059).
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -433
APPROVING SITE
PLAN AMENDMENT FOR
CHESHIRE BUSINESS
CENTER (91059)
Item *8 -F
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -434
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION APPROVING MPUD
NO. 91 -434 APPROVING THE MIXED PLANNED UNIT FINAL PLAT AND
DEVELOPMENT (MPUD) FINAL PLAT AND DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT
CONTRACT FOR NC BERKSHIRE LANE I LIMITED CONTRACT FOR
PARTNERSHIP (TRADMELL CROW) FOR PLYMOUTH BUSINESS PLYMOUTH BUSINESS
CENTER 5TH ADDITION (90063) (MPUD 90 -1). CENTER 5TH
ADDITION (90063)(
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes. (MPUD 90 -1)
Item *8 -G
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur,
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RE
NO. 91 -435 SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET
FILING OF AND RELATED TO THE MPUD FINAL
NC BERKSHIRE LANE I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
CROW COMPANY) (90063) (MPUD 90 -1).
seconded RESOLUTION 91 -435
SOLUTION SETTING CONDITIONS
PRIOR TO TO BE MET PRIOR TO
PLAT FOR FILING (90063)
TRAM-ML Item *8 -G
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -436
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION APPROVING CUP FOR
NO. 91 -436 APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR NC BERKSHIRE LANE
NC BERKSHIRE LANE I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (TRAMMELL I (90063)
CROW COMPANY) (90063). Item *8 -G
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 297
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -437
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION ADOPTING
NO. 91 -437 ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS, PROJECT NO. 124, ASSESSMENTS,
WATERMAIN AREA, PLYMOUTH BUSINESS CENTER 5TH PROJECT NO. 124
ADDITION. PLYMOUTH BUSINESS
CENTER 5TH ADDN.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes. (90063)
Item *8 -G
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -438
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION RELEASE OF SITE
NO. 91 -438 AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE
PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR CHESHIRE BUSINESS GUARANTEE FOR
CENTER I (89082) AND CHESHIRE BUSINESS CENTER II CHESHIRE BUSINESS
89116) BOTH LOCATED AT 2600 FERNBROOK LANE. CENTERS I AND II
89116) (89082)
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes. Item *8 -H -1
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -439 AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF SITE
PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR NORTHWOOD HOMES INC.
FOR PONDS NORTH LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER
OF 54TH AVENUE NORTH AND NATHAN LANE NORTH
87093) .
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -4
RELEASE OF SITE
PERFORMANCE
GUARANTEE FOR
PONDS NORTH
87093)
Item *8 -H -2
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -440
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION RELEASE OF SITE
NO. 91 -440 AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF SITE PERFORMANCE
PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR NEW VENTURES CHRISTIAN GUARANTEE FOR
CHURCH (88086). NEW VENTURES
CHRISTIAN CHURCH
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes. (88086)
Item *8 -H -3
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -441 AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF SITE
PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR TREE PRESERVATION FOR
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #284 FOR KIMBERLY
LANE SCHOOL (90031).
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -4
RELEASE OF SITE
PERFORMANCE
GUARANTEE FOR
KIMBERLY LANE
SCHOOL (90031)
Item *8 -H -4
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 298
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -442 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF JOINT
COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY TO
PARTICIPATE IN HENNEPIN HOUSING CONSORTIUM.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -443 RECEIVE BIENNIAL UPDATE OF PAVEMENT
MANAGEMENT REPORT, ORDER PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING
REPORT FOR 1992 STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM,
CITY PROJECT NO. 201.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Manager Willis recommended that the Council
a resolution denying a petition for an
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) on
Northwest Boulevard between 56th Avenue and
Avenue North and an interchange at I- 494 /Scl
Lake Road.
RESOLUTION 91 -442
AUTHORIZING
AGREEMENT WITH
HENNEPIN COUNTY TO
PARTICIPATE IN
HENNEPIN HOUSING
CONSORTIUM
Item *8 -I
RESOLUTION 91 -443
ORDER PREL. ENG.
REPORT FOR 1992
STREET
RECONSTRUCTION
PROGRAM
PROJECT NO. 201
Item *8 -J
adopt Petition for RAW
on Northwest
Blvd., 56th to
54th 54th Avenue
idt Item 8 -K
Councilmember Vasiliou stated the current 50 mph
speed limit is excessive on Northwest Boulevard,
north of County Road 9, since the road is under
construction. Staff was directed to check this
posted speed.
Bryan Sykora, 4970 Quinwood Lane, represented
citizens from Bass Lake, Bass Lake Woods, and
Meadows of Bass Lake. He requested that the City
consider the A -E alignment because he feels it is
environmentally superior to the A -D alignment.
He stated the A -E alignment has been supported by
the DNR. The request for an EAW is being made
because of citizen feelings that the City did not
give sufficient consideration to the A -E
alternative.
He stated the residents obtained the assistance
of the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and the
Department of Natural Resources to allow
participation in public hearings during the
City's permitting process. He stated that if the
Council awards any contracts for Northwest
Boulevard construction, it would be inconsistent
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 299
with the City's promise to the EQB to take no
further action which would eliminate the A -E
alignment. He requested that the Council delay
consideration of bids until the DNR permitting
process is completed.
John Coyne, 5515 Sycamore Lane, stated the
Northwest Boulevard alignment was selected 17
years ago and recently was moved closer to the
residential properties to lessen the impact on
the wetlands. Since 1989 he has asked that the
City address environmental issues, such as the
removal of trees abutting his property and the
noise levels that will be created by the roadway.
He stated the EQB and DNR have tentatively given
approval to the A -E alignment which is favored by
abutting residents.
Mr. Coyne stated that the neighbors were not
included in development of the proposed
landscaping plan to mitigate conditions created
by the project as previously directed by the
Council. The City held an informational meeting
where the plan was presented to residents. He
requested that the Council consider fencing and
tree planting to mitigate the effects on his
property. He demonstrated the traffic volumes
and encouraged the Council to also consider
berming.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated that the residents
should have been allowed to provide input on the
City's recommendation. She will not vote on the
plan to mitigate effects of the roadway until the
residents have been involved.
Manager Willis stated that one DNR staff member
has stated that the A -E alignment may be the best
alternative -- the City has not received any
indication that that is the DNR position. At a
July 18 meeting of the Environmental Quality
Board, the issue was whether the City had
properly followed the process with respect to the
previous EAW. The Board decided that the City
had followed the appropriate process, and the
best way for the residents to get their concerns
addressed was through a hearing before the DNR
during the permitting process.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 300
Jack Leahey, Sycamore Lane, said that the DNR has
stated, on at least three separate occasions,
that the DNR favors the A -E alignment.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated that if the DNR
prefers the A -E alignment, it should put its
comments and decision in a letter to the City and
deny the permit, rather than approving the permit
and then blaming the City for moving ahead with
the project.
David Barstad, 12915 54th Avenue North, stated
that the Council previously directed staff to
respond to questions by the DNR, and residents
have not been provided with a copy of the letter.
He stated that three DNR employees have supported
the A -E alignment.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated she asked about
this several weeks ago and asked why the Council
or residents were not provided with a copy of the
letter.
Manager Willis stated that the DNR requested
additional information of the City. The letter
responding to the DNR has not been prepared.
Staff is obtaining additional information in
order to prepare the response.
Councilmember Zitur asked for a status report on
the Pineview Lane railroad arm. Director Moore
responded that the construction timing is at the
discretion of the Soo Line Railroad. They have
indicated that construction is slated for fall.
Manager Willis stated he met with Mr. Barstad and
Mr. Stemper for about three hours to discuss
their previous letters and concerns. Residents
in the audience responded that they did not get
the answers they wanted.
Councilmember Ricker stated that if the Council
denies the petition for an EAW, the DNR still
would have the authority to approve or deny the
City's permit application.
Mr. Coyne stated that if the City awards the bid
for construction of Northwest Blvd. from 56th to
54th Avenues, this will eliminate an alternate
alignment.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 301
Manager Willis stated the staff's recommendation
is that the bid be awarded on that portion from
56th to 55th Avenues. This bid award would not
eliminate the A -E alternative.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded
by Councilmember Zitur, to adopt RESOLUTION 91-
444 DENYING PETITION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, four ayes,
Vasiliou nay.
Director Moore stated the contract for
construction of Northwest Boulevard was bid in
two phases - from 56th to 55th Avenue and from
55th to 54th Avenue. The Council has 30 days in
which to award the contract on Phase I, and 90
days to award Phase II. Each phase could be
awarded separately. Phase I is necessary to
provide access to Bass Lake Park and the Bass
Lake Terrace Addition.
Director Moore stated that as the Council
directed, a landscaping plan to mitigate the
effects of the project on the abutting residences
was prepared for all residential properties from
54th Avenue to 56th Avenue. The estimated cost
of the southerly portion is $21,000, and the
northerly portion is $29,000. He recommended
that landscaping and fencing be the
responsibility of the property owners, with the
exception of the southerly portion of the project
where the road is elevated. The estimated cost
for that portion of work is $15,000- $16,000. It
is proposed that following landscaping
installation, the adjacent property owners would
be responsible for maintenance.
Vicky Hubbell, 12935 54th Avenue North, stated
she does not support the A -D alignment. She
stated that residents had no input on and
landscaping plan proposed by staff.
Councilmember Ricker stated that at Council
direction staff prepared a plan and held a public
meeting to present it to residents and to get
input. He suggested that the meeting be held
RESOLUTION 91 -444
DENYING PETITION
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET
Item 8 -K
Northwest Blvd.
Construction
Project 106
Item 8 -L
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 302
again if residents felt they did not have
adequate input.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated that an attorney
represented the City at the Environmental Quality
Board meeting, and asked that the Manager advise
the Council in the future if the City hires an
attorney to represent the City.
Ms. Hubbell stated that at the public information
meeting on the landscaping plan, Director Moore
listened to resident input but stated he would
not bring it forward to the Council. She stated
that she does not believe the Council directive
to work with the residents was met, and
therefore, the bid should not be awarded.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated she would be
willing to meet with staff and the residents to
discuss the landscape plan.
Manager Willis recommended that the Council award
the bid for Northwest Boulevard construction.
The developer to the west of the roadway needs
access to his new development and this
construction will not eliminate the alternative
alignment desired by abutting residents.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded
by Councilmember Zitur, to direct Director Moore,
Manager Willis, and Councilmembers (desiring to
attend), to meet with the residents at 7:00 p.m.
on August 12, to discuss the landscape plan. The
plan should be returned to the Council with the
cost of the City plan, and the cost of the
residents' plan.
Motion carried, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded
by Mayor Bergman, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 91 -445
AWARDING BID, NORTHWEST BOULEVARD - 54TH TO 56TH
AVENUE PHASE I, CITY PROJECT NO. 106.
Councilmember Vasiliou asked whether the DNR will
have made a decision on the permit application by
the next meeting. Manager Willis stated "no ".
RESOLUTION 91 -445
AWARDING BID -
NORTHWEST BLVD.
PROJECT NO. 106
Item 8 -L
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 303
Mike Boen, 12945 55th Avenue North, stated he
supports the A -E alignment. If it is not
adopted, he requested that Sycamore Lane be
posted off of Northwest Blvd. as "One -Way Out" to
eliminate through traffic.
MOTION carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
No action was necessary on the request of Vern Request of Vern
Reynolds Construction to revise the development Reynolds Const.
contract since the request was handled through Item 8 -M
the Council's award of bid for Northwest Blvd.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -446 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, CHURCHILL
FARMS ADDITION (90009).
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -44E
REDUCING
DEVELOPMENT BOND,
CHURCHILL FARMS
ADDITION (90009)
Item *8 -N -1
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -447
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION REDUCING
NO. 91 -447 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, PHEASANT DEVELOPMENT BOND,
TRAIL ADDITION (85103). PHEASANT TRAIL
ADDITION (85103)
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes. Item *8 -N -2
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -448 REDUCING DEVELOPMENT BOND, WILLOW
MEADOWS 2ND ADDITION (88035).
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -448
REDUCING
DEVELOPMENT BOND,
WILLOW MEADOWS 2ND
ADDITION (88035)
Item *8 -N -3
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -449
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION REIMBURSING
NO. 91-449 REIMBURSING DEVELOPER FOR REQUIRED DEVELOPER FOR
WATERMAIN CONSTRUCTION -- BASS LAKE TERRACE WATERMAIN
ADDITION (90050): CONSTRUCTION
90050)
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes. Item *8 -0
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -450
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION ORDERING HEARING
NO. 91 -450 ORDERING PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ON VACATION OF
PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF XENIUM LANE PORTION OF XENIUM
RIGHT -OF -WAY WITHIN WESTMINSTER ADDITION. LANE
Item *8 -P
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 304
MOTION was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -451
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS
NO. 91 -451 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AND ORDERING BIDS
ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, 15TH AVENUE PROJECT NO. 945
STREET AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, CITY PROJECT Item *8 -Q
NO. 945.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -452 DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND
ORDERING PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT,
HARBOR LANE, CITY PROJECT NO. 912.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -453 FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT,
CITY PROJECT NO. 912, HARBOR LANE.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
RESOLUTION 91 -452
ORDERING
PREPARATION OF
ASSESSMENT,
PROJECT NO. 912
Item *8 -R
RESOLUTION 91 -453
SETTING ASSESSMENT
HEARING ON PROJECT
NO. 912, HARBOR
LANE
Item *8 -R
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -454
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION REVISING
NO. 91 -454 REVISING CONSTRUCTION COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION
AGREEMENT, COUNTY ROAD 6, FERNBROOK LANE TO AGREEMENT
COUNTY ROAD 101, COUNTY PROJECT NO. 8642 /CITY PROJECT NO. 829
PROJECT NO. 829. Item *8 -S
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Director Moore presented the staff report on the
petition for an "All Way" stop at 25th Avenue and
Walnut Grove Lane. The Council previously
approved placement of a stop sign at the
southerly corner of this intersection. Residents
have now petitioned for an all -way stop. Staff
recommends denial of the petition.
Nick Bognanno, 2500 Walnut Grove Lane, requested
that the Council approve the request. He stated
there are four large pine trees at the corner
that inhibit visibility, in addition to a park
and trail going to Mooney Lake.
Request for "All
Way" Stop at 25th
Avenue and Walnut
Grove Lane
Item 8 -T
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 305
Brian Lokkesmoe, '2415 Walnut Grove Lane, stated
traffic speed has recently increased and
requested approval of the petition.
Staff was directed to conduct speed checks on
25th Avenue at Walnut Grove Lane.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Helliwell, RESOLUTION 91 -455
seconded by Councilmember Zitur, to adopt INSTALLATION OF
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -455 INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGN, STOP SIGN
for an "All Way" stop at 25th Avenue and Walnut Item 8 -T
Grove Lane.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -456 AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) SCHMIDT
LAKE ROAD FROM I -494 TO VICKSBURG LANE, CITY
PROJECT NO. 907.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Manager Willis presented a report on the City's
participation in the League of Minnesota Cities
LMC), Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
AMM), Municipal Legislative Commission (MLC),
and the Suburban Rate Authority (SRA). He
outlined the dues for 1991 and 1992, as well as
the applicable withdrawal dates should the
Council decide to withdraw membership from one or
more of the organizations.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated the City continues
to belong to the LMC because of the insurance
provided; however, she questioned what the
insurance alternatives are.
Manager Willis stated the LMC dues are based on
population of the City. Through the last year,
the 1980 population was used to determine the
City's membership dues. This year the 1990
population was used which results in a large
increase. He stated that lobbying is the primary
and sole function of the MLC. The other three
organizations provide many other services, in
addition to lobbying.
RESOLUTION 91 -456
AUTHORIZING EAW ON
SCHMIDT LAKE ROAD
FROM I -494 TO
VICKSBURG LANE
PROJECT NO. 907
Item *8 -U
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 306
Manager Willis stated that he feels there is
value to each of the organizations, but if the
Council decides to reduce the number of
memberships, he recommended memberships be
maintained in the following order: LMC, AMM, SRA,
and MLC.
Councilmember Helliwell stated this is a
difficult decision because each of the
organizations have a different emphasis on
different issues.
Councilmember Ricker suggested that a letter be
send to each of the organizations that a cap
needs to be placed on the dues or Plymouth will
not be able to continue membership in future
years.
Councilmember Zitur suggested that membership in
one organization be discontinued for next year.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Mayor Bergman, to continue the City's
membership in the League of Minnesota Cities and
the Suburban Rate Authority during 1992.
Motion carried four ayes; Councilmember Vasiliou
nay.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to continue the
City's membership in the AMM and MLC, and to
direct staff to send letter to the organizations
indicating that the City takes serious objection
to the dues increases and unless dues are capped,
Plymouth may not continue those memberships.
Attorney Thomson 'stated the SRA and MLC are joint
powers agreements that the City entered into.
The City must follow the bylaws. The LMC and AMM
are voluntary organizations.
Motion was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded
by Mayor Bergman, that a letter also be sent to
the SRA that Plymouth is resigning its membership
from the SRA effective 1 -1 -93.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, four ayes,
Vasiliou nay.
Membership in LMC
and SRA
Item 8 -V
Withdraw
Membership from
SRA effective
1 -1 -93
Item 8 -V
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 307
Councilmember Vasiliou stated her no vote
reflects her opposition to remaining in the
Suburban Rate Authority this year. She stated
the City Manager should have made the Council
aware of this membership renewal so the City
could have withdrawn this year.
Manager Willis stated the Suburban Rate Authority
membership was presented to the Council earlier
in the year and no objections were received so
membership was renewed.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Ricker, to split the vote on
continuing the membership for the MLC and AMM.
Motion carried, four ayes, Councilmember Vasiliou
nay.
Motion to continue the MLC membership for 1992
carried, Helliwell, Ricker, Zitur ayes; Vasiliou
and Bergman nays.
Motion to continue the AMM membership for 1992
carried, Helliwell, Ricker, Zitur ayes; Vasiliou
and Bergman nays.
Motion was made by Councilmember Helliwell,
seconded by Councilmember Ricker, to adopt
RESOLUTION NO. 91 -457 APPROVING ADOPTION OF
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM, 1991 -1995.
Councilmember Helliwell stated she supports the
overall program, but opposes the Schmidt Lake
Road construction.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Manager Willis stated the Council previously
directed that staff submit possible means of
financing for the proposed expansion of the
existing City Center building. He stated there
are three options for financing: 1) General
obligation bond sale, 2) Existing City reserves,
and 3) Combination of general obligation bond
sale and use of reserves. Finance Director Hahn
has indicated there are sufficient reserves to
pay the estimated cost of the project.
RESOLUTION 91 -457
CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAM 1991 -1995
Item 8 -W
City Center Space
Needs Report -
Financing Options
Item 8 -X
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 308
Councilmember Ricker stated that the Council
should determine if there is a need to expand the
building - he believes some expansion is
warranted. If there is a need, the financing is
available and should be designated.
Mayor Bergman stated he is reluctant to do
anything right now, other than the connection to
the Public Safety building.
Councilmember Ricker suggested that the architect
be asked to provide further information that
could assist the Council in determining the
amount of space needed.
Manager Willis stated the architect has provided
information on space needs through the year 2011.
He could be asked to provide a more conservative
estimate to serve needs for the next five or ten
years.
Councilmember Zitur stated that the Council
should consider the use of reserves for this and
other projects. His concern is that the
legislature could penalize the City for holding
excessive reserves in the future.
Councilmember Vasiliou stated she cannot see the
need as easily as the Public Works or Public
Safety buildings. She would like further
information as well.
Councilmember Zitur stated additional space is
needed, particularly conference rooms for citizen
and employee privacy.
Manager Willis stated he will ask the architect
to provide further, more tangible information, on
the space needs at the City Center.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -460
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION APPOINTING
NO. 91 -460 APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR SPECIAL ELECTION
ELECTION CONDUCTED BY MAIL BALLOT ON SEPTEMBER 3, JUDGES
1991. Item *8 -Y
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 309
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded RESOLUTION 91 -461
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION APPROVING
NO. 91 -461 APPROVING 1991 CIGARETTE LICENSE CIGARETTE LICENSE
APPLICATION for Target Greatland. Item *8 -Z
Motion carried on a roll call vote, five ayes.
Community Development Director Tremere presented
the report requested by the Council and showed
slides of trash and recycling containers in
various locations in the City and noted the types
of problems that can be created by their
placement and lack of enclosure.
He stated there are 49 pending enforcement
efforts relating to unenclosed /unscreened trash
containers and unlawful outside storage of
materials other than trash or recyclable items.
Other violations noted were obstruction of
parking, and obstruction of fire hydrants and
building connections.
He asked that the Council decide whether a
distinction should be made between containers
used for recyclables and all other containers,
and provide staff with direction with respect to
Zoning Ordinance standards.
Mayor Bergman asked the purpose of requiring
enclosures? Director Tremere stated that the
Planning Commission and Council were concerned
with aesthetics, location, and sanitation issues
during the early to mid 198019. The current
zoning ordinance standards were developed before
source separation was mandated.
Councilmember Helliwell suggested that building
owners could be notified by letter requesting
them to construct larger or additional
enclosures.
Jeff Crees of BFI Systems Inc., stated that it is
unlikely many businesses would comply with the
request due to cost considerations. One concern
is that the businesses may discontinue source
separation if the cost is too great.
Report on
Enclosure of
Containers used
for Trash, Garbage
and Recyclables
Item 9 -A
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 310
Councilmember Zitur stated that the City has
perhaps not sufficiently communicated the City's
position to the businesses and, particularly, to
the haulers.
Councilmember Ricker stated that it is possible
that, in some cases, the property owner may not
have the land available to construct additional
enclosures. He suggested that exceptions be
considered if new standards are adopted.
Councilmember Vasiliou suggested that a Task
Force be established to consider the issue.
Representatives of various businesses, commercial
and industrial property owners, and refuse
haulers could serve on the Task Force. The Mayor
stated the issue was one of space which is
valuable and the ultimate decision an owner faces
is whether to dedicate space to business needs or
to trash containers.
Director Tremere stated the Council should
determine whether it wants to make a distinction
between containers designated for recycling and
those used for trash. The current standards do
not make a distinction.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Vasiliou, to establish a Task
Force to address this issue and to direct staff
to return with a recommendation for Task Force
members and charge. Membership can be developed
through publicity and representatives of local
businesses, property owners, and city staff
should be included.
Motion carried, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to adopt RESOLUTION
NO. 91 -462 APPOINTMENT OF JAMES EDWARDS TO BOARD
OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS, for a term
expiring January 31, 1992. This fills the
vacancy resulting from Jay Naftgzer's
resignation.
Motion carried on a roll call vote, four ayes,
Vasiliou nay.
RESOLUTION 91 -462
APPOINTING JAMES
EDWARDS TO BOZA
Item 9 -B
Regular Council Meeting
August 5, 1991
Page 311
Councilmember Vasiliou stated she feels there are
too many board representatives from the same area
of the City.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Zitur, seconded
by Councilmember Helliwell, to direct staff to
send a letter of appreciation to Jay Naftgzer for
his years of service.
Motion carried, five ayes.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded Policy on
by Councilmember Vasiliou, to make no changes to Appointments to
the Policy on the Appointment /Reappointment of Boards and
Members to boards and commissions for 1992. Commissions
Item 9 -C
Motion carried, five ayes.
Items 8 -D and 8 -E were tabled to the next
meeting.
Manager Willis stated that the preliminary
proposed budget and tax levy will be placed on
the August 19 agenda to comply with the Truth in
Taxation statutes.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 midnight.
City Clerk
7 -G
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: August 16, 1991 for Council Meeting of August 19, 1991
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: James G. Willis, City Manager
SUBJECT: PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING PROJECT - APPROVE DESIGN
DEVELOPMENT DRAWINGS, AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF
INSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.
1. ACTION REQUESTED Review the Public Safety Building design
development drawings and cost estimates prepared for the
project as prepared by Polson /Trossen /Wright Architects and
authorize the architects to proceed with the construction
document phase.
2. BACKGROUND: Last year Polson /Trossen /Wright was selected to
serve as the architect for the Public Safety Building
project. Since that date they have been making good
progress on the program.
At your July 1 meeting, you reviewed and approved the
schematic drawings of the project and ordered that the
architects proceed with the design development phase. The
architects report to me that they have completed that work
and will be presenting their work product to the Public
Safety Building Committee at 5 p.m., Monday, and the full
City Council at 7 p.m.
The architects inform me that the estimated construction
costs for this project at this point are still within the
previously approved budget. The total budget including
miscellaneous costs and furnishings is still projected at
3,574,000.
At this juncture we are comfortable that the construction
estimates provided by the architect will ensure that the
project comes in within the budget established by the City
Council.
PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING PROJECT - APPROVE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
DRAWINGS, AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
August 16, 1991 for Council Meeting of August 19, 1991
Page 2
The design development drawings will include some internal
space revisions, but will not change the size of the
building. The drawings will be available for your review
Monday after the architects arrive from Kansas City .
Following approval of this phase of the project,
Polson /Trossen /Wright Architects will proceed to prepare the
contract documents.
3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECONK NDATIONS: I recommend that the
Council adopt the attached resolution approving the design
development drawing phase for the Public Safety Building,
and authorizing the architects to proceed with the
construction document phase of the project.
JW:kec
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING - APPROVAL OF DESIGN
DEVELOPMENT DRAWINGS (PROJECT 017)
WHEREAS, the City Council has entered into an architectural
services agreement with the architectural joint venture of
Polson /Trossen /Wright to provide architectural design services
for the new Public Safety Building; and
WHEREAS, the architects have submitted design development
drawings and cost estimates for the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the design development
drawings and cost estimates.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the Public Safety Building
design development phase drawings are hereby approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the architects are hereby authorized
to proceed with the contract document phase of the project.
Adopted by the City Council on
7- N
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: August 16, 1991 for Council Meeting of August 19, 1991
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: James G. Willis, City Manager
SUBJECT: CITY CENTER SPACE NEEDS REPORT
1. ACTION REQUESTED: Provide direction to the staff as to
whether or not the spaces needs identified in the Polson
study adequately forecast the future spaces needs for the
City Center facility.
2. BACKGROUND: The Council has previously received and
reviewed a space needs analysis report commissioned by the
Council from Polson Trossen Wright Architects. The Council
considered this report at their August 5 Council meeting,
but indicated they prefer to hear more from the architect
with respect to the justification of the space needs.
Mr. Polson will be present Monday evening to respond to
questions the Council has with regard to this report.
I am attaching a copy of the report from the August 5
Council meeting which further backgrounds this topic.
JW:kec
MBMO
x
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: August 1, 1991 for Council Meeting of August 5, 1991
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: James G. Willis, City Manager
SUBJECT: CITY CENTER SPACE NEEDS REPORT - FINANCING OPTIONS
1. ACTION REQUESTED: Provide direction to the staff as to
whether or not one of the suggested financing mechanisms for
the proposed expansion of the City Center building is
acceptable to the Council.
2. BACKGROUND: The City Council directed that we submit for
consideration, possible means of financing the proposed
expansion of the existing City Center building. This report
suggests alternatives for Council consideration.
3. PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS: The existing City Center
building was constructed in 1978, and was planned to serve
the City's space needs for approximately 10 years. The
Council currently has under development, the final plans for
a new public safety building to be located adjacent to the
existing City Center building. The proposed project is
designed to meet the space needs of the Public Safety
Department through the year 2010.
The Poison
I
Trossen Wright space needs study for the City
Center building forecast additional space needs of 13,500
square feet (gross) to meet the needs through the year 2011.
This space is projected to be required in addition to
converting 3,300 square feet to be vacated by the Public
Safety Department. The estimated cost for the expansion and
renovation of this building is estimated at $2,733,000. A
summary of the Poison study reflecting their conclusions is
attached.
CITY CENTER SPACE NEEDS REPORT - FINANCING OPTIONS
August 1, 1991 for Council Meeting of August 5, 1991
Page 2
The Council directed that we examine alternative means by
which such an expansion could be financed. The Finance
Director and I have examined that issue and have the
following options to recommend for your consideration:
1. General Obligation Bond sale.
2. Existing City reserves.
3. Combinations of 1 and 2.
General Obligation Bond Sale - The project could be financed
through the issuance of General Obligation (G.O.) Bonds.
G.O. Bonds must be approved by the voters prior to their
being issued as the debt created by the sale of the bonds is
paid for through higher property taxes during the period the
bonds are outstanding. The City currently has relatively
modest outstanding G.O. Bond debt. From a financing
perspective, G.O. Bonds offer the advantage of providing us
the opportunity to conserve existing cash and spreading the
cost of the project to the future, presumably ensuring that
future citizens of Plymouth help share in the cost of
facilities built to serve their needs.
Existing City Reserves - The City Council earlier this year
received a report of the Financial Task Force which set
forth their recommendations, as well as analysis of existing
City reserves. A copy of a summary of that report is
attached. The City Center project was not specifically
contemplated for future financing, although it was mentioned
in their report.
The Finance Director has examined the City's reserves and
has suggested the possible funding of the proposed expansion
of the City Center building coming from the sources noted
below:
Permanent Improvement
Revolving Fund (PIR) $1,733,000
Public Facilities Fund $ 500,000
Project Administration Fund S 500,000
TOTAL $2,733,000
CITY CENTER SPACE NEEDS REPORT - FINANCING OPTIONS
August 1, 1991 for Council Meeting of August 5, 1991
Page 3
Use of Both Cash Reserves and G.O. Bonding - The option will
permit the Council to balance the need to conserve existing
and project cash reserves while incurring long -term debt.
The amount of financing from each source would have to be
determined by the Council as a matter of preference. It
would be possible to merge both the Public Safety building
and City Center projects into a single project for financing
purposes. As noted above, any amount proposed to be
financed through the sale of G.O. Bonds would require voter
approval.
The last sale of General Obligation Bonds was used to assist
in the financing of Fire Stations I and III. Those bonds
were sold in 1987 in the amount of $1,400,000. More
recently, the Council has authorized the use of existing
City resources to finance the remodeling of Fire Station II,
the construction of the new Public Works Maintenance
facility, the Bass Lake and Parkers Lake Community
Playfields, and the Public Safety Building. Those projects
represent a total commitment of nearly $10,500,000.
4. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: Any one of the financing
options suggested are viable. The Financial Task Force
report does not contemplate the expenditure of funds for the
expansion of the City Center building. I believe it would
be fair to conclude they would not recommend a further
drawing down on existing City reserves as they have
recommended that those reserves be strengthened.
If the Council were to determine that a G.O. Bond sale is
the most appropriate means to finance the proposed project,
then it would need to determine a timeline for the
scheduling of the project which would incorporate sufficient
time to inform the public and provide an opportunity for the
voters to authorize the issuance of the bonds.
I believe there is meri t
the City Center building
growing needs for space
operations and divisions
JW:kec
to proceed with the expansion of
in order that we can address the
as we have done for the other
of the City.
City of Plymouth Financial Task Force Report
Appendix C• Analysis of Fund Balances as of December 31. 1990
Public Safety 3,700,000
Public Works 3,800,000
Parks 11) 3,000,000
10,500,000
saaaaazsazata
1) May be partially funded from future park dedication fees.
14
Estimated
Fund Unencumbered Required Recommended Discretionary
Balance Committed Balance Reserves Reserves Reserves
General Fund 3,900,000 3,900,000 3,900,000 0
Recreation 18,000 18,000 18,000 0
Police State Aid 178,000 215,000 37,000) 37,000) 0
Building 5 Equipment 1,500,000 104,000 1.396,000 1,396,000 0
Forestry 15,000 15.000 15.000 0
Parkers Lake Cemetery Maint 49,000 49,000 49.000 0
Transit System 130,000 80,000 50.000 50,000 0
Community Oevel Block Grant 47,600 47.000 47,000 0
Project Administration 828,000 828.000 428.000 400,000
City 6 Community Parks 830,000 830,000 330,000 500,000
Neighborhood Parks 379,000 379,000 379,000 0
Park Replacement 60,000 60.000 60,000 0
Public Facilities 1,221,000 1,221.000 1,221,000 0
Housing 3 Redevelopment 25,000 25,000 25,000 0
General Obl. Debt Sery 89,000 89,000 89,000 0
Tax Increment Bond Debt Sery 6,111,000 6.111.000 6,111.000 0
Special Assess. Debt Sery 27,000,000 27.000.000 27.000.000 0
Gen. Capital Proj Const 310,000 310,000 310.000 0
Minnesota State Aids Const 862,000 862,000 862,000 0
Special Assessment Const 13,858,000 13,858,000 13,858,000 0
Permanent Improv Revolv. 12,341,000 800,000 11,541,000 1,200,000 10.341.000
Water 5,900,000 5,900,000 4,500,000 1,000,000
Sewer 2,800,000 2.800,000 2,800,000 400,000
Central Stores 180,000 180,000 180,000 0
Central Equipment 1,875,000 1,875,000 875,000 1,000,000
Risk Management 4,500,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 0
Parkers Lake perpetual 70,000 70,000 70.000 0
85,076,000 1,199,000 83,877,000 48,325,000 21,911,000 13,641,000
azsz :azaxaaz assaaaa :asaaa asasasssaas :: a :assaas::w s:sarn : :ssss ss:asa:sss :sa
Estimated future interest earnings'1991 through 2004 7,135.000
20,776,000
Sazaass:aaasa
Proposed Projects:
Public Safety 3,700,000
Public Works 3,800,000
Parks 11) 3,000,000
10,500,000
saaaaazsazata
1) May be partially funded from future park dedication fees.
14
3
EXPANSION DIAGRAMS
The expansion diagrams show both floors of the
existing structure, with current office space indicated
along side the year 2011 required space. The 2011
diagrams show 18,500 sq. ft. renovated and a 13,500
sq. ft. expansion. (A reconfigured north parking lot
is expected to contain about 40 cars, compared with
the 45 spaces now provided.)
COST ESTIMATES
ft is difficult to estimate costs with only floor area
requirements. For example, since needs include
supplement public meeting space, retained lobby
service counters, and more spaces with walls to the
ceiling, renovation requirements could be extensive.
And there are savings associated with a construction
contract that includes both the Public Safety and the
Administrative buildings.
Renovation (18,500 sq.ft. @ $40)
Expansion (13,500 sq.ft. @ $100)
Link ( *280 sq.ft. @ 4 f 10)
Total Construction
Testing & Professional
Furnishings (75% new)
Contingency (10% const)
Total Project Estimate $2,733,000.
this assumes that a link is not constructed prior to
the expansion of the present structure
4
Space Needs Summary
Current Public Safety Space: 3,296 sfg
Total Building Area: 31,490 sfg
2011 Administrative Spaced Needed 32,000 sfg
Less Existing Administrative Space - 15,200 sfg
Less Abandoned Public Safety Space - .300 sf
Expansion Required: 13,500 sfg
Renovation Required: 18,500 sfg
1991 Personnel: 72
2011 Personnel: 116
space figures are Fross; area totals)
department Spn"nt S191 S201
1. Finance 3,013 4,970 7,430
2. Administration 1,873 2,150 4,130
3. Community Devel. 2,200 3,090 4,680
4. Public Works 2,328 3,165 5,085
5. Parks & Rec. 2,088 2,560 3,700
6. General 2.230 3.590 3.920
subtotal, sfg 13,732 19,525 28,945
mech, circ & tlts 1,442 2,083 3,038
15% sfn)
Total, sfg 15,174 21,608 31,983
Current Public Safety Space: 3,296 sfg
Total Building Area: 31,490 sfg
2011 Administrative Spaced Needed 32,000 sfg
Less Existing Administrative Space - 15,200 sfg
Less Abandoned Public Safety Space - .300 sf
Expansion Required: 13,500 sfg
Renovation Required: 18,500 sfg
1991 Personnel: 72
2011 Personnel: 116
Expansion Diagrams
s
Present 2011 Required
15,200 sfg 32,000 sfg
Rbk Safety
Ground Floor N ag' Ground Floor N 0"
Frst Floor N ag' Frst FIM N lQ
7 -I
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: August 16, 1991 for Council Meeting of August 19, 1991
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: James G. Willis, City Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF PROPOSED 1992 CITY AND KRA BUDGETS AND
PROPOSED 1991 PROPERTY TAX LEVY, AND SETTING PUBLIC
HEARING ON SAME
ACTION REQUESTED: Adoption of the attached three resolutions:
1) Adopting the preliminary proposed 1992 City and HRA Budgets;
2) Approving proposed 1991 (payable 1992) property tax levies;
and 3) Setting dates for public hearing (s) on the proposed 1992
budgets and property tax levies.
BACKGROUND: The Truth in Taxation statute requires that local
governments adopt proposed operating budgets and adopt proposed
property tax levies in order that the County can issue "Truth in
Taxation" property tax statements to property owners. This year,
within Hennepin, Ramsey and St. Louis Counties (Duluth), property
taxpayers will receive parcel - specific preliminary tax notices.
These preliminary tax statements will be mailed to all property
tax owners on or about November 8 by the respective counties.
The tax statements will project the taxes proposed to be levied
by each of the taxing jurisdictions affecting that particular
property owner. It is for that purpose that the City Council is
required to adopt a proposed budget and proposed property tax
levy.
Each local unit of government must also establish public hearing
dates to which the public is invited to attend for the purpose of
commenting on the proposed budget and proposed property tax
levies. The County and School Districts, by statute, have the
opportunity of selecting their dates first. The County and
School Districts in Plymouth have selected the following dates
for their public hearings:
Hennepin County November 19, December 3
School District 279 Osseo) November 26, December 17
School District 281 Robbinsdale) December 2, December 16
School District 284 Wayzata) December 9, December 16
School District 270 Hopkins) December 5, December 19
ADOPTION OF PROPOSED 1992 CITY AND HRA BUDGETS AND
PROPOSED 1991 PROPERTY TAX LEVY, AND SETTING PUBLIC
HEARING ON SAME
August 16, 1991
Page 2
The date(s) we select must not conflict with the dates previously
selected by the County and the School Districts. The Finance
Director and I have looked at the calendars for November and
December and are suggesting that the Council schedule its first
public hearing for November 25. The second public hearing,
December 10, has been selected in case the Council needs to
continue the first hearing. The second hearing must not be less
than five nor more than fourteen business days after the first
meeting. The Truth in Taxation statute require that the budget
be adopted at a public hearing meeting. These proposed dates are
open for your discussion.
The adoption of the preliminary proposed budgets and proposed
property tax levy must be accomplished by the City Council August
19 as that is the last scheduled Council meeting prior to the
statutory deadline of September 3.
It is recognized that the hearing proposed to be held on November
25 is based upon the budgets I am attaching to this memorandum
Exhibit I and II) . The City Council has not had an opportunity
to consider these budgets. These preliminary budgets reflect the
requests of each of our operating units; I have not yet fully had
the opportunity to review them. However, for the purposes set
forth in the Truth in Taxation statute, I believe it is
appropriate for the Council to adopt the attached preliminary
proposed 1992 budgets as presented. The Council's formal budget
review will undoubtedly result in changes to these budgets, as
will mine.
The recommendation to levy proposed property taxes contained in
the attached resolution is the maximum authorized under the levy
limit statutes. You will note that in 1990, we levied $295,864
under the levy limit cap as a general debt service levy. This
levy would have qualified as a "special levy," however it was
included under the levy limit in order to "protect" our levy
limit base. For the 1991 tax levy (payable 1992), it is assumed
that the full levy limit will be used to finance General Fund
operations.
The schedule of proposed levies is shown on attached Exhibit III.
In addition to the normal special levies, I have also included a
special levy for tax abatements and cancellations in the amount
of $200,483. This levy is to recoup the lost tax dollars which
resulted from court ordered reductions in valuations last year.
In essence, it collects in 1992, taxes which were anticipated to
have been collected previously; it does not represent "new"
money.
ADOPTION OF PROPOSED 1992 CITY AND HRA BUDGETS AND
PROPOSED 1991 PROPERTY,TAX LEVY, AND SETTING PUBLIC
HEARING ON SAME
August 16, 1991
Page 3
You will also note that the City's total tax capacity value
decreased from $58,462,583 to $57,794,000. A good portion of
this reduction results from a decrease in the tax capacity rates
applied to higher value homes as well as commercial /industrial
and apartment properties. The loss of this tax capacity is to be
made up through increase H.A.C.A. in 1992. Attached are two
memos from the City Assessor which I have previously provided to
the City Council in the Information Memorandum. These two memos
discuss the tax abatements and cancellations and reductions in
the tax capacity value for taxes collectible in 1992.
Finally, the proposed HRA levy, $361,558, is the maximum
allowable and presumes that the Council and /or HRA will continue
to proceed with the proposed senior citizen housing program.
CONCLUSIONS & RECObIIM19NDATIONS: Based upon the instructions we
received from the Commissioner of Revenue with respect to
compliance with the Truth in Taxation statute, I recommend the
Council adopt the attached resolutions providing for the
following:
1) Adoption of the preliminary proposed 1992 City and HRA
budgets.
2) Adoption of the proposed 1991 (payable 1992) property tax
levy in the amount of $10,602,293.
3) Setting November 25 and December 10 as public hearing
dates for the public to comment on the proposed 1992 City
budgets and proposed 1992 property tax levy.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX LEVIES FOR TAXES PAYABLE IN 1992
WHEREAS, the City Council has preliminary approved the proposed
operating budgets for the period commencing January 1, 1992 and
certain monies to finance said budgets are preliminary required
to be raised from taxes on taxable property in the City of
Plymouth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the following sums of money be
raised by tax on taxable property in the City of Plymouth for the
year 1992 as set out in the approved proposed 1992 City budgets
are hereby proposed to be levied:
General Purpose:
General Fund
Infrastructure
Forestry
Storm Sewer Tax Districts
Total General Purpose
Special Levies:
Tax Abatements
City Special Assessments
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
General Obligation Debt
Total Special Levies
Total All Levies
7,809,914
930,804
228,500
300,0A
9,269,252
200,483
110,000
361,558
661,000
1,333,041
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the said proposed tax levy be
certified to the County Auditor of Hennepin County on or before
September 3, 1991.
Adopted by the City Council on
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
A RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING FOR 1992 CITY BUDGETS
WHEREAS, in accordance with state statutes, the City Council
annually adopts various operating budgets; and
WHEREAS, the Council desires to receive information from the
public relative to the proposed budgets; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing is annually established for the purpose
of obtaining such resident input.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it hereby establishes Monday,
November 25, 1991 at 7:00 p.m. as the first public hearing date
for public review and comment regarding the 1992 City Budgets and
Tuesday, December 10, 1991 as the second public hearing date if
needed; and
FURTHER, does hereby direct the City Clerk to cause public notice
of such hearing to be published in the Star Tribune in
substantially the form attached.
Adopted by the City Council on
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 91-
ADOPTING PROPOSED 1992 BUDGETS
WHEREAS, the City Manager has prepared preliminary proposed 1992
budgets for fiscal year commencing January 1, 1992 based upon the
requirements of the State Tax Law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the preliminary 1992 proposed
operating budgets for the following funds are hereby preliminary
approved:
General Fund Budget $12,080,919
Recreation Fund Budget 610,835
Forestry Fund Budget 279,709
Water Fund Budget 2,574,500
Sewer Fund Budget 4,032,524
Central Equipment Fund Budget 1,436,300
Solid Waste Fund Budget 528,400
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, (i) that the City Council concurs on the
1992 Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Authority budgets in the
amount of $1,118•,358, (ii) that this proposed operating budget
resolution and the accompanying proposed tax levies contained in
Resolution No. 91- are being submitted by the City in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, and other applicable law in
effect on this date; (iii) that the Resolutions represent a good
faith effort by the City to substantially comply with applicable
law; and (iv) that the City Council declares its intent to take
all necessary actions legally permissible to conform with the
laws, rulings, and regulations now or hereafter applicable to the
submission and approval of the City's budget and tax levies both
proposed and final.
Adopted by the City Council on
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: August 7, 1991
TO: James G. Willis, City Manager
FROM: Scott Hovet, City Assessor i tk
SUBJECT: CITY TAX CAPACITY VALUATION
STATUTORY IMPACT
The total estimated market valuation of the City continues to grow, yet the City's
taxing capability is declining due to legislative action. First is a listing of the
overall City market value, this is followed by the percent growth of that value
from the prior year assessment. Next is the City's taxing capacity for the same
assessment years, followed by the percent of change in our taxing capacity for
those collectible years as listed:
ASSESSMENT YEAR
1989
1990
1991
MARKET VALUE
2,438,235,900
2,657,688,500
2,759,981,400
GROWTH
FROM PRIOR YEAR)
7.35%
8.57%
4.23%
Current Year)
It should be noted that the City's 1991 estimated market value grew by 4.23 %.
Before Legislative changes our tax capacity for collectible 1992 would have grown
by 4.34 %. Due to statutory changes in property classification percentages, the City
will lose 6.63% of it's taxing authority from the prior year.
CiM NG 9,91
GROSS COLLECTABLE
TAX CAPACITY CHANGE TAX YEAR
1989 67,480,530 1990
1990 72,869,801 7.98% 1991
Before 1991 76,031,803 4.34% 1992
Prior Year)
After 1991 71,303,364 6.63% 1992
Current Year)
It should be noted that the City's 1991 estimated market value grew by 4.23 %.
Before Legislative changes our tax capacity for collectible 1992 would have grown
by 4.34 %. Due to statutory changes in property classification percentages, the City
will lose 6.63% of it's taxing authority from the prior year.
CiM NG 9,91
I
August 8, 1991
Tax Capacity Impact
Page 2
There are 3 primary reasons for this change. First, the most notable change is in
the calculations of residential homestead taxes in 1992 under the revised 3 tier
system. Demonstrated as follows:
1991 TAX CAPACITY
1st $68,000 of Value @ 1%
Next $42,000 of Value @ 2%
Over $110,000 of Value @ 3%
140,000 House = $2,420)
1992 TAX CAPACITY
1st $72,000 of Value @ 1%
Next $43.000 of Value @ 2%
Over $115,000 of value @ 2.5%
140,000 House - $2,205)
55 %, or 8,144 out of 14,755 single family homes are valued in excess of $110,000.
This alone amounts to $1,750,000 loss in tax capacity.
Second, commercial and industrial property in Plymouth is 48.3% of our tax base.
The Legislature has dictated that the tax capacity calculation on
commercial /industrial property be reduced over three years from 5.061% down to
4.95% and for collectible tax year 1992 down to 4.75 %, a $1,00.0,000 loss in our
tax capacity.
Lastly, our loss to the Fiscal Disparities pool (contribution) is increasing from
12,525,000 to $13,673,000, another $1,148,000 tax capacity loss.
These are the three major reasons that our tax capacity, even though we are
experiencing market value growth, is being reduced. The Legislature has also
increased our HACA (Homestead Credit) Aid to help offset some of our lost tax
capacity.
cc: Dale Hahn, Finance Director
CiM AUG TO
J
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: August 8, 1991
TO: James G. Willis, City Manager
FROM: Scott Hovet, CAE, City Assessor
SUBJECT: ABATEMENTS AND PROPERTY TAX APPEALS
The increasing trend in property tax reduction being sought by taxpayers through
the abatement (correction) or tax court petition filings are on the increase
throughout Hennepin County. This trend is also being felt in Plymouth.
Abatements are a property tax correction that is sought by property owners to
reduce the amount of taxes owed for an improper classification (homestead) or a
reduction in valuation.
Court case tax petition growth is occurring at an alarming rate. Attached is a
listing of each city in Hennepin County of the growth in court case appeals that
have been filed. The City has 595 commercial, industrial and apartment properties.
119 tax court petitions have been filed against the City, most of these are
commercial and industrial.
The amount of property tax revenue loss that the City is experiencing is growing
each year. In 1988 we lost approximately $10,000. In 1989 our loss was close to
25,000. Our loss of taxes from all causes (abatements, exempt filings, delinquent
taxes, valuation reduction from tax court appeals) will amount to approximately
100,000 in 1991. I am expecting about $150,000 to be refunded during the 1992
budgetary year.
The magnitude of this problem is requiring assessors to be prepared to perform a
fee appraisal on every commercial, industrial and apartment property in the City
should they go all the way to trial. This is consuming more and more of my time
and is next to impossible as there are 595 commercial, industrial and apartment
properties to be assessed each year on the assessment date (January 2).
CIM pIJ 9'91
V
August 8, 1991
James G. Willis
Page Two
Market values on many of our larger commercial properties are declining during this so
called recession. Some examples of this are as follows:
POTENTIAL
CVN /Litton)
Holiday Inn $ 4,420,000 $ 2,400,000 $ 15,900
Foreclosure)
Scanticon Minneapolis $18,232,000 $15,000,000 $ 25,400
40,000,000 (Foreclosure)
Construction Cost)
These five larger taxpayers represent a possible reduction in market value and ultimately
property tax that could have an impact in the budgetary process for the City. All five
of these properties have filed tax court petitions and I am currently in the income
discovery stage. I will keep you informed of the status of our progress.
I think we are experiencing the "peak" of appeals as commercial /industrial values are
stabilizing. Also, we are addressing 2 and 3 assessment years at one time. I also feel
most major properties that may have experienced financial trouble have already surfaced.
Attached for your information are two articles dealing with the magnitude of property
tax appeals. The article "Appeals are Appealing" is from Monday, August 5, Minnesota
Real Estate Journal. The article "Minneapolis tax appeals likely to raise rates for all"
is from the August 7 Star Tribune. These articles very graphically describe the nature
of the problem.
There is not all bad news. The 1990 Legislature passed a statute where the City may
re -levy losses of property tax revenue the subsequent year. This means that property
tax revenue lost to the City in one year may be recouped the following year.
c«M AUG 5'91
FUTURE)
COMPLEX NAME 1991 VALUE SALE PRICE TAX LOSS
Park Place 22,000,000 15,500,000 35,000
Apartments Foreclosure)
Plymouth Place 5,505,000 1,100,000 4,600
Hotel
Carlson Marketing 10,265,500 9,000,000 10,000
CVN /Litton)
Holiday Inn $ 4,420,000 $ 2,400,000 $ 15,900
Foreclosure)
Scanticon Minneapolis $18,232,000 $15,000,000 $ 25,400
40,000,000 (Foreclosure)
Construction Cost)
These five larger taxpayers represent a possible reduction in market value and ultimately
property tax that could have an impact in the budgetary process for the City. All five
of these properties have filed tax court petitions and I am currently in the income
discovery stage. I will keep you informed of the status of our progress.
I think we are experiencing the "peak" of appeals as commercial /industrial values are
stabilizing. Also, we are addressing 2 and 3 assessment years at one time. I also feel
most major properties that may have experienced financial trouble have already surfaced.
Attached for your information are two articles dealing with the magnitude of property
tax appeals. The article "Appeals are Appealing" is from Monday, August 5, Minnesota
Real Estate Journal. The article "Minneapolis tax appeals likely to raise rates for all"
is from the August 7 Star Tribune. These articles very graphically describe the nature
of the problem.
There is not all bad news. The 1990 Legislature passed a statute where the City may
re -levy losses of property tax revenue the subsequent year. This means that property
tax revenue lost to the City in one year may be recouped the following year.
c«M AUG 5'91
4
U3
in
z
w
4 a
O 4
E 1
r•1
a co
44 .W7
O
Wz
r1l
rI P4
U
C-+
O
H
ri
m
to
CO
0
M E C I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
H 1J a) 1 a0 O+ Ili O O d O O 1 In 1m1I1
W a) I M 1" O v v O v N O I r- 1
Ri t IA h N M 1` to 0 r-1 0 I O I
O d' N M M I ON I
I
to r-i rn I
1
m m z 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
M 1J C I 0000000001 0 I
1 04a) wH0mH0Mr-IO M I
O > I I 1
M M M O M O H O O I M I
RC OG I 0 0 N N O to C O o 1 N 1
M ri V M d In ri 1 d' 1
1
f ri O I
e--I
Ot ro 7 1 1- ri 0 0 O v O N I CO 1
M O C I O N t0 O CO CO W O H 1 10 1
ri 1.) a) I to M M M t0 m a0 M %D 1 0 1
u > I 1 I
4 a) I w o T v I` o M v O 1 w I
cx I Ot 1` o M o v m m r- 1 v I
fD .-I -e
I
t0 .•i O 1
a)
b 7
C C
a) b
W > a)
m m >
ra m x d •rl
ro N U N
c V4JV $4a
y •rd $4 C a)
U
m 44 C c
m O $$4 $4 O ° N
u r74 04 a w1, C
ar > a ro
a m1m.
1 d+yA
k u $4 c c 41 b C m
ro- 4 () .,.1 O C .0 O •,.1
E a 04 r4 Z -1 U U Z
V
a
O
W
rA
ro
4
D
C
w
c
r.l
ro
1.1
O
H
o m o-e O o o o m
M O O N O O O O M
w r- In m v M M O N
O o d' N CO o O M d'
14 t- I. M N M M O M
t0 N M O to V N M M
N d' ri
O O le O O O O O O
M O r-I M O O O O O
t0 o o M M r4 v H r-
14 0 U1 N 0 v N N 0
t- M O N O r•1 O M .-I
m N ri rq M v N v M
ri cr r-i
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I- 0 O t0 N C v 1•1 r-
1-1 0 O 1` m o N N Ot
tl M m to r 4 1` O M H
to N t0 Ot 1f1 d' N d' M
N M H
M M M M M N N W O
Ot " t0 O m t0 r'I
I17 t0 to O M d' M O
to M N O 10 ri Ill N
U1 N t0 CO M tp .•-1 d'
N M ri
T
C
r{
a) m
C 7
C CO O
a) x
C
a) O I.1
a) a A O
O) 0 C9 13 •a
G a) a) c A N a1
C 4) E U W N
G04 > m 7 a W 1 I I
ro a a 3 ro>>>
000wioma a a
xw3toV)L) xx
EXHIBIT I
I I u
1 10 1 O n
I t0 1 In II
1 1 + II
I co I N II
I U=
I
M
II
O I r II
ri N II
I 1 II
I Ot 1 Ot II
d' 1 a• II
I t fl
I M 1 d' II
I O 1 Ot 11
14 1 o 11
r-1 N II
1 O 1 O 11
o° i C)
I I II
I d' 1 n II
I n I Ot 11
I M I t` II
1 II
O 1 O II
ri N II
1 r•1 1 M II
1 00
1 0 1 ON II
I I II
I r 1 N
Ln 11
11
I r- I In II
I
0 1
I I1C1
r-I II
m
N4 N
W m
0 a
o .
r-1
ro
E-4 v
O
E
M c cc i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ii V
of a) CC I / 400000000 II r4 I
1 via) 11 000 V OO MMOtO II Ot 1
ro > I II 1
C aa) 1 00 Ch 1 In U CO O II 1` I
ro MM 1 OO r m v r- M H N Ot 11 d' 1
a0 ri C N of d' II n I
1
O I
MM +1 OO I
1
000000000101
a)
b 7
C C
a) b
W > a)
m m >
ra m x d •rl
ro N U N
c V4JV $4a
y •rd $4 C a)
U
m 44 C c
m O $$4 $4 O ° N
u r74 04 a w1, C
ar > a ro
a m1m.
1 d+yA
k u $4 c c 41 b C m
ro- 4 () .,.1 O C .0 O •,.1
E a 04 r4 Z -1 U U Z
V
a
O
W
rA
ro
4
D
C
w
c
r.l
ro
1.1
O
H
o m o-e O o o o m
M O O N O O O O M
w r- In m v M M O N
O o d' N CO o O M d'
14 t- I. M N M M O M
t0 N M O to V N M M
N d' ri
O O le O O O O O O
M O r-I M O O O O O
t0 o o M M r4 v H r-
14 0 U1 N 0 v N N 0
t- M O N O r•1 O M .-I
m N ri rq M v N v M
ri cr r-i
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I- 0 O t0 N C v 1•1 r-
1-1 0 O 1` m o N N Ot
tl M m to r 4 1` O M H
to N t0 Ot 1f1 d' N d' M
N M H
M M M M M N N W O
Ot " t0 O m t0 r'I
I17 t0 to O M d' M O
to M N O 10 ri Ill N
U1 N t0 CO M tp .•-1 d'
N M ri
T
C
r{
a) m
C 7
C CO O
a) x
C
a) O I.1
a) a A O
O) 0 C9 13 •a
G a) a) c A N a1
C 4) E U W N
G04 > m 7 a W 1 I I
ro a a 3 ro>>>
000wioma a a
xw3toV)L) xx
EXHIBIT I
I I u
1 10 1 O n
I t0 1 In II
1 1 + II
I co I N II
I U=
I
M
II
O I r II
ri N II
I 1 II
I Ot 1 Ot II
d' 1 a• II
I t fl
I M 1 d' II
I O 1 Ot 11
14 1 o 11
r-1 N II
1 O 1 O 11
o° i C)
I I II
I d' 1 n II
I n I Ot 11
I M I t` II
1 II
O 1 O II
ri N II
1 r•1 1 M II
1 00
1 0 1 ON II
I I II
I r 1 N
Ln 11
11
I r- I In II
I
0 1
I I1C1
r-I II
m
N4 N
W m
0 a
o .
r-1
ro
E-4 v
O
E
EXHIBIT I
I I u
1 10 1 O n
I t0 1 In II
1 1 + II
I co I N II
I U=
I
M
II
O I r II
ri N II
I 1 II
I Ot 1 Ot II
d' 1 a• II
I t fl
I M 1 d' II
I O 1 Ot 11
14 1 o 11
r-1 N II
1 O 1 O 11
o° i C)
I I II
I d' 1 n II
I n I Ot 11
I M I t` II
1 II
O 1 O II
ri N II
1 r•1 1 M II
1 00
1 0 1 ON II
I I II
I r 1 N
Ln 11
11
I r- I In II
I
0 1
I I1C1
r-I II
m
N4 N
W m
0 a
o .
r-1
ro
E-4 v
O
E
EXHIBIT II
N V V 1 1 I I II
ON 4J () I O d O N tD 1 1 N M 1i O O to in M ri m to to O O I 0 1 to m O V' O O O O w 1 to II
ON 0) IT 1 1-1 N M O tD N ON tD N O r-1 ON tD 00 ON N ri In V' M U) 0 0 1 ri I M O O N O O O O to 1 V' II1Vv1r- to O N N V V' r- 0 00 N 00 . i to D r- O O r- V' H N O 1 O% I co r- to to v M M co N 1 to II
a) 0 1 _ 1 _ I - I 11
aY W I N 1-•4 M r- tD N r- n V' o N t- 00 r-1 ON M N O M 1-1 M V' O 1 O 1 0 m V N 00 tD O M V' 1 H 11
I O %D * N kD 1-1 t` ON tD V' r4 O to t` N to %D ri t` ON ON to O I 00 1 -i r- n M N M M to M I W II
N N H M M M ri N V' M M V' to M d' M N ri 1 0 I tD N to O to V' N to M 1 tD II
N I N V' 1-i N 11
H 1 N II
0
1 1 I II
O 1) la I to N O tb 00 r d' M O% ei 00 00 d' to O w n V' ''4 O N O O I M 1 0 0 d' O O O O O O I r II
m E I d1 0 O t` O e W to t` M tD O N O O W 0 0 to O N O 0 1 r- I M O r-1 to 0 0 0 0 0 1 tD II
r-1
E
43 1 1--1 to to V' M to tb tT ri t0 r-I w w ri W N O O to W n r-1 O 1 to 1 w O m M M H sT r-1 t` 1 O 11
01 a 1 - 1 1 - I - If
W x 1()N 11 N 00 r r- N to tD O 1` r- to tD to M co V' r-1 N r to O 1 1` 1 r-1 ON U) N O% V N N m I V' II
W I co to O, to m r-1 to an O co r- to 1` ri '-+ 1-1 0 O t` to m O 1 m 1 r- M 0 to O 14 O M r-1 I ON If
N r1 N M M ri O m N 1--1 O 11 N M M N 1--I 1 O 1 to N -i ri to V1 N C M 1 O II
1-1 M 1--1 O 1 M d' r-i ri 11
N 11
d W 1-1 1 1 1 1 II
a) O O) I to M V' t` t- 1-'1 O tD M O M M r- V OD 0 M tD O w M 14 O 1 ON 1 OO ON OM OD tD V' O) CO O 1 O II
1t) 1 I r-1 to 00 00 r-1 to N t` N t` ri to r- O r- r r to O N V tD 1 to 1 M co V' V' V' ri r-I O 1 r II
W
tll m
O 1 N 00 O V' N O r N M O t- M O O% m r- O` ri M V co V1 1 V' 1 r-1 00 r-1 t` ri r- r-1 O
1 m 11I _ I
z a i 1 H H t- lV t0 Ln 1- tD V CO d' -4 d %D CO r4 tO t- N d 00 1- I to I tD M ri d %D V d' N I 40 11
W W O I d N t` N .•4 V' to 1` to t` M N V' ri to N N V' tD H I to 1 to V' r O tD D O N I tD 11
ri r-1 ri 1--1 d' 1-•I r-i to V r-I t0 r-4 1 to I N r-1 rn v, r 4 tD N 1
a 1-4 d I 1-4 N ° 11
a a
41 FC
H 10 -P I I 1 I II
p 1 OZ a) a) I O O M 000000 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00000 I M 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 l m IIO) N Cr I O O ri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O to O O O O 0 0 1 V' 1 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O I V' II
r m r-i - 4 'O I M d1 d1 M to to d' O to t- N V1 N O M to to to 0 O tD tD O 1 W 1 O 47% to t- N O V' r-1 t` -4
1 11
pa pC a) W 1 O r-1 O tD O 0 N v 1` 00 _I 00 co N M O O H ri r 1 r r-1 O 1 to I 00 V1 tD tD to V' N N rn I to 11
rn to a0 W rn O W to O M t` M N O N aD O to H O 1 tD I tb N V V H V O M 1-1 1 00 It
44 E'1 N r-1 N M M r-1 O V' N Cl) lb H N M M N M H 1 V I In N tD 01 <n N N V M I to II
O H - 1 - II
O 1 N M 1-•I O II
N 11
It
4 a o r-1 ro 1
U >C ON ro >a 1 M N N r-1 N ri co O N O to to ON to 0,0 r•i V to h W tD O 1 N 1 0o O% W 00 V r tD tD O 1 V 11
W 0 O 4-1 1 M N N IT V M to ri to O V' 00 00 t` N Co tD ON r tD V tD I N 1 Ot r to OD N M N W 1 n II
r4 V '0 1 CO W O0 N N O N N V tD t- Ot O r-I M ri t- W to 00 ri to i V1 i to M t- N Ot 0o N to I to 11
U GL 1 . _ .
I - 11
Q. X 1 r- N r-4 N Oo N O tD n M M r-i O V' tD O %o to W OD N N I ri 1 to V' Ot d ON M N Ln I to 11
O W I t V' to V M O O V' M M M tD V to M .-1 V N N M I V i V M M 0D rn V' V' ri 1 0 II
N r•1 M M M ri O V' N r4 O M ri N M M t- I M I to N r4 N M 00 r•1 V' _ I O II
E4 - - I - II
ri M 1--I O 1 N M co 11
r1 1 If
y
N 4
N
n C 7
N co O
1 x
O a t1) r-14 C
v ro o sa
O N 14 U U 0) J-1 iS C -A O
I U 1 ro G w C m
U) X 7 E U C
a) m ro 0) m w 4 a zs w a A (1) a)
4 o U a) a E s4 v ro 1) E4 v w e el U m m
4 Q) -ri 11 4 a) v01 LL C
a)
tP
C
4
H
m I
U •u O C w 10
m
O 1.) DO' 1 I I
U 0 41
C ro m m I
C U 1.)
O (1) a ON ro 1 4 C C w O C C t0 W
O 'O7CUCa) 0) to r1 a- 4 C C U N 4 cif 4.) a) a) r1 >. O C ro 10
ri
m O ro- a O C m C +1 ro a) rl ro I~ 164 a) r 1 Ot O 1-1 yr W w w 3 r4 C C C
L) :C C r+ c i U to U w 0) a 4) +1
C a)
4.)
a)
c C ts'
A C
ro
I i
ro 41
a) m W 4 '0
ro e s :3
f-t w w w
p 3 y O ra
ro
C (1)
C 04 x `'
C to U
ro a) --4
01
w a) a) 4 a) a) 4.) --4 a) M a) (I) a) -4
ri 1 >. E
E
U
ro
to
4 tT ro 0) 14 U
x
C m 0) 1-1 a) 1 4 O• It 1 C ri U $4 4J 3: -
o
43 C FaC rsLrt C
4
A o r+ m a) a C ro (d a m -.4 004 E -rWw w
C +J
W CO
V
m
o
U
o a)
U A
a)
a
a) o
w 3
m
tom
m
U x x xoUUUwu, a a. H P, a w 4 a
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1991 1991 1992 1992
Actual Actual Tax Projected Projected Tax
Levy Capacity Rate Levy Capacity Rate
GENERAL PURPOSE LEVIES
General Levy 7,809,914 13.36 7,809,914 13.51
Infrastructure 930,804 1.59 930,804 1.61
Forestry 228,500 39 228,500 40
Storm Sewer Tax Dists. 300,034 51 300,034 52
Total General Purpose 9,269,252 15.85 9,269,252 16.04
SPECIAL LEVIES
Tax abatements and
cancellations 0 0 200,483 35
1980 Park Bonds 73,636 1) 13 363,000 62
1980 Storm Sewer Bonds 44,000 08 44,000 08
1987 Fire Station Bonds 254,000 43 254,000 44
City Special Assessments 330,200 57 110,000 18
H.R.A. 347,000 59 361,558 62
Total Special Levies 1,048,836 1.80 1,333,041 2.31
TOTAL ALL LEVIES 10,318,088 17.65 10,602,293 18.35
LESS: HOMESTEAD & 1,440,077 2) 2.46 1,601,016 3) 2.77
AG CREDIT AID
HACA)
NET CITY TAX & RATE $8,878,011 15.19 $9,001,277 15.58
TAX CAPACITY VALUE $58,462,583 $57,794,000
1) General Fund Contributed $295,864 in 1991 for General Debt Service; this sum is
available under levy limits for the 1992 budget.
2) The City's 1991 HACA payment is being reduced by approximately $360,000 from
1,440,077.
3) Current estimate provided by Minnesota Department of Revenue.
Exhibit III
08/16/91
MEMO S-1)
CITY OF PLYMDUTS
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: August 15, 1991, for Council Meeting of August 19, 1991
TO: James G. Willis, City Manager
FROM: Laurie Rauenhorst, City Clerk
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL DIRECTIVES
Attached is a list of pending and completed 1991 Council
Directives for City Council review.
w w
N
F+ FA O1
N ro ro
W W ,A
N
OD IjOD
N r r
FA T NFAI-A
I-A;
tpn o c ba r cp l ro
h M o rr c
rn
r ct
a . i cr r
ny° N g
Nffi -
o •
o
o rt
fhn 'C o
It 5. o
5'• a • N• cr o M t Dr
ii rt ° o M Q ° * Ia•
atn tSK ffi Y
to
co
OD
OD
rA
r ".
Ln
OD N ' " c 00
cna
to w
to
0
N N N N
cD j
ppI ppI ,
t ,p WOODJ (JI J N OD
N .
rh
I I I
oD
ao I
ko to to
IfTto2) I
H
tG I i to
N N N to d
ra 0tr
w w
cp
ct
moo
ko
rrtr •
o• c cart S •'
O
ff { rt
a a
cpp
0 5• c c
m•
10
cin .
4C t W to rr
to
H r K] ct
o ••
0
OD
r
p
I I I
C) Cl
lob
N Ipp
O
I
dOD1
I
Ln
OD
I
N
r N N
o
D ID to ° f°
H `P n`4 `P
N I
ice+
N vtp
N
I ° "
O
iC
ro ro
N V k -4
R
h
ct
t°t
u•
Ffi'•
a ,
o
fh O cu
c
D++
1 . J
iv,
p
s , %(
o
t , '
Q
a
t o
I • °
C " '
rr .
f
ro
rn
6 R N 9
r
rt
o rt °
H U.
O N
ro
a
o
a
rot
o
O O
n
CO M. ct
rr
ct
Ch
LA
fit• + .
a n
rr
L44 w1.0 o • c
N OD
N N
N C) 0 0
o 0o J rn
N
n
NNJ NNJ
J J J
fl
1 I t tD W
N to H H F
OD co OD
ct
It
it
EO
v
to
a n
tt it
it
ro • 1
ct
58. 00
OD
to
D %D
OD J Ln
N
n
N
W H
Oh
O hH N coo ODD 00
C7
O Q O O R m
M O t~A
rt. 00 . R La -
a iri 4c
H M
fA - hd
SD
rt
o rfifrM
ro (
t (t
O .
M
hU.
i w
it
o o G boo o "o
m W
OD OD OD
t ..
N O
to I Oh
M
N OD OD
I, £ L N
N
r r
h (In W N
po
O M
N
00 OD OD 00 OD
N N N to, I 1 N
N
Fes-+
N N
Fes+
O O O
N
c"o
N N N N N d
ro ro °Dro
M "
t6 rr o rt,
ro
10 . o I-h , o
co
it
rr °
r+
O Oro v aN a M
n • n C4
Q
0
o
t
P. o
OD
OD
ro
ebb (a
a OD
J A W N O %D °D ~
OD 00 (
o -
N N N N N
OD
N
OD
All obb
NOb
j I W
lG %0 I /
D (
I
N N N ~ C7
0
rt
p MOM a iO \
D O
to Ion
FA
it
rr M n C -
wwi Hp
is ODD C] ODD
OD ff • rt o ' o
wO fi
cr
rr ro
to 00
w o bD on
r N
M
I OD OD ONO OD
N t0 O tC tG %D tG
to
r r r r r
r r r r d
off
M -
ro °
r
o M
r
N•
it •
rt
it
o
to A• o. M
OM 0w H- dR,RQ
to
N ro ro o ' 't o
CD
OD
r
W
W
r
f,.
r
R+
co f
N H
Fes•
N r FC
ODD (III ODD CHID trp FI-,
fT
10 -
ho rt N• N M r •
r°hN• •Ntt c d
rt-
rt I•
OD
tG b' rt, F+
r c f O rr N (D . O
rch
OM O M Go Cn j. F- r
r p-
o o b
ft H
IOU) w y CQ3 0 L4
p-
a
F- h • cD r rr rno
w o M -
fi W 1\-+
NN
C \
NO ,pfr
co CD
F°fi r'I • a N 1-
r - •
F+•
r't
7
O
C
I OD
W N N
O OD J JI A
W
W
r
f,.
r
R+
co f
N H
Fes•
N r FC
ODD (III ODD CHID trp FI-,
fT
10 -
ho rt N• N M r •
r°hN• •Ntt c d
rt-
rt I•
OD
tG b' rt, F+
r c f O rr N (D . O
rch
OM O M Go Cn j. F- r
r p-
o o b
ft H
IOU) w y CQ3 0 L4
p-
a
F- h • cD r rr rno
w o M -
fi W 1\-+
NN
C \
NO ,pfr
co CD
F°fi r'I • a N 1-
r - •
F+•
r't
7
O
C
I OD
W N N
W W W W W I trpD
OD OD ODD OD OD O
y
N N N N N r F C
4v r r
I
r (
y
O to N N t0 G fr
ct
ko
c7r
n
rco5s c
ccD+ . .
o
ft
to
iD F,• f6 O
rA t6 8-1101.
r*
r n
c
ro
o ca
it
w " w F• o o
EO
o faro CN •
a R
CD
F'fA t0 l'O a -j
W
Q
O
rt
OD
I N•
a
p •
a• .
r
H
r
O
w
to
w
Cn
I
Ti
w
A
w
W
w
N
r
W W W W W I t rpD
OD OD ODD OD OD O
y
N N N N N r F C
4v r r
I
r (
y
O to N N t0 G fr
ct
ko
c7r
n
rco5s c
ccD+ . .
o
ft
to
iD F,• f6 O
rA t6 8-1101.
r*
r n
c
ro
o ca
it
w " w F• o o
EO
o faro CN •
a R
CD
F'fA t0 l'O a -j
W
Q
O
rt
OD
I N•
a
p •
a• .
r
H
r
N N N
OD t
N N
lG C1
r r
r OH I't
4
W W
I OD OD OD OD co
to to w I to W
Ob l0 W Ak W W H
W.
J
N
F- cmp iD' Q N
EO EG
ct
W F• W
O O
rOSj
H c' •t O M
p M Mal* tb [r7
W ct
C.
d
r cctt q
W
boa
QQ
v ' • •
W D . pW
Iy , -
K
r
pM
M -
K
W
F•
F%
I •
N -
r
N •
F
a fn
iW
n
r
C
i
O
N
cO
ffi
M
tO
N
h'n
r
N
01, ID
N O M
co fi
rt -
N
EG
W
co
0 co
r rr
I N N N
to
bI N•
tp RCN lC
Nr
4`
r l r
l
r l N I
tG
r
OD
I
r
o
r
do I I
cn tr cn
c, a
A A A A A A
Ii
I A
A (n
I I I
H t- ao " Ii
a ra
a
Iti
i6 • o, r• tt " M o
oot
to
rt
rt
co
0
I, a a
a o
n
ft pF+• fr • S N W
It
O
M
H to it.
jito 0
to OD
o -
co T
lob
N H
ltb
ko
H FA c
I
d o ro roo -
rt
ao ct
arrw -y
n
pp
fn
Q
t • .
cGpD
o
O
K
a
rt
tice}
Q•
fr
o
No
F$ - '
cd
N
N
nH
N o
O N M
prt
N
od
o
c
M CD
w tAN6 "'
c
U
8
N ~
J .
w -
KM%O
a
Ma
i 6
J
N•
4 c
N
ro '
O
ct,
O O r
O
0
OD
rm
N
to
M
o
lob
OD
m
r N
n
K
lob
N H
ltb
ko
H FA c
I
d o ro roo -
rt
ao ct
arrw -y
n
pp
f n
Q
t • .
cGpD
o
O
K
a
rt
tice}
Q•
fr
o
No
F$ - '
cd
N
N
nH
N o
O N M
prt
N
od
o
c
M CD
w tAN6 "'
c
U
8
N ~
J .
w -
KM%O
a
Ma
i 6
J
N•
4 c
N
ro '
O
ct,
O O r
O
0
OD
rm
N
to
M
o
lob
OD
r r r r r r r
C1 I
ON
I
N r O %D & cn
nn
N r
ro
ca
NA
AN
NA NA
AN AN lP
N N N N N N N (
pHN
Imo+
H N H I
pp r H
FI+
N N N
N N
I
N
i
N ~ #• Nt
to
1 1 d
fir ct rr, N
ct r
W H
ct r • r
m
WD '
fh
fW-+
W r ft
M MM
lrF fW..
k H-
m r
N
t + r- c AA H
W W
M
F+•
r m •
a
Q
t r
p
a
N a
it
FN-
N I
W
QQ
I I
rtNCO
T o
Ch OD M
4D top O
O N H
to O
N (n r OD
r
N N N N D
rn 0 a w
w
N
N- N N
P
N
I N
N
N
N
N
N
N
NN
N
N N N t"1-
N
N
I
N
OR I
R
ro • o
o
Gr o cn
rt.
to
b R
do
Mo -
4C M M
p
N '7
w
N
N
N to l0 N
N N
oo10
a
a - N
10,< -:
ro
rt a
A
w
FJ
ko
N
J J
I •(• OD
I[N \VV tl kJ t~O
N
I
N
v
OD
N
N
N N N
OD AD OD
I 1
O
OOD
D J W H
ro ro
T I I N N
N N N N N Ut
I I /
D v y
ro Qtwo
fro. N 0 rOi, wGOfi O
K M
N . Q , frt fT
i
a
O
rt
O Oy - I.. co
p `•
R. -
M
W N
M `
N
a • N ,
fA•
La
sm re
rt
5co
w co -
1, -
O H-
J C `tNG
h
F'-
N tC O f'f
ro
LQ
05
r
Ln
Ln
N
N ro
LQ
05
r
N N t -A N N
C
W
G G
I N I N I A
tom- Fes''
Fo ~ FC
oo ( H
I, J FI W _ N
Fes-+
H ~ N to
d
ct a
o ID
et
rt
M "•
ct GD
fi {
4C - ii'
CD O Q
O -
one
O to M
n 1
a
i6 F- pj'
C M • to O
a
M
C
p p
O Mp• N
c
Oj
r
S .,
a H `n
00
a
00
N W to N N
t J1 W N O co J
r N r
r r r r r W
I J J J J I I
r r r r r
to
co
to w
U.
r r O
tpi a
O
J
ba O- O to M N. cr 4 bD,
tD
r
M
w
yy
ct N
J -
ro It o
ro
Eo
h
K a
rn
OD N O N
Ln
N
OD
r
tGr
A
GQ
r r r r r r
0
OD OD OD OD
NN , N NNW + + +
N N N N N
F-1 N N ~ N N lC F• N f.+ EC
r
OD aD OD i i OD OD OD i1 H
r F r Ij W W F
II
W
If
N N N N N r N d
g, a ro r ro M . • O
ft] ra
it
cr . Ntd N-
rf-
F
M
p PL
a xa
000 •.
o 0-
n
o:
rt
i5.
rafi
rt o
Wa V
o
r
la-
Ln
OD
00 OD OD OD OD CD co 1-1
00
ct
r
N N N H N
r O lfl OD j 01 J1 A W N
A
GQ
r r r r r r
0
OD OD OD OD
NN , N NNW + + +
N N N N N
F-1 N N ~ N N lC F• N f.+ EC
r
OD aD OD i i OD OD OD i1 H
r F r Ij W W F
II
W
If
N N N N N r N d
g, a ro r ro M . • O
ft] ra
it
cr . Ntd N-
rf-
F
M
p PL
a xa
000 •.
o 0-
n
o:
rt
i5.
rafi
rt o
Wa V
o
r
la-
Ln
OD
00 OD OD OD OD CD co 1-1
00
ct
r
1
r
r •
R 9
N
0. A
L<
aR
OD
Ul
toN
N
N fr
z
IS
r.
r =.
N-
r •
N
N
OD