HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 03-14-1990PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA WHERE: Plymouth City Center
WEDNESDAY, March 14, 1990 3400 Plymouth Boulevard
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Plymouth, MN 55447
CONSENT AGENDA
All items listed with an asterisk ( *) are considered to be routine by the
Planning Commission and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no
separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner, citizen or
petitioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the
consent agenda and considered in normal sequence on the agenda.
7:15 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER 7:30 P.M.
4.* APPROVAL OF MINUTES February 28, 1990
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Lundgren Brothers Construction. RPUD Concept Plan, Preliminary
Plat /Plan, Rezoning and Conditional Use Permit for property located
north of County Road 24 and south of Highway 55 (90009)
B. Holiday Stationstores, Inc. Conditional Use Permit Amendment for
property located at 10100 County Road 9 (90013)
A. Ryan Construction of Minnesota, Inc. MPUD Final Plat /Plan and
Waiver of Subdivision Ordinance for "Rockford Road Plaza" located at
the Northwest Corner of I -494 and County Road 9 (89014)
A. Status of Comprehensive Plan Update
B. Joint Hearing on Parks and Trails Element with PRAC
1 i C u
i 5-3
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: February 28, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: March 14, 1990
FILE NO.: 90013
PETITIONER: Jerry Jenson, Holiday Station Stores, Inc.
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit Amendment to Allow for a 24 -Hour
Operation Versus the Hours of Operation Approved at 7 a.m.
to 11 p.m., 7 Days a Week
LOCATION: 10100 County Road 9
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CR (Retail Shopping)
ZONING: B -2 (Shopping Center Business)
BACKGROUND:
In March 1985, the City Council approved the Site Plan and Conditional Use
Permit for a 3,600 square foot self- service gasoline station and retail
convenience store. In June 1987, the City Council approved a Site Plan and
Conditional Use Permit amendment to allow for an extension to the existing
canopy and to add two additional fuel pumps.
A major issue during the 1985 discussions of this Conditional Use Permit was
that of the hours of operation. The Planning Commission heard a motion fail
that would have recommended limiting the hours of operation to 6 a.m. through
12 a.m. The issue was again addressed at the City Council where a condition
was added to limit hours to varying periods depending on whether it was a
weekday, a Saturday, or a Sunday. Two weeks following the initial approval of
the Conditional Use Permit, the City Council again considered the Conditional
Use Permit and modified the hours of operation to the 7 a.m. to 11 p.m., 7
days a week that now stands.
The petitioner now seeks to have the station open 24 hours per day, 7 days a
week.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the official City
newspaper, and notices have been mailed to adjoining property owners within
500 feet. A development sign was also placed on this property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The request proposes all other aspects of the business remain the same.
see next page)
File 90013
Page Two
2. Before any Conditional Use Permit amendment may be granted, the Planning
Commission shall review the requested proposal for purposes of evaluating
against these standards set forth in Section 9, Subdivision A, paragraph
2a, and develop a recommendation to the City Council which shall make a
final determination as to the approval or denial. Attached is a copy of
the Conditional Use Permit Criteria from Section 9, Subdivision A,
paragraph 2a of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The physical constraints analysis identifies this property to be located
within the New Hope Outlet Drainage District. The site is not located
within a Shoreland Management District, but does contain some wetlands.
There are no major woodlands, but there are some severe slopes to the rear
of this property. The soils appear suitable for urban capability with
public sewers.
4. The petitioner has addressed the Conditional Use Permit Criteria in the
attached narrative.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. We find that the proposed change to the Conditional Use Permit will not
have an impact on elements of the Comprehensive Plan, nor should it have
negative impact on adjoining properties, or diminish or impair property
values in the immediate vicinity.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the application for a Conditional Use Permit
amendment to the hours of operation for the Holiday Station Stores at 10100
County Road 9. I recommend the Conditional Use Permit be renewable in six
months to monitor the impact of the extended hours and the compliance with the
conditions.
Submitted by: CL=e— C:f -,
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Recommended Conditional Use Permit Approval
2. Location Map
3. Resolution 85 -184
4. Conditional Use Permit Criteria
5. Petitioner's Correspondence
pc /cd /90013:dl)
N
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR JERRY JENSON FOR HOLIDAY
STATION STORES, INC. (90013)
WHEREAS, Jerry Jenson has requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit
amendment to allow for a 24 -hour operation for Holiday Station Stores, Inc.
located at 10100 County Road 9; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by
Jerry Jenson for a Conditional Use Permit amendment to allow for a 24 -hour
operation for Holiday Station Stores, Inc. located at 10100 County Road 9,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the applicable terms and conditions of City Council
Resolution 85 -184.
2. The Conditional Use Permit shall be renewed at six month intervals to
monitor the impact of the extended hours and the compliance with the
conditions.
o Rolrm
w i-14 Al-
8.
I 'A
fd
4
WIN-
trill
Lvrl
1=\
f
i
mil. i i
ni
I
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of
the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 18th day of March . 1985.
The following members were present: Mayor Davenport, Councilmembers Schneider,
Neils, Carin and Vasfliou
The following memberL were absent: Norge
introduced the following Resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 55 -164 (.AS AMENDED B1 RESOLUTION NO. 214 AS APPROVED Oil APRIL 1, 1955)
APPROVING SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HOLIDAY STATION STORES, INC.
95002)
WHEREAS, Holiday Station Stores, Inc. has requested approval of a Site Plan and
Conditional Use Permit for a 3,600 sq. ft. self -serve gasoline station and retail
convenience store to be located east of Nathan Lane on Lot 2, Block 1 Rockford Square
Addition; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said requests at a duly called Public
Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH,
MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request for Holiday Station
Stores, Inc. for a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a 3,600 sq. ft.
self -serve gasoline station and retail convenience store to be located east of Nathan
Lane on Lot 2, Block 1 Rockford Square Addition, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with 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 Buildinq Permit issuance.
3. Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 79 -80 regarding minimum flour 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. Signage and illumination shall be within Ordinance standards.
6. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approv-
als per Ordinance provisions.
7. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the enclosure.
8. No Building Permit to be issued until the Final Plat for Rockford Square is
filed and recorded with Hennepin County.
PLEASE SEE NEXT PAGE
t
40
Resolution No. 85 -164
Page two
9. The conditional use permit is subject to all applicable codes, regulations and
Ordinances.
10. The permit is issued to the Holiday Station Stores, Inc. as operator of the facil-
ity and shall not he transferable.
11. The site shall be maintained in a sanitary manner and should the petitioner fail
to comply with this provision, store management shall be notified of the irregu-
larity, and given 24 -hours to comply. In the event store management does not
comply, the City shall proceed with the necessary corrective work and assess the
cost against the property.
12. There shall be no outside display, sales, or storage of merchandise or related
materials.
13, Hours of operation shall be limited to 7s00 A.H. to 11:00 P.M, seven days a week.
14. Compliance with applicable Building and Fire Code requirements shall be verified
by the City prior to issuance of the Conditional Use Permit.
15. All parking shall be off - street in designated areas which comply with the Zoning
Ordinance. Deferred parking spaces are allowed subject to installation upon
determination by the City that they are needed.
16. An additional 25 trees consisting of Evergreens at a minimum height of 8 ft. shall
be planted with at least eight of the trees on the berm in front, and the
remainder to be used to screen the develoPfiaent from residential properties to the
south including installation within the City right -of -way if necessary.
17. That the finished floor elevation of the building for Holiday Station Stores be
estAblished at an elevation of 922.0-
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by
Counclisember Vasiliou 9 and upon vote being taken thereon, the
0 owing voted n avoc thereo s Mayor svenport, Councilmembers Schneider,
Hells Crain and Vasiliou
he following voted against or abstaineW none
9hereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Irk,'.
IN
Of •
Fib! S NCK 9, - - IIVISICK A
r I. • M • 11 • '.1
2. Proced»re. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Commission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recommendation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Commission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will prorate and enhance the general public welfare and will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or comfort.
3) The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the neighborhood.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding
property for uses permitted in the district.
5) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress,
egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic
congestion in the public streets.
6) The:conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the
applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.
forms:o >pl /cup.stnd /s) 10/89
I
Holiday Companies
GEN. OFFICE: 4567 WEST 80th STREET /MAIL ADDRESS P.O. BOX 1224 MINNEAPOLIS, MN S5440/1`11. 612- 830 -8700
CREDIT OFFICE: 5501 W. OLD SHAKOPEE RD. / MAIL ADDRESS: P.O. SOX 1216 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55440 / PH. 612.921.5200
7, i
January 12, 1990
AN' -
Mayor and Members of the City Council
Blair Tremere
Director of Community Development
Plymouth City Hall'
3400 Plymouth Blvd. F g;
Plymouth, MN 55441
d
RE: Holiday Stationstore Co. Rd. #9 and Nathan Lane
Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council:
On March 18, 1985 the City Council passed resolution 85 -184 approving aConditionalUsePermitforustooperateaHolidayStationstoreonCo. Rd.
9 and Nathan Lane. This resolution was subsequently ammended on April 1,
1985 (85 -214).
Condition 13 of that ammended resolution states that the "hours of operation
shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 11 :00 p.m. seven days a week ". At the time
this condition was approved our standard hours of operation were 6:00 or
7:00 a.m. to 11:00 or 12:00 p.m., the approved hours fit very well into our
program.
Today however, our operation has changed. To meet the demands of competion
we have been forced to open many of our locations 24 hours a day. Today
virtually all your suburban units are now operating 24 hours a day, seven
days a week.
Additionally, the character our the area has changed. When we built we
were one of the first commercial developments in the area. The
agricultural uses that were prevalent are now gone. Commercial areas around
us has since filled in. Co. Rd. #18 has become U.S. Federal Hwy #169 and
Co. Rd. #9 is now a major four lane highway. Today there are over 85,000
cars per day that pass through the Hwy #169/Co. Rd. #9 interchange. Co. Rd.
9 alone carries about 22,000 cars per day west of Hwy #169.
Residential development has now almost completely filled in to I -494
creating more traffic and a demand for more services. Many people in this
area find it necessary or convenient to purchase gas during the hours we are
now closed.
JJ
LESS Lii
B
It is our desire to provide a service to the community and we believe that
can best be accomplished by deleting condition 13 from our Conditional Use
Permit and allowing us to serve the neighborhood at all hours. We therefore
respectfully request that the Council delete condition X13 for our
Conditional Use Permit.
Very truly yours,
HOLIDAY STATIONSTORES, INC.
rerome A . Jense
or- Corporateate
Real Estate and Development
JAJ:ks06
HOIIday Companies
iv lri[ kinh til RLI1 MAlt AU_1KI ";'O W 1 :_.4 ,Ivvi4 S54411 PH ,. -n
IH AKUPII RU ',+41( 4171H:E t'( - I1(A 12 ItN %!AP( L MA 554.61 fH.
February 20, 1990
Mr. Blair Tremere
Community Development Director
City of Plymouth
Plymouth City Hall
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55441
Re: Holiday Stationstore
County Road No. 9 and Nathan Lane
Dear Mr. Tremere:
This letter is submitted to the City of Plymouth pursuant to your
letter request dated January 16, 1990. Enclosed herewith please
find all application materials in connection with Holiday
Stationstores' request to amend the Conditional Use Permit for
the operation of the Holiday Stationstore located at County Road
No. 9 and Nathan Lane.
The Plymouth Holiday Stationstore is operated pursuant to a
Conditional Use Permit (Resolution 85 -184) granted by the City
Council on March 18, 1985, as amended by Resolution 85 -214
granted on April 1, 1985. Condition No. 13 of the Conditional
Use Permit limits the hours of operation from 7:00 a.m. to
11:00 p.m., seven days a week. At the time the Conditional Use
Permit was granted, the limitation set forth regarding hours of
operation was sufficient for Holiday's purposes at the site.
Since the Conditional Use Permit was granted, Holiday
Stationstores has experienced a change in the general nature of
its operations. Due to competitive pressures, Holiday now
operates many of its stationstore locations 24 hours a day. Such
continuous operation is similar to most convenience store
locations in the suburban metropolitan area.
Accordingly, Holiday hereby requests that the Conditional Use
Permit for the County No. 9 /Nathan Lane location be amended to
allow for operation 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Such a
change in a Conditional Use Permit would be consistent with the
change in the surrounding neighborhood. Since the Conditional
Use Permit was granted in 1985, County Road No. 9 has become a
Foon
ON N) LEss
Ho+aar ioracr-
February 20, 1990
Mr. Blair Tremere
Page 2
major four -lane highway. Additionally, County Road 18 (near the
site), has become U.S. Highway No. 169. At the present time,
over 85,000 cars pass through Highway No. 169 /County Road No. 9
interchange on a daily basis. County Road No. 9 itself carries
about 2,200 cars per day.
In addition to increased traffic and commercial development, the
residential development in the area is almost complete which
creates a greater demand for the services of a Holiday
Stationstore. As a result, Holiday is aware of the additional
convenience to many individuals who may wish to make purchases
during the later evening or earlier morning hours.
You have requested that we set forth our Conditional Use Permit
Amendment request pursuant to the Conditional Use Permit
standards described in Section 9, Subdivision A of the Plymouth
Zoning Ordinance. Our comments with regard to those standards
and our request are as follows:
1. Compliance with Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive
Plan does not mandate hours of operation for businesses within
commercial districts. Holiday Stationstores' existing use of the
subject property is and will remain in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
2. General Public Welfare, Health, Safety, Morals and
Comfort. The requested amendment to the Conditional Use Permit
will not detrimentally affect the public welfare. Rather, the
extension of hours will provide an additional service to the
residential neighborhood and commercial area.
3. Affect Upon Neighboring Property. The requested change
in the Conditional Use Permit will not be injurious or
detrimental to surrounding properties. With the exception of one
residential property located within 500 feet of the stationstore,
all other properties within the area are commercial in nature.
4. Affect Upon Orderly Development and Improvement of
Surrounding Property. As previously mentioned, the surrounding
property has been developed during the prior five years. An
extension of Holiday's hours of operation at the location will
not impede continuing development or improvement of surrounding
areas.
February 20, 1990
Mr. Blair Tremere
Page 3
5. Parking and Traffic Concerns. The operations at the
existing Holiday Stationstore have not resulted in traffic
congestion or parking problems. The extension of hours of
operation may well alleviate traffic congestion during peak
periods giving Holiday's customers an opportunity to visit the
stationstore at times other than peak periods.
6. Conformity with Applicable Regulations. Holiday is
unaware of any other applicable regulations which would affect
the stationstore's extended hours. If I can address any other
matters which may be known to the City, please let me know.
I enclose all additional items required by the Conditional Use
Permit Application Checklist, including the following:
1. Application Form;
2. Certified Property Owners List, Map and Mailing
Labels from Hennepin County; and
3. Check payable to City of Plymouth for $120.00.
Holiday Stationstores desires to provide a continuing service to
the community. The extension of the hours of operation for the
County No. 9 /Nathan Lane stationstore will enhance the service
provided to the community and allow Holiday to more fully serve
the area.
Please place Holiday Stationstores' application request on the
next Plymouth Planning Commission Agenda. Please provide me with
a Notice as to the date and time of the Planning Commission's
meeting. If I can provide you with additional materials in this
regard, please give me a call.
Very truly yours,
HOLIDAY STATIONSTORES, INC.
rome A. Jen en
irector /Corporate
Real Estate and Development
JAJ /mbl1
Enclosures
0
5-A
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: February 28, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: March 14, 1990
FILE NO.: 90009
PETITIONER: Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc.
REQUEST: RPUD Concept Plan, Preliminary Plan /Plat, Conditional Use
Permit, and Rezoning
LOCATION: Northeast of County Road 24 and Brockton Lane (19010 County
Road 24
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development)
BACKGROUND:
On August 21, 1989, by Resolution 89 -467, the City Council approved a Sketch
Plan for Lundgren Bros. Construction Companies for the development of 112 lots
on approximately 68.5 acres.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the official City
newspaper, and notices have been mailed to adjoining property owners within
500 feet. A development sign has been placed on the property.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The applicant proposes an RPUD Concept Plan, Preliminary Plan and Plat,
Conditional Use Permit, and Rezoning for an area referred to as the Leuer
Property. The Concept Plan and Preliminary Plan and Plat is for the
creation of 113 single family lots and 4 outlots on 68.5 acres gross. No
areas below the 100 -Year High Water Elevation exist on the site.
2. The Zoning Ordinance provides the Planning Commission criteria upon which
to analyze and make a recommendation concerning an RPUD Concept Plan and
Preliminary Plan /Plat. Those criteria are as follows:
a. Compatibility with the stated Duraoses and intent of the Planned Unit
Development. The applicant, in his narrative submission of February
1990, identifies the professional design assistance being used, the
proficient use of streets and facilities, usable suitably located
passive and active recreational facilities and affirmative design
efforts towards the preservation of desirable natural site
characteristics.
see next page)
File 90009
Page Two
b.
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. The present plan for this site is
responsive to the Land Use Guide Plan with respect to the project
density and structure type based on the LA -1 Guiding.
The relationship to the surrounding neighborhood is with single family
lots of varying sizes and outlots for active and passive recreation.
The applicant is requesting front yard setbacks of 25 feet; side yard
setbacks of 9 feet to a living area and 6 feet to the garage; and a
rear yard setback of 20 feet.
c. Internal organization and adequacy of various uses or density:
circulation and parking facility; recreation areas: and open spaces.
The petitioner's narrative identifies the density of the project being
1.6 dwelling units per acre based on 68.5 acres. The Zoning Ordinance
identifies the maximum number of dwelling units allowed in a
development shall be determined by the density approved for the
development within a minimum to maximum density range for the living
area category shown in the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The density
shall be established by the City Council with the approval of the
Concept Plan based upon recommendations from the Planning Commission.
The gross density allowable in any RPUD shall fall within this range
to only the degree that the RPUD Plan response to the intents and
purposes of a PUD. The allowable gross density shall be for only that
land above the high water elevation established by the adopted City
Sewer and Water Drainage Plan as verified by the City Engineer. This
Planned Unit Development could be assigned three bonus points based on
size and percentage of open space, which would allow a density range
of 2.0 to 2.3 gross density per acre.
The circulation of the streets is responsive to the Council direction
from the approved Sketch Plan. The passive and active open space
areas are responsive to the design elements of the PUD.
3. The petitioner is proposing a total of 8 entrance monument signs acting as
a gateway to the development at each access point from the outside. The
Zoning Ordinance allows for a total of two area identification signs not
to exceed 32 square feet in surface area located at the entrance to the
PUD. Recent amendments to the Planned Unit Development section of the
Zoning Ordinance permit signage to be considered an element of PUD design
subject to the flexibility inherent in the Planned Unit Development. As
such, the concept of 8 entrance monument signs should be considered a
proposed PUD design feature rather than a variance to the Zoning
Ordinance. The PUD Ordinance provides for review of the PUD Master Sign
Plan at the Final Plan stage. Specifics with respect to project signage
should, at that time, be proposed. Staff has not reviewed signage aspects
with this stage of the PUD, including number or location suggested.
see next page)
File 90009
Page Three
4. The physical constraints analysis identifies this site to be located in
both the Bassett Creek and the Mooney Lake Drainage Districts. The site
is not located within a Shoreland Management District, but does contain
several wetlands. The site contains some major woodlands in the southwest
corner and along the northern portion of the site; there are no severe
slopes on this property. There appear to be some unsuitable soils for
urban capability with public sewers located along the northern portion and
the south central portion of this property.
The generalized aerial photos the City uses to identify the potential
areas of federally regulated wetlands shows 3 areas of the site where such
wetlands would appear to exist. The petitioner has reviewed the site with
representatives of both the Minnesota DNR and the Corps of Engineers and
has determined that approximately 1.2 acres of that portion of the site
that is designated federal wetlands could be altered as a function of the
proposed grading plan. State and federal regulators have indicated their
general concurrence with the proposed relationship of this plan to the
state and federal wetlands existing on the site.
City review of wetland conservation /preservation measures of development
applications is responsive to the provisions of Section 500.15,
Subdivision 5 of the City Code (the Subdivision Ordinance); and with a PUD
application such as this, Section 9, Subdivision B, paragraph lc (5) of
the Zoning Ordinance. We have attached copies of both Ordinance
provisions. In addition, the PUD Ordinance excludes all site area below
the 100 -Year High Water Elevation specified by the Plymouth Storm Water
Drainage Plan from use in dwelling unit density calculations. This site,
even though it has state and federal designated wetlands, has no areas
required for storm water holding purposes.
The passive open space (private) proposed by Outlot D, together with the
proposals to create Lots 1 and 14 of Block 8, east and north of Outlot D,
creates a design concern for staff that has been discussed with the
petitioner. Because of the topography of this area, the portion of the
proposed plat identified as Lots 1 and 14 of Block 8 (the extreme
northeast corner) are physically related to land lying north and east of
this plat to a greater degree than the balance of the land within the
plat. The "panhandles" proposed to service each of these lots from public
streets within this proposed plat will both cross wetland areas.
5. The City of Medina has responded to notification by the City of Plymouth
of this application. In a letter dated February 28, 1990, the City of
Medina's Planning and Zoning Administrator has noted that this concept and
Preliminary Plan "...does not address the issues that the Medina Council
agreed to..." Staff has responded to the Medina Planning and Zoning
Administrator by a letter dated March 6, 1990, that the design comments
that were submitted during the Sketch Plan review process for this site by
the Medina City Council were carefully considered by both the Plymouth
see next page)
File 90009
Page Four
staff and the Plymouth City Council during the review of that Sketch Plan.
It should be noted that any agreement that existed involving the City of
Medina with respect to design features for this site was not with the City
of Plymouth.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The petitioner has not demonstrated the need for the substantially reduced
setbacks from the Ordinance minimums. We believe the intent in requesting
25 -foot front yard setbacks may, in some cases, relate to the desire to
preserve existing woodlands and /or wetlands of the site. A "wholesale"
use of a 25 -foot setback throughout the development may not be required to
accomplish the necessary natural feature preservation could be the case in
some instances.
The petitioner has provided no specific purpose for the proposed reduction
from 25 feet to 20 feet throughout the Subdivision for rear yard setbacks.
There may be lots within the Subdivision that are not feasible for home
construction without the concession in rear yard, but we cannot conceive
of need for all lots in the Subdivision to be subject to that dimensional
concession.
The proposal to reduce side yard setbacks from the Ordinance standard of
15 feet on each side to a proposal for 9 feet on the living side, and 6
feet on the garage side, may be consistent with a design approach that was
prevalent a number of years ago, but, few recent single family detached
plats, whether PUD or otherwise, have been approved with setbacks of less
than 10 feet. We do not find that fitting large homes on small lots is
necessarily a reasonable basis for reducing side yard setbacks.
3. The petitioner has not provided dimensional and locational detail with
respect to the entrance monument signs proposed as a element of the
Planned Unit Development Plan. The Final PUD Plan for this site shall
provide detail plans for the proposed signs including location and
specific dimensions.
4. Staff strongly recommends that the area proposed for the two lots in the
extreme northeast corner of this plat be combined with property
immediately to the north that was a part of the Mitchell- Pearson Sketch
Plan to create a more logical approach to the platting of the site that
better reflects the natural lay of the land.
see next page)
File 90009
Page Five
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend the Planning Commission address the Concept Plan and the
Preliminary Plan /Plat /CUP as two separate steps. With this approach, the
Commission could corporate some or all the staff suggested design
modifications within a Concept Plan approval and continue consideration of the
Preliminary Plat for incorporation of those design modifications. If, on the
other hand, the Planning Commission desires to move forward with both stages,
they could simply adopt both resolutions as recommendations to the City
Council.
With the modifications suggested above, staff recommends the
Concept / Preliminar RPUD Plans be ap ved.
0
Submitted by:
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Resolution Approving
Resolution Approving
Rezoning from FRD to
Engineer's Memorandui
Location Map
Resolution Approving
PUD Concept Plan
RPUD Preliminary
R -1A
n
Sketch Plan
Plan /Plat /Conditional Use Permit and
Planning Commission Minutes Related to the Sketch Plan
City Council Minutes Related to the Sketch Plan
PUD Attributes
Subdivision Ordinance Excerpt with
Resources
Respect to Preservation of Natural
10. February 28, 1990, Letter from the City of Medina
11. Project Booklets and Large Plans
pc /cd /90009:dl)
APPROVING RPUD CONCEPT PLAN FOR LUNDGREN BROS. CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE
LEVER PROPERTY" (90009)
WHEREAS, Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. has requested approval of an RPUD
Concept Plan for the creation of 113 single family lots and 4 outlots on 68.5
acres for property located northeast of County Road 24 and Brockton Lane
19010 County Road 24); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Informational Meeting and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by
Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. for an RPUD Concept Plan for the creation of
113 single family lots and 4 outlots on 68.5 acres for property located
northeast of County Road 24 and Brockton Lane (19010 County Road 24), subject
to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Staging of the development shall be in accordance with utility
availability as approved by the City Engineer and based on a City Contract
for trunk construction.
3. Draft restrictive covenants for the private open areas (all proposed
outlots) shall be submitted with preliminary plat /plan application.
4. No private drive access shall be permitted to County Road 24; all private
drives shall be provided by internal public streets.
5. The private trails shall be built to City standards and shall be
constructed prior to issuance of Building Permits for homes on lots
adjacent to the trails.
6. The minimum side yard setbacks for all detached dwellings and accessory
buildings shall be 10 feet; the minimum rear yard shall be 25 feet and the
minimum front setback 35 feet. The Preliminary Plat may specify
individual lots where, to preserve natural site features only, front
setbacks of less than 35 feet are requested.
7. The design of proposed private open space areas shall be specified with
the preliminary plan. The approved improvements shall be installed prior
to issuance of building permits for homes on the adjacent lots.
8. The Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Plan shall designate the northeast
corner of the site (depicted as Lots 1 and 14, Block 8) as a single
outlot, the purpose of which is combination with land immediately to the
north in the "Mitchell - Pearson Sketch Plan" at such time as the land to
the north is platted to permit lotting design that best responds to the
topography and wetland /woodland characteristics of this portion of the
plat.
APPROVING RPUD PRELIMINARY PLAN /PLAT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND REZONING FOR
LUNDGREN BROS. CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE "LEVER PROPERTY" (90009)
WHEREAS, Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. has requested approval of an RPUD
Preliminary Plan /Plat, Conditional Use Permit, and Rezoning for the creation
of 113 single family lots and 4 outlots on 68.5 acres for property located
northeast of County Road 24 and Brockton Lane (19010 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 should and hereby does approve the request by
Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. for an RPUD Preliminary Plan /Plat,
Conditional Use Permit, and Rezoning for the creation of 113 single family
lots and 4 outlots on 68.5 acres for property located northeast of County Road
24 and Brockton Lane (19010 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 according to the
Dedication Policy in effect at the time of filing the Final Plat with
Hennepin County.
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. Rezoning shall be finalized with filing of the Final Plat.
8. No building permits shall be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
9. Maximum density shall be 1.6 units per acre for the land at or above the
established high water elevation per the adopted City Storm Water Drainage
Plan as verified by the City Engineer. No density bonus points are
assigned. The maximum number of dwelling units is 113.
10. No private drive access shall be permitted to County Road 24; all private
drives shall be provided by internal public streets.
11. The private trails shall be built to City standards and shall be
constructed prior to issuance of building permits for homes on lots
adjacent to the trails.
Resolution No.
File 90009
Page Two
12. The minimum side yard setbacks for all detached dwellings and accessory
buildings shall be 10 feet; rear yard setback shall be 25 feet; and the
front yard setback shall be 35 feet except on lots specified by the Final
Plan and Development Contract where preservation of natural site features
requires a reduced front setback.
13. The design of proposed private open space areas shall be specified with
the Final Plan. The approved improvements shall be installed prior to
issuance of building permits for homes on the adjacent lots.
14. Compliance with the terms of City Council Resolution 89 -439 regarding tree
preservation.
15. The Final Plat and Final Plan shall desi nate the northeast corner of the
site (depicted as Lots 1 and 14, Block 8? as a single outlot, the purpose
of which is combination with land immediately to the north in the
Mitchell - Pearson Sketch Plan" at such time as the land to the north is
platted to permit lotting design that best responds to the topography and
wetland /woodland characteristics of this portion of the plat.
DATE:
FILE NO.:
PETITIONER:
PRELIMINARY PLAT:
LOCATION:
N/A Yes No
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
March 7, 1990
90009
Mr. Terry Forbord, Vice President, Lundgren Brothers Construction,
Inc., 935 East Wayzata Blvd., Wayzata, MN 55391
LEUER PROPERTY
North of County Road 24, east of the City of Medina city limits
located in the northwest 1/4 of Section 19
1. X Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. X Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits are
issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No. 1 and
No. 2.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of final plat approval.
4. Area assessments: W terma n area assessment based on 113 units x
790 /unit = $89,270. Sanitary sewer area assessment based on 113
units x $440 /unit = $49,720.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: The estimated assessments for
Project No 016 Pond BC -P1, will be detailed in the development
contract.
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.
8. _ _ X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's comprehensive
storm water drainage plan. Drainage easements for ponding purposes
shall be provided on the final plat for each pond. The developer's
en —.neer shall also provide 100 year high water elevations for the
ponds just north of County Road 24 east and west of Zircon Lane and
the pond south of 33rd Avenue, west of Xanthus Lane and for the ponds
in the northwest and the southwest corners of Outlot D.
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:
X DNR
MnDOT
X Hennepin County
X MPCA
X State Health Department
2 -
X 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. Zircon Lane is a collector street
and shall provide the through- movement at 32nd Avenue. This
intersection shall be redesigned. 32nd Avenue shall intersect at
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 60 feet of right -of -way
from centerline is required on County Road 24 as shown on the
preliminary plat.
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. 11"
Special Conditions.
1$. 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 petition the
City to construct Pond BC -P1.
19. _ _ x Conforms with City policy regarding minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots. A development plan shall be provided with the final plat
application showing the type of home with the lowest floor elevation
which shall be two feet above the 100 year high water level
designated for each pond within the plea
20. _ X The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
21. _ X The preliminary plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
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:
The Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan shows a 33 inch storm sewer
draining the southern portion of the site to the south across County
Road 24 Drainage calculations shall be provided to confirm that the
1•/ m
24. A. The sanitary sewer shall be installed at minimum grade from 34th Avenue to the
north plat line on Zircon Lane to provide service for the southwest portion of
the property to the north.
B. A final plat will not be submitted prior to a contract being awarded for the
northwest trunk sewer system.
C. A final plat shall not be submitted prior to a contract being awarded for the
construction of Pond BC -P1.
D. The City of Medina must be contacted and approve the storm drainage that goes
into Medina. The rate of runoff from the proposed plat shall not exceed the
existing runoff.
E. Sanitary sewer service to Lots 1 and 14, Block 8 shall be private service
lines.
F. Sanitary sewer on the south end of Zircon shall be extended south to serve Lot
1, Block 1.
G. Medians shall not be allowed on Zircon Lane.
Submitted by: -
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
5 -
1AAP
Ell
a. •1 *.
a!
1-
to
m rirs
n
r04- 1Ii
Not,
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular •meetinlq of the
City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 2 st day
of Allglly, 198_ The following members were present:
ouncilmembers Vasiliou, Ricker, Zitur and Sisk
The following members were absent: None
Councilmember Ricker introduced the following Resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 891+67
APPROVING SKETCH PLAN FOR LUNDGREN BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE
LEUER PROPERTY" (89021)
WHEREAS, Lundgren Brothers Construction Company has requested approval of a
Sketch Plan for the development of 112 lots on approximately 68.5 acres
located north of County Road 24 between Brockton Lane and Xanthus Lane; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request at a duly called
Public Informational Hearing and has recommended approval;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that is should and hereby does approve the Sketch Plan
for Lundgren Brothers Construction Company for a development to be known as
The Leuer Property" consisting of 112 lots on approximately 68.5 acres
located north of County Road 24 between Brockton Lane and Xanthus Lane,
subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandums of June 6, 1989 except
delete items 7 and 8, and of August 17, 1989.
2. Staging of the development shall be in accordance with utility
availability as approved by the City Engineer.
3. Applications for preliminary plats /Planned Unit Development
plans /rezonings may be made only when the subject property is identified
in the current year of the adopted 5 -year Capital Improvement Program,
relative to municipal sanitary sewer and water.
4. This approval is for a Sketch Plan only, consistent with City Council
Policy 89 -91. No approval or substitute for any portion of RPUD Concept
Plan for these parcels is intended or implied by this action. The City
Council acceptance of this Sketch Plan shall not be deemed to constitute
approval of formal variances or modifications, including residential
development density.
5. The curvature of 34th Avenue North shall be increased to minimize
speeding, or other methods shall be implemented so to slow traffic.
6. Prior to submittal of the next (concept plan or preliminary plat)
application, staff and developer will review potential problems relating
to the rate and volume of drainage water for possible solution.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded
by Councilmember Sisk , and upon vote being taken thereon,
the following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Schneider, Councilmembers
Vasiliou Ricker, Zitur and Sisk
The following voted against or abstained None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
11- 01. - --,--Wwmrrt 1» 1 V11 C.:1 L.T . . v, v)
to recommend approval of the Resolutions on Rezoning, Final
Plat, Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit subject to all
conditions listed in the June 6, 1989 Staff Report.
MOTION by Commissioner Pierce, seconded by Commissioner a MOTION TO AMEND
to add a condition to the Resolution stating trash
enclosures must be consistent with ;on Ordinance
specifications.
Roll Call Vote. 5 Commissioner Marofsky abstained. VOTE - MOTION CARRIEDAye-&:`"
MOTION carried.__ - -.-
Rol ,- -al,I- Vote on Main Motion. 5 A es. _- _Commissioner_ Marofsky ._VOTE MOTION CARRIED
Chairman Plufka introduced the request of Lundgren Brothers LUNDGREN .BROS.
Construction, Inc. for a Sketch Plan for the Leuer Property CONSTRUCTION (89021)
located north of County Road 24 between Brockton Lane and
Xanthus Lane.
Coordinator Dillerud gave an overview of the June 8, 1989 Staff
Report.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. Terry Forbord of Lundgren
Brothers, representing the petitioner.
Mr. Forbord stated that the entrance to the development is the
key issue. He described the plan for the development, which
includes open space for recreation, wetland area and the
ponding.
Rich Sather, the Engineering Consultant for the developer,
stated the developer's desire to have an access onto County
Road 24 from the development. He discussed the advantages and
disadvantages of access on Brockton Lane and Xanthus Lane. He
discussed the plans of the City of Medina.
Mr. Sather stated that the City of Medina wanted options for
access onto Brockton Lane because they did not have a plan for
Brockton Lane at the present time. Brockton Lane divides the
City of Medina and the City of Plymouth. Mr. Sather stated
that the developer would go along with the Brockton Lane access
if the access from County Road 24 was denied.
Chairman Plufka opened the Public Hearing.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. Mary Black of 18610 34th Avenue
North.
Mr. Black stated that he thought the design of the development
was good, but he was concerned about the increase in traffic
and the safety factor if 34th street was extended to County
Road 101 or west to the City limits. He stated he did not want
34th Street extended.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mr. Russ Waters of 18600 34th Avenue
North.
Mr. Waters reported that he lived i n Amber Woods. He said he
did not want to see 34th Street as a major access point to the
development.
Chairman Plufka introduced Mary Weinzierl of 18820 County Road
24.
Ms. Weinzierl said she was concerned about the safety of the
exit proposed onto County Road 24.
Rick Sather, in responding the statements from the public
stated that 34th Street is shown as a minor collector on the
Plymouth City Thoroughfare Plan. He reported that County Road
24 has a very flat grade in the area the developer is
requesting as an access and would be safe.
Chairman Plufka closed the Public Hearing.
Commissioner Zylla stated that the proposed lots were small
compared with R -1A standards.
MOTION by Commissioner Stulberg, seconded by Chairman Plufka to MOTION TO APPROVE
recommend approval of the Sketch Plan for "The Leuer Property"
subject to the conditions listed in the Staff Report of June 8,
1989 omitting Condition #4, and adding to Condition #5 the
words "including density ".
MOTION to Amend by Commissioner Stulberg to add Condition #4 MOTION TO AMEND
back into the conditions listed.
Motion failed for lack of a second. MOTION FAILED DUE TO
LACK OF A SECOND
MOTION by Chairman Plufka, seconded by Commissioner Marofsky to MOTION TO AMEND
add a new condition stating that 32nd Avenue be extended to the
City of Medina border.
Roll Call Vote. 5 Ayes, Commissioner Stulberg Nay. MOTION VOTE - MOTION CARRIED
carried.
MOTION by Commissioner Zylla to add a condition stating that MOTION TO AMEND
the lot size be within 90 percent of the R1 -A requirements.
Motion failed for lack of a second. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK
OF A SECOND
Roll Call Vote on Main Motion once amended. 5 Ayes, VOTE - MAIN MOTION
Commissioner Marofsky Nay. MOTION carried. CARRIED
C oes°rz mmeq- 6row= Gomparc._IM € `CROW'_ COMPANY
fg,r_ P-r-&l4m+nary Plat, f-ina — pi ar,'-7oning' Variance and-Amended .(89023):
Regular Council
August 21, 1989
Page 218
Meeting
Mr. Sathre stated that there appears to be a conflict in
Con tion No. 1 of the proposed resolution. Director Moore
agree and recommended that the resolution be amended at
Conditi No. 1 to read: "Compliance with the City Engineer's
Memorandu of June 6, 1989 except deleting Items 7 and 8 and
August 17, 89." He also recommended that Condition No. 4 be
deleted, cons tent with the previous Council discussion that
residential str is not be extended into the City of Medina.
Mr. Sathre address Item No. 5 of the Engineer's Memo which
notes that a storm seer outlet has not been provided for Pond
BC -POI. Mr. Sathre st6tsed that the Capital Improvements Program
doesn't contemplate a puB*Ic improvement for an outlet, but from
a practical standpoint there is a minimal amount of water and
flooding does not occur. H proposed that language be included
to indicate that these facil- ties will not be required as a
condition of approval of this, property's subdivision, nor of
building and occupancy permit issuance.
Councilmember Sisk stated concern with the language as proposed
by the developer. At the Sketch Plan ,stage it is unknown what,
If any, public improvements will be needed to serve this area
when developed.
Councilmember Vasiliou questioned whether thel,Council could make
this assurance when a future Council may hear the preliminary
plat request.
Mayor Schneider stated the intent is that per City:;pollcy, the
run -off from this property is not to exceed the existing amount
of run-off unless appropriate agreements are made.
Attorney Thomson stated this includes amount as well as rb a of
run -off. Both will need to be addressed at the preliminary 11t
stage.
Councilmember Sisk noted an inconsistency between Condition No.
3 of the proposed resolution and Item No. 16 of the Policy for
Sketch Plan review.
Director Tremere stated Item No. 16 should be substituted for
Condition No. 3 of the resolution.
MOTION was made by Councilmember Ricker, seconded by RESOLUTION NO. 89 -467
Councilmember Sisk, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 89 -467 APPROVING APPROVING SKETCH PL AN
SKETCH PLAN FOR LUNDGREN BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR THE FOR LUNDGREN BROTHERS
LEUER PROPERTY" with the change recommended by the Public FOR THE LEUER PROPERTY
Works Director relative to Condition No. 1 (89021). 89021)
Item 8 -C
Regular Council Meeting
August 21, 1989
Page 219
Motion to amend the main motion was made by Mayor Schneider,
seconded by Councilmember Zitur, to delete Condition No. 4 which
provided for extension of 32nd Avenue North to the west property
line.
Motion to amend carried, five ayes.
Motion to amend the main motion was made by Mayor Schneider,
seconded by Councilmember Zitur, to substitute the language in
Item No. 16 of the Policy on Sketch Plan Review for Condition
No. 3, as recommended by Director Tremere.
Motion to amend carried, five ayes.
MOTION to amend the. main motion was made by Mayor Schneider,
seconded by Councilmember Ricker, to add a new condition to
Include that the curvature of 34th Avenue North will be
increased to minimize speeding, or other methods implemented so
to slow traffic.
Motion to amend carried, five ayes.
MOTION to amend the main motion was made by Mayor Schneider,
seconded by Councilmember Zitur, to add a new condition that
prior to submittal of the next (concept plan or preliminary
plat) application, staff and developer will review potential
problems relating to the rate and volume of drainage water for
possible solution.
Motion carried, five ayes.
MAIN MOTION as amended four times carried on a Roll Call vote,
five ayes.
Gr Frank of McCombs, Frank, Roos asked for clarifications U.S. Home Corp. /Thompson
Land Dev. Sketch Plan
relat to the proposed Sketch Plan for property in the
for land south of Medina
southeast drant of Brockton Lane and Medina Road (89059).
Road and east of Brocktoi
Mayor Schneider 3t ed that the north -south street proposed Lane (89059)
through. this development needs more curvature to reduce Item 8 -D
speeding.
Councilmember Vasiliou noted that developer is asking theIhe
Council to approve an alternate to riginal Sketch Plan that
was presented to the Planning Commissio The Council should
not review the alternate plan until the Plan Commission has
reviewed it.
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 9, Subdivision B
SUBDIVISION B - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
1. Purpose.
a. The provisions of this section of the Zoning Ordinance are intended to
provide areas which can be developed with some modification of the
strict application of regulations of the normal zoning districts in
accordance with the provisions and regulations contained herein, the
intent and purpose of the Comprehensive Municipal Plan, the general
intent of the districts in which the development is proposed, and
generally in accordance with the "Community Structure Concept" of the
Comprehensive Plan.
b. The provisions of this section of the Zoning Ordinance provide design
flexibility for the development of larger parcels under single
ownership or control, in order to obtain a higher quality of
development than might otherwise be possible should development occur
under strict application of the zoning ordinance regulations for a
particular district.
c. The benefit to the developer is one of design and development
flexibility; in order to utilize this flexibility, the developer has
the responsibility to demonstrate that its utilization does indeed
provide a development which has substantial attributes to enhance the
particular area or the City in total. Expected attributes are:
1) Benefits from new technology in building design, construction and
land development.
2) Higher standards of site and building design through use of
trained and experienced professionals in Land Planning,
Architecture and Landscaping to prepare plans for Planned Unit
Developments.
3) More efficient and effective use of streets, utilities and public
facilities to yield high quality development at a lesser cost.
4) More usable and suitably located recreation facilities and other
public and common facilities than would otherwise be provided
under conventional land development procedures.
5) Demonstration of affirmative design efforts toward the
preservation and enhancement of desirable natural site
characteristics. (Amended Ord. No. 82 -15)
d. The provisions for Planned Unit Developments in this section are
applied in two separate and distinct forms: A Residential Planned Unit
Development (R.P.U.D.) and a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development
M.P.U.D.). Where provisions are not specifically designated for
either the R.P.U.D. or M.P.U.D., they apply to both types. All
property within a R.P.U.D. shall be in one or more R Districts. Within
a M.P.U.D. land shall include one or more non - residence districts and
may or may not include one or more R Districts.
9 -5
Plymouth City Code
500.13
it duration; should such
restrictions and +trusteeships be of such - leng t ii a e lettering
of same of the plat impracticable, and thus necessitate th preparation
of a separate instrument, reference to such instrument 1 be made on
the plat and the book and page number referring to t instrument shall
be added to the plat after the restrictions or usteeship have been
recorded.
f) The form for approval of County authorities required.
500.13 Supplementary Documents and Information ubdivisions. A complete set of
subdivision development plans shall be file ith the City and shall conform to
City requirements. A complete set of uilt" construction drawings for any
improvements constructed in the subdivis shall be furnished to the City when the
construction is complete and finally a oved by the City.
500.15 Subdivisions; Desi n St lards; General Requirements. Subdivision 1.
Streets and Public Lands. The anning Commission in its review of a preliminary
plat will take into considera on the requirements of the city and the best use of
the land being subdivided. articular attention will be given to the arrangement,
location and widths of reets, the general drainage, ituation, lot sizes and
arrangement, as well Comprehensive Plan requireme , such as, but not limited
to, parks, school s' s, boulevards and highways.
Subd. 2. 'oinin Land. The preliminary''plat must cover all of the owner's
continguous nd, but the final plat may cover only a portion of the preliminary
plat, proyned it is in conformance wi an approve pre im nary plat and other
require —rQAts herein.
On/
ubd. 3. Large Tracts. Where the parcel is subdivided into larger tracts
for building lots, such parcels shall be divided so as to allow for the
pening of major streets and the ultimate extension of adjacent minor streets.
4. Unplatted Strips. Subdivisions showing unplatted strips or private
easements con - -- -- -
Subd. 5. Conservation and Preservation of Natural Environment. All
developers are required to retain and maintain the features of the natural
environment as much as possible by such measures as the preservation of desirable
trees, shrubs, land forms, wetlands, and ponding areas. The Planning Commission
shall pay particular attention to proposed measures to preserve or to mitigate the
impacts upon natural features and to the compliance, where applicable, with the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance Special Protection Districts. The Commission
shall consider the degree to which a maximum reasonable effort has been
demonstrated to preserve and conserve the natural features, including mitigation
measures, and the degree to which minimum adverse impact upon the natural
environment will be realized as the result of the proposed development. (Ord.
87 -17)
44wb
CITY OF
EDIN
2052 - County Road 24, Hamel, MN. 55340
February 28, 1990
Charles E. Dillerud
Community Development Director
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, Mn. 55447
Dear Mr. Dillerud,
BAR 2 1990
CITY OF L= -iNIGU'i H
COh1MDN{TY DEVELOP "fiENT DEVI
This is in response to your letter of February 23, 1990 regarding the
Lundgren Brothers development on the Leuer property.
Enclosed is a copy of the letter that your city was sent in August of 1989
by Donna Roehl, city clerk for the City of Medina, regarding the same
development. Your recent plan does not address the issues that the Medina
council agreed to (see the highlighted portions of the enclosed letter and
also the highlighted areas of the enclosed map).
If you have any further questions, please give me a call.
Sincerely,
Loren Kohnen
Planning & Zoning Administrator
City of Medina
LK /sl
encI.
cc: Lundgren Brothers, Terry Forbord
ADMINISTRATION • PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT • PUBLIC WORKS: 473 -4643 / PUBLIC SAFETY: 473 -9209
CITY OF
m=w LJA,
2052 - County Road 24, Hamel, MN. 55340
August 7, 1989
City Council
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
The Medina City Council and staff have been working with
Lundgren Bros., U.S. Homes and your staff to plan for
alignment of Brockton Ln. between Co. Rd. 24 and Medina Rd.
For referral purposes I have enclosed two sketches that
have been agreed upon for each of the Plymouth developments.
Lundgren Bros. - The city agrees to Lundgren's access, as
proposed, with no extension of Brockton Ln. to Brockton Ln.
south of Co. Rd. 24. We also approve of 34th Ave. and 32nd
Ave. being extended westerly to the common boundary, for
future extension into Medina.
U.S. Homes - The city agrees to U.S. Homes access as proposed
for Brockton Ln. from Medina Rd. We have also agreed that
two easements,easterly from Brockton Ln. should be extended
to the Plymouth /Medina boundary for further extension in
Medina.
Medina appreciates the courtesy and cooperation received
from your staff to plan for the future and would appreciate
continued discussions regarding serving the easterly portion
of our city with sewer through Plymouth.
Yours truly,
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL
Donna Roehl, Clerk- Treasurer
A,-'1N,';7RATION • PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT • PUBLIC WORKS: 473 -4643 / PUBLIC SAFETY: 473 -9209
I.
Ir
0 -A
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: March 7, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: March 14, 1990
FILE NO.: 89014
PETITIONER: Ryan Construction of Minnesota, Inc.
REQUEST: MPUD Final Plan /Plat and Request for Waiver of the
Subdivision Code
LOCATION: Northeast Quadrant of County Road 9 (Rockford Road) and
Interstate 494
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CR -2 (Retail Shopping)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development) - Rezoned to B -2
Shopping Center Business District), Subject to Approval of
the Final Plat and Development Contract
BACKGROUND:
On November 6, 1989, the City Council, by Resolution 89 -689, approved an
amended Mixed Use Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan /Plat and
Conditional Use Permit to develop slightly over 400,000 square feet of retail
commercial structures on a site of 52 acres, subject to 17 conditions of
approval. On October 16, 1989, the City Council adopted Resolution 89 -649,
finding "no need" for an Environmental Impact Statement based on review of the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The petitioner has filed application for an MPUD Final Plat /Plan, but
includes no individual Site Plans. The Final Plat would basically create
lots, blocks, and the public street. A Development Contract will be drawn
to address the installation of public and private improvements. Private
improvements shall be limited to the 2 outlots intended to be held and
maintained in common for the benefit of all property owners within this
PUD ( Outlots A and B).
City Council Resolution 83 -125 provides for the processing of PUD Final
Plats /Plans directly from the Development Review Committee (DRC) to the
City Council where such plats /plans are consistent with the approved
Preliminary Plat /Plan and the related provisions of the Subdivision
Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance. This Final Plat /Plan would qualify for
such processing, except as noted below.
see next page)
File 89014
Page Two
2. By this letter dated February 19, 1990, the applicant is requesting the
City of Plymouth to provide a Waiver of the Subdivision regulations of the
responsive to Section 500.43, Subdivision 2 of the Plymouth City Code
copy attached). Proposed is creation and the conveyance of, a portion of
the plat equal to proposed Lot 1, Block 1 and the public street right -of-
way running from West Medicine Lake Drive to County Road 9 prior to full
recording of the final plat. This conveyance would be by a lengthy metes
and bounds description. The purpose of the waiver is to facilitate the
sale of one of the parcels so the proceeds can be used to complete the
purchase of the entire PUD property.
3. The Subdivision Ordinance provides that such conveyance by metes and
bounds description may occur if the City Council, upon the recommendation
of the Planning Commission, finds that a waiver of compliance with the
Subdivision Ordinance will not interfere with the purposes of that
Subdivision Ordinance, and compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance will
create an unnecessary hardship. This provision of the Subdivision
Ordinance has very seldom been used in Plymouth.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The proposed MPUD Final Plat /Final Plan is responsive to the approved
Preliminary Plat /Preliminary Plan and Conditional Use Permit, including
the 17 conditions of that approval, as they apply to the plat and the 2
common ownership outlots.
2. Landscaping and screening of the 2 common ownership outlots (proposed
Outlot A and proposed Outlot B) is consistent with the Grading Plan and
the previously approved preliminary Landscape Plan.
3. We can find that the proposal to waive the Subdivision Ordinance to allow
the conveyance of a portion of this plat by metes and bounds will not
interfere with the purpose of the Subdivision Ordinance, only if the
approval of the waiver is subject to certain conditions related to the
approved PUD Plan and the PUD Final Plat /Plan under consideration.
The petitioner and the buyer of the land to be conveyed should sign a
letter of agreement, to be approved by the City Attorney, which explicitly
acknowledges that no development, beyond site grading, soil correction,
and environmental cleanup measures will be proposed or allowed prior to
the recording of the approved final plat and execution of the Development
Contract.
The petitioner has verbally agreed; we expect to have a copy of the letter
prior to the Commission meeting. Without this written assurance and the
understanding, we are unable to support the request for the waiver, for
reasons cited by the City Engineer in his memorandum.
see next page)
File 89014
Page Three
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend the Commission recommend approval of the MPUD Final Plat
and Final Plan, with approval of the request to waive the provisions of the
Plymouth Subdivision Code to permit conveyance by metes and bounds, subject to
the specified condjj ons.
Submitted by: 1_ d Cam— d1k1LQx•.Aa-1/
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution Approving the MPUD Final Plan /Plat
2. Draft Resolution Setting Conditions Prior to Filing of the Final Plat
3. Draft Resolution Providing for a Waiver of the Subdivision Ordinance to
Permit Conveyance by Metes and Bounds
4. Engineer's Memorandum
5. Location Map
6. Petitioner's Letter of February 19, 1990
7. Petitioner's Letter of February 26, 1990
8. Section 500.43 of the Plymouth City Code (the Subdivision Ordinance)
9. Large Plans
pc /cd /89014:dl)
APPROVING MPUD FINAL PLAT /PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR RYAN CONSTRUCTION
OF MINNESOTA, INC. FOR ROCKFORD ROAD PLAZA (89014) (MPUD 89 -2)
WHEREAS, Ryan Construction of Minnesota, Inc. has requested approval for an
MPUD Final Plat /Plan for Rockford Road Plaza located at the northeast quadrant
of County Road 9 (Rockford Road) and Interstate 494; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request and recommends
approval; and,
WHEREAS, the City staff has prepared a Development Contract covering the
improvements related to said plat;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the MPUD Final
Plat /Plan and Development Contract for Ryan Construction of Minnesota, Inc.
for Rockford Road Plaza located at the northeast quadrant of County Road 9
Rockford Road) and Interstate 494; and,
FURTHER, that the Development Contract for said plat be approved, and that the
Mayor and City Manager be authorized to execute the Development Contract on
behalf of the City.
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO MPUD FINAL
PLAT /PLAN FOR RYAN CONSTRUCTION OF MINNESOTA, INC. FOR ROCKFORD ROAD PLAZA
89014)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the MPUD Final Plat /Plan and
Development Contract for Ryan Construction of Minnesota, Inc. for Rockford
Road Plaza located at the northeast quadrant of County Road 9 (Rockford Road)
and Interstate 494;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the following to
be met, prior to recording of, and related to said plat:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. The Ordinance rezoning the property shall be published upon evidence that
the Final Plat has been filed and recorded with Hennepin County.
3. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
City Policy in effect at the time of filing the Final Plat.
4. No Building Permits shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for
the construction of municipal sewer and water.
5. Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's
expense.
6. Removal of existing structures at the developer's expense and
removal /capping of all private wells /septic systems per ordinance
provisions.
7. 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.
8. No yard setback variances are granted or implied.
9. Submittal of required utility and drainage easements as approved by the
City Engineer prior to filing the Final Plat.
10. No building permits to be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
11. Appropriate legal documents regarding Property Owner Association covenants
and restrictions as approved by the City Attorney, shall be filed with the
Final Plat.
12. The Final Plat mylars shall contain a statement noting that the plat is
part of the approved MPUD 89 -2 per Section 9 of the Zoning Ordinance.
13. Access shall be limited to internal public roads and prohibited from
County Road 9 (Rockford Road) and West Medicine Lake Drive (Northwest
Boulevard /County Road 61).
see next page)
Resolution No.
File 89014
Page Two
14. The Development Contract as approved by the City Council shall be fully
executed prior to release of the Final Plat.
15. Outlots A and B shall be common open space, the private ownership and
perpetual maintenance of which shall be specifically provided for by the
Property Owner documents. All improvements to Outlot A and Outlot B per
the approved Grading and Landscape Plans shall be completed prior to
issuance of the initial Certificate of Occupancy for any site within the
PUD.
APPROVING SUBDIVISION WAIVER FOR RYAN CONSTRUCTION OF MINNESOTA INC. FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF COUNTY ROAD 9 (ROCKFORD ROAD)
AND INTERSTATE 494 (89014)
WHEREAS, Ryan Construction of Minnesota, Inc. has requested approval for a
Subdivision Waiver for property located at the northeast quadrant of County
Road 9 (Rockford Road) and Interstate 494; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request and recommends
approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the Subdivision
Waiver for Ryan Construction of Minnesota, Inc. for property located at the
northeast quadrant of County Road 9 (Rockford Road) and Interstate 494 to
create new parcels described as:
PARCEL A
Insert Legal Description)
PARCEL B
Insert Legal Description)
FURTHER, that this waiver is approved upon the following conditions:
1. No building permits shall be issued for any property in this PUD until a
Final Plat, consistent with the terms and provisions of the Plymouth Codes
and Ordinances, and approved by the City of Plymouth, has been recorded
with Hennepin County and the approved Development Contract has been
executed.
2. This resolution shall be certified and released for filing only upon
receipt of a letter, from all applicable persons involved in the
conveyance allowed by the waiver approved by the City Attorney,
acknowledging Condition No. 1.
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: March 8, 1990
TO: Planning Commission and City Council Through Fred G. Moore,
Director of Public Works
FROM: Daniel L. Faulkner, City Engineer
SUBJECT: WAIVER TO THE PLYMOUTH CITY CODE
ROCKFORD ROAD PLAZA (89014)
Ryan Construction Company is requesting that they be granted a waiver from
the City of Plymouth Code requiring platting of property.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: I recommend that this be denied and Lot 1,
Block 1, be created through the platting process for the following reasons:
1. This will create a parcel of land not in conformance with the
approved preliminary plat. The parcel will include the land that is
to be public streets.
2. There will be no development contract or financial guarantees
to ensure the construction of streets and public utilities to
serve the site.
3. The owner of the parcel created by meets and bounds would be
required to sign the development contract.
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
DLF:rcj:kh
I F4
February 19, 1990
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
Attn: Mr. Blair Tremere
Mr. Chuck Dillerud
RE: CONVEYANCE RESOLUTION -- ROCKFORD
ROAD PLAZA, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA
Gentlemen:
DVAN CO
OF MI NNESO A NC.
NV
7
i
Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc., requests the City's
approval, in the form of a City Resolution for recording in the Office
of the County Recorder and /or Registrar of Titles Office, to allow the
conveyance by a meets and bounds legal description, of that portion of
the preliminary plat of Rockford Road Plaza which will, when platted, be
known as:
Lot 1, Block 1
Vinewood Lane Right -of -Way
42nd Place North Right -of -Way
This request is being made to facilitate the closing of the land
purchase by Dayton Hudson Corporation before filing of the final plat
With Hennepin County, and would only be required should the County not
be able to maintain the City of Plymouth's schedule for the above.
Further, the meets and bounds legal description is consistent with the
final plat of our February 16, 1990, submittal to the City.
We anticipate and look forward to working closely with the City of
Plymouth staff over the next several weeks as we complete the tasks
required to obtain final plat approval and grading permit for the start
of Rockford Road Plaza.
700 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE. 900 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH, MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE 612/339.9847 FAX 6121337 -5552
City of Plymouth
Page Two
February 20, 1990
Please feel free to call us at 339 -9847 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
RYAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
OF MINNESOTA, INC.
William J. McHale
Vice President
VJGS /64 /sl
c: Vince Driessen
Bob Goodpaster
Dick Koppy
Marie McCallum
Pat Ryan
Jim Willis
February 26, 1990
Mr. Jim Willis
City Manager
City of Plymouth
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
RE: ROCKFORD ROAD PLAZA
Dear Jim:
IDVAN CONSTRUCTION C
OF MINNESO AO INC.
MPANY
fE9,28
C j;r1 TN
0
Thank you very much for responding so quickly to our proposed timelines.
In response to your letter of February 22, 1990, 1 would like to make
the following observations:
1. Regarding the special assessment issue, Pat and I have met on this
extensively, and based on Fred Moore's proposal, I feel that if in
fact all this infrastructure is necessary as stated (we both agreed
that obviously economics aside, it is better for us and for the
community) can be absorbed based on a 15 year amortization which
would then keep the P &I equal to the $1,000,000 in specials we are
anticipating in the Spring of 1989.
2. Additionally, we would like to point out that the original tax
increment run by Ehlers and Associates was based on the original
square footage approved of 338,133 sq. ft., and with the new
proposed square footage being considerably higher seems to be
somewhat at odds with your comments in paragraph 6 of the letter
dated February 22, 1990.
At the initial request of the City of Plymouth for $1,000,000 in tax
increment for the excavation based on the meeting Pat and I had with you
and our subsequent meetings with Ehlers, we were anticipating a total
tax increment of $2,250,000 with $1,000,000 going to Ryan and $1,250,000
to the City, plus the necessary capitalized interest, bonding fees,
etc. Our project as it stands today should be able to generate excess
for the City over the required assessment minimums as stated above.
The timing is pushed off approximately six months, and one thing I am
not privy to is whether or not the district timing has already
commenced, thereby reducing the number of increments that are available.
However, even with less increments, the increased square footage should
serve to meet the above budget with opportunity for more upside to the
City over the increment period.
700 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE, 900 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE 6121339-9847 FAX 612/337-5552
i
Mr. Jim Willis
Page Two
February 26, 1990
Regarding your final concerning regarding meets and bounds transfer oftitle, I would make the following comments:
I. There is no question that we would rather close with the final plathavingbeenapprovedbytheCityandsignedoffbytheCounty, however that will be physically impossible at this point. EvenwiththeCityapprovingfinalplat /plan on April 2, we willprobablybeaminimumof30daysbeforetheCountywillsign off ontheplat. The only reason we are asking the City to allow us to dothisistofacilitatethelegalrequirementsofourpurchaseaareementwiththeBegins.
Once again, thank you for your cooperation. We look forward to theMarch14andApril2CouncilagendaandtocleaningupandexcavatingthissiteasofApril3.
Sincerely,
Wi c a4li
Vice President
WJM20 /12 /sl
c: Steve Apfelbacher
John Dean
Chuck Dillerud
John Kirby
Fred Moore
Pat Ryan
Blair Tremere
Plymouth City Code 500.39
with applications for waivers of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, ctio
462.358, Subdivision 4, or for division or consolidation of lots or cts as
provided in Section 500.37 shall show thereon sea level elevations t 50 foot
intervals.
500.41. Variances. Subdivision 1. General Conditions. he Planning
Commission may recommend a variance from the
Z
of his Section as to
specific properties when, in its judgement, dship on the land
exists. In granting a variance, the Commisscribe conditions that
it deems necessary or desirable in the publiIn making its find-
ings, as required below, the Commission shalhe nature of the pro-
posed use of the land and the existing use oe vicinity, the number
of persons to reside or work in the propos subdivision, and the probable
effect of the proposed subdivision upon affic conditions in the vicinity.
No variance shall be granted unless t Commission finds:
a) That there are special 00fr cumstances or conditions affecting the
specific property SuV that the strict application of the provisions
of this Section wo d deprive the applicant of the reasonable use
of the land.
b) That the va ance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of
a substa al property right of the applicant.
c) That a granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the
pu is welfare or injurious to other property in the territory
which the property is located.
The Kilmedission findings in granting or denying a variance shall be in writing
a with the City Clerk.
Subd. 2. implication Required. Applications for any variance under this
bsection shall be submitted in writing by the owner or subdivider at the time
e preliminary plat is filed for consideration by the Planning Commission, and
all state all facts relied upon by the applicant, and shall be supplemented
th maps, plans or other additional data which may aid the Commission in the
alysis of the proposed project. The plans for such development shall include
ch covenants, restrictions or other legal provisions necessary to guarantee
L 500.43. Compliance; Waivers; Building Permits. Subdivision 1. Conveyance of
and. Any person who conveys land by metes and bounds or by reference to an
unapproved plat or registered land survey in violation of the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, Subdivision 4, is subject to the penalty
provisions of that Section.
Subd. 2. Waiver of Compliance. In any case where compliance with the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, Subdivision 4 will create an
unnecessary hardship and failure to comply will not interfere with the purpose
of this Section, the City Council may by resolution waive compliance with this
Subsection, provided, however, that the proposed conveyance has been reviewed
by the Planning Commission and the Commission has found that it complies with
all provisions of this Section.
Plymouth City Code 500.43, Subd. 3 (Rev. 1979)
Subd. 3. PermitsbWithheld. No building permit shall be issued for the
construction or erection of a building on any lot or parcel conveyed in viola-
tion of this Section, or for the construction or erection of a building on any
lot or parcel not identified on a plat or registered land survey recorded with
the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles.
Subd. 4. Permits in Oversize Lots. With respect to parcels of land not
subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, Subdivision 4b
no building or structure shall be constructed or erected on such parcels,
nor shall any building permit be issued for such construction or erection,
unless such parcels abut upon a public street. (Amended Ord. No. 81 -11)
Subd. 5. Conveyance of Lot in Unrecorded Plat. It is unlawful to convey,
offer to convey or enter into a contract to convey a lot or parcel of land
subject to the provisions of this Section, that is not identified on a plat or
registered land survey recorded with the County Recorder or Registrar of Titles.
Subd. 6. Misrepresentations as to Construction, Supervision or Inspection
of Improvements. It is unlawful to represent that any improvement upon any
street or alley, of a subdivision or any improvement in a subdivision has been
constructed according to the plans and specifications approved by the City
Council, or has been supervised or inspected by the City Engineer, when the
improvements or subdivision has not been so constructed, supervised or inspect-
ed.
Subd. 7. Application of Subsection 500.25 of City Code. With respect to
parcels of land created pursuant to Subdivision 2 herein or which are oversize
parcels not subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358,
Subdivision 4b, the provisions of Subsection 500.25 of this Code shall apply if
such parcels of land were not separate parcels of record on duly 1, 1980. In
the case of oversize parcels, no building permits shall be issued for such
parcels until the requirements of said Subsection 500.25 have been met.
Added, Ord. No. 79 -7, Sec. 1) (Amended Ord No. 81 -11)
r
U
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was held on the 6th day
of Novembpr1989 The following members were present:
Mayor Schneider, Councilmembers Vasiliou, Ricker, Zitur and Sisk
The following members were absent: None
Counci lmember Zi tur introduced the following Resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 89 -689
APPROVING AMENDED MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY PLAN /PLAT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR RYAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR ROCKFORD ROAD PLAZA
89014)
WHEREAS, Ryan Construction Company has requested approval of an Amended Mixed
Use Planned Unit Development Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit
to construct 401,088 square feet of retail commercial on a site of 52 acres
located at the northeast quadrant of County Road 9 and I -494; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it hereby does approve the request for Ryan
Construction Company to construct 401,088 square feet of retail commercial on
a site of 52 acres located at the northeast quadrant of Rockford Road and I-
494, subject to the following conditions:
1. Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's
expense.
2. No Building Permits shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for
sewer and water.
3. 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 with
Hennepin County.
4. Street names shall comply with the City Street Naming System, specifically
Vinewood Lane North to the south line of Outlot A and 42nd Place North
from that point easterly to West Medicine Lake Drive.
5. Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 19 -80 regarding minimum floor
elevations for new structures in subdivisions adjacent to, or containing
any open storm water drainage facility.
6. No Building Permits shall be issued until the final plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
see next page)
RESOLUTION NO. -689
Page Two
File 89014
7. No final approval is granted or implied for individual site details such
as setbacks, parking, landscaping, aesthetics curb -cuts and circulation;
these will be addressed with the final plat and plan.
8. Each final site plan shall specifically address efforts to create and
maintain the appearance of site and structures of the site consistent with
the high visibility of the site.
9. Ownership and perpetual maintenance of outlots shall be private, and
covenants implementing ownership and maintenance approved by the City
Attorney shall be recorded with the initial final plat.
10. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum including recommendations
in response to Environmental Assessment issues raised by other agencies as
applicable.
11. Site plans shall include effective means to screen loading and other
services facing West Medicine Lake Drive and the north property line /42nd
Place North. Such means must include predominantly landscape methods, and
not fencing.
12. Architectural treatment of the south and east elevations (facing County
Road 9 and West Medicine Lake Drive) shall include design measures to
reduce the impact of building wall mass.
13. The initial Development Contract shall address construction of roadway
improvements on and off site identified as required to provide level of
service proposed by the applicant and concurred in by the Director of
Public Works.
14. All identification and clean -up activities related to wells, septic
systems, petroleum tanks, and potentially hazardous wastes shall be
completed prior to issuance of building permits.
15. All existing structures on the site shall be removed and site reclamation
per approved plans shall be completed prior to issuance of building
permits.
16. Provisions of City council Policy Resolution 89 -439 regarding tree
preservation shall be complied with prior to issuance of a grading permit
or issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first.
17. All pertinent issues raised by agencies responding to the Environmental
Assessment Worksheet shall be addressed or mitigated, as required, with
initial Final Plat /Final Site Plan documentation.
FURTHER, Resolution 89 -464 is hereby rescinded.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded
by Councilmember Sisk , and upon vote being taken thereon,
the followin voted in favor thereof• Mayor Schneider, Council members; _
Vasiliou Ricker, Zitur and Sisk
The following voted against or abstained None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
n
0
N1 191
Q
i
I a
INTERSTATE HWY 494
TTTTTTTTTTiTI'1.S0DD0 //0 //t
VINEW00o LANE
i
w
i
c,
U11lIllill~
r / " TTTTTTTTfTTTTi _
01111111111111111111111111111111
N -
llilt lui;
1 '- ;:
01111111111 111 1111111111 111M
0 !1111118111 IIIINNII II111A
L
VT1T1LTTMMTTrLi
dllllllll llll9 - =- _ -._ -= -_:
o
i o t C M
rtz
D
JT NIEO`
AKE F
G WE
M
FF = i- I
N
O
l Jim o
D Ate
I,
MO '
m ; 00
zmm m c NDp la I I I toilllir ;;; Io =
D
o
1
z-
1 01
E) log 406
wk
lfel
air
rn
iUe
I
II p
torm Sewer
sesY
I, x
W
u**Wnwowww
2
W
ul
er ms
ce
w /
w
gtO
to)
POEVIS
40p# Ip
Im
3)
Q )
POND
4
CCC=L.
g RVC.Z 0u
F
0.
cra
C.2
z
LLI
C/)