HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 02-28-1990I
Z-- A-.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: February 14, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: February 28,
1990
FILE NO.: 89090
PETITIONER: Hans Hagen Homes, Inc.
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat and Rezoning from FRD to R -1A and B -3
LOCATION: Southwest Corner of Dunkirk Lane and County Road 24
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential) and CS (Service Business)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development)
BACKGROUND:
In late 1988, early 1989, an application was reviewed on this property for a
Preliminary Plat and Rezoning from FRD to R -1A. The Planning Commission
reviewed the application in April, 1989 and recommended approval subject to a
number of conditions. The application was then withdrawn by the petitioner.
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 a Preliminary Plat of an 8.5 acre parcel into nine
single family detached conventional building lots and one commercial
building lot. Concurrently, the applicant proposes a rezoning of the
subject parcel from the existing FRD (Future Restricted Development) to a
proposed R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential) and B -3 (Service
Business).
2. Section 500 of the City Code (the Subdivision Ordinance) provides
standards and specifications by which the Planning Commission is to base a
review of a proposed plat. The proposed plat is of a design that
affirmatively responds to the dimensional standards and specifications
required by the Ordinance. Specifically, lot sizes are in excess of
18,500 square feet; lot width at setback lines is in excess of 110 feet;
and lot depth in excess of 120 feet. The commercial lot is in excess of
one acre; lot width at the setback line is in excess of 150 feet; and lot
depth is in excess of 150 feet.
see next page)
File 89090
Page Two
r
3. The physical constraints analysis identifies this site to be within the
Gleason Lake Drainage District; to contain no storm water drainage
facilities; to contain no flood plain or shoreland overlay districts; to
contain a small potential federally designated wetland, but no wetland of
a DNR protected category; to contain no woodlands of significance; no
slopes over 12 %; and to have soil suitable for urban development with
public sewers, except a small portion in the northeast quadrant of the
Site.
4. Two areas of the site exhibit natural features differing from the
generally level farm land appearance of the bulk of the site. Near the
center is a depression of wetland of less than 1 acre that is not DNR
protected" but may be federally designated. This area would be almost on
the center line of the Medina Road extension.
The southeast corner of the site is a small wooded area where the
petitioner has identified no trees for preservation responsive to the
Plymouth Tree Preservation Policy. The grading plan for the site would
eliminate this entire wooded area.
5. The attached memo from the City Engineer addresses several design features
of the proposed Preliminary Plat that are inconsistent with roadway design
principals and /or concepts contained in the Transportation Plan for the
City of Plymouth as follow:
a. No access be permitted to County Road 24.
b. Existing Dunkirk Lane between Medina Road and County Road 24 be closed
except for a short section extending north from Medina Road to a cul-
de -sac to serve both the commercial site proposed by this plat and
other property located north and east of this site.
c. No access be permitted to the north parcel directly from Medina Road.
d. The "bubble" proposed to residential Lots 2, 3, and 4 be eliminated
and replaced by a common driveway access serving 2 of the 3 lots.
e. Additional right -of -way be dedicated as a function of this plat (10
feet additional) along the entire County Road 24 frontage.
f. Additional right -of -way dedication at the proposed northeast corner of
Medina Road and County Road 24 to accommodate intersection geometrics
to assure a 90 degree intersection with County Road 24 by Medina Road.
6. The Director of Parks and Recreation has identified, during the
Development Review Committee process, the need for public trail corridor
along the entire County Road 24 frontage of this plat. It has been the
policy of the City of Plymouth to require outlot dedication for trail
corridors within and adjacent to residential plats, and by easement
adjacent to or within commercial plats. The petitioner, by his letter of
January 3, 1990, indicates that he objects to the provision of the trail
easement required since he feels sufficient right -of -way already exists on
the north side of County Road 24.
see next page)
File 89090
Page Three
7. We have noted the petitioner's proposed plat assumes the guiding of the
northerly portion of the site to be CS. The City Council on December 18,
1989 approved the reguiding of this area to CS contingent upon approval by
the Metropolitan Council.
Staff has advised the applicant that no development will be able to occur
until the Land Use Guide Plan amendment has been approved by the
Metropolitan Council.
8. The issues noted here related to plat design and private access to
collector streets bAyg been reviewed with the applicant during the staff
review process. The applicant had declined to modify the Preliminary Plat
to comply with these concerns.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The Preliminary Plat, as proposed, meets the dimensional criteria of the
Subdivision Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance for subdivision design in
the R -1A and B -3 Zones. We find that the General Development Plan for the
commercial site includes the level of detail with respect to parking
design not required of a General Development Plan. We specifically find
that no review has taken place with respect to the Zoning Ordinance
standards regarding parking, setback, signage and any other site related
Zoning Ordinance specification. We find that the General Development Plan
would appear to assume numerous variances from Zoning Ordinance
specifications, and that such variance is specifically excluded from the
staff's comments with respect to this project.
2. The rezoning from FRD to R -1A and B -3 is responsive to the Land Use Guide
Plan and the City of Plymouth Policy on urban development because of the
availability of municipal water and sewer services. Any rezoning and
development shall be contingent upon the Land Use Guide Plan being
approved by the Metropolitan Council.
3. The proposed design of the Preliminary Plat for the major collector street
Medina Road is inconsistent with the provisions of Plymouth City Code
Section 500.17 with respect to the design of streets. Specifically, the
absence of the recommended right -of -way to allow a 90 degree intersection
with County Road 24; the proposal to construct a "bubble" adjacent to the
residential lots; and the proposal for direct access to Medina Road from
the commercial site proposed to the north are all inconsistent with the
City Code design standard for plats related to public safety and
reasonable circulation of traffic.
4. The Preliminary Plat proposal to withhold dedication of additional right -
of -way along the entire plat frontage of County Road 24 is both contrary
to the requirements of the Hennepin County Department of Public Works and
inconsistent with the Plymouth City Code Section 500.17, Subdivision 7
see next page)
File 89090
Page Four
with respect to the dedication of streets. In addition, the Preliminary
Plat proposal to provide direct access to County Road 24 from the
commercial parcel within the plat is inconsistent with the Plymouth City
Code Section 500.17, Subdivision 1 with respect to the design of streets
with reasonable circulation and public safety. The public safety will be
potentially compromised by direct access to County Road 24 from the
commercial parcel.
5. The Preliminary Plat proposal to continue existing Dunkirk Lane between
Medina Road and County Road 24 is inconsistent with the standards of the
Plymouth City Code Section 500.17, Subdivision 1 with respect to
reasonable circulation and the public safety. We find the elimination of
the access from Dunkirk Lane to County Road 24 as a design feature of this
plat to be the best design solution related to reasonable circulation and
the public safety.
RECOMMENDATION:
We hereby recommend denial of the Preliminary Plat and Rezoning as reflected
in the attached draft recommendations. Consistent with previous Planning
Commission direction, we have included draft resolutions of approval and
denial for consideration by the Planning Commission. Conditions of approval
are set up so that "standard" conditions appear first and conditions related
to staff comments appear next. The Commission may then alter those special
conditions if the ®
r,
ire.
Submitted by:
E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended Findings for Denial
2. Recommended Conditions for Approval of Preliminary Plat
and Rezoning
3. Engineer's Memorandum
4. Location Map
5. Petitioner's Correspondence
6. Large Plans
pc /cd /89090:dl)
DENYING PRELIMINARY PLAT AND REZONING FOR HANS HAGEN HOMES, INC. (89090)
WHEREAS, Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. has requested approval for a Preliminary Plat
for 9 single family detached conventional building lots and 1 commercial
building lot, and Rezoning from FRD to R -1A and B -3, located at the southwest
corner of Dunkirk Lane and County Road 24; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends denial;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it hereby does deny the Preliminary Plat for Hans
Hagen Homes, Inc. for 9 single family detached conventional building lots and
1 commercial building lot, and Rezoning from FRO to R -1A and B -3 located at
the southwest corner of Dunkirk Lane and County Road 24, based on the
following findings:
1. The Preliminary Plat and General Development Plan propose direct private
access to Medina Road and County Road 24 inconsistent with public safety
and proper traffic circulation design as required by Section 500.11,
Subdivision 1 of the City Code (Subdivision Ordinance).
2. The Preliminary Plat and General Development Plan propose a "bubble"
street design for a portion of Medina Road inconsistent with public safety
design as required by Section 500.17, Subdivision 1 of the City Code
Subdivision Ordinance).
3. Proposed public street dedication at the intersection of Medina Road and
County Road 24, and along the County Road 24 frontage, is inconsistent
with the specifications of the Hennepin County Department of Public Works
and the City Engineer.
4. The Preliminary Plat is inconsistent with the Parks and Trails Element of
the Plymouth Comprehensive Plan based on the absence of the Class I trail
provision, by fee or easement, along the entire County Road 24 frontage.
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT AND REZONING FOR HANS HAGEN HOMES, INC. (89090)
WHEREAS, Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. has requested approval for a Preliminary Plat
for 9 single family detached conventional building lots and 1 commercial
building lot, and Rezoning from FRD to R -1A and B -3 located at the southwest
corner of Dunkirk Lane and County Road 24; 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 Preliminary Plat for Hans
Hagen Homes, Inc. for 9 single family detached conventional building lots and
1 commercial building lot, and Rezoning from FRD to R -1A and B -3 located at
the southwest corner of Dunkirk Lane and County Road 24, 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. Dedication of 10 feet additional right -of -way for street purposes along
the entire County Road 24 frontage.
10. No private access shall be permitted to County Road 24.
11. Dunkirk Lane access to County Road 24 shall be eliminated with Dunkirk
Lane north from Medina Road ending in a cul -de -sac.
12. The "bubble" proposed on the south side of Medina Road shall be
eliminated and shared driveway access with on -site turn around provisions
shall be made for the three lots with access only to Medina Road.
see next page)
Resolution No.
File 89090
Page Two
13. North access from the commercial parcel to Medina Road shall be
permitted. All access to the commercial parcel shall be from Dunkirk
Lane via Medina Road.
14. Additional right -of -way shall be dedicated at the intersection of Medina
Road and County Road 24 sufficient, as determined by the City Engineer,
to allow a 90 degree intersection to be constructed.
15. A 30 -foot easement shall be provided for public trail purposes along the
entire County Road 24 frontage. No credit for park dedication
requirements shall be available because fee title will not be provided.
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: February 23, 1990
TO Planning Commission and City Council
FROM: Daniel L. Faulkner, City Engineer
SUBJECT: SEVEN PONDS SECOND ADDITION (PP /LUGPA /RZ) (89090)
This development plan is being proposed in an area where the roadway
system is subject to some major realignments and extensions in accordance
with our adopted "Transportation Plan ". In particular, the extension of
County Road 9 from Vicksburg Lane to County Road 24, the extension and
realignment of existing Medina Road between Dunkirk Lane and Co. Rd. 101,
and the potential abandonment of a portion of County Road 24.
The staff has been working closely with the Hennepin County staff to
develop a preliminary layout of the County Road system in conjunction with
the City road system. A preliminary layout plan has been prepared by
Hennepin County staff and subsequently, reviewed by Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch,
Inc. A copy of this preliminary layout with the addition of review
comments from Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch, Inc. is attached to this memo. While
this map is a little difficult to decipher and it is only a concept plan,
it does indicate the extent of potential change to the roadway system in
the immediate vicinity of this proposed development. It is important to
know though that the section of Medina Road between Dunkirk Lane and
Brockton Lane is scheduled for improvement this year. With the
establishing of the Medina Road alignment in this area, the future County
roadway system will also become more refined.
In consideration of the existing and future roadway system, it is our
recommendation that action on this development plan be deferred until the
City and County have determined the future roadway alignments in the area
of this development. As indicated, these decisions will need to be made
within the next few months in order to proceed with Medina Road
construction this season. If it is the City's desire to approve this
project at this time, we recommend that all conditions of the standard
Engineer's Memorandum be met.
DLF:kh
attachmennts
cn
Z
Z
a1
0 =1
C M k
z
I -< 0
m r- -0
0
0
m
m
0 m
z
G)
m m
O
W4"
CO) z
m
PW-
OF
J-q ul n-i
0 x
1,7
it i M
ff
01
Nl= Bmm. $ ; 41 z
77--
0 m
M-1
rn
J-q ul n-i
0 x
1,7
it i M
ff
01
Nl= Bmm. $ ; 41 z
77--
DATE:
FILE NO.:
PETITIONER:
PRELIMINARY PLAT:
LOCATION:
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
February 22, 1990
89090
Mr. Hans Hagen, Hans Hagen Homes, Inc., 2353 North Rice Street,
Suite 205, St. Paul, Mn. 55113
SEVEN PONDS SECOND ADDITION
West of Dunkirk Lane, south of Co. Rd. 24 in the northwest one
quarter of Section 20.
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: Water area assessments based on 8.5 acres x $1,58
per acre s $13,430.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: If the developer petitions
the City to construct Medina Road the estimated assessment will be
detailed in the Development Contract. The estimated watermain
lateral assessment for Lots 1, 2, 3- 4 Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2 is
923,630.85.
6. _ _ X Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The City will require utility and drainage easements ten feet (10')
in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in width adjoining
side and rear lot lines.
N/A Yes No
7. X 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.
g. — _ X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's comprehensive
storm water drainage plan. A drainage easement for ponding purposes
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. A portion of Dunkirk Lane north of
the proposed intersection of Medina Road when Medina Road Js extended
from Dunkirk Lane to Co. Rd. 24.
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
2 -
Bassett Creek
X Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
X Army Corps of Engineers
Other
TRANSPORTATION:
N/A Yes No
12. X Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to the
City grid system for street names. The following changes will be
necessary.
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. The alignment from Medina-Road i
not the same as that proposed on Seven Ponds North Preliminary Plat,
The Preliminary Plat for Seven Ponds Second Addition shall be revised
to correspond to the original alignment.
14. X _ _ Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
15. _ _ X All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on An additional ten feet of
sight of way will be required on Co Rd 24 making a total distance
from centerline 50 feet.
16. X Conforms with City standards requiring the developer to construct
utilities necessary to serve this plat -
In accordance with City standards, the developer shall be responsible
for constructing the necessary sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer and
streets needed to serve this plat. A registered professional
engineer must prepare the plans and profiles of the proposed sanitary
sewer, watermain, storm sewer facilities and streets to serve the
development. See special conditions.
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. B-ee
npr.al conditions.
18. X Per developer's request a preliminary report and plan will be
prepared by the City -
If it is their desire to have the City construct these facilities as
part of its Capital Improvements Program, a petition must be
submitted to the City. The cutoff date for petitions is October 1,
of the year preceding construction. The developer shall be
responsible for constructing Medina Road and will be reimbursed for
the cost with the exception of the concrete curb and gutter and one
half the cost of a 36 foot wide seven ton street adjacent to Lots 2
3, and 4 Block 1 and one half the cost of a 52 foot nine ton street
adjacent to Lot 1 Block 2 or the developer may petition the City to
construct the road.
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 Lot 1 Block 2 shall be two
fear above the 100 Year High Water Elevation to be established by the
developer's engineer, The minimum basement elevations for Lots 1 and
2_. Block 1 shall be two feet above the fond in Seven Ponds East.
20. _ X The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required: The City will be
constructing a 20 inch watermain within Medina Road under Project
906.
21. — X The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
4 -
PRELIMINARY GRADING DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL:
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
wettau.
23. _ _ X Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been submitted to
the City's Consulting Engineer for review to see if it is in
conformance with the City's Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All
of their recommendations shall be incorporated in a revised plan.
The grading and drainage plan shall also indicate proposed methods of
erosion control, including the placement of silt fence in strategic
locations. Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary:
Shall comply with all agency permits.
24. A. A 30 foot trail easement will be required along the entire northerly border of
the site along Co. Rd. 24.
B. The bubble on the street right of way on the south side of Medina Road shall
not be allowed. The Garland Court cul -de -sac shall be extended to provide
access for one more lot. No more than two single family lots will be permitted
to access onto Medina Road.
C. Lots 2 and 3 Block 1 shall use a common driveway. Lot 4 Block 1 shall be
provided access by extending the Garland Court cul -de -sac.
D. The driveway for Lot 1 Block 1 shall be to Dunkirk Lane and shall be as close
to the south property line as possible. No access to Medina Road will be
permitted for this lot.
E. No access is permitted to Co. Rd. 24 and Medina Rd. with the exception of the
two single family lots noted above.
F. The preliminary plat shall be revised to show a cul -de -sac on Dunkirk Lane
north of Medina Road, this shall be used for access to Lot 1 Block 2.
G. The preliminary plat shows a storm sewer on Dunkirk Lane being extended east
across Dunkirk Lane. This drainage shall be directed north to the existing
culvert under Dunkirk Lane. A pond shall be constructed along the east line of
Lot 1 Block 2, as shown on the previous Seven Ponds North Preliminary Plat.
5 -
H. The exact location for the intersection of Medina Road and Dunkirk Lane has
been furnished to the developer's surveyor. It shall be used in preparing the
final plat.
I. Additional right -of -way will be required in the southeast quadrant of
intersection of Medina Road and Co. Rd. 24 for a larger radius.
J. The developer shall be responsible for constructing Medina Road, including the
storm sewer and will be reimbursed for the cost with the exception of:
1. Concrete curb and gutter.
2. One half the cost of a 36 foot wide seven ton street adjacent to the
lots accessing Medina Road.
3. One half the cost of a 52 foot wide street including curb and gutter
adjacent to Lot 1 Block 2.
K. The developer will be responsible for one half the cost of a 12 inch watermain
adjacent to Lot 1 Block 2.
L. The developer shall be assessed one half the cost of an eight inch watermain
for Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 Block 1.
M. If the developer wishes the City to construct Medina Road, a petition must be
submitted.
N. Garland Lane within Plymouth Meadows must be constructed to provide access to
Garland Court.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
1 0 -
January 3, 1990
Mr. Charles E. Dillerud
Community Development Coordinator
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Re: ds Second Addition
89090)
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
i iAFC
JAN 0' 19,90
CV rtiflil Y 4E1EELOR' ENf NP1.
This letter is in response to your letters of October 13, 1989 and
November 6, 1989 along with the written communication to you from
Hennepin County and Robert Johnson, Senior Engineering Technician
at the City of Plymouth.
We are in agreement with the request made by Robert Johnson
outlined in his Memorandum of October 13, 1989, identified as
Numbers 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 13, 14, and 15.
We take exception to the following paragraphs:
Paragraph 3 - We want to retain the bubble on Medina Road for
the following reasons:
1. Medina Road is classified as a major collector which will
carry faster and heavier traffic.
2. It would be difficult for people to back out into Medina
Road and will cause a safety problem.
3. The bubble will provide some off - street parking for the
three lots served by the bubble.
Paragraph 4 - This shall drop out if you accept our rational
on the change in Paragraph 3.
Paragraph 6 - Lot 1, Block 2, north of Medina Road cannot work
if reasonable access is not provided to the site. Land Use
Guide Plan now calls for CS. Reasonable access to the site
is necessary if the land is to be used as CS. We are still
requesting that a right -in, right -out access be provided on
2353 Rice Street North
St. Paul Minnesota 55113
Phone (612) 483 -0801
We Build Dreams.
Mr. Charles
Page 2
January 3,
E. Dillerud
1990
County Road 24 three hundred feet north of the center line of
County Road 24 and Medina Road. We also are requesting that
a full access be provided across from the bubble.
Paragraph 7 - We would prefer that Dunkirk Lane be vacated
upon the acceptance of this plat.
Paragraph 11 - We would prefer not to put a ponding area on
Lot 1, Block 2. A 45 -acre swamp exists approximately 400 feet
east of Lot 1, Block 2 and we would prefer that storm water
be piped to this larger swamp.
Paragraph 12 - We would prefer to leave the alignment of
Medina Road as we have proposed it. The alignment has
apparently been accepted by the County - see their letter of
October 27, 1989. We intend to request the City to construct
Medina Road and any of the infrastructure that will exist in
the road. Please let me know if you want a signed Petition
for the improvements.
In your letter of October 13, 1989, paragraph 3, you requested a
30 foot trail easement along all property abutting County Road 24.
In Hennepin County's letter of October 27, 1989, they request an
additional 10 foot right -of -way on all property abutting County
Road 24. All told, the City is requesting that we give up 1.28
acres out of 8.66 acres which amounts to 15% of the property.
Requests made by the City benefits everybody using Medina Road and
County Road 24, not just the proposed development. According to
our survey information, Hennepin County has an additional 70 feet
of right -of -way on the west side of County Road 24 adjacent to our
proposed site. It would appear to me that there is sufficient
right -of -way presently in place to take care of Hennepin County's
needs and the 30 foot trail easement. Please understand we are
anxious to work with the City and the County to dedicate right -of-
way or easements where none exist. In this instance, however, it
appears there is sufficient property in place to accomplish the
needs of both the City and the County.
In view of the fact the City has adopted a new Land Use Guide Plan
which is consistent with our request for guiding, I assume your
paragraph 3 of your letter of November 6, 1989 is no longer
applicable.
We are anxious to proceed with the development and hope you will
put us on the Planning Commission Agenda at your earliest
convenience.
assistance.
January 22, 1990 CITY OF
PLYMOUTR
Mr. Hans Hagen
Hans Hagen Homes, Inc.
2353
ON, '
h Rice Street
SuitSt. MN 55113
SUBJECT: HANS HAGEN HOMES. PRELIMINARY PLAT, LAND USE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT
AND REZONING - SEVEN PONDS SECOND ADDITION (89090)
Dear Mr. Hagen:
This letter is written to forward review comments and observations submitted
by the staff members at the January 16, 1990, staff review committee meeting
regarding the above referenced application. DRC review was of the contents of
your letter dated January 3, 1990, regarding our previous letters to you with
respect to preliminary plat deficiencies. During the staff discussion of the
application materials submitted, the following items were addressed:
1. We acknowledge your agreement with Items 1, 2, 5, 8, 10, 13, 14, and 15 of
the memorandum of Robert Johnson dated October 13, 1989. You should now
modify your preliminary plat drawings to reflect those engineering - related
changes.
2. We acknowledge your position with respect to retaining the "bubble"
proposed for Medina Road. Our recommendation will continue to be the
elimination of this design feature due to the high volume /high speed
design for Medina Road. We find the bubble to be intrinsically unsafe on
this type of thoroughfare.
3. We will continue to recommend that no access be permitted to the portion
of the plat north of Medina Road from County Road 24, or directly to
Medina Road. With respect to the access to County Road 24, this
recommendation is consistent with the requirements of Hennepin County
reflected in their letter of October 21, 1989.
4. We hereby acknowledge your position that Dunkirk Lane be vacated upon the
acceptance of this plat, rather than be partially vacated and the south
end used as a cul -de -sac access to your site and the site immediately to
the east, as recommended by the Engineering Division. Our recommendation
in this regard will remain as has been stated with respect to the vacation
of a portion of Dunkirk Lane and retention of a portion of Dunkirk Lane
with a cul -de -sac northerly from Medina Road.
5. We will continue to recommend that a storm water holding pond be
constructed along the east line of Lot 1, Block 2 as shown on the Seven
Ponds north preliminary plat, and we acknowledge your January 3, 1990,
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550 -5000
Mr. Hans Hagen
January 22, 1990
Page 2
statement that you do not wish to construct this pond. Please note that
the amount and quality of storm water drainage generated by individual
developments is of increasing importance to both the City of Plymouth and
state /federal agencies that regulate water resources.
6. This shall acknowledge your statement in your letter of January 3, 1990,
that it is your preference to retain the alignment of Medina Road as
proposed by your preliminary plat even though the Engineering Division has
indicated the alignment depicted by the preliminary plat previously
submitted for this site at Seven Ponds North is that which staff
recommends. Our position in this matter has not changed, and our
recommendation will continue to be that the alignment be adjusted. The
purpose for the adjusted alignment relates to the geometrics of the
intersection of proposed Medina Road with existing County Road 24. The
proper geometrics cannot be accomplished without the alignment adjustment
referenced.
7. This shall acknowledge your comments of January 3, 1990, with respect to
street right -of -way dedication along County Road 24 and the provision of a
30 -foot trail easement south and east of County Road 24 along the entire
frontage of your proposed plat. Our recommendations, together with those
of the Hennepin County Department of Public Works with respect to street
right -of -way, will remain as previously stated with respect to both of
these public intrastructure dedication issues. Please note, however, that
the trail dedication would be by easement, and therefore would not impact
your setbacks for the adjacent parcels as would the dedication of a fee
simple title by way of an outlot.
8. The general development plan graphics submitted as a "sketch plan" on
November 6, 1989, reflecting proposed development for that portion of the
plat located north of proposed Medina Road must be incorporated within the
full size graphic entitled "general development plan ".
At this time, there does not appear to be agreement between you and City staff
with respect to a number of design - related features of this proposed plat.
You have indicated your desire to proceed to the Public Hearing on this
preliminary plat based on the presentations contained in your letter of
January 3, 1990, with respect to design - related matters that staff has found
deficient with your current plan. It is not the intent of staff to
administratively deny your right to be heard in this regard, and therefore it
would be our intention to schedule a Public Hearing concerning this
preliminary plat at such time as we have received plans reflecting the
modifications agreed to with respect to Items 1 and 8 above.
Due to the significant number of design features that you propose inconsistent
with the recommendations of City staff, and the critical nature of many of
these design features, it is likely that staff will recommend to the Planning
Commission and City Council that the preliminary plat application be denied
based on design deficiencies, as provided for in the Subdivision Ordinance.
Mr. Hans Hagen
January 22, 1990
Page 3
This letter will be faxed
engineer, Ernie Rudd, toda y
undisputed modifications a
development plan (including
submitted by 4:30 p.m. by
schedule you for a Public
meeting February 14, 1990.
January 26 date, it will be
Commission meeting of February 28, 19
both to your offic e
Monday, January
re made to your p
the modifications t o
Friday, January 26,
Hearing before the
If these modified
necessary to go on
W.
and to the office .of your
22, 1990. If the necessary
reliminary plat and general
the utility plans), and are
1990, it will be possible to
Planning Commission at its
plans are not received by the
to a hearing at the Planning
Should you have any questions concerning these matters, please do not hesitate
to contact me.
Sincerely,
Xar E. Dillerud
Community Development Coordinator
dre /cd /89090:dl)
1
I
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
MEMO
DATE: March 2, 1990
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: James G. Willis, City Manager
SUBJECT PROPOSED COMMUNITY CENTER - STUDY MEETING WITH BWBR ARCHITECTS
At the 4:30 p.m. study meeting Monday afternoon, I believe the Council can
expect to discuss two components of the proposed community center project.
These are:
1. Evolution of the community center project through the design
development phase; and
2. Where do we go from here?
The evolution of the community center project involved numerous meetings
over a long period of time. The resulting design concepts which are
reflected in the design development drawings, represented a project which
was perceived to meet a wide -range of community leisure needs. Lloyd
Bergquist and Steve Patrick of BWBR Architects will be prepared to discuss
and review the evolution of the project and discuss with the Council the
final schematic design which was approved by the Council. Copies of the
community center drawings, as well as the mass model will also be available.
Where do we go from here?
The architects were instructed to terminate work on the project following
the special Council Meeting of November 9. At that meeting the Council
deferred further action on the project until after the new Council had an
opportunity to review the project and determine their own particular desires
with respect to the future of the proposed community center. The architects
had previously undertaken a considerable amount of work on the final design
drawings of the project and in fact, had largely completed those drawings.
The architects have sought additional compensation for this work. In that
regard I am attaching a copy of my December 14 memo to the Council with
respect to that matter.
Following the meeting with the architects Monday afternoon the Council may
wish to provide the staff with additional direction as to what step or steps
they with to consider with regard to the proposed community center project.
JW:kec
CITY OF PLYMOUTH DD
3400 PLYMOUTH BLVD., PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
TELEPHONE (612) 559 -2800
MEMO
DATE: December 14, 1989 for Council Meeting of December 18, 1989
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: James G. Willis, City Manager
SUBJECT BWBR ARCHITECTS - REQUEST R PAYMENT ON SERVICES FOR PLYMOUTH
COMMUNITY CENTER
1. SUMMARY: The Council suspended further work on the proposed community
center on November 9. Following that meeting I contacted the
architects and construction managers in order that their bills could be
brought up -to -date and paid. We have paid or authorized payment for
all work done through the design development phase. The total of all
these costs for BWBR Architects and McGough Construction amount to
393,732.71. In addition, BWBR Architects has requested payment for
work they undertook in preparing construction documents in anticipation
of approval by the City of the design development phase. This request
amounts to $174,473.65. I have reminded Lloyd Bergquist that such work
had been undertaken by the architects solely at their risk and that I
could not recommend payment to the Council.
I am enclosing for the Council's information, Lloyd
of December 6 and the accompanying Invoice Number 7
accompanied his letter. Also enclosed is other cor
relates to points raised in his letter. Lloyd will
evening Council Meeting and will be able to address
his perspective on this matter.
Bergquist's letter
Revised, which
respondence which
be at the Monday
you with respect to
2. BACKGROUND: Earlier this year the City entered into an agreement with
BWBR Architects, Inc., for services with respect to the proposed
community center. The agreement provided that the compensation for the
project would be based upon 7.5 percent of the construction costs which
were initially estimated at $10,500,000. The agreement provided,
however, that the 7.5 percent fee would be calculated upon the
estimated cost of the project at the completion of the design
development phase. At that point, McGough Construction estimated that
the project would cost $10,872,279, or an increase of $372,279 over the
original cost estimate.
BWBR ARCHITECTS - REQUEST FOR PAYMENT ON SERVICES FOR PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY
CENTER
December 14, 1989 for Council Meeting of December 18, 1989
Page 2
The process for developing and controlling the project was established
In the agreement to go through five phases: 1) schematic design; 2)
design development; 3) construction documents; 4) bidding; and '5)
construction. The agreement between the architects and the City, at
the City Council's direction, contained a special clause with the
following language, 1115.13. Notwithstanding any provision of this
agreement to the contrary, Architect will not proceed with any work
beyond the schematic design phase until receiving written authorization
from owner to do so."
The schematic design was approved by the City Council on July 10, and
the architect was directed to proceed with the design development
phase. With the completion of the schematic phase, the architect had
earned 15 percent of the fee, which was paid. During the design
development phase it was determined, in order to achieve economies in
the project, to separate the site preparation work from the basic
building construction. As a result, the architect was authorized to
prepare the plans in order that the first phase of the project could be
bid. The Council approved the grading and utility plans and authorized
the solicitation of bids on September 11. Bids were received on
September 26 and reviewed by the City Council on October 2. Based upon
concurrent design development work, which at that point indicated the
building project would exceed the original cost by nearly $1,000,000,
the bids were rejected. Work on the design development phase continued
as the architect, construction manager, and staff worked to reduce the
project costs. This was accomplished and the Council received and
approved the design development phase on November 9. At that time the
architect had earned an additional 20 percent of the total fee due, or
35 percent cumulatively, which was paid.
During the latter stages of the design development phase, the architect
Indicated that, in order to maintain a schedule which would allow
bidding for the entire project to be accomplished around the end of
1989, work would be required to be commenced on the final construction
documents. Steve Patrick, the BWBR architect with whom we were most
closely working, advised me that they were embarking upon the
construction documents in order to try to maintain that schedule. I
advised Steve that I could not authorize the commencement of the
construction document work until after the Council had approved the
design development phase and that any work in this regard would be at
their risk. Steve's concern at that time was what the risk exposure
might be if work began on construction drawings. I informed him that I
could foresee two risks:
1) The project costs exceeding the budget preliminarily approved
by the City Council; and /or
BWBR ARCHITECTS - REQUEST FOR PAYMENT ON SERVICES FOR PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY
CENTER
December 14, 1989 for Council Meeting of December 18, 1989
Page 3
2) A change in the composition of the Council resulting from the
November council elections.
As work on the refinement of design development took place in the
latter part of October, which resulted in changes in the roof design of
the community center project, Steve again expressed concern with the
fact that they were continuing to spend a considerable amount of time
with construction documents. Some of these were being revised as a
result of changes in the roof constructual design. Steve was pressing
McGough Construction to complete their cost estimates for the project
In late October in order that the design development could be presented
to the Council for approval within the range of the original budget
estimates and thereafter, receive approval to commence the construction
document phase. After we received the design development phase
construction cost estimates, we met to review them on October 26 and
submitted them to the City Council at a Special Council Meeting on
November 9. At the Special Council Meeting, the Council approved the
design development phase, but deferred further consideration of the
project until after January 1, 1990 when the new Council would be able
to revisit the question.
I informed both the architects and construction manager of this action,
although both had been in attendance at the November 9 meeting. I also
asked that they submit their invoices for services so we could have
them paid. All bills have now been received, reviewed and paid in
accordance with our contractural obligations.
I believe that the agreement between the City and the architects is
quite clear with respect to how the various phases of the project were
to be undertaken, and that the architect was not authorized by the City
to proceed with the preparation of construction documents. The
architect did so on the basic assumption that the project would
continue to move forward generally along the lines of the original
schedule. There is no question in my mind that Steve Patrick
recognized that the City Council was the body that had to approve and
authorize the commencement of the construction document phase,
following design development phase approval, and was advised by me that
proceeding without that approval would be solely'-at BWBR's risk.
3. RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSIONS: I do
the architect for any work done in t
until the Council authorizes that step.
continue to put time and money into
determines whether or not it wishes to
after the first of January, 1990.
JW:kec
attachment
not recommend that the City pay
he construction document phase
There is no justification to
the project until the Council
proceed with a community center
December 6, 1989
Mr. Jim Willis
City Manager
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
RE: Plymouth Community Center
Commission Number 88124
Dear Jim,
1
I am enclosing a revised statement for consulting fees. It's structured differently in that
it separates Bid Pack 1 from the rest of the work. This was done because the work in Bid
Pack 1 went all the way through the bidding process where the balance of the work has
gone through two- thirds of contract documents. Section 14.2.1 of the Owner /Architect
Agreement calls for adjustment in the lump sum based on the CM detailed cost estimates
of the approved scope and design. The CM estimate submitted with the DD package is
10,872,279.
I would like to raise a point again regarding authorization to proceed with the work well
into the contract document phase before the City Council passed a resolution to stop the
project until January of 1990. We proceeded in good faith, as directed, and we have no
choice other than to bill the City for the work which has been completed. There are
several reasons that we feel justified in our position. First of all, Article 15.13 in the
Owner /Architect Agreement, specifically requires written authorization to proceed after
approval of the schematic design phase. This written authorization was given to us in the
summer of 1989. Secondly, the Council was aware that we were proceeding with Bid Pack
1 for early construction this fall for which Council took action. The original charge by
the Council was to have the work completed for bidding before the end of the year. We
have always pursued this course and :aerc in a position to comply with the Council's
wishes at the time the project was stopped. I put in writing, in October, the fact that we
were 20% of the way through contract documents and we had resolved the issues of
design and budget with staff and with the construction manager that would have
permitted us to complete contract documents ready for bidding in December.
It is also our position that it is clearly to the City's benefit to have the contract
documents completed on schedule. That would permit the City to go out for bids at any
date after the completion of contract documents without loss of time or without invoking
any penalties because of the stoppage or possible termination of the project. The issue of
competitive bidding or continuing with construction management is also open to
discussion.
Bergquist Rohkohl Johnson Sleiter
400 Sibley St., Suite 500
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Phone (612) 222 -3701
Mr. Jim Willis
December 6, 1989
Page 2
We are available to present our case to the City Council. We are available to meet with
the new mayor and the new councilwoman regarding the project and we are available to
discuss any other issues regarding the Community Center Project with the new City
Council in January.
Very truly yours,
BWBR AR ITECTS INC.
L oy rgquist, FAIR
LB /j n
Enclosure
Mr. James Willis, City Manager
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
1
BWSR ARCHITECTS
400 S18LEY ST. SUITE 500 / ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101 / $12 222 -3701
DATE: December 6, 1989
INVOICE NO: 7 - Revised
COMM NO: 88124
PROJECT: Plymouth Community Center
BASIS OF CHARGES: 7.5% of Construction Costs,
plus Pool, Kitchen, and Acoustical Consultants,
plus reimbursable expenses.
Statement Of Services
AMOUNT
EARNED
AMOUNT
PAID PAST DUE CURRENT
Competition 15,000.00 15,000.00
Est. Construction Cost $10,225,562.00
Excluding Bid Pack I)
Fee @ 7.5% $ 766,917.15
unount earned thru 11/9/89:
Schematic Design (15% of Fee) - 100% Complete 115,037.57 115,037.57
Design Development (20% of Fee) 100% Complete 153,383.43 153,383.43
Const. Documents (35% of Fee) - ..65% Complete 174,473.65 55,125.00 119,348.6
Est. Const. Cost -Bid Pack I $274,438.00
Fee @ 7.5% $ 20,582.85
Amount earned - Bid Pack I - 75% of Fee 15,437.14 7,204.00 8,233.1
per Article 14.2.2)
Consultants Fees:
Counsilman /Hunsaker Assoc. 18,370.00 8,523.00 948.00 8,899.0
730.0
Robert Rippe & Assoc. 730.00
1,840.00 1,840.0
Anderson Kvernstoen Inc.
APPROVED
Continued on Page 2)
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
Mr. James Willis, City Manager
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
BWBR ARCHITECTS
400 SIBLEY ST. SUITE 500 / ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA 55101 / 612 222 -3701
DATE: December 6, 1989
INVOICE NO: 7 - Revised ( Page 2 )
COMM NO: 88124
PROJECT: Plymouth Community Center
BASIS OF CHARGES: 7.5% of Construction Costs,
plus Pool, Kitchen and Acoustical Consultants,
plus reimbursable expenses.
Statement of Services
AMOUNT
EARNED
AMOUNT
PAID PAST DUE CURRENT
Reimbursable Expenses: Printing & Delivery 9,206.67 2,489.91 3,229.43 3,487.3
Travel (Counsilman/ 1,572.17 1,572.17
Hunsaker)
Travel (Barker Rinker) 2,186.59 1,570.28 616.3
Photography 62.75 48.46 8.82 5.47
Calls 32.94 14.41 7.81 10.7
Supplies 101.12 101.1
APPROVED
Lloyd F. Bergquist
507,434.03 $304,843.23 $59,935.37 $142,655.43
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE
59,935.37 PAST DUE
142,655.43 CURRENT
202,590.80
October 23, 1989
Mr. Jim Willis
City Manager
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
RE: Plymouth Community Center
Commission Number 88124
Dear Jim:
Our design team of twelve people is continuing to work on theCommunityCenterinthedevelopmentoftheworkingdrawingsfor
completion at as early a date as possible.
The original concept presented to the City Council identified the
project scope and functions included in your program, and arranged
the space around a cluster concept, sited the building and
suggested the exterior design. As we completed the schematic
design phase and moved into the design development phase, the
construction manager indicated to us from his estimating that thebuildingasdesignedexceededthebudgetlimitationsagreedtoby
the City Council. There are several reasons that the estimate was
as high as it was. The most important one, I believe, is the
current market for construction in the Twin City area.
We believe that it is far more important to maintain the program
space requirements, maintain the cluster design concept, provide
for highest quality of finishes on the interior of the buildinganddevelopanexteriorenvelopethatismoreresponsivetobudget
limitations. After the most recent set of numbers came in from
McGough Construction Company, we made some significant changes in
the structure for the ice arena and the community center wing
which resulted in a fresh and different look at the overall
exterior image of the project. As a result, the structural
systems are very simple and basic for the entire building with
exception of the leisure pool. You may argue that what we are
presenting at this time is not the same as the original
competition and in a portion of the exterior form, this is true.
In all other ways, we have responded completely to the original
presentation. We believe the Council is faced with a choice of
substantially increasing the budget to maintain the roof forms
over the ice arena and the community wing or accept an
Bergquist Rohkohl Johnson Sleiter
400 Sibley St., Suite 500St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Phone (612) 222 -3701
1
Mr. Jim Willis
Page 2
October 23, 1989
alternative design that is more responsive to the budget and that
provides a quality appearance with a very strong emphasis on the
main central function which is the leisure pool. Because of this
change, some modification to the elevations are proposed to
strengthen the appearance of the project as you see it when you
enter from Plymouth Boulevard.
These changes have required us to go back and do some significant
redesigning in the two areas I have mentioned above. As a result
the structural system has been completely redesigned and the
architectural features have changedto allow the new forms to make
a strong design statement. All of this has resulted in more time
and dollars in the design process which are required to meet the
development goals for the project. Therefore, we are requesting
and can identify for you an additional investment of approximately
20,000 of design time to make these changes. We are assuming
that the City Council will hold firm to the original budget on the
project which makes it necessary to go back to the drawing board.
Modification to the design solution we have been working with from
the beginning is the most efficient and cost effective of the
solutions presented in the competition. We have gone deeply into
There is at the same time, very strong justification for the
alternate approach that we are following and we are not concerned
that this alternative takes away from the excitement of the design
solution. We are anxious for Council approval of the revised
design at the earliest possible date.
Very truly yours,
o:.B is
Vi Presiden
November 27, 1989
Mr. Jim Willis
City Manager
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Jim:
As per your instructions and the resolution passed by the City Council on
November 9, we have instructed all of the team members on the Community Center
to stop work until sometime after the beginning of the year when the new Mayor
and the council take office. We have also instructed all of our consultants to
bring their bills up -to -date so that whatever action is required by the City
Council to pay for the services of all of the consultants, through time of
shutdown, can be accomplished during the month of December 1989.
At the time of shutdown, we were two- thirds of the way through contract
documents, anticipating final owners' review the first or second week in
December ready to go out for bids before the end of the year per your
instructions. This would permit receiving bids for the entire project in
January of 1990. Included in those bid documents would be sufficient
alternates that will permit you to make a number of decisions regarding
materials and systems after the bids are open. The current estimates from the
construction manager also anticipates a $300,000 contingency above the
estimated construction costs of $10,800,000 for decisions that also can be made
after bids are open.
A great deal of time, energy and cost has been invested in the Community Center
to date, both by the consultants and by the City. I would like to review for
you the features in the current concept that reflect our presentation in the
design competition. They include:
A. Program functions
B. Location Onsite
C. The Cluster Concept of Circulation
D. The Space Adjacencies
E. Functional Building to Site Relationships
F. Access and Egress from Adjoining Streets to the Site
G. Location of Various Entrances Relating to Driveways, Parking
Lots and Park
H. Significant Portions of the Exterior Appearance
Through the design process, significant changes in the Community
Center were made. They are:
Bergquist Rohkohl Johnson Sleiter
400 Sibley St., Suite 500
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Phone (612) 222 -3701
Mr. Jim Willis
November 27, 1989
Page 2
A. Redesign of the Community Wing to permit that portion of the
building to function more effectively.
B. Change in seating capacity, support functions and ice -sheet
size for the ice arena.
C. Reorientation of the principle entrance to center on the
Leisure Pool Wing.
D. Reconfiguration of the Playground, Aerobics Area, Weight
Room, and Youth Center to function more effectively and
pick -up from the design feature from one of the other
entries in the competition.
E. Addition of a Wellness Center.
F. Reprogramming of the Gymnasiums.
G. Reorientation of the Handball Courts to eliminate the
corridor between the Gymnasium and the Ice Arena.
H. Redesign of the Locker rooms.
I. Reconfiguration of the Leisure Pool area as a result of many
meetings to permit this area to function as effectively as
possible and include as many of the features considered
desirable in the Leisure Pool, including the Wave Pool
feature.
With all of these changes, the overall concept of the Community
Center presented by our firm in the competition remained intact.
Other changes have taken place in order for the facility to meet
the budget cap of $10.8 million dollars. Some areas grew, some
areas were reduced in size and the overall area of the design
development plan submitted to the Council on November 9 is
approximately 3,000 square feet larger than the 120,000 square
foot design in the original competition. This increase was
necessary to accommodate the modifications and the program needs
agreed to.
From the schematic design phase through the design development
phase, it was necessary to revisit the design in order to reduce
the cost estimates from the construction manager by up to nine
percent. This was accomplished in the following way:
A. Re -bid the earth work and utilities with the entire project
savings $50,000.
Mr. Jim Willis
November 27, 1989
Page 3
B. Start construction in March rather than November and avoid
heavy winter construction costs - savings $100,000.
C. Reconfigure the roofs over the Ice Arena and the Community
Wing by eliminating the gable construction - savings
750,000.
D. Eliminate the Handball Courts in the base bid and include it
as an add alternate - savings $125,000.
The redesign of the roofs for the Ice Arena and Community Wing now
permits the Leisure Pool Wing to be dramatically emphasized
compared with the balance of the building. We were concerned
originally about the Ice Arena Roof because of its size and
because of the dominant location the Ice Arena has as you enter
the site. In the original competition where we felt the form for
the Ice Arena should compliment the form for the Leisure Pool, it
left an unbalanced scheme which suggested that the same gable form
should be placed over the Community Center roof. The gable over
the Ice Arena and the Community Center roof have no functional
value and obviously represent a sizable premium in construction
costs. The alternative we have presented to the Council in
drawing and model form is a very responsive design. It emphasizes
the principle entrances to the building and permits the Leisure
Pool Wing to be the dominant element in the complex. We believe
this is a very responsible and architecturally pleasing
alternative to the original design and we have recommended it to
the Council.
Let me comment on the statement that I made to Mayor at the
presentation on November 9. When he asked what would the original
design cost today, I gave him an answer of from 42 - 5Z increase.
I gave him this statement for two reasons. First: there currently
is over $2.5 billion worth of construction underway in the
metropolitan area at this time. Most contractors and
subcontractors are very busy and construction cost estimates and
bids reflect this activity. The second and more important reason
is the construction management mode. There are two distinct
advantages for construction management. The first one being the
preselection of the construction firm you wish to work with and
second the cost estimating or value engineering available from
schematics through construction. The principle disadvangtage of
construction management is the fact that you are making prime
contractors out of what are normally subcontractors and the price
escalates accordingly. We have specific information on two other
community center projects, both under construction at this time.
One where we are the architects in Shoreview where construction
Mr. Jim Willis
November 27, 1989
Page 4
management was used and two, the community center in Chaska which
was bid through an open bidding process where Ron Rinker was also
the design consultant. The Chaska project came in significantly
lower than the Shoreview project and lower than the estimates
McGough has given to us on the Plymouth project. We believe there
is a premium of up to 10I to build with construction management
compared with open bidding. It may be worth your while to
reinvestigate the benefits to the City regarding this issue. The
Mayor may not have realized in my answer that the increase I was
referring to would require you to bid the project competively.
You have referred in two letters to me regarding the authorization
for the project through and beyond the design development phase.
As I mentioned earlier in the letter, we have completed
approximately two- thirds of contract documents and at the time we
stopped the project were within five weeks of completing contract
documents. The owner architect agreement includes articles
involving shutdown and termination that should be reviewed because
of the costs involved in both.
Our team now is scattered onto other projects and it will be
difficult and costly to reassemble the team again to complete
contract documents but we sincerely believe it is to the best
interest of the City to do just that at the earliest date
possible. The City has a sizable investment in consulting fees
and in staff time regarding this project and the only way that
this investment can be recovered is to complete the project. It
is our impression that this facility will serve the community well
and be a facility that is second to none in the metropolitan area.
We wish to cooperate in every way we possibly can to complete the
project as was originally intended. In the meantime, it is
necessary for us to bill you for all of the work that we have
completed to date. We would also be happy to meet with the new
Mayor and the new Councilwoman to answer any questions they have
regarding the project or the process we have followed to get us
where we are.
Very truly yours,
WBR ARCHITECTS, INC.
4Ve g i ,
Viiden t
LB /jn
July 11, 1989
Lloyd Bergquist
BWBR Architects
400 Sibley Street
Suite 500
St. Paul, MN 55101
SUBJECT: PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY CENTER (PROJECT 901)
Dear Lloyd:
The City Council has approved the schematic drawings for the Plymouth
Community Center. With that approval you are hereby authorized to proceed
with the design development phase of the project. This authorization is
provided to you in accordance with Section 15.13 of our agreement.
Yours truly,
es G. Willis
Ci y Manager
JW:kec
cc: Dale Hahn, Finance Director
Fred Moore, Public Works Director
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 559 -2800
Article 12 (cont'd)
15.10 This Agreement does not include, as additional services (see
Article 1.7), the services of a Kitchen Consultant to provide
programming and design of kitchen equipment. This consultant's
billings will be hourly, estimated not to exceed $6,600.
15.11 This Agreement does not include, as additional services (see
Article 1.7), the services of an Acoustical Engineer to
provide design acoustical engineering data relative to the
Natatorium, ice arena, gym, and community meeting rooms. This
service will be billed hourly, estimated not to exceed $3,000.
15.12 The provisions of 1.7.18 notwithstanding, Architect will
assist owner with a building review prior to the expiration
of the warranty period provided in the construction contracts.
Architect will also assist owner with inspection and nego-
tiations with contractors concerning apparent defects found
between the date of substantial completion and the expiration
of the-applicable-warranty period. These are basic services.
15.13 Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary,
Architect will not proceed with any work beyond the schematic
design phase until receiving written authorization from owner
to do so.
Due from Invoice No. 7 - Revised
Bid Package 1 $ 8,233.14
Anderson Kvernstoer, Inc. 320.00
8,553.14
Due - difference between
original construction estimate
and design development cost
estimate (Sec. 14.21)
Original Estimate $ 10,500,000
Design Development Estimate 10,872,279
372,279
7.50- $27,920.93
Schematic Design
15% of Fee) $ 4,118.14
Design Development
20% of Fee) 5,584.19
9,772.33
18,325.47
Total Fees to BWBR, including
above
Fees to McGough Construction
342,732.71
51,000.00
393,732.71
A
9T
Extract of Minutes of Meeting
of the City Council of the City
of Plymouth, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Plymouth, Hennepin County, Minnesota, was held at the City Hall in the
City on Monday, March 5, 1990, commencing at 7:00 P.M.
The following members of the Council were present:
and the following were absent:
The following resolution was presented by Member who
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE
AND SALE OF $1,350,000 TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION
TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1990
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Plymouth, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, (City) as follows:
1. It is hereby determined that:
a) the City has duly established City Development District No. 7 (District)
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 through 469.134;
b) the City has duly established tax increment financing district no. 7 -1 (TIF
District) within the District pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.174 to 469.179 (TIF Act);
c) the City is authorized by section 469.178 of the TIF Act to issue and sell
its general obligations to pay all or a portion of the public development
costs (Costs) related to the District as identified in the program and tax
increment financing plan (Plan) for the TIF District.
1
d) the Plan lists the following Costs to be financed by the general obligations:
Public Improvements Total Development Costs
Site Improvements
Administration
Capitalized Interest
Investment Earnings
Costs of Issuance
Discount
Subtotal
Total
1,000,000
335,000
28,250
23,000
1,329,750
202.50
1,350,000
e) it is necessary and expedient to the sound financial management of the
affairs of the City to issue $1,350,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds, Series 1990 (Bonds) to provide financing for the Costs;
2. To provide financing for the Costs, the City will issue and sell Bonds in the
amount of $1,329,750. To provide in part the additional interest required to
market the Bonds at this time, additional Bonds will be issued in the amount of
20,250. The excess of the purchase price of the Bonds over the sum of $1,329,750
will be credited to the debt service fund for the Bonds for the purpose of paying
interest first coming due on the additional Bonds. The Bonds will be issued, sold and
delivered in accordance with the terms of the following Official Notice of Sale:
2
OFFICIAL NOTICE OF SALE
1,350,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds Series 1990
City of Plymouth
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Global Book Entry System)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed bids for the purchase of the above
bonds will be received until 11:00 a.m., C.T. on Monday, April 2, 1990, in the offices of
Ehlers and Associates, 2950 Norwest Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, at which time
the bids will be opened in the presence of the city finance Director and tabulated. for
consideration by the City Council at a meeting at 7:00 p.m., C.T. on the same day.
The bonds are offered on the following terms.
Purpose and Security
The purpose of the bonds is to provide funds for the financing of public
development costs in economic development tax increment financing districts in a
development district. The bonds will be taxable general obligations of the City, for
which its full faith, credit and taxing powers are pledged together with tax increments
from the districts.
Date and Maturities
The bonds will be issued only in fully registered global book entry form,
will be dated April 16, 1990, will be in denominations of integral multiples of $5,000
each and will mature on February 1, in the years and amounts as follows:
Year Amount Year Amount
1994 $ 150,000 1997 $ 250,000
1995 200,000 1998 250,000
1996 225,000 1999 275,000
Redemption
The City may elect on February 1, 1994 or on any interest payment date
thereafter to redeem and prepay bonds of this issue maturing on or after February 1,
1995 at a price of par plus accrued interest to date of redemption. Prepayment may
be in whole or in part and will be in inverse order of maturities and by lot within
maturities.
Interest
Interest on the bonds will be payable on
thereafter on each February 1 and August 1. Bonds
bear interest from date of issue until paid at a single,
rate specified for bonds of any subsequent maturity.
multiple of 1/20 or 1/8 of 1%.
3
August 1, 1990, and semiannually
maturing on the same date must
uniform rate, not exceeding the
Each rate must be in an integral
Registration: Book Entry
The Bonds when issued will be registered in the name of Cede do Co., as
nominee of the Depository Trust Company, New York, New York (DTC). DTC will act
as securities depository for the Bonds. Individual purchases will be made in book entry
form only in principal amounts of $5,000 and integral multiples thereof. Purchasers
will not receive certificates representing their interest in the Bonds purchased.
Principal and interest will be paid by the City to DTC who will in turn remit such
principal and interest to its participants for subsequent disbursement to the beneficial
owners of the Bonds.
CUSIP Numbers
The City will assume no obligation for the assignment or printing of CUSIP
numbers on the bonds or for the correctness of any numbers printed thereon, but will
permit such numbers to be assigned and printed at the expense of the purchaser, if the
purchaser waives any extension of the time of delivery caused thereby.
Delivery
Within 40 days after sale the City will furnish and deliver to the office of
the purchaser or, at its option, will deposit with a bank in the United States selected
by it and approved by the City as its agent to permit examination by and to deliver to
the purchaser, the printed and executed bonds, the unqualified opinion thereon of bond
counsel, and a certificate stating that no litigation in any manner questioning their
validity is then threatened or pending. The charge of the delivery agent must be paid
by the purchaser but all other costs will be paid by the City. The purchase price must
be paid upon delivery of the bonds in funds available for expenditure by the City on the
day of payment.
Legal Opinion
An unqualified legal opinion on the bonds will be furnished by Holmes &
Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis, Minnesota. The legal opinion will be printed on the
bonds at the request of the purchaser. The legal opinion will state that the bonds are
valid and binding general obligations of the City payable primarily from tax
increments, and that the City is required by law to levy taxes for the principal and
interest thereon as the same become due without limit as to rate or amount, but that
the bonds will be subject to federal and state income taxes
Type of Bid - Amount
Sealed bids must be mailed or delivered to the undersigned and must be
received prior to the time specified above for the opening of bids. Each bid must be
unconditional. A good faith deposit in the amount of $27,000 must be submitted with
each bid. The good faith deposit must be in the form of a certified or cashiers check
or bank draft or a wire transfer of funds to Resource Bank & Trust Company, ABA
09 -19- 0550 -6 for further credit to Ehlers do Associates, Inc., Bond Issue Escrow
Account #850 - 788 -1, attention Nancy Allen. The good faith deposit will be retained
by the City as liquidated damages if the bid is accepted and the bidder fails to comply
therewith. The good faith deposit will be returned to the purchaser at the closing for
the bonds. The bid authorizing the lowest net interest cost (total interest from date of
bonds to stated maturities less any cash premium or plus any discount) will be deemed
the most favorable. No oral bid and no bid of less than $1,329,750 plus accrued
interest on all of the bonds will be considered and the City reserves the right to reject
any and all bids and to waive any informalKy in any bid.
jr
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
s/ Laurie Rauenhorst
City . Clerk
Dated: March 5, 1990.
3. The Clerk is authorized and directed to advertise the Bonds for sale in
accordance with the foregoing Official Notice of Sale and to publish the
abbreviated notice of sale attached hereto as Exhibit A in the manner required
by law. The City Council will meet at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, April 2, 1990, to
consider bids on the Bonds and take any other appropriate action with respect to
the Bonds.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded
by Councilmember , and upon vote being taken thereon the following
members voted in favor of the motion:
and the following voted against:
whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
5
Exhibit A
NOTICE OF BOND SALE
1,350,000
TAXABLE GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX
INCREMENT BONDS SERIES 1990
CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Global Book Entry System)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed bids for the purchase of the above bonds
will be received until 11:00 am., C.T. on Monday, April 2, 1990, in the offices of Ehles
do Associates in Minneapolis, Minnesota, at which time the bids will be opened and
tabulated for consideration by the City Council at a meeting at 7:00 p.m. on the same
day. The bonds are offered on the following terms. The bonds will be dated April 16,
1990, will bear interest payable semiannually on each February 1 and August 1,
commencing August 1, 1990, and will mature on February 1 in the years and amounts
as follows:
Year Amount
1994 $ 150,000
1995 200,000
1996 225,000
Year Amount
1997 $ 250,000
1998 250,000
1999 275,000
The City may elect on February 1, 1995 or on any interest payment date
thereafter to redeem and prepay bonds of this issue in whole or in part, in inverse
order of maturities and by lot within maturities, maturing on or after February 1, 1996
at a price of par plus accrued interest to date of redemption.
Bidders must specify a price of not less than $1,329,750 plus accrued
interest. A legal opinion on the bonds will be furnished by Holmes do Graven,
Chartered, Minneapolis, Minnesota. The proceeds of the bonds will be used to finance
public development costs related to a development district in the City.
Bidders should be aware that the Official Statement to be distributed for
the Bonds may contain additional bidding terms and information relative to the Bonds.
In the event of a variance between statements in this Notice of Bond Sale and the
Official Statement bidders must comply with the terms of the latter.
Dated: March 5, 1990.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
6
s/ Laurie Rauenhorst
City Clerk
I Im w !
EE
431
1:11
11
warmo C=2
f`'af * ( i
y1
1
nl
af t
4-0)
01
Ar
Ass
ADD.
ciag
VIP,
7- AMOCO
ou- CO. 00 •
lLOGKI U"' 1 C TONWOOD
POWELLS
PLAZA •
BLOCK I
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT 7-1
4
S J
H RI
41"
EKI AGE S WES
L
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: February 14, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: February 28,
1990
FILE NO.: 90005
PETITIONER: Trammell Crow Company
REQUEST: Rezoning, Lot Consolidation /Division, Site Plan & Variance
LOCATION: North of County Road 9 and West of Berkshire Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: IP (Planned Industrial)
ZONING: IP -1 (Office Limited Business)
BACKGROUND:
The property was platted in 1980 and is currently vacant. The original
general development plan for this property called for office uses. In early
1988, Vantage Companies proposed to reguide the land to the east of Berkshire
Lane from CL (Limited Business) to IP (Planned Industrial). The City Council
ultimately denied their reguiding request.
In mid 1988 Vantage Companies proposed to reguide this land along with the
land to the east of Berkshire Lane from CL (Limited Business) to IP (Planned
Industrial). During the review process, the landowner of the property west of
Berkshire Lane decided to no longer be involved with the reguiding request.
Ultimately the City Council denied that reguiding.
As part of the Land Use Guide Plan Amendments conducted in 1989, Trammell Crow
Company requested that the City include this property along with the property
to the east of Berkshire Lane in their overall reguiding scheme to reguide the
property from CL (Limited Business) to IP (Planned Industrial). The City
Council on December 18, 1989 approved this Land Use Guide Plan Amendment along
with other amendments subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council.
Notice of the Public Hearing with regard to the rezoning has been published in
the official City newspaper. All property owners within 500 feet have been
notified and a development sign has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The applicant proposes to rezone this 5.98 acre site from B -1 (Office,
Limited Business) to I -1 (Planned Industrial). The lot consolidation
see next page)
File 90004
Page Two
division and variance is to consolidate the existing three platted lots
and redivide them into two lots. The variance is for the lot size on the
southerly lot for 1.26 acres where the ordinance minimum is 2 acres.
2. The Planning Commission may recommend a variance from the provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance as to a specific property when, in its judgment, an
unusual hardship on the land exists. We have attached a letter dated
February 13, 1990, from the petitioner which addresses the six Zoning
Ordinance standards that must be met for the Planning Commission to
recommend approval of a Variance. We have also attached a copy of those
Zoning Ordinance standards.
3. The petitioner has also submitted a General Development Plan for the
entire Plymouth Business Center site -- except the existing office
structure - -which reconfigures the site design responsive to the approved
Planned Industrial guiding. The key feature of the GDP, as it relates to
these applications, is the specified use of the parcel for which a lot
size variance is requested. As in the February 13 letter supporting the
variance, the petitioner, with this GDP, specifies "day care" use on the
substandard size lot, with a footprint that meets setback requirements.
The submission of this General Development Plan is both in support of the
lot size variance request and responsive to representations of the
petitioner during the hearings on the Land Use Guide Plan amendment in
1989.
4. The proposed Site Plan is responsive to the City of Plymouth's codes,
policies and ordinances that apply to this type of construction.
Specifically, the Site Plan proposes structure setbacks consistent with
the zoning ordinance; landscaping consistent with the landscape policies;
screened rooftop equipment consistent with the zoning ordinance; onsite
lighting to illumination standards established in the Zoning Ordinance;
storage of trash with an enclosure; and fire lane /fire protection
consistent with the City Fire Code.
5. The architectural appearance of the proposed structure is that of flat
precast concrete panels which will be stained in three colors, generally
consistent with the Merrill Lynch office building located southeast of the
site.
6. The physical constraints analysis identifies that this property is located
within the Bassett Creek Drainage District. It does not contain any
wetlands, major woodlands, or severe slopes. The soils appear suitable
for urban capability with public sewers.
see next page)
File 90005
Page Three
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The division of platted property responsive to Section 500.37 of the City
Code meets all submission requirements and standing alone, the division
would appear to be responsive to the City Code.
2. Based on the type of use intended for the proposed parcel of substandard
size referred to in the applicant's narrative, and the variance -free
design the applicant proposes for the site by the General Development Plan
and his letter of February 16, 1990, we find the lot size proposed of 1.2
acres to be responsive to the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
The variance request responds to the Zoning Ordinance standards for
approval of a variance based on the General Development Plan and
supporting letter.
3. The Site Plan proposed is responsive to the Zoning Ordinance requirements
and meets or exceeds all of those requirements, as well as other City
codes and policies related to this type of development.
4. The architectural appearance of the proposed structure is consistent with
the terms of the City of Plymouth policy reguiding building aesthetics and
architectural design. The finding of compatibility relates to the
structure to the southeast.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the requested Rezoning and Site Plan subject to
the conditions in the draft recommendations. I also recommend approval of the
requested lot divisiRn /consolidation and resulting variance to permit a lot
size of 1.2 acres/i /the I -1 Zoning_,istrict.
Submitted by:
Char es E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommendations for Approval of Site Plan, Lot Division /Consolidation and
Variance
2. Engineer's Memorandum
3. Location Map
4. Petitioner's Narrative of
5. Variance Criteria
6. Large Plans
pc /cd /90005:dl)
February 13, 1990 and February 16, 1990
APPROVING SITE PLAN, LOT CONSOLIDATION /DIVISION AND VARIANCE FOR TRAMMELL CROW
COMPANY (90005)
WHEREAS, Trammell Crow Company has requested approval of a Site Plan, Lot
Consolidation /Division and Variance to reduce the lot size to 1.26 acres from
the Ordinance minimum of 2 acres for property located north of County Road 9
and west of Berkshire Lane; 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 approve the request for Trammell Crow
Company for a Site Plan, Lot Consolidation /Division and Variance to reduce the
lot size to 1.26 acres from the Ordinance minimum of 2 acres for property
located north of County Road 9 and west of Berkshire Lane, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
the Dedication Policy in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance.
3. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures on sites adjacent to, or containing any open storm
water drainage facility.
4. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement
for completion of site improvements.
5. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance and approved Site
Plan.
6. Any and all subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required
reviews and approvals as to Site Plan per Ordinance provisions. Plans
submitted for building permit review shall delete all reference to future
additions or expansions.
7. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants and
fire lanes.
8. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the enclosure, and
no outside storage is permitted.
9. An 8 -1/2 x 11 inch "As Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted
prior to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City
Policy.
10. A variance to the Zoning Ordinance minimum standards to permit a parcel of
1.26 acres in the I -1 Zoning District where the Zoning Ordinance requires
a minimum parcel size of 2 acres. A condition of the variance is
recording of a covenant upon the property, prepared by the petitioner and
see next page)
Resolution No.
File 90005
Page Two
to be approved by the City Attorney, providing for development of the 1.26
acre site as a day care center as specified by the applicant in the
General Development Plan submitted in support of this application and the
letter of the applicant dated February 16, 1990, with no setback variances
required.
11. No building permit to be issued until the is lot division /consolidation
is filed with Hennepin County.
12. Submittal of all necessary utility easements prior to filing the lot
division /consolidation with Hennepin County.
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE REZONING LAND
LOCATED IN THE B -1 (OFFICE LIMITED BUSINESS) DISTRICT TO I -1 (PLANNED
INDUSTRIAL) DISTRICT (90005)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved an Ordinance rezoning certain land from
B -1 (Office Limited Business) District to I -1 (Planned Industrial) in
conjunction with approval of the Site Plan for Trammell Crow Company for
property located north of County Road 9 and west of Berkshire 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 Site Plan for
Trammell Crow Company for property located north of County Road 9 and west of
Berkshire Lane to be filed with Hennepin County prior to the publication of
said Ordinance.
phrases: setcond /ordinance)
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: February 22, 1990
FILE NO.: 90005
PETITIONER: Mr. John Griffith, Trammel Crow Company, 601 Lake Shore Parkway,
Minnetonka, Mn. 55343
SITE PLAN: PLYMOUTH BUSINESS CENTER
LOCATION: West of Berkshire Lane, north of Co. Rd. 9, in the northwest one
quarter of Section 15.
ASSESSMENT RECORDS:
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _ X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No 1 and
No. 2•
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Site Plan approval:
4. Area assessments estimated - None
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None
LEGAL /EASEMENTS /PERMITS:
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. This will comply with the Lot Consolidation /Division of
Lots 1. 2 and 3 Block
7.
N/A Yes No
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.) Six foot drainage and utility easements will be
required on both sides of the new common property line.
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.
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. The consolidation
and division of Lots 1, 2 and 3 Block 1 will require the vacation of
the drainage and utility easesment along the common property lines
of 1 and 2 and 2 and 3 Block 1.
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
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: $gg
special conditions.
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. _ XX _ 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. XX _ _ 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
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-
0
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 5 100% 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 5 100% crushed base and two inch bituminous mat. The site
plan shall be revised to indicate compliance with these
requirements.
STANDARDS:
N/A Yes No
24. _ X It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's utility
foreman,
24 hours in advance of making any proposed utility connections to
the City's sanitary sewer and water systems. The developer shall
also be responsible for contacting Jim Kolstad of the Public Works
Department for an excavating permit prior to any digging within the
City's right -of -way. All connections to the water system shall be
via wet tap.
25. _ X The City will require reproducible mylar prints of sanitary sewer,
water service and storm sewer As- Builts for the site prior to
occupancy permits being granted.
26. X The site plan complies with the City of Plymouth's current
Engineering Standards Manual. Note Items 6. 7. 10, 11, 12, 13, 27A.
27B. 27C. 27D. 27E. and 27F.
5-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
27. A. The storm sewer is designed for a five year run off under surcharge
conditions. The City's standards require a five year storm with no
surcharging. A 21 inch pipe shall be used from manhole 1 to manhole 3 and an
18 inch pipe from catch basin 1 to manhole 3.
B. Flow to catch basin 1 is 5.5 CFS not 3.7 CFS. Given this flow an additional
catch basin is required.
C. The 3 foot wide concrete swale at the northwest corner of the building shall
be shown on the site plan.
D. Permission shall be obtained from the adjacent property owners to grade on
their property.
E. The numbers of all manholes shall be shown on the Site Utility Plan.
F. No building permits shall be issued until all "as- built" street and utility
plans for the existing improvements are provided to the City.
Submitted by:
6-
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: February 22, 1990
FILE NO.: 90005
PETITIONER: Mr. John Griffith, Trammel Crow Company, 601 Lake Shore Parkway,
Minnetonka, Mn. 55343
LOT DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION: LOTS 1, 2, 3 BLOCK 1 PLYMOUTH OFFICE COMMERCIAL PARK
LOCATION: North of County Rd. 9, west of Berkshire Lane, in the northwest
quarter of Section 15.
N/A Yes No
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Lot Division /Consolidation approval:
4.. Area assessments: gone
5. Other additional assessments estimated: Non
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.) Six foot drainage and utility easements will be required
along_ the new common property line created by the lot
division /consolidation.
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. X _ Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots:
9. X _ _ All standard utility easements required for construction
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities
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. The existing 6 foot drainage and utility easements along
She common property lines of Lots 1 and 2 and 3 and 4, which will no
longer be necessary with the lot consolidation /division.
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.
12. _ X All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on none.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
2
Trammell Crow Company
Carlson Center
601 Lakeshore Parkway
Suite 200
February 16, 1990
Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343
612/449 -4000
Mr. Blair Tremere
Mr. Chuck Dillerud FEB 20 1990
CITY OF PLYMOUTH _:.
3400 Plymouth Boulevard `
I
Ui- i -L1 VIOUTHPlymouth, Minnesota 55447 COMNWNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
Re: Site Plan /General Development Plan
Northwest Quadrant of I -494 and County Road 9 (?
ocmo'
Dear Blair and Chuck:
I would like to address some concerns that may come up as it
relates to the processing of the above referenced item.
Trammell Crow Company's preeminent commitment to quality
development of investment grade real estate has not changed. Our
desire to develop a gateway for the City of Plymouth at County
Road 9 and I -494 is unchanged. Trammell Crow Company is
committed to creating the finest business environments available
in the Twin Cities at Plymouth Business Center.
The substandard lot that we are asking you to approve is targeted
for the construction of a New Horizon day care center. We expect
to be submitting our site plan review package and request for a
conditional use permit within the next thirty days.
We have submitted a general development plan that approximates
our plans for the land that we own on the east side of Berkshire
Lane. Although we were not able to submit a preliminary plat
before the Holmberg site plan application, the general
development plan which you have is very close to what we intend
to develop. We.expect to re -zone this area to an I -1 designation
and replat the property so that the lot sizes appropriately
reflect the industrial zoning requirements.
Trammell Crow Company is excited about the addition of this land
to our portfolio and the opportunity that it represents for us.
Additionally, we are pleased that it lies within the City of
Plymouth and that we can continue to work with and maintain the
fine relationship which we have enjoyed over the past ten years.
Mr. Blair Tremere
February 16, 1990
Page Two
If you have should have any questions, please feel free to call
me directly at 449 -4033.
Very truly,
TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY
John D Griffith
CC: Linda Fisher
jhx -073
JAMES P. LARKIN
ROBERT L. HOFFMAN LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. JOHN A. COTTER
BEATRICE A. ROTHWEILER
JACK F. DALY PAUL B. PLUNKETT
D. KENNETH LINDGREN ALAN L. KILDOW
WENDELL R. ANDERSON ATTORNEYS AT LAW KATHLEEN M. PICOTTE NEWMAN
GERALD H. FRIEDELL MICHAEL B. LE BARON
ALLAN E. MULLIGAN FRANCIS E. GIBERSON
ROBERT J. HENNESSEY TRACY R. EICHHORN -HICKS
JAMES C. ERICKSON 1500 NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER 2000 PIPER JAFFRAY TOWER AMY DARR GRADY
EDWARD J. DRISCOLL CATHERINE BARNETT WILSON
GENE N. FULLER 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH 222 SOUTH NINTH STREET JEFFREY C. ANDERSON
DAVID C. SELLERGREN DANIEL L. BOWLES
RICHARD J. KEENAN
JOHN D. FULLMER
BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TODD M. VLATKOVICH
TIMOTHY J. MCMANUS
ROBERT E. BOYLE TELEPHONE 16121 835 -3800 TELEPHONE 16121 338 -6610 GREGORY E. KORSTAD
FRANK I. HARVEY
CHARLES B. MO It AX 16121 696 -3333 FAX 16121 336-9760
LISA A. GRAY
GARY A. RENNEKE
CHRISTOPHER J. D1i L p! L P THOMAS H. WEAVER
JOHN R. BEATTII BRIDGE
LINDA H. FISHER
i
r"' F tj DENISE M. NORTON
THOMAS P. STOL N NORTH SUBURBAN OFFICE GARY A. VAN CLEVE
STEVEN O. LEVIN 1- -'• MICHAEL B. BRAMAN
M ICHAEL C. JACKMAN 8990 SPRINGBROOK DRIVE, SUITE 250 JOSEPH W. DICKER
JOHN E. DIEHL JACOUELINE F. DIETZ
JON S. SWIERZEWSKI COON RAPIDS, MINNESOTA 55433 GAYLEN L. KNACK
THOMAS J. FLYNN i U" RODNEY D. IVES
JAMES P. OUINN
IVFEB j 4/ iJV TELEPHONE 16121 766 -7117 JULIE A. WRASE
TODD I. FRECMAN CHRISTOPHER J. HARRISTHAL
STEPHEN B. SOLOMON FAX 16121786-6711 SHARON L.SRENNA
PETER K. BECK
JEROME H. KA KE
SHERRILL R. O }
I
MARIKAY CANAGA LITZAU
TIMOTHY J. KEANE
JON R. NORBERG
GERALD L. BECK
t
WILLIAM C. GRIFFITH, JR.
JOHN S. LUND I t &() ( THEODORE A. MONDALE
DAYLE NOLAN" 'f lY
t
v L Iii v I JOHN J. STEFFENHAGEN
THOMAS B. HUMPHREY, JR. DANIEL W. VOSS
MICHAEL T. MCKIM MARK A. RURIK
CHARLES R. WEAVER
HERMAN L.TALLE Reply to Bloomington JOHN R. HILL
JAMES K. MARTIN
VINCENT G. ELLA STEVEN P. KATKOV
ANDREW J. MITCHELL THOMAS J. SEYMOUR
OF COUNSELJOSEPHGITIS
RICHARD A. NORDBYE
February 13, 1990 DAVID J. PEAT
ALSO ADMITTED IN
WISCONSIN
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
Community Development Coordinator
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Re: Plymouth Business Center Expansion - Written Statement in Support
of Substandard Lot Variance for Parcel B
Our File No. 10,095 -36
Dear Chuck:
This letter is in connection with Trammell Crow Company's application
for rezoning, lot consolidation, and lot division, and site plan
approval (the Application) for the expansion of Plymouth Business
Center at the northwest quadrant of County Road 9 and I -494. As
discussed in our February 6, 1990 correspondence, the newly created
Parcel B is a substandard lot in terms of conformity with I -1 minimum
lot size requirements. This letter specifically addresses the
variance standards set forth in Section 11, subd. C(2)(d) of the
Plymouth Zoning Ordinance:
1. The Application includes property owned by the applicant on the
west side of I -494, north of County Road 9 and both east and west
of Berkshire Lane (the Property). The portion of the Property
west of Berkshire Lane consists of three platted lots, legally
described as Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Plymouth Office Commercial
Park (the Site). The applicant is proposing to combine these lots
into two parcels, the northerly Parcel A and the southerly
Parcel B. The Application also requests a rezoning of the Site
from B -1 to I -1, consistent with the IP guiding. A conceptual
master plan for the entire Property has also been submitted. It
shows a future day care center on Parcel B, west of Berkshire Lane
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD.
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
February 13, 1990
Page 2
and three office - warehouse facilities east of Berkshire Lane. The
conceptual master plan assumes the applicant's future request for
rezoning of the portion of the Property east of Berkshire Lane
from B -1 to I -1 and also assumes the applicant's future request
for approval of a replat and vacation of Annapolis Circle and
existing utilities east of Berkshire Lane.
The Property was platted several years ago as Plymouth Office
Commercial Park. At the time of the platting, the Property was
zoned B -1 and guided CL Limited Business. The southernmost
platted lot west of Berkshire Lane, Lot 1, does not meet I -1
minimum lot size requirements. Lot 1 is approximately the same
parcel of land that comprises the newly created Parcel B, which is
also a substandard I -1 lot. Because of the unusual configuration
of Lot 1 and the curvature of the existing platted roadway,
Berkshire Lane, there are practical difficulties associated with
compliance with the minimum lot size requirement. As recommended
by the DRC, the applicant intends to proceed expeditiously with an
application for approval of a conditional use permit and site plan
for a day care facility on newly created Parcel B.
2. The conditions upon which the variance request is based are
related to the specific configuration of the Site and adjoining
properties and are not applicable, generally, to other property
within the same zoning classification.
3. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to
increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. The
same or greater overall square footage can be accommodated on the
Site without the necessity to obtain a minimum lot size variance.
4. The practical difficulties described in this letter are not self -
created by any persons having an interest in the Property. They
result from the previous platting of the Property and the
construction of the curvilinear Berkshire Lane, all of which
predated the applicant's interest in the Property.
5. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the
neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. Development
of the northerly Parcel A, pursuant to the Application, meets all
applicable zoning ordinance requirements. The nonconformity of
the existing platted lot, Lot 1, and the newly created Parcel B,
results from the rezoning of this parcel of land from I -1 to B -1.
The original Application submitted to the City on January 19,
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGI3EN, LTD.
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
February 13, 1990
Page 3
1990, proposed to retain the existing B -1 zoning on Parcel B for
future development of the day care facility as a conditional use.
The B -1 zoning would have been consistent with the zoning of the
Merrill Lynch site located at the extreme northeast corner of
Berkshire Lane and County Road 9. The Application was, however,
amended on February 6, to respond positively to staff and DRC
recommendations for a uniform I -1 zoning on the entire Property.
Granting of a variance enables the developer to proceed with the
office - warehouse facility on Parcel A and the day care facility on
Parcel B, consistent with the goals and objectives of the updated
Comprehensive Plan. There are no adverse health, safety, or
welfare consequences of granting the requested minimum lot size
variance.
6. The requested minimum lot size variance does not have a negative
effect on supply of light and air to adjacent property, will not
increase congestion of public streets, will not increase the
danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, and will not
substantially diminish or impair property values within the
neighborhood, for the reasons stated in our January 19 and
February 6 correspondence to the City and in this letter.
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please feel free to
give me a call.
Sincerely,
Linda H. Fisher, for
LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, Ltd.
ab
cc: John Griffith
Tim Kissler
LHF:BF2
V
A
1. That because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical conditions of the specific parcel of land involved, a
particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a
mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be
carried out.
2. That the conditions upon which a petition for a variation is based are
unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought and are not
applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning
classification.
3. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire
to increase the value or incame potential of the parcel of land.
4. That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Ordinance and
has not been created by any persons presently having an interest in the
parcel of land.
5. That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in
which the parcel of land is located.
6. That the proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light
and air to adjacent property, or substantially increase the congestion of
the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public
safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the
neighborhood.
forms:o >pl /zon.stnd /s) 10/89
It
Z-0 D.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: February 13, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: February 28,
1990
FILE NO.: 90006
PETITIONER: Eiden Construction Inc.
REQUEST: Conventional Preliminary Plat to Create Eleven Single -
Family Lots on a Parcel of 7.1 Acres
LOCATION: West of Highway 101 and south of 8th Avenue
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -A (Low Density Single - family Residential)
BACKGROUND:
In November of 1986, the Wayzata Evangelical Free Church submitted a petition
for a Preliminary Plat, a Final Plat, a Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan
to expand the church site westerly into this property. This plan was later
amended to plat the parcel into eight residential building lots and a parking
lot expansion for the church at a lesser magnitude than before. This
application was later withdrawn.
In August 1988, a similar request was submitted by the Church for a
Preliminary Plat to create seven single - family residential building lots and
one expanded lot containing the Church and the expansion of the parking for
the Church by 122 spaces. This application was also withdrawn.
Notice of the Public Hearing has been published in the official City newspaper
of the City of Plymouth. Notices have been mailed to all property owners
within 100 feet. A development sign has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Proposed is the Preliminary Plat of a parcel of 7.1 acres to create 11 new
single family lots. All 11 lots meet or exceed the R -1A conventional
standards of 18,500 square feet of area; 35 feet front setback; 25 feet
rear setback; 15 feet side setback; 110 feet lot width at the front
setback; and 120 feet minimum lot depth. The proposed plat meets minimum
Subdivision Code and zoning ordinance standard for design in all the
respects.
see next page)
J
File 90006
Page Two
2. The site is located within the Hadley Lake Drainage District and contains
some wetlands along the westerly portion of the site. The site is not
located within a Shoreland Management district or a Flood Plain. The site
contains some major woodlands along the southern border but no severe
slopes. The site does appear suitable for urban capability for public
sewers.
3. Section 500 of the Plymouth City Code provides that the Planning
Commission shall hold a public hearing with respect to the proposed
preliminary plat and shall submit its recommendations with respect to the
proposed plat to the City Council.
4. Structures exist on the site in conflict with the plat design. Removal of
those structures should be a condition of the plat approval.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The proposed plat, in all respects, responds affirmatively to the
standards of both the Zoning Ordinance per R -A property and the
Subdivision 0 rdinance with respect to the overall subdivision design.
2. The natural site features observed on the site are limited in scope and
the design reflects preservation of those natural site features to the
extent feasible.
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat as designed subject to the
standard condition plats of i pe.
G
Submitted by:
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution
2. Engineer's Memo
3. Location Map
4. Large Plans
pc /cd /90006:dl)
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR EIDEN CONSTRUCTION, INC. (90006)
WHEREAS, Eiden Construction, Inc. has requested approval for a Preliminary
Plat for 11 single - family lots on a parcel of 7.1 acres located at 17705 8th
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 hereby does approve the Preliminary Plat for
Eiden Construction, Inc. for 11 single - family lots on a parcel of 7.1 acres
located at 17705 8th Avenue North, 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.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: February 22, 1990
FILE NO.: 90006
PETITIONER: Mr. Tony Eiden, Eiden Construction, Inc., 4100 Berkshire Lane,
Plymouth, Mn. 55446
PRELIMINARY PLAT: HAWTHORNE PLACE
LOCATION: West of State Hwy. 101, south of Eighth Avenue, in the northeast
one quarter of Section 31.
N/A Yes No
1. _ X _ Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ 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: None
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None,
6. _ X _ Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The City will require utility and drainage easements ten feet (10')
in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in width adjoining
side and rear lot lines. As shown on the typical lot detail on the
Preliminary Plan General Development Plan.
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.
g. _ _ X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's comprehensive
storm water drainage plan. Drainave easesments for ponding shall be
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
Hennepin County
X MPCA
X State Health Department
2 -
X Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
X Army Corps of Engineers
Other
TRANSPORTATION:
N/A Yes No
12. _ X Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to the
City grid system for street names. The following changes will be
necessary.
13. _ X _ Conforms with the City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan -
The following revisions must be made to conform with the City's
adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan.
14. X _ _ Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
15. _ X All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on
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.
3 -
N/A Yes No
17. X _
18. 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.
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. _ _ Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots. The minimum basement elevation for Lots 1 thru 5 and Lots 8
and 9 shall be 2 feet above the One Hundred Year High Water Elevation
established by the developer's engineer.
20. The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
21. _ --2L The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
4 -
PRELIMINARY GRADING DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL:
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 comply with all agency permits.
24. A. The preliminary fire flow calculation submitted shows hydrant flow to be 900 to
1,000 GPM. The minimum flow should be 1,250 GPM. An eight inch watermain
shall be used on Olive Lane.
B. The developer will be responsible for the installation of concrete curb and
gutter along the length of the plat for Eighth Avenue.
C. The existing sanitary sewer and water service in Eighth Avenue shall be used
for Lot 11.
D. A detail of the retaining walls shall be submitted with the final plat
application.
Submitted by:
5 -
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
f Aft
in on
onions
Ong on
i
a
7sibs:
NN Json
fill IIA
I:.M
r A
E
GLEASON ._ N
LAKE •
SCHOOL