HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 05-23-1990CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: May 15, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: May 23, 1990
FILE NO.: 90028
PETITIONER: U.S. Homes Corporation /Thompson Land Development Division
REQUEST: RPUD Concept Plan for the "Mitchell- Pearson Property"
LOCATION: Southeast Quadrant of the West City Limits (Brockton Lane)
and Medina Road
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Single Family Residential)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restriction Development)
BACKGROUND:
The City Council, on October 16, 1989, by Resolution 89 -639, approved a Sketch
Plan for U.S. Homes for this site for the development of single family
detached housing on 116 acres, subject to five conditions. This approval came
after amendments to the plan originally proposed were made at the Planning
Commission level involving future street alignments within the plat.
The 1990 -1994 Capital Improvements Program includes public water and sewer
trunk line extensions that will include this site within the public water and
sewer service area, as a 1990 project. Engineering design for the project has
been directed by the City Council, and work is expected to begin late in 1990.
No actual service to this specific site will be available until 1991.
Notice of this Public Informational Meeting has been published in the official
City newspaper and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. A
development sign has been placed on the property.
This Concept Plan application proposes the development of the 116 -acre site
with 256 single family detached dwelling units.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Section 9, Subdivision B, paragraph 3 of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance
provides a method for determining allowable PUD Plan residential density
within the minimum to maximum range provided for by the Land Use Guide
Plan classification of a parcel. The allowable density for a PUD is
determined by "bonus points" assigned to a project Concept Plan based on
specific criteria stated in the Zoning Ordinance. Criteria for which
see next page)
File 90028
Page Two
bonus points may be assigned are project size in acres; mix of dwelling
unit types; and percentage of private /public open space proposed, "... net
exclusive) of required street right -of -way, required public park and
trail dedication, required storm drainage ponding areas, and required
storm drainage ponding areas, and required rear yards..." [Section 9,
Subdivision B, paragraph 3a (d)].
2. The applicant proposes assignment of 4 bonus points due to project scale.
The net site area, after deduction for the 14 acres of the site that is a
part of storm water drainage upon BC -P1 is 102.5 acres. The PUD bonus
points available based on project scale, therefore, is a maximum of 4. In
addition, the applicant proposes assignment of 1 bonus point for the
provision of open space in amount equal to between 10 and 20 percent of
net project area. Ten and one half acres of Pond BC -P1 is included within
the total of 18.5 acres proposed as "private open space ". The total area
of BC -P1 (14 acres) is subtracted by the applicant in his calculations of
the net area upon which the private open space calculation is based. If
that portion of Pond BC -P1 that is included within the total of private
open space is excluded, the resulting private open space proposed is 8
acres or 7.8 percent of the area of the site, net of storm water ponding,
not 15.9 percent as the applicant proposes.
3. Based on the 5 bonus points that the applicant proposes, the site would be
eligible for a density of 2.5 units per acre, or 256 units based on 102.5
acres net of storm water ponding. The Sketch Plan previously approved for
this site suggested availability of 4 bonus points with a resulting
allowable density of 2.4 units per net acre over the same net acreage,
yielding 246 dwelling units.
4. Portions of the site are located in Bassetts Creek, Minnehaha Creek, and
Elk Creek Watershed Districts, and a portion of Pond BC -P1 of the Plymouth
Storm Water Drainage Plan is located in the southeast corner of the site.
This site is not located in a Shoreland Management area or in federally
designated flood plain, but does have wetlands subject to federal
regulation located in the same area as the storm water holding pond. The
site has been surveyed by Minnesota DNR, and they have found, in a letter
of January 29, 1990, that no State regulated or protected wetlands are
found on the site.
5. The site has a limited woodland area, concentrated in the southeast corner
related to the wetland), and in the southwest corner. No grades in
excess of 12 percent are naturally occurring on the site. Except with
respect to the storm water drainage area in the southeast corner, the site
is generally suitable for urban development with public sewers. The
proposed Concept Plan recognizes the existence of the physical constraints
noted, and the design incorporates and accommodates those physical
constraints.
see next page)
File 90028
Page Three
6. The site is bounded on the east by the Greenwood Elementary School; on the
south by the existing single family detached Amber Woods development and
the recently approved "Lever Property" single family detached Planned Unit
Development; on the west by the City limits and undeveloped land in the
City of Medina; and on the north (across Medina Road) existing greenhouse
development in the FRD District of Len Busch Roses, and vacant
agricultural land. The area north of this site is outside the
Metropolitan Urban Service area, and therefore not eligible for urban
development in the foreseeable future. The Len Busch Roses greenhouse
construction is responsive to agricultural definitions of the FRD
District.
7. The proposed Concept Plan is responsive to the various elements of the
Comprehensive Plan including transportation, utilities, parks, and land
use - -with respect to the proposed range of dwelling unit density within
the LA -1 Guide Plan Classification.
The Concept Plan submission is responsive to the Zoning Ordinance with
respect to the content of such applications. The application makes
reference to proposed structure setbacks that would be inconsistent with
Zoning Ordinance setback standards. The Concept Plan stage is not the
stage at which to consider such setback matters unless a unique concept is
proposed, and staff has specifically refrained from review and comment
until the future submission of a Preliminary Plan /Plan. The standards
that have been approved in recent PUD Plans such as this (single family
detached) have been: 35 -foot street setback; 25 -foot rear setback; and
10 -foot side setback on both sides. Where the applicant can demonstrate
that a reduction in front or rear setbacks will result in the preservation
of natural site features the PUD Plan approval action has permitted
further reduction on a case -by -case basis.
8. The site is within the area designated in the Capital Improvements Program
for the installation of trunk water and sewer facilities as a part of the
1990 construction program. It is unlikely that access to these facilities
will physically be available until sometime during calendar 1991. Any
approvals of this Concept Plan and subsequent PUD stages will be subject
to physical availability of municipal water and sewer facilities.
9. A residential development with 250 or more units would require the
preparation of an Environmental Assessment worksheet.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The proposed bonus points, and allowable project density are inconsistent
with the Zoning Ordinance specifications for determining maximum PUD
density. We find the bonus points available per density calculations
should be limited to 4 based on the design of the Concept Plan now
proposed. The inclusion of the majority of Outlot B as open space is not
see next page)
File 90028
Page Four
consistent with the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance. Storm water drainage
facilities would be protected from development regardless of whether this
is a Planned Unit Development. Therefore, the acreage of these storm
water drainage facilities should not be included as private common open
space when subdivision density bonus points are being determined.
2. The proposed RPUD Concept Plan is consistent with the approved Sketch Plan
for this site with respect to general layout and street design, including
the conditions of Sketch Plan approval. The Concept Plan proposal is
inconsistent with the Sketch Plan approval with respect to the number of
dwelling units proposed and the resulting density per acre. The proposed
Concept Plan has 10 more dwelling units and has increased from 2.4 to 2.5
dwelling units per net acre when compared with the approved Sketch Plan
from 1989.
3. A condition of Resolution 89 -639 approving the Sketch Plan for this
project is that "future plat /plan design shall provide for private common
open space equal to at least 10 percent of the net project area ". Based
on this condition, we find that at least 10 acres of private common open
space should be provided - -not including storm water ponding area. By
deducting that portion of proposed Outlot B that is a part of Storm Water
Drainage Pond BC -P1 (approximately 9.5 acres), we find the proposal for
private open space to be approximately one acre short of the 10 percent
requirement that was a condition of Sketch Plan approval.
4. With the 4 bonus points for project size, we find assignable the resulting
2.4 units per net acre density available will yield a total unit count of
246, consistent with the approved Sketch Plan for the site. We find that
the 246 units is the maximum number of units available to the site based
on the PUD bonus points assignable.
5. With the exception noted above, we find the PUD Concept Plan proposed to
be both responsive to the Comprehensive Plan with respect to land use,
transportation, and the related Comprehensive Plan Elements; and
responsive to the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance, as applicable. These
constitute the findings specified by the Zoning Ordinance to be made by
the staff with respect to all Concept Plans.
6. Should it be determined by the Planning Commission that bonus points in
excess of the 4 found assignable by staff would be available to this
project, and therefore the total dwelling unit count would exceed 250, an
Environmental Assessment Worksheet will be required to be prepared.
Preparation of this document shall begin no later than application for the
PUD Preliminary Plan /Plan. No approval of the Preliminary Plat /Plan will
be granted until such time as Environmental Assessment Worksheet is
completed and a finding is made with respect to the need for an
Environmental Impact Statement.
see next page)
File 90028
Page Five
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the RPUD Concept Plan for the "Mitchell- Pearson
Property" based on the assignment of 4 density bonus points; a resulting
density per net acre of 2.4 dwelling units; andsulting total unit count
not to exceed 246. / 1
Submitted by:
ATTACHMENTS:
Char Community Development Coordinator
1. Draft Resolution Approving RPUD Concept Plan
2. Engineer's Memorandum
3. Resolution 89 -639 Approving Sketch Plan
4. Location Map
5. Sketch Plan
6. Petitioner's Concept Plan Booklet
7. Large Plans
pc /cd /90028:dl)
APPROVING RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN FOR U.S. HOMES
CORPORATION /THOMPSON LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION (90028)
WHEREAS, U.S. Homes Corporation /Thompson Land Development Division has
requested approval for a Residential Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for
property located at the southeast quadrant of the west City limits (Brockton
Lane) and Medina Road; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
SNOW, 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
U.S. Homes Corporation /Thompson Land Development Division for a Residential
Planned Unit Development Concept Plan for property located at the southeast
quadrant of the west City limits (Brockton Lane) and Medina Road, 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.
3. Maximum density shall be 2.4 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 resulting in a maximum 246 dwelling
units. Density bonus points are assigned as follows:
a. +4 for Project Size (Maximum Available for Size)
4. Draft restrictive covenants for the private open areas shall be submitted
with Preliminary Plat /Plan application.
5. A private trail system to be constructed within the project, providing
residents of the PUD with internal access, shall be bituminous and
constructed to City standards. It shall be completed prior to issuance of
building permits to adjacent lots.
6. No private drive access shall be permitted to Medina Road; all private
drives shall be provided by internal public streets.
7. Completion of the environmental review process per the rules of the
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board if approved density exceeds the
criteria in the State Rules.
8. No approval is hereby granted for structure setbacks or other dimensional
standards that related to the Zoning or Subdivision Ordinance. The City
setback standard applied to detached dwellings in RPUDs is 25 feet rear,
10 feet side, and 35 feet front. Exceptions may be approved for specific
lots based upon need to preserve natural features.
9. All street rights -of -way will be dedicated with the initial final plat and
park dedication will be in accordance with the Park Dedication Policy in
effect at the time of filing the Final Plat.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
ENGINEER'S MEMO
to
PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
DATE: May 16, 1990
FILE NO.: 90028
PETITIONER: Mr. William Pritchard, U.S. Homes /Thompson Land Development, 300 South
County Road 18, Suite 870, St. Louis Park, MN 55426
CONCEPT PLAN: MITCHELL PEARSON PROPERTY
LOCATION: South of Medina Road east of the City of Medina in the southwest 1/4 of
Section 18
This memo was prepared in response to the request for conceptual approval for the above
referenced property. Documents in support of the request were submitted by U.S. Homes
and received in this office on April 12, 1990.
1) Sanitary sewer area assessments and water main area assessments will be levied
with the final plat approval and will be based on a minimum of two units per
acre.
2) A drainage easement for ponding purposes shall be required for Pond BC -P1 to the
100 year high water elevation of 1002.53.
3) A storm sewer outlet has not been provided as yet for Pond BC -P1. A Feasibility
Report is in the process of being prepared and the pond must be constructed
before development of this property.
4) The Comprehensive Water Distribution Plan shows a 12 inch water main along the
east side of this property. The developer shall construct this watermain along
Walnut Grove Lane and Xanthus Lane.
5) The rate of runoff from the proposed plat, which drains west to Medina, shall
not exceed existing runoff.
6) A Feasibility Report is currently being prepared for the Northwest Trunk Sewer
Districts 21, 22, and 23. A contract must be awarded prior to final plat
approval of this property.
7) The proposed plat is located in Sanitary Sewer District NW -23.
8) This proposed plat fronts on Medina Road classified as a major "Collector"
street on the Thoroughfare Guide Plan. A Feasibility Report is being prepared
for the construction of Medina Road. This project must be under contract before
a final plat is approved for development of this property.
ENGINEERING MEMO - CONCEPT PLAN
Page Two
9) A public sanitary sewer shall be provided between Lots 9 and 10, Block 18, for
future extension to serve the existing single family homes east of the project.
10) The City will require utility and drainage easements 10 feet in width adjoining
all streets and 6 feet in width adjoining the side and rear lot lines.
11) The City will require 10 foot drainage and utility easements on each side of a
public utility, where these utilities are proposed to be installed.
12) The developer will be responsible for the construction of necessary watermain,
sanitary sewer, storm sewer and streets to serve the site.
13) The City will require a final plan and profile of proposed sanitary sewer,
watermain, streets and storm sewers, plus an Erosion Control Plan in accordance
with our engineering guidelines.
14) The City will require a storm drainage plan showing proposed finished contours
indicating how the proposed plat will ultimately drain. This material must be
submitted in conjunction with proposed storm sewer plans. The City will then
review the proposed storm drainage plans and make sure they are in compliance
with the City's Comprehensive Plan for storm drainage systems.
15) The current 33 feet of right -of -way from the centerline of Medina Road is
adequate. 60 feet of right -of -way will be required for the "Collector" street
that starts at the south property line and extends north to Medina Road. The
remaining interior right -of -ways may be 50 feet.
16) A storm water drainage map with runoff calculations and pipe capacity
calculations shall be furnished to the City prior to final approval of the storm
sewer system.
17) The developer will be responsible for reconstructing the sanitary sewer that
serves Greenland Elementary School from the south plat line to the trunk
sanitary sewer manhole.
18) If a lateral watermain is not required on Medina Road to service other
properties, the developer will be responsible for the cost of the watermain
since it must be constructed to provide water service to this site before the
City completes all of the trunk watermain.
SUBMITTED BY:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P.E.
City Engineer
Resolution No. 89 -639
Page Two
File 89059
5. The Sketch Plan hereby approved is dated August 29, 1989, received by the
City September 1, 1989.
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: Ma or Schneider, Councilmembers
Vasiliou. Ricker. Zitur and Sisk
The following voted against or abstained None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a _ reQular ofCityCounciloftheCityofPlymouth, Minnesota, was held on theti16th
daye
Of to e; 19.x_ The following members were present: d councilmembers Vasiliou, Ricker, Zitur and SiskThefollowingmemberswereabsent. None
SouncilmPmbe r X11, introduced the following Resolution andmoveditsadoption:
RESOLUTION 89-639
APPROVING SKETCH PLAN FOR U.S. HOME CORPORTION - THOMPSON LAND DEVELOPMENTDIVISIONFORTHE "MITCHELL - PEARSON PROPERTY" (89059)
WHEREAS, U.S. Home Corporation has requested approval of a Sketch Plan for thedevelopmentoflotsonapproximately116acreslocatedinthesoutheastquadrantofBrocktonLaneandMedinaRoad; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request at a duly calledPublicInformationalHearingandhasrecommendedapproval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OFPLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the Sketch PlanforU.S. Home Corporation for a development to be knows as Mitchell - PearsonPropertyconsistingof116acreslocatedinthesoutheastquadrantofBrocktonLaneandMedinaRoad, subject to the following conditions:
I. Staging of the development shall be in accordance with utilityavailabilityasapprovedbytheCityEngineer.
2. Future plat /plan design shall provide for private common open space equaltoatleast10percentofnetprojectarea.
3. This approval is for a sketch plan only, consistent with City CouncilPolicy89 -91. No approval of or substitute for any portion of RPUDconceptplanfortheseparcelsisintendedorimpliedbythisaction. TheCityCouncilacceptanceofthissketchplanshallnotbedeemedtoconstituteapprovalofformalvariancesormodifications, includingresidentialdevelopmentdensity.
4. Street design shall be consistent with the memorandum of the Public WorksDirectorofAugust17, 1989.
olwAIt*
E.IM
z
1
r • }
a
z
t
fs
lo
p
Ll
y,,
6--8.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: May 15, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: May 23, 1990
FILE NO.: 90030
PETITIONER: Trammell Crow Company
REQUEST: Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for Day Care Facility
LOCATION: West Side of Berkshire Lane, North of County Road 9
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: I -1 (Planned Industrial)
ZONING: I -1 (Planned Industrial)
BACKGROUND:
This site was part of a commercial plat approved in 1980, subject to a General
Development Plan calling for office uses.
As a part of the Land Use Guide Plan amendment conducted in 1989, Trammell
Crow Company requested that the City include this property, along with the
property to the east of Berkshire Lane, in our overall Land Use Guide Plan Map
recommendations to reguide the property from CL (Limited Business) to IP
Planned Industrial). The petitioner said a new development plan would be
submitted for the proposed industrial uses along with a new plat.
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. Approval by the Metropolitan Council in this reguiding action has
subsequently been granted. The petitioner has not submitted an application
for a revised plat or development plan. A "Master Concept Plan" for the area
east of Berkshire was submitted to the file.
At its meeting March 19, 1990, the City Council approved a rezoning of this
site from B -1 to I -1, responsive to the Land Use Guide Plan, and a property
division to create this site together with the creation of a larger site
immediately north upon which a Site Plan was approved.
As a part of this action, a variance was granted to minimum Zoning Ordinance
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. No other
variances were granted or implied.
see next page)
File 90030
Page Two
Notice of the Public Hearing regarding the Conditional Use Permit was
published in the official City newspaper, and all property owners within 500
feet have been notified. A sign announcing this proposal has been placed on
the property.
Proposed is the construction of a 5,880 square foot building and related
parking area for 26 cars, together with a Conditional Use Permit to allow the
use of the structure as a day care center. The site is 1.26 acres in size
consistent with the previously approved lot division.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The Conditional Use Permit to permit a day care center in the I -1 District
is applied for responsive to Section 8, Subdivision D, paragraph 2b of the
Zoning Ordinance where retail and service establishments essential to the
operation of this district and providing goods and services which are
primarily for the use of persons employed in the district are allowable as
conditional uses. The applicant, by a letter dated April 16, 1990, has
addressed the six Conditional Use Permit criteria that must be met prior
to issuance of any Conditional Use Permit by the City Council upon the
recommendation of the Planning Commission.
The Planning Commission, in its recommendation regarding this Conditional
Use Permit, should make a finding with respect to the essential nature of
this proposed use to the I -1 District in general, and the specific I -1
District in this immediate neighborhood.
2. This site is located in the Bassetts Creek Watershed District and contains
no hydrological features, state /federal wetlands, or shorelands; does not
have woodlands subject to preservation responsive to either the
Subdivision Ordinance or the Tree Preservation Policy; contains no slopes
in excess of 12 percent; and is generally suitable for urban development
with public sewers. There are no physical constraints appearing on the
site that would influence the Site Plan design.
3. The proposed Site Plan is consistent with the City codes and policies
governing the design of such facilities, including compliance with Zoning
Ordinance setback, off - street parking, signage, site lighting, trash
storage (enclosure per zoning specifications proposed), roof top units
none proposed), and landscaping. In addition, the Site Plan proposes a
combination of a 3.5 -foot berm and a 4 -foot high wooden fence to screen
the 8 off - street parking spaces that adjoin the Residential Zoning
District to the west. This screening of off - street parking is consistent
with Zoning Ordinance standards in that regard.
see next page)
File 90030
Page Three
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The Site Plan, as proposed, meets applicable Zoning Ordinance standards
and City Council Policy with regard to site design in the I -1 Zoning
District. The only variance requested relates to fire lane location,
which has been recommended for approval by the fire chief, and will be
acted on directly by the City Council.
2. We find the provision of day care services to be an essential service in
the I -1 Zoning District. Further, we find that the proposed location for
this day care facility is such that this specific I -1 District (either
side of Berkshire Lane, north of County Road 9) as well as other I -1
Districts (notably areas south of County Road 9 and parallel to I -494) can
be sufficiently served without the requirement of day care - related traffic
circulating through the I -1 District.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the attached resolution providing for the
approval of the Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for New Horizon Day Care
to be located wes o ^Berkshire Lane nd north of Co y Road 9.
Submitted by:
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Site Plan and
2. Engineer's Memorandum
3. Petitioner's Communication of April
4. Conditional Use Permit Standards
5. Section 8, Subdivision D, Paragraph
6. Location Map
7. Large Plans
pc /cd /90030:dl)
Conditional Use Permit
16, 1990
2b of the Zoning Ordinance
APPROVING SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY FOR
NEW HORIZON DAY CARE (90030)
WHEREAS, Trammell Crow Company has requested approval for a Site Plan and
Conditional Use Permit for a New Horizon Day Care facility for property
located west of Berkshire Lane, north of 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
Trammell Crow Company for a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for a New
Horizon Day Care facility for property located west of Berkshire Lane, north
of County Road 9, 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. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement
for completion of site improvements.
4. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance and the approved
Site Plan.
5. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
6. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants and
fire lanes.
7. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within an enclosure and no
outside storage is permitted.
8. An 8h x 11 inch "As Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior
to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy.
9. No building permit to be issued until the lot division creating this
parcel is filed and recorded with Hennepin County.
10. No Zoning Ordinance variances are approved or implied.
11. The Conditional Use Permit is approved based on findings that day care is
an essential service to the operation of the I -1 (Planned Industrial)
District; and this application meets all criteria of the Zoning Ordinance
for approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
12. A copy of the State License shall be submitted prior to issuance of the
Conditional Use Permit and a copy of the current license shall be kept on
file with the City.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: May 16, 1990
FILE NO.: 90030
PETITIONER: Mr. Peter Elger, Portfolio Design Services, Inc., 1711 County Road B,
Roseville, MN 55113
SITE PLAN: NEW HORIZON DAY CARE CENTER
LOCATION: West of Berkshire Lane, north of County Road 9 in the northwest 1/4
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:
N/A Yes No
6. _ _ X Property is one parcel -
The approval of the site plan as proposed requires that a lot
consolidation be approved by the City Council and the necessary
resolution should be processed at the same time as the site plan
approval. Will comply when the lot division lot consolidation is
filed with Hennepin County, File 90005.
N/A Yes No
7. — _ X Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any
building permits.) See Item No. 6.
8. X _ _ Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100
year high water elevation and conformance with the City's
comprehensive storm water requirements.
9. X All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities.
N/A Yes No
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated. Existing 6 foot
drainage and utility easements on the common property lines of Lots
1. 2. and 3.
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
N/A Yes No
12. _ _ X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
DNR
MN DOT
Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
X Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
13. _ _ X Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The site plan will be submitted to the City's consulting engineer
for review to see if it is in conformance with the City's
Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All of their recommendations
shall be incorporated in a revised plan. The grading and drainage
plan shall also indicate proposed methods of erosion control,
including the placement of silt fence in strategic locations.
Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary: egg
special conditions.
N/A Yes No
14. _ X Necessary fire hydrants provided -
The City of Plymouth requires that all parts of a building such as
the one proposed be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. It will be
necessary to locate hydrants in such a manner that the site plan
complies with this section of the City Ordinance.
15. _ X Size and type of material proposed in utility systems has been
provided
The utility plan shall be revised to indicate the size and type of
material required in the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain services
and storm sewer.
16. _ X Post indicator valve - fire department connection
It will be necessary to locate the post indicator valve in such a
manner that it will not render any of the existing fire hydrants
inoperable.
3-
N/A Yes No
17. _ X _ Hydrant valves provided -
All new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6" gate valves per City
Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W -2. This plate should be
referenced on the site plan.
18. _ X Sanitary sewer clean -outs provided -
It will be necessary to provide clean -outs on the proposed internal
sanitary sewer system at a maximum of 100 foot intervals.
19. X Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
N/A Yes No
20. _ X All existing street right -of -ways are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on
21. _ X Complies with site drainage requirements -
The City will not permit drainage onto a City street from a private
parking lot; therefore, the site plan shall be revised accordingly.
4-
N/A Yes No
22. _ X Curb and gutter provided -
The City requires B -612 concrete curb and gutter at all entrances
and where drainage must be controlled, Curb Stone may be used where
it is not necessary to control drainage. For traffic control either
B -612 or curb stone is required around the bituminous surfaced
parking lot. The site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance
with this requirement.
23. _ X _ Complies with parking lot standards -
The City will require that all traveled areas within the parking
lot, as well as the proposed entrances, shall be constructed to a
7 -ton standard City design with six inches of Class 5 100% 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. See Item Nos. 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 27A
and B.
5-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
27. A. A drainage area plan must be submitted to confirm the storm sewer
calculations. The invert elevation of the existing catch basin is shown as
989.5 on Sheet C -1, but 984.5 on storm sewer calculations. The correct
elevation shall be noted on Sheet C -1.
B. The south driveway shall be relocated further south to insure no vehicles can
attempt to make a left turn.
C. As- builts for the previously constructed street and utilities shall be
submitted to the City prior to a building permit being issued.
Submitted by: S d.
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
6-
Rosewood Construction, Inc.
Commercial / Industrial / Residential
M E M O R A N D U M
Date: APRIL 16, 1990
To: TO MR. CHUCK DILLERUD
PLYMOUTH CITY OFFICES
From: PETER HILGER
PORTFOLIO DESIGN SERVICES, INC.,
ROSEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55113
Re: NEW HORIZON DAYCARE -
Project Description:
M TB
APR 17 199G
CITY OF PL J MOUTH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
LANE
Trammell Crow Company proposes to have designed and
constructed by Rosewood Corporation a 5,880 sf prototype
daycare center for New Horizons Enterprises which currently
operates over 40 such centers in the Twin City metro area.
The building and site design is unique to New Horizons,
featuring the twin gabled roof design, full birch veneer
exterior, and cedar trim. Multiple play areas, parking for
26 cars and a fully landscaped setting complete this high
quality project.
The applicant, Portfolio Design Services, Inc. seeks
approval of site and building plans, conditional use permit,
and a variance on the fire lane requirement.
Variance Request:
The applicant is seeking a variance from the fire lane
requirement for the following reasons:
The rear and side yards are fenced per State
requirements regarding play area enclosures.
The building is prepared to be fully fire
sprinklered to meet NFPA 13, including a service
connection and key box near the main entrance, a
post indicator valve on site, an alarm system and 4"
class 3 stand pipes.
Rosewood Office Plaza • Suite 300 South • 1711 West County Road B • Roseville, MN 55113 • (612) 6313254 • FAX (612) 636 -2844
The combination of equipment, potential access from the
proposed north side neighboring driveway and parking area,
plus the strict State guidelines for fire safety in these
facilities should eliminate the need for the fire lane
around the property.
Conditional Use Permit Request:
A daycare center of this type is a conditional use within
the current zoning district. The applicant believes that:
1. This use is in compliance with the intent of the
comprehensive plan.
2. The establishment and operation of this facility
enhance the neighborhood and the existing
proposed business parks in the immediate vicinity,
and as such will not endanger public health, safety,
morals and comfort.
3. The use will not be detrimental to the
enjoyment of other property rights in the vicinity,
nor will it diminish property values.
4. This conditional use will likely benefit rather
that impede the normal and orderly development of
surrounding property.
5. The site plan fully addresses the adequacy of the
ingress and egress.
6. The proposed development, except for the variance
stated above, is to the best of our knowledge, fully
consistent with the applicable City development
standards and criteria.
word \dill
L• Z • . . 1 V Z • •I•.
FKX SF TIM 9, A
2. per. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Carmi.ssion for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and develcpent of a reca,: ration to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Carmission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) CcYrpliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will prarnte and enhance the general public welfare and will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or comfort.
3) The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the neighborhood.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding
property for uses permitted in the district.
5) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress,
egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic
congestion in the public streets.
6) The.. conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the
applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.
forms:o >pl /cup.stnd /s) 10/89
PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE
Section 8, Subdivision D
SUBDIVISION D - ALLOWABLE USES: INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
Within an I -1 PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, no building or land shall be used
except for one or more of the following uses, providing they comply with the
performance standards set forth in Subdivision G of this Section.
a. Any manufacturing, pr ing, cleaning, storage,
servicing, repair or testing of maters I or products that is
wholly contained within a building and whi ets and maintains all
environmental standards established by State of Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency. (Amend. 8
b. Municipal and other public a y administrative and service
buildings, including publi orks maintenance facilities, post
offices, fire stations d the like which are compatible with other
allowed uses is the trict. (Ord. 89 -36)
c. Essential ser ' es. (Ord. 89 -36)
2. CONDITIONA
a. A permitted or accessory industrial use not conducted within a
b. Retail and service establishments essential to the operation of this
district and providing goods and services which are primarily for the
use of persons employed in the district; any such commercial use
allowed under this Section shall be subject to all requirements of
this Ordinance and the City Code applicable to such commercial use.
Amended Ord. No. 82 -08) <44
IIY111Illl bl .,
executive, professional, research, sales represent ati fices, or
similar organization, and generally compatible a industrial
district; any such commercial use allowed this Section shall be
subject to all requirements of this ance and the City Code
applicable to such commercial us ended Ord. No. 82 -08 and 86 -26)
d. Industrial Buildings incl single tenant /occupant and
multi- tenant /occupant
g
dings, allowed by this Section, which
contain office use ich occupy more than 50% of the gross floor area
of the building are found to be generally compatible with the
Industrial Di ict. Any such commercial use allowed under this
Section s be subject to all requirements of this Ordinance and the
City Co applicable to such commercial use. (Amended Ord. No. 86 -26)
e. Re ' ential structures and related residential uses necessary for
urity and safety reasons in relation to a principal use.
f
8 -7
11 S.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: May 15, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: May 23, 1990
FILE NO.: 90031
PETITIONER: Independent School District 284 (Wayzata)
REQUEST: Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Rezoning from FRD to
R -1A for an Elementary School
LOCATION: Between County Road 9 and Highway 55, East of Peony Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Single Family Residential) and CL
Limited Business)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development)
BACKGROUND:
Records of the Community Development Department reveal no prior
planning /zoning applications have been processed involving this site.
A notice of Public Hearing regarding the Rezoning and Conditional Use Permit
has been published in the official City newspaper, and all property owners
within 500 feet have been notified. In addition, a development sign has been
placed on the property.
Proposed is the development of a 30 -acre site for an elementary school of
81,348 square feet, together with related athletic facilities. The rezoning
is from FRD (Future Restricted Development) District to R -1A (Low Density
Single Family Residential) District, and the Conditional Use Permit is for an
elementary school in the R -1A Zone.
This site is within the area scheduled to receive public water and sewer
service as a project of the 1990 element of the 1990 -1994 Capital Improvements
Program. The City Council has directed design of this public utilities
project, but no construction will begin until late in 1990, and actual service
will not be available to this site until 1991.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The site is located within the Bassett Creek Watershed District. It
contains a significant area of state and federal wetlands and city storm
water drainage. The southeasterly 1/3 of the site is totally constrained
by wetlands and storm water drainage features. No Shoreland Management
see next page)
File 90031
Page Two
Area, but Flood Plain related to Plymouth Creek is designated on the site
by flood plain maps.
Although there are some scattered stands of trees on the site, no major
woodlands exist. The site does slope to the extensive flood plain /wetland
area of Plymouth Creek from northwest to southeast, but no slopes over 12
percent are indicated. Approximately the southeasterly 1/2 of the site is
constrained by soils for urban development with public sewers.
In general, the southeasterly
development either by slopes of
proposed, with the exception of
proposes all development on the
sloping and lower portion of
undisturbed.
1/2 of the site is constrained from
wetlands /flood plain. The Site Plan
the storm water drainage holding pond,
upland portion of the site, leaving the
the site in its natural state, and
2. A literal interpretation of the 1,000 scale Land Use Guide Plan map for
this area results in the southerly 40 percent of the site being classified
CL (Limited Business) District land use classification. All of this
portion of the site is either located within the wetland /flood plain
portion of the site or of land sloping to the wetland area at grades of 8-
10 percent. None of the area of the site that is guided CL would be
considered developable responsive to the Physical Constraints Analysis.
The guiding district boundary between LA -1 and CL was established without
the benefit of the detailed site analysis and topography that we not have
available as a part of this application. A broad interpretation of the
Guide Plan map would result in the site being classified LA -1.
3. The proposed Site Plan is responsive to all standards of the Plymouth
Zoning Ordinance and related policy applicable to Site Plans for this type
of development. No variances are requested or required.
Specifically, all structure and parking setbacks are consistent with the
Ordinance; structure coverage is 6.35 percent (Ordinance maximum 20
percent); off - street parking of 120 spaces is in excess of the Ordinance
standard for this structure (66 spaces); signage meets Ordinance
requirements (a freestanding sign of 32 square feet and no wall signage);
all roof top mechanical equipment is proposed to be screened consistent
with Ordinance requirements; the landscape plan meets the standards of the
Landscape Policy; and trash is proposed to be retained within the primary
structure.
4. With respect to response to the City Council Policy regarding site and
building aesthetics and architectural design, the applicant proposes an
appearance to the structure duplicating that of the present Plymouth Creek
Elementary School at the southwest corner of County Road 9 and Vicksburg
Lane.
see next page)
File 90031
Page Three
5. The applicant in its application documentation dated April 17, 1990, has
addressed the six Conditional Use Permit standards, stating that the
location of this elementary school in the R -1A District at this location
meets all standards of the Zoning Ordinance regarding conditional uses. A
copy of those Ordinance standards is attached.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The relationship between the physical characteristics of this site and the
split" guiding of the site is not correct based on the more detailed view
of the site that is gained as a result of this review. The assignment of
LA -1 guiding to the majority of the site is correct, but the assignment of
CL guiding to the southerly portion of the site without reference to the
substantial wetland /flood plain and steep slopes of that portion of the
site is inappropriate.
Now that detailed information is available
characteristics of the site, we find a Land Use
is in order to properly guide this entire parcel
to the south and east LA -1, based on th,
wetland /flood plain that has been inaccurately
Land Use Guide Plan.
concerning the physical
Guide Plan map adjustment
and two "remnant" parcels
e true location of the
presented on the current
Rezoning of this site to R -1A should await resolution of this Land Use
Guide Plan map correction and the availability of public sewer and water
to the site. That action can be promptly initiated by the City; other
land ownerships are involved.
2. We find that the proposed elementary school at this location is responsive
to the six criteria of the Zoning Ordinance with respect to all
Conditional Use Permits. Upon the availability of public water and sewer
to the site and the rezoning of the site to R -1A, we find the issuance of
a Conditional Use Permit for an elementary school at this location is
consistent with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Until R -1A
Zoning is assigned to the site, the Conditional Use Permit cannot be
issued.
3. The Site Plan presented for the elementary school of 81,348 square feet is
consistent with the applicable ordinances and policies of the City of
Plymouth regarding development of this type in this Zoning District. In
addition, the proposed appearance of the structure, consistent with that
which exists at the Plymouth Creek Elementary School, is consistent with
the requirements of the City Council policy regarding site and building
aesthetics and architectural design.
see next page)
File 90031
Page Four
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of a recommendation for approval of the Site Plan,
Conditional Use Permit and rezoning from FRD to R -1A, subject to a Land Use
Guide Plan man amendment reclassifying this entire site to LA -1, which will be
originated by staff, and subject to the availability of public water and sewer
to the site. -,/ /
11 1 T I1 . n., - /
Submitted by:
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution Approving Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit, and Rezoning
from FRD to R -1A
2. Engineer's Memorandum
3. Petitioner's Communication of April 17, 1990
4. Location Map
5. Land Use Guide Plan Map Excerpt
6. Large Plans
pc /cd /90031:dl)
APPROVING SITE PLAN, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND REZONING FOR INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL DISTRICT 284 (WAYZATA) (90031)
WHEREAS, Independent School District 284 (Wayzata) has requested approval for
a Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit for an elementary school of 81,348
square feet, together with related athletic facilities; and rezoning from FRD
Future Restricted Development) District to R -1A (Low Density Single Family
Residential) District for property located between County Road 9 and Highway
55, east of Peony Lane; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by
Independent School District 284 (Wayzata) for a Site Plan and Conditional Use
Permit for an elementary school of 81,348 square feet, together with related
athletic facilities; and rezoning from FRD (Future Restricted Development)
District to R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential) District for property
located between County Road 9 and Highway 55, east of Peony Lane, subject to
the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication with appropriate
credits in an amount determined according to verified acreage and paying
costs and according to the Dedication Policy in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
3. Provisions for a 30 -foot wide trail corridor per Comprehensive Park Plan,
as verified by the Parks and Engineering Departments, with submittal of
detailed plans as to construction of the trail per City standards.
4. 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.
5. Submission of required financial guarantee and Site Performance Agreement
for completion of site improvements.
6. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance and the approved
Site Plan.
7. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
8. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire hydrants and
fire lanes.
9. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within the principal
structure, and no outside storage is permitted.
see next page)
Resolution No.
File 90031
Page 2
10. An 8k x 11 inch "As Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior
to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy.
11. Rezoning and issuance of the Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to
approval by the City Council of Land Use reclassification of the entire
site to LA -1. In addition, rezoning is subject to the availability of
public sewer as evidenced by the award by the City Council of a contract
to construct the public sewer to serve the site.
12. No building permit shall be issued until a contract has been awarded for
of municipal water and sewer service that will serve this site.
13. No Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued prior to the connection of
public water and sewer to the building.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: May 16, 1990
FILE NO.: 90031
PETITIONER: Mr. Stan Tikkanen, Executive Director, Finance and Business Services,
Independent School Distric 284, P.O. Box 660, Wayzata, MN 55391
SITE PLAN: I. S. D. 284 - New Elementary School
LOCATION: East of Peony Lane, south of County Road 9 in the northwest 1/4 of
section 17.
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 - Sanitary sewer area assessment based
on 29.38 acres - 9.37 acres wetland = 20.01 acres times $880 per
acre = $17,608.80. Watermain area based on 29.38 acres - 9.37 acres
wetland = 20.01 acres times $1.580 Qer acre = S31,615.80.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: The estimated lateral
assessment for sanitary sewer Project No. 010 and lateral watermain
Project No. 012 will be furnished to the School District when the
Feasibility Reports have been completed and prior to the public
hearing for the sanitary sewer and watermain. The School District
shall sign an assessment waiver before a building permit is issued.
LEGAL /EASEMENTS /PERMITS:
N/A Yes No
6. _ X _ Property is one parcel -
The approval of the site plan as proposed requires that a lot
consolidation be approved by the City Council and the necessary
resolution should be processed at the same time as the site plan
approval.
F
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.)
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. An easement for oonnding
purposes will be required to an elevation of 981.5 for pond BC -P4
long with a drainage easement for the ditch that runs east from the
west property line south of the proposed baseball field.
9. X All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities. A drainage and utility easement will be required where
the trunk sanitary sewer is proposed to be installed on the east
side of the new school A tem o y construction easement shall
also be provided.
N/A Yes No
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
N/A Yes No
12. _ _ X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
X DNR
MN DOT
X Hennepin County
MPCA
State Health Department
X Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
X Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
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: See
Special Conditions.
N/A Yes No
14. _ X Necessary fire hydrants provided -
The City of Plymouth requires that all parts of a building such as
the one proposed be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. It will be
necessary to locate hydrants in such a manner that the site plan
complies with this section of the City Ordinance.
15. _ X Size and type of material proposed in utility systems has been
provided
The utility plan shall be revised to indicate the size and type of
material required in the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain services
and storm sewer.
16. _ X Post indicator valve - fire department connection
It will be necessary to locate the post indicator valve in such a
manner that it will not render any of the existing fire hydrants
inoperable.
3-
N/A Yes No
Ll
17. _ X _ Hydrant valves provided -
All new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6" gate valves per City
Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W -2. This plate should be
referenced on the site plan.
18. _ 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
Subject to Hennepin County approval for the driveway access to
County Road 9
N/A Yes No
20. _ _ X All existing street right -of -ways are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on An addtional 17 feet of
right -of -way will be required on County Road 9 making a total
distance from centerline 50 feet.
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. See Item Nos. 1. 2. 7. 8. 9. 11, 12,
13, 20, 27A, B. C. D. E. F, G. H. I. and J.
5-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REOUIRED:
27. A. The runoff from area 6 is incorrectly calculated, area = 0.45 acres, not 0.25
acres and Q = 2.27 CFS, not 1.26 CFS. Please revise your calculations and
resubmit.
B. The storm sewer from Manhole 2 to Catch Basin 6 is shown to be a 0.06% grade
and should be shown as a 0.60% grade. Please revise your plans accordingly.
C. The storm sewer from area 6 to Catch Basin 3 is shown as 0.39% grade and
should be shown as,3.90% grade. Please revise your calculations and resubmit.
D. The pipe from Catch Basin 4 to Catch Basin 1 should be 21 inch, not 18 inch as
shown. Please revise your plans accordingly.
E. The pipe from Catch Basin 3 to Catch Basin 2 should be 21 inch, not 18 inch as
shown. Please revise your calculations and resubmit.
F. The pipe from storm sewer Manhole 1 to the outlet should be 33 inch, not 30
inch as indicated. Please revise your calculations and resubmit.
G. Pond calculations shall be provided for review and approval.
H. The detention pond shall be cleaned of silt as necessary.
I. Sanitary sewer and watermain are not currently available to this site. The
City is proposing to construct these improvements in 1990/1991. No occupancy
of the building shall be approved until the City has completed the sewer and
watermain improvements. If the School District requests a building permit
before the improvements are under contract, they shall submit a hold harmless
agreement which states as follows:
The School District agrees to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify
the City, its agents, employees, and servants from any damages
arising out of: (1) the issuance of building permits for the school
prior to the site being served with public utilities, and (2) the
awarding of a contract, or the failure to award a contract for
construction of the trunk sanitary sewer and water facilities."
City Project No's 010 and 012).
J. A lateral sanitary sewer will be required in the future to serve the property
to the west. In accordance with City Policy, this site is responsible to
extend this lateral sanitary sewer. The School District shall sign an
agreement with the City agreeing to be assessed the cost of the lateral sewer
when it is constructed and to provide the necessary easements. As an option,
the School can construct this sewer at this time.
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
0
a za taI
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Independent School District 284
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 210 COUNTY ROAD 101 NORTH
gn
APR
CITY OF 'y N,'°'` M.
WOUN11y, i rhi #WIt d
P.O. BOX 660 WAYZATA, MN 55391 -9990 (612) 476 -3100 FAX: (612) 476 -3214
5. Brief_ Description of Request - New Elementary School
The school district is experiencing a rapid and significant increase in its
elementary school age population. Much of the increase is associated with the
new housing units in Plymouth and Medina. The school district desires to
locate an elementary facility to accommodate 650 students in the area of this
projected residential neighborhood. A school is permitted use in a residential
zone. The city's capital improvement plan for 1990 includes providing water
and sewer to this site. To the best of our knowledge, the design of the
building complies with all applicable city ordinances for this site.
Current zoning for this parcel is FRD . The school district hereby requests the
city to consider rezoning the parcel to residential R -1A and issuing a
conditional use permit for the operation of a school at this site.
za ta
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
pendent School District 284
MIAJI, TH
APR 2' 1990
CITY OF r'LYMOUTH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES 210 COUNTY ROAD 101 NORTH P.O. BOX 660 WAYZATA, MN 55391 -9990 (612) 476 -3100 FAX: (612) 476 -3214
5. Brief Description of Request - New Elementary School
The school district is experiencing a rapid and significant increase in its
elementary school age population. Much of the increase is associated with the
new housing units in Plymouth and Medina. The school district desires to
locate an elementary facility to accommodate 650 students in the area of this
projected residential neighborhood. A school is permitted use in a residential
zone. The city's capital improvement plan for 1990 includes providing water
and sewer to this site. To the best of our knowledge, the design of the
building complies with all applicable city ordinances for this site.
Current zoning for this parcel is FRD . The school district hereby requests the
city to consider rezoning the parcel to residential R -1A and issuing a
conditional use permit for the operation of a school at this site.
We maintain the school project as submitted complies with the standards set
forth in section 9 of the zoning ordinances. The six areas are addressed as
follows.
1. The school site is in compliance with the City's comprehensive plan
2. Locating an elementary school at this site will promote and enhance the
general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, morals or comfort. As noted above, we consider this
residential neighborhood ideally suited for an elementary school.
3. This school will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity. Property values should be enhanced
because of locating a school at this site.
4. Construction and operation of a school at this site will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property.
5. A single entry from Rockford Road with a right turn lane for east bound
traffic and by -pass lane for west bound traffic will provide minimum
congestion problems of ingress and egress to the site. One hundred twenty
parking spaces are provided for staff and public use.
6. We believe the site and building plan conforms to all applicable
regulations of the area.
T. P AU
i
i
i
m`
I
X11
PLYMOUTH CREEK
SCHOOL
ir
i
BYTH
IV
I
1iG
v..,o... .,..r•" -.
rte
m k.:
1
a
1w$`
In ,I
4 4t
r• •
Ir.! lEE Ej . i
s
Iw
Mr
It
l
1a' g •
1 07011-
a a *Fi
r r_r,tr.a
f` s .F •<
4F : e ` Vii` viE E`
rt
5 D.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: May 15, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: May 23, 1990
FILE NO.: 90039
PETITIONER: Ryan Construction Company
REQUEST: Amended MPUD Master Sign Plan for "Waterford Park"
LOCATION: 505 and 605 North State Highway 169
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: CL (Limited Business)
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
MPUD 86 -1
On October 17, 1988, the City Council adopted Resolutions 88 -685 and 88 -686
approving the MPUD Final Site Plan and Plat for the second phase of the
Waterford Park MPUD and setting the conditions of that approval. A part of
that MPUD Final Site Plan was an extended Master Sign Plan providing
additional signage related to the second phase, over and above that which was
provided with the first phase of Waterford Park.
The applicant has requested an amendment to the Master Sign Plan for Waterford
Park to permit a second freestanding sign, with an area of 90 square feet
immediately north of the main entrance, set back 20 feet from County Road 169
west service drive.
The existing Master Sign Plan for the Waterford Park MPUD for an "office
portion" provides for signage to meet ordinance standards. A single
freestanding sign within ordinance dimensional standards is located in the
median, identifying the entire office portion of the project. The Master Sign
Plan provides for wall identification on each of the two existing office
towers and internal directional signage.
Notice of this request has been published in the official City newspaper as a
Public Hearing to amend the PUD Conditional Use Permit, and property owners
within 500 feet have been notified. However, the Master Sign Plan is properly
subject only of the PUD Final Plan, and therefore no hearing is legally
required. Staff believes the amendment to the Master Sign Plan involving an
additional sign, as well as a sign in excess of Zoning Ordinance standards for
surface area, exceeds the standard of "minor PUD amendment" that could be
approved administratively.
see next page)
File 90039
Page Two
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Section 9, Subdivision B, paragraph 3e of the Zoning Ordinance provides
that all signs within a PUD shall conform with the standards of this
Ordinance unless specifically approved otherwise by the Master Sign Plan.
Any changes to the Master Sign Plan constitute amendments to the PUD Plan.
2. Each of the two existing office towers of the Waterford Park are located
on separate parcels of record. On this basis, were it not for the
controlling influence of the PUD Plan, each of the existing buildings
would be eligible for a freestanding business sign up to 16 feet in height
of a maximum surface area of 64 square feet, responsive to the underlying
B -1 Zoning of the parcels.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. We find the proposed amendment to the Master Sign Plan for the Waterford
Park to allow a second freestanding sign of 90 square feet in area and 23
feet, 3 inches in height set back 20 feet from right -of -way line of the
west service drive to County Road 169 to be a reasonable plan amendment
considering the signage that is available to this location under
conventional B -1 Zoning and the overall scale of the project involved in
this MPUD.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for approval
of an amended MPUD Final Plan (Master Sign Plan) to permit a second
freestanding sign withi the Waterford Pa PUD (office portion).
Submitted by: v
Char es E. Dilleru , Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution for Approval of MPUD Final Plan (Master Sign Plan)
Amendment
2. Location Map
3. Petitioner's Submissions
4. Resolution 88 -686 Relating to the MPUD Final Plan for This Site
pc /cd /90039:dl)
APPROVING MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FINAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE
MASTER SIGN PLAN FOR RYAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (90039) (MPUD 86 -1)
WHEREAS, Ryan Construction Company has requested approval for a Mixed Use
Planned Unit Development Final Plan amendment to the Master Sign Plan for
property located at 505 and 605 North State Highway 169; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the 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
Ryan Construction Company for a Mixed Use Planned Unit Development Final Plan
amendment to the Master Sign Plan to add a second freestanding sign 23 feet, 3
inches in height and 90 square feet in area for property located at 505 and
605 North State Highway 169, subject to the following conditions:
1. No other PUD plan amendments are approved or implied by this action.
2. All applicable provisions of City Council Resolution 88 -686 establishing
conditions related to approval of the MPUD Final Site Plan shall be
complied with.
3. All applicable conditions of the MPUD Preliminary Plan /Conditional Use
Permit and Environmental Assessment Worksheet remain valid and shall be
complied with.
c
I
MIMS
lire
111 10.-
u
It
WE
4'
n3
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
D OF MINNESOTA, INC.
May 15, 1990
Mr. Charles Dillerud
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447
MAY 15 10
IDF j'LyMoUOWL
RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO THE MIXED USE PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT FOR RNWNL LTD. PARTNERSHIP /RYAN CONSTRUCTION ( #88049)
Dear Mr. Dillerud:
Regarding your correspondence dated May 11, 1990, and be way of review,
the Plymouth City Council by Resolution 88 -684 dated October 17, 1988,
authorized the Conditional Use providing for a Class I restaurant within
the above referenced Planned Unit Development and more specifically
within the 605 Waterford Office building. Our current request as per
our application of 4/23/90, is for a MPUD Conditional Use site plan
amendment to provide for the location and approval of a free standing
pylon sign for the restaurant.
Per item #1 of your letter, an itemized review of this application
conformance to the standards identified in the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance
Section 9, Subdivision A.2.a. and Section 10 Subidvision 3B -1,
Subparagraph B(1) ) is as follows:
1) Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan
The Waterford Office Park is a P.U.D. Zoned B -1 and guided CL.
A Class I restaurant is identified as an allowable use by
conditional permit according to the zoning ordinance within
that zoning /land use classification. Signage is permitted by
Section 10 of the Zoning Ordinance. This request has no
negative effect, and is in compliance with the Comprehensive
Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and
will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, morals or comfort.
The establishment of a Class I restaurant in this part of the
City and at this location will provide a necessary and
desirable service to the employment population within the
P.U.D. and to the general populous of the community. The
installation of a free standing sign to identify the location
will not endanger the public health, safety, morals or
comfort.
700 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE, 900 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402
TELEPHONE 612/339 -9847 FAX 612/337 -5552
Mr. Charles Dillerud
May 15, 1990
Page 2
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.
The overall complex, and uses provide therein, probably
enhances adjacent property values due to the quality of the
development. Employees within the adjacent industrial area my
find benefit with a quality restaurant in such close
proximity. The signage will enhance the opportunity for
profitability and success of the Restaurants and will have no
negative effect on neighborhood property values.
4) The establishment of the conditional use will not impede the
normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding
property or uses permitted in the District.
The conditional use is within the second phase of an orderly
developing P.U.D. I will not impede and more probably will
enhance the development of adjacent property.
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.
Access points and parking are the same as for the office
complex itself thereby eliminating unnecessary duplication of
facilities and creating land use efficiency. Evening use will
easily be accommodated by the parking provided on site. The
signage is intended to direct patrons to an abundance of off
street parking.
6) The conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to
the applicable regulations of the district in which it is
location.
The restaurant and its related signage is to be an integral
part of the office and support services provided. This
amendment will conform to all applicable regulations
identified by the P.U.D. and City requirements.
Regarding Item 3 of your letter, Chuck, my apologies for the omission of
dimension lines on the reduced site plan exhibit. A revised site plan
exhibit is included with this submittal and dimensioned to show a twenty
foot (20') setback from each property and right -of -way line.
n
Mr. Charles Dillerud
May 15, 1990
Page 3
Thanks for your help and the expeditious handling of this matter
Best regards,
RYAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
OF MINNESOTA, INC.
Alan W. Schackman
Vice President
AWS20 /11 /dm
Enclosure
cc: Pat Ryan
Jim Jetland
Sandy Hansen
P.S.: Please note that the PUD was incorrectly referenced as "Rockford
Road Plaza (90039)) in your 5/11/90 letter.
0
ul
Ln
Nin
O
N@Sw m
APR 25 1990
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
COMMUNR DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
OEp
i' O
a J
m
C
O
ca
cn
C
i i Z,
0
x!'21 L 1
l o
fV
a
0
0
LL
I
w
r`
to
d
to.
E
O
a. yOO
x
W E
t0 ccac
LL c E 'E-
C C 012
E C 0 c0
c °co
O 0rno
G LL to O
C m aC',a
Q. io EY adccoco
N= N O t N
7 N C N E NfC .r m. y s
N .
20
y d
cr- 3 fO L i T V
O p Y CX3tU _
U .p V d E
010.0 act ai o
f`0 y L d t C oC7ico3CF- m> c
m
m -0 N
rn to
N N D
O Cl O T
rN N
d 7cxycyv)
U cu M
mErnE
c0mrn
oam'cCD
t t >
U h
NMBT[m
APR 25 1990
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
ft
r
c
tm
N
c
O
ca
N c
ME
L O
N .d:
0 x
w
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 17th day
of October, 19 88 The following members were present:
Mayor Schneider, Councilmembers Vasiliou, Ricker, Zitur and Sisk
The following members were absent: None
Councilmember Ricker introduced the following Resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION 88 -686
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO MPUD FINAL
PLAN /PLAT FOR GROVES OFFICE PARK SECOND ADDITION FOR RNWNL LTD.
PARTNERSHIP /RYAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY (88049) (MPUD 86 -1)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the Final Plat and Development Contract
for the Groves Office Park Second Addition as requested by RNWNL Ltd.
Partnership /Ryan Construction Company;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the following to
be met, prior to recording of, and related to said plat:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
the City Policy in effect at issuance of Building Permit.
3. Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's
expense.
4. Removal of existing structures at the developer's expense.
5. Compliance with Policy Resolution No. 79 -80 regarding minimum floor
elevations for new structures in subdivisions adjacent to, or containing
any open storm water drainage facility.
6. Submittal of required utility, maintenance, and drainage easements as
approved by the City Engineer prior to filing the Final Plat, including
the northerly 80 feet of the lot immediately to the south.
7. No Building Permits to be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
Resolution No. 88 -686
Page 2
8. A variance from Zoning Ordinance Parking Standards is hereby granted to
permit deferral of construction of the 180 at -grade parking spaces
depicted on the north side of the Final Plan until the City determines the
constructed parking is deficient per Ordinance off - street parking
standards.
9. A variance from Subdivision Code Design Standards is hereby granted to
permit Final Plat approval without an easement for drainage and utility
purposes along a portion of the south property line of Lot 1, Block 1,
based on an existing easement for these purposes of more than 80 feet
across the parcel directly abutting on the south.
10. A variance is hereby granted to provisions of the City Code regarding fire
lanes to allow construction of the Stage II building without a fire lane
along the west side, as recommended by the Fire Chief.
11. All Site lighting, including visible parking ramp lighting shall be
designed so there is no glare, and so light sources are not visible beyond
the site.
12. The Preliminary Plan /Plat and Conditional Use Permit for the Groves Office
Park (MPUD 86 -1) is hereby amended to permit a height increase for
Building 2 from 11 stories to 12 stories, and to allow a Class I
restaurant of 10,000 square feet in Building 2.
13. An easement for driveway and access purposes to this site across and
through the existing access for the site to the south shall be submitted,
approved by the City Attorney, shall be filed with the Final'Plat.
The motion for adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded
by Councilmember Zitur , and upon vote being taken thereon,
the following voted in favor thereof: Mayor Schneidpr. Councilmembers
Vasiliou. Ricker. Zitur and Sisk
Tile following voted against or abstained None
Whereupon the Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
6.4.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: May 15, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: May 23, 1990
FILE NO.: 90019
PETITIONER: Vicksburg 55 Partnership
REQUEST: Division of Platted Property and Proof of Parking Plan in
the 1 -1 District
LOCATION: Northeast Corner of 32nd Avenue North and Vicksburg Lane
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: IP (Planned Industrial)
ZONING: I -1 (Planned Industrial)
BACKGROUND:
The last previous action concerning this site was taken by the City Council by
Resolution 80 -176 in March 1980 to approve a Site Plan amendment for an
addition to the then existing building located at the southeast corner of
State Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane.
Proposed by this application is the division of the existing parcel located at
the southeast corner of State Highway 55 and Vicksburg Lane into two parcels;
a 6.6 -acre northerly parcel that would remain the site of the existing 100,000
square foot warehouse /manufacturing facility and related parking; and a 2.06 -
acre southern parcel that would be sold for industrial development. Even
though this is platted property, the Planning Commission must consider this
proposed lot division because the "proof of parking" plan for the site must be
amended to accommodate the lot division.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Section 500.37 of the City Code (Subdivision Ordinance) provides for the
division of lots which are part of a recorded plat without the requirement
for a replatting of those parcels. Normally, such division (or
consolidation) is directed by staff to the City Council without Planning
Commission action. In this case, the proposal will create the need for an
amended "proof of parking" plan, and therefore the Planning Commission
must, by Ordinance, render its recommendation.
2. Section 10, Subdivision B, paragraph 5h (4) of the Zoning Ordinance
provides that when two or more uses could be accommodated in a commercial
building, parking must be constructed to meet the use that is of greatest
see next page)
File 90019
Page Two
parking demand per the standards of the Ordinance. The Planning
Commission may recommend, and the City Council may approve, a "proof of
parking" plan which proposes to initially install only a portion of the
required parking, but demonstrates that the full complement of required
parking could be installed on the property within Ordinance standards at a
later date, as determined by the City.
3. Approval of the amended Site Plan involving this entire parcel (8.6 acres)
in 1980 included a condition that stated, "Proof of parking plan approval
contemplates possible future use of vacant south area." Clearly the
vacant south area" that was referenced by that condition is the 2.06 -acre
parcel that is proposed to be created separate from the main parcel by
this action.
4. The applicant has prepared an amended "proof of parking" plan that
demonstrates the ability to accommodate the required total of 288 spaces
of off - street parking within the remaining 6.6 -acre site after the
division action to create the 2.06 -acre site to the south. The applicant
proposes no parking, in addition to the 108 existing, be constructed at
this time. The "proof of parking" plan includes the necessary traffic
island delineators as required by the Landscape Policy, together with the
all necessary fire lanes as required by the Fire Code. All setbacks and
parking space dimensional requirements of the code are met by this "proof
of parking" plan.
5. The parcel proposed to be created at the northeast corner of 32nd Avenue
North and Vicksburg Lane is of the size and physical characteristics
consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance for the
creation of a parcel in the I -1 (Planned Industrial) Zoning District.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. We find the "proof of parking" plan submitted for the 6.6 -acre remnant
parcel containing the existing structure of 100,800 square feet to be
consistent with the dimensional standards of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Landscape Policy, and therefore qualifying as a demonstration that parking
to the manufacturing standard of the Zoning Ordinance can be provided on
the remaining site.
2. We find the division of platted property proposed consistent with both
Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance standards with respect to size and other
physical characteristics for such lots in the I -1 Zoning District.
see next page)
File 90019
Page Three
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of the attached resolution providing for approval
of a lot division in the I -1 District and the attached resolution providing
for conditions to be met prior to recording of the lot division action and
amending the "prop" parking" _lancer the remymq parcel.
Submitted by:
Charles E. Dillerud,
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Lot Division
2. Resolution Setting Conditions Prior
Parking" Plan
3. Engineer's Memorandum
4. Location Map
5. Resolution 80 -176
6. Large Plans
pc /cd /90019:dl)
ity Development Coordinator
to Filing and Amending "Proof of
APPROVING LOT DIVISION FOR VICKSBURG 55 PARTNERSHIP (90019)
WHEREAS, Vicksburg 55 Partnership has requested approval for a lot division
for the creation of two parcels; a 6.6 -acre northerly parcel that would remain
the site of the existing 100,000 square foot warehouse /manufacturing facility
and related parking; and a 2.06 -acre southerly parcel that would be sold for
industrial development located at the northeast corner of 32nd Avenue North
and Vicksburg Lane;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the lot division
for Vicksburg 55 Partnership for property located at the northeast corner of
32nd Avenue North and Vicksburg Lane.
EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Lot 3, Block 1, PLAYHOUSE INDUSTRIAL PARK
To be divided as follows:
PARCEL A
Lot 3, Block 1, PLAYHOUSE INDUSTRIAL PARK, except that part of the west
484.96 feet of said Lot 3 which lies southerly of a line running from a
point in the east line of the west 484.96 feet of said Lot 3 therein
distant 160.00 feet north of the south line of said Lot 3 to a point in
the west line of said Lot 3 therein distant 210.00 feet north of the
southwest corner of said Lot 3.
PARCEL
That part of the west 484.96 feet of Lot 3, Block 1, PLAYHOUSE INDUSTRIAL
PARK, which lies southerly of a line running from a point in the east
line of the west 484.96 feet of said Lot 3 therein distant 160.00 feet
north of the south line of said Lot 3 to a point in the west line of said
Lot 3 therein distant 210.00 feet north of the southwest corner of said
Lot 3.
FURTHER, that the City Manager be authorized to make the necessary special
assessment corrections based upon City Policy when the division is approved by
Hennepin County.
t
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO LOT DIVISION
AND AMENDING "PROOF OF PARKING" PLAN FOR VICKSBURG 55 PARTNERSHIP (90019)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved a lot division for Vicksburg 55
Partnership located at the northeast corner of 32nd Avenue North and Vicksburg
Lane;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does direct the following
conditions to be met prior to recording of, and related to said lot
division /consolidation:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. No yard setback variances are granted or implied.
3. Compliance with Policy Resolution 79 -80 regarding minimum floor elevations
for new structures on sites adjacent to, or containing open storm water
drainage facilities.
4. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication prior to issuance
of building permit in accordance with City Policy in effect at the time
of building permit issuance.
5. No building permit is to be issued until the lot division is filed with
Hennepin County.
6. Submittal of all necessary utility easements prior to filing the lot
division with Hennepin County.
7. Construction of 108 of the required off - street parking spaces is
approved based on Site Plan demonstrating that 288 spaces can be
constructed on site pursuant to Section 10, Subdivision B, paragraph 5h
4) of the Zoning Ordinance, and will be constructed upon notification
of the need by the City without additional action by the City Council.
This resolution shall be recorded on the title of this parcel.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: May 16, 1990
FILE NO.: 90019
PETITIONER: Mr. Robert Dowden, Vicksburg 55 Partnership, 3920 Orleans Lane,
Plymouth, MN 55441
LOT DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION:LOT 3, BLOCK 1, PLAYHOUSE INDUSTRIAL PARK
LOCATION: North of 32nd Avenue, east of Vicksburg Lane, south of State
Highway 55 in the northwest quarter of section 21.
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.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are reviewed
annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that in effect at
the time of Lot Division /Consolidation approval:
4. Area assessments: NONE
5. Other additional assessments estimated: NONE
6. _ _ X Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required,
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any building
permits.)
N/A Yes No
7. X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100 year
high water elevation and conformance with the City's Comprehensive
Storm Drainage Plan.
8. 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.
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
13. A. The southerly parcel must grant an easement for the sanitary sewer and storm
sewer to the northerly parcel.
B. The southerly parcel must get sanitary swewer from the public utillities in
32nd Avenue.
C. There shall be no access from the southerly parcel to Vicksburg Lane.
Submitted by:"`
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
2
City Engineer
9
MAP
50010
I I I T rT 11 11 1 fl I Y T I 7r7
11nd A
IT if HAI 1
ICE /
Are,*
d.
rw
air.
do TH AV 4 a
c - a
ap
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a re ular meeting of the -City
Council of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, was a on the 17th day of
March , 19 80. The following rembers were present: ctIng Mayor
mbers Hoyt and Schneider
The following members were absent: Mayor Hunt, Co ncilmember Uave— porT
o ncilmember Hoyt introduced the following Resolution and moved
s adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 80- 176
APPROVING SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ST. CROIX VENTURES AT THE SOUTHWEST QUADRANT OF
THE INTERSECTION OF VICKSBURG LANE AND STATE HIGHWAY 55 (80010)
WHEREAS, St. Croix Ventures /Bob Dowden has requested approval of a site plan
amendment for an office, warehouse and manufacturing building located at the
southwest quadrant of the intersection of Vicksburg Lane and State Highway 55;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request and recommends its
approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLY-
MOUTH, MINNESOTA. that it ;hould and hereby does approve the request of St.
Croix Ventures /Bob Dowden for site plan amendment for an office, warehouse and
manufacturing building per plans staff dated February 17, 1980 located at the
southwest quadrant of the intersection of Vicksburg Lane and State Highway 55
subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Traih disposal facilities shall be within the building and there shall be
no outside storage of materials or products.
3. Fire hydrants and fire lanes shall be in accordance with City Codes and
Policies.
4. All signage shall be subject to City ordinance standards.
S. Elimination of existing curb cut access onto State Highway 55.
6. Location and design of curb cut onto 32nd Avenue North per Engineering
standards and City Ordinance.
7. "Proof of parking plan" approval contemplates possible future use of
vacant south area.
8. Submittal of required site performance financial guarantee termed for a
period of 24 months.
RaWlution 180 -176
Page 2
9. Provision for landscaping and plantings in accordance with City Landscape
Criteria to include credit for existing healthy trees.
10. Revision Gf abrupt grade change in east parking lot area to provide
appropriate drainage and safety configuration.
11. Variance is granted to parking setback at the northwest corner of the building
to extend to the proposed right -of -way line for 12 diagonal parking spaces
with a variance to within 5 feet of the building and permitting a southbound
one -way drivi to the main parking lot to be asphalted in accordance with
City standards.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolutivn was duly seconded
by m hneijer 0 and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: ActingMayor Neils, Councilmemters
Hoyt and Schneider •
The following Voted a afnst or a sta one
Whereupon the Resolution w is declared dul pass pt
Os• eat e
6. B.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: May 17, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: May 23, 1990
FILE NO.: 90038
PETITIONER: Len Busch Roses
REQUEST: Site Plan for the Construction of a Greenhouse Structure
LOCATION: North of Medina Road and West of County Road 101
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LAR (Living Area, Rural)
ZONING: FRD (Future Restricted Development)
BACKGROUND:
Over a period of many years, involving several construction stages, a sizeable
complex of structures consisting mainly of greenhouses has been constructed on
the subject parcel as well as the parcel owned by the same party immediately
to the northeast (fronting County Road 101). Because these facilities are
classified as "agricultural ", "greenhouses ", or dwellings, previous
construction has not been subject to Site Plan provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance, nor have the agricultural structures been subject to provisions of
the Building Code. A building permit is not required for the construction of
the greenhouses.
The City Council adopted Ordinance 89 -35 amending the portions of the Zoning
Ordinance dealing with Site Plans to include the requirement that all proposed
developments except agriculture permitted within the FRD District, and
dwellings, shall require the preparation and approval of a Site Plan.
Previously the Ordinance had excluded from the requirement of a Site Plan my
development activity in the FRD District.
The definition of "agriculture" specified in Section 4 includes only those
activities directly related to the growing of crops on open tracts of land and
the raising of animals or poultry. The growing of crops within greenhouses
would not qualify as "agriculture" under this definition and, thus, the
erection of more greenhouses is subject to the Zoning Ordinance Site Plan
review requirements.
This Site Plan is presented responsive to provisions of the Zoning Ordinance
requiring such review for development located in residential zoning districts,
and not located in the Urban Zoning District which corresponds with the
Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan classification for the property. The site
see next page)
Page Two
File 90038
upon which the greenhouses are proposed for construction is in the FRD Zoning
District (considered residential) and in the Living Area Rural (LAR)
classification, outside of the Metropolitan Urban Service Area, (therefore,
within an "Urban Zoning District ").
The applicant proposes the construction of tw o
greenhouse structure of 201,420 square feet. The
in appearance to the existing greenhouses. Th e
33,790 square feet to take place in 1990, and in
square feet is proposed.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
additions to an existing
additions would be identical
initial addition would be
1991 an addition of 64,890
1. The site on which the greenhouse addition is proposed is 35.94 acres
paralleling Medina Road for approximately 112 mile from the west City
limits easterly. This parcel is one of three owned by the Len Busch firm.
A second parcel lying to the northeast, consisting of 20 acres is the
location of another greenhouse complex of about the same size. The third
parcel lying north of the subject parcel of approximately 80 acres remains
open agricultural land. A home is also located on the subject parcel.
2. The subject parcel is located in the Elm Creek Watershed District and
contains no existing or planned hydrological features, including flood
plain or storm water ponding. The site is not within a Shoreland Overlay
District nor is it a part of a DNR designated protected wetland. The
north central portion of the site appears to include an area of Federally
regulated wetland. No woodlands of significance nor slopes of over 12
percent appear on the site.
A portion of this site, related to the area previously identified as
potential Federal wetlands, is not found to be suitable for either
agricultural development or urban development, with or without public
water and sewer. With this noted constraint the site is generally
suitable for. development. The proposed additions to the greenhouse
facility, based on recent aerial photos of the site, do not appear to
conflict with what remains of the wetland area in the north central
portion of the site. It appears that filling of this wetland area has
taken place prior to the time the aerial photos were taken in May, 1989.
No further encroachment on existing physical site constraints will take
place as a result of the additions subject to this Site Plan review.
3. The Development Review Committee has reviewed the limited Site Plan
information that has been submitted together with this application for
compliance with those City Codes, standards and policies that would be
applicable for development of this type of structure for this type of use
in the FRD District. The absence of public utilities serving this site,
either now or in the foreseeable future, results in certain public utility
see next page)
Page Three
File 90038
items normally reviewed during the DRC process not appearing on the Site
Plan graphics.
The applicant and his engineer have been supplied the checklist for Site
Plan submission, but have not addressed such factors as site landscaping,
trash containment, or offstreet parking with their Site Plan graphics.
4. With respect to Zoning Ordinance setback provisions for structures, the
proposed additions to the greenhouse facility meet or exceed all Zoning
Ordinance provisions related to nonresidential uses in the FRD Zone. The
minimum lot width of 500 feet is not met with respect to the westerly
portion of the subject lot, but this being a lot of record, no variances
are required. Ground coverage by structures on this parcel is currently
12.86 percent, and would be increased to 15.02 percent with the addition
labeled "1990" and to 19.17 percent including both the "1990" and the
1991" additions. Maximum lot coverage by structures in the FRD District
is 20 percent.
5. The Site Plan notes a proposed year of construction for each of the two
additions. The Zoning Ordinance provides that Site Plans that are
approved but for which no building permit has been applied for and issued
within one year of the approval of that Site Plan will become null and
void. In this case, if no building permit has been secured for the "1991"
addition by a date one year beyond the approval of this Site Plan the
approval will become null and void for that proposed addition.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The Site Plan graphics before the Planning Commission are the "second
round" following the staff letter to Mr. Busch dated May 11, 1990. We
cited in that letter what material must be included with a Site Plan
submission, and sent along the Site Plan checklist to ensure that Mr.
Busch was aware of this as well. While we recognize that certain items
that we would normally expect to see on a Site Plan regarding public
utilities obviously could not be included due to the location of this
site, certain other items such as landscaping offstreet parking and
driving areas, and trash enclosures could be. These should be addressed
consistent with the ordinance standards that apply, before approval of the
request.
2. Except with respect to the Site Plan data and information that is not
supplied we find the proposed Site Plan to be consistent with the
standards of City ordinances and policies.
3. The requirement for Site Plan review reflects the changing conditions and
growth in the City, and is not intended to impede or prohibit bona fide
development. The Community Development Director commented on this to Mr.
Busch recently in a letter (copy attached).
see next page)
Page Four
File 90038
It is significant here that urban residential development has been and
will be approved very close to this site which reflects the rural
character of the area which will now be changing. Review and evaluation
of those aspects of continued expansion that can have external impacts
upon the area - -no longer rural and agricultural - -are warranted.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of the attached draft resolution providing for the
approval of the Site Plan for Len Busch Roses to construct 98,680 square feet
of greenhouse addition to the existing facility located north of Medina Road
and west of County Road 101. We recommend conditions of approval that would
require the applicant to present a landscape plan, an offstreet parking plan,
and trash enclosure facility consistent with the terms of the Landscape Policy
and the Zoning Ordinance.
Submitted by:lQ
Charles E. Dillerud, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution for
2. Engineer's Memo
3. Ordinance 89 -35
4. Staff Letter of May
5. Blair Tremere Letter
6. Location Map
7. Large Plans
pc /cd /90038:jw)
Approval of Site Plan
11, 1990
of April 23, 1990
APPROVING SITE PLAN FOR LEN BUSCH ROSES (90038)
WHEREAS, Len Busch Roses has requested approval for a Site Plan for property
located north of Medina Road and west of County Road 101; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Len
Busch Roses for a Site Plan for property located north of Medina Road and west
of County Road 101, subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. No payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication or dedication of
land is required until such time that the land is subdivided for urban
development.
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 approved site improvements.
5. Any signage shall be in compliance with the Ordinance.
6. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and
approvals per Ordinance provisions.
7. Compliance with the Ordinance regarding the location of fire lanes.
8. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within an enclosure, and no
outside storage is permitted. Trash enclosure plans consistent with
Zoning Ordinance specifications shall be submitted prior to issuance of a
building permit.
9. An 8h x 11 inch "As Built" Fire Protection Plan shall be submitted prior
to the release or reduction of any site improvement bonds per City Policy.
10. Compliance with the standards of City Council Resolution 81 -273 regarding
site landscaping. A landscape plan consistent with this resolution shall
be submitted; and the Site Improvement Performance Agreement and financial
guarantee shall include the improvements of the landscape plan.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: May 17, 1990
FILE NO.: 90038
PETITIONER: Mr. Len Busch, Len Busch Roses, 4045 County Road 101, Plymouth, MN
55446
SITE PLAN: GREENHOUSE ADDITION
LOCATION: North of Medina Road, west of County Road 101, in Section 18.
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 - The developer shall waive their rights
for an assessment hearing for sanitary sewer, area charges and
watermain charges within the urban service area.
5. Other additional assessments estimated: The develoQer shall waive
their rights to an assessment hearing for the lateral sanitary
sewer lateral watermain and for the construction of Medina Road
within the urban service area.
LEGAL /EASEMENTS /PERMITS:
N/A Yes No
6. X _ _ Property is one parcel -
The approval of the site plan as proposed requires that a lot
consolidation be approved by the City Council and the necessary
resolution should be processed at the same time as the site plan
approval.
N/A Yes No
7. - -X Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The current City ordinance requires utility and drainage easements
ten feet (10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in
width adjoining side and rear lot lines. (If easements are required
it is necessary for the owner to submit separate easement documents
executed and in recordable form prior to the issuance of any
building permits.)
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. Drainage easements for
ponding purposes will be required for Pond EC -Pl to an elevation of
990.0.
9. X All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The following easements will be required for construction of
utilities. The Comprehensive Watermain Plan shows a 12" watermain
running along the east side of the parcel 18- 118 -22 -31 -0001 and
along the west and north line of the parcel 18- 118 -22 -13 -0003. The
Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan shows a 30" storm sewer and 36"
storm sewer from Medina Road to Pond EC -P1,
N/A Yes No
10. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. It should be noted that this
vacation is not an automatic process in conjunction with the
platting process. It is entirely dependent upon the City receiving
a petition for the vacation from the property owner; therefore, it
is their responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal
descriptions of easements proposed to be vacated.
11. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to the
City with this application -
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the City
Attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the required easements referred to above.
2-
N/A Yes No
0
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
Bassett Creek
Minnehaha Creek
X Elm Creek
Shingle Creek
Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
13. _ _ X Complies with Storm Drainage Plan -
The site plan will be submitted to the City's consulting engineer
for review to see if it is in conformance with the City's
Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. All of their recommendations
shall be incorporated in a revised plan. The grading and drainage
plan shall also indicate proposed methods of erosion control,
including the placement of silt fence in strategic locations.
Additionally, the following revisions will be necessary: Storm
sewer plans have not been submitted for review
N/A Yes No
14. X _ _ Necessary fire hydrants provided -
The City of Plymouth requires that all parts of a building such as
the one proposed be within 300 feet of a fire hydrant. It will be
necessary to locate hydrants in such a manner that the site plan
complies with this section of the City Ordinance. Their proposed
building is not within the urban service area.
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. See Item 14.
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. See Item 14.
3-
N/A Yes No
17. X _ _ Hydrant valves provided -
All new fire hydrants shall be valved with 6" gate valves per City
Engineering Guidelines Detail Plate No. W -2. This plate should be
referenced on the site plan. See Item 14.
18. X _ Sanitary sewer clean -outs provided -
It will be necessary to provide clean -outs on the proposed internal
sanitary sewer system at a maximum of 100 foot intervals. The
proposed addition is not within the urban service area.
19. X Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection of
and
No new access is proposed to County Road 101.
N/A Yes No
20. _ _ X All existing street right -of -ways are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on County Road 101 as
required by Hennepin County.
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. -
No parking is proposed with this application.
4-
N/A Yes No
22. _ _ X Curb and gutter provided -
The City requires B -612 concrete curb and gutter at all entrances
and where drainage must be controlled, Curb Stone may be used where
it is not necessary to control drainage. For traffic control either
B -612 or curb stone is required around the bituminous surfaced
parking lot. The site plan shall be revised to indicate compliance
with this requirement.
23. _ X Complies with parking lot standards -
The City will require that all traveled areas within the parking
lot, as well as the proposed entrances, shall be constructed to a
7 -ton standard City design with six inches of Class 5 100% 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 Item No's 1. 2, 7, 8. 9, 11, 12,
13, 20, 22, 23, and 26.
5-
SPECIAL CONDITIONS REQUIRED:
Submitted by:
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
ORDINANCE NO. 89 -35
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PORTIONS OF THE ORDINANCE 80 -9 ADOPTED JUNE 16, 1980, AS
AMENDED, AND KNOWN AS THE PLYMOUTH ZONING ORDINANCE, RELATIVE TO REQUIREMENTS
FOR GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 11, Subdivision A is hereby amended to read as
follows:
All proposed development except these Agriculture permitted within the
FRD District, and except dwellings permitted in the FRD. R -1A and R -1B
Districts shall conform with the provisions of this
subdivision when i-mg with respect to platting, rezoning, or site
plan approval.
Section 2. Section 11, Subdivision A, Paragraph 6 is amended as follows:
6. A site plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission and approved
by the City Council, before building permits are issued for the
development or alteration of structures and before development or
redevelopment of sites commences on any property in the City whieh is
the same zones whieh are also elassified as Planmed Unit Development,
except for Agriculture permitted in the FRD District, except for
dwellings permitted in the FRD. R -1A. and R -1B Districts and except as
otherwise provided in this section.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its
passage and publication.
Adopted by the City Council this 20th day of Novembe r, 1989.
Mayor
ATTEST
142
City Clerk
St°aek Material - indicates deleted text
Underscore - indicates new text
cc /bt /Sec.11:jw)
May 11, 1990
Mr. Len Busch
Len Busch Roses
4045 Highway 101
Plymouth, MN 55446
SUBJECT: LEN BUSCH. SITE PLAN FOR GREENHOUSE ADDITION (90038)
Dear Mr. Busch:
This letter is written to forward review comments and observations submitted
by the staff members at the May 8, 1990, staff review committee meeting
regarding the above referenced application. During the staff discussion of
the application materials submitted, the following items were addressed:
1. The Site Plan you have submitted does not appear to reflect the correct
land parcel (per the tax records) upon which the new greenhouse facility
will be constructed. It appears that the grouping of greenhouse
structures located adjacent to Medina Road, to which the proposed new
greenhouse structure will be added, is a part of a land parcel that
parallels Medina Road all the way to the west City limits, but does Lot
include the parcel of land upon which the other greenhouse structures are
located which front County Road 101.
0 As the Site Plan graphic is now presented, the coverage by all structures
over the parcels of land on which they are located appears to be 23
percent. The addition of the new greenhouse structure will increase this
to 28 percent. The maximum land coverage by structures in the FRD
District permitted is 20 percent. Based on the current Site Plan graphic
you have submitted, it would be necessary for you to also apply for a
variance.
As noted above, it appears from our records that the southerly group of
greenhouse structures are physically located on a tax parcel that extends
along Medina Road all the way to the west City limits. It also appears
that the greenhouse structures that are fronting County Road 101 are on a
separate tax parcel from the one above noted. If that is the case, a re-
drawn Site Plan showing the southerly greenhouses (including the one that
is now proposed) on the correct tax parcel may result in a ground coverage
of under 20 percent, thereby eliminating the need for a variance request.
3. I have enclosed a copy of the Site Plan checklist which provides for the
type of data that is required on all Site Plans. Please review this list
with the your engineer, and have the updated plans include all of this
information.
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550 -5000
Mr. Len Busch
May 11, 1990
Page 2
Should you,
one or more
notation to
provided on
for some reason, determine that it is impossible to provide
items of information found on the checklist, please make a
that effect and the reason that the information cannot be
the Site Plan graphic.
4. I have tentatively scheduled consideration of this matter by the Planning
Commission at their meeting of May 23, 1990. To continue that agenda
position, it will be necessary for you to provide the above information
early the week of May 14. If 1 have not received that information by May
16, 1990, 1 will be unable to continue the agenda position that I have now
tentatively set.
The purpose of this letter is to notify you of those review items identified
during the staff review of tht application materials. You should respond to
the above review comments in written and /or graphic form as appropriate. Your
earliest response in written and /or graphic form to the above points will
permit us to continue processing the application for review by the Planning
Commission. You should respond to all of the items.
Once the additional and /or revised information is submitted, the staff members
will in turn review the information to verify that all the items have been
addressed. If any additional comments arise from that staff review,
correspondence similar to this letter will be promptly forwarded to you. If
you have questions relating to the above review comments, or if you feel a
more detailed discussion (through a meeting with the staff members) is
warranted, please feel free to contact our office at your earliest
convenience.
We anticipate working with you through the completion of the review process.
Hopefully, this information will assist you.
Sincerely,
Ae illerud
Community Development Coordinator
cc: File 90038
dre /cd /90038:dl)
CITY OF
April 23, 1990 PLYMOUTR
Mr. Leonard Busch
4045 County Road 101
Plymouth, MN 55446
Dear Leonard:
I regret that I was unable to reach you in response to your telephone call
Friday. I will be out of the office for several days but I have had an
opportunity to review your recent request for permission to build another
greenhouse with Building Official Joe Ryan and with Community Development
Coordinator Chuck Dillerud. I understand you also discussed the matter with
Associate Planner Al Cottingham.
I first want to clarify for you, as I did for the City Manager, the specific
situation at hand: unlike the case about a year ago when we dealt with
whether your structures constituted agricultural buildings within the meaning
of the State Building Code and thus were exempt from building permit
requirements, this matter is a zoning consideration.
The Planning Commission and City Council approved an amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance which clarified the requirements for site plan approval. The
language has been provided to you on your earlier visits; it states that
development in the Future Restricted Development District is subject to review
and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. The exceptions to
that requirement are single family dwellings and agriculture which has been
defined by the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance for many years as the "growing of
soil crops in the customary manner on open tracts of land.... ".
The requirement for site plan approval for developments is consistent with the
Plymouth Planning and Zoning Policies and Practices; the apparent exemption of
that for many years for developments in the Future Restricted Development
District reflected the rural and agricultural nature of much of Plymouth when
the ordinance was written. You and I have discussed this subject many times
and I think you are aware that urbanization has now come to your part of
Plymouth.
The Planning Commission and City Council recognized this which means that with
the advent of municipal utilities urban development will follow and thus the
level of attention traditionally paid to nonresidential development is
warranted and necessary despite the zoning classification which signifies the
lack of municipal utilities to a specific property. The City Zoning Ordinance
contains requirements designed to ensure that development other than single
family homes and nonresidential land uses, such as yours, are compatible with
the standards of the City. Whereas much of your operation has been
established and constructed over the years in the rural /agricultural
environment, that environment is changing rapidly. The City Council, for
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550 -5000
Mr. Leonard Busch
April 23, 1990
Page Two
example, at their last meeting approved a preliminary plat for over 100 single
family dwelling units on land south of you, north of County Road 24. We have
just received plans from another developer for over 100 units for the property
north of that development just south of Medina Road. Further proposals for
urban development in this area are expected in the coming months in response
to the approval by the City Council of Capital Improvement Programs which will
extend sanitary sewer and water into this area.
This is consistent with the City's planning and the requirements for review of
your plans in a more formal manner by the Planning Commission and City
Council. This is a straight forward process described in the ordinance. I
understand that you have been provided with the information sheets and
checklists that relate to this.
There is not a presumption on our part that the use is inappropriate or that
it will not be approved. The key consideration is getting the information
required by the ordinance so we can assist you in expediting the application
through the review process. Chuck Dillerud and Joe Ryan are both familiar
with the Zoning Ordinance requirements; I suggest that you coordinate your
efforts with Chuck Dillerud who is in charge of the plan review process and
scheduling matters before the Planning Commission /City Council.
I will be pleased to meet with you when I return and I will give you a call
later in the week. I urge you to contact Chuck Dillerud however and clarify
any questions you may have about the informational requirements.
Sincerely,
Blair Tremere
Community Development Director
cc: City Manager James G.
Community Development
Building Official Joe
File
pl /bt /bush:jw)
Willis
Coordinator Chuck Dillerud
Ryan
J
f
Z=
TW
L
ELM c K
GOLF C RSE
1
i
T.« P A U
N N E P
r
r- \
fir`,,
U)
W
U)
0
0
0 (
f)
L.L LLJ
z
L.Li z
UN
D
U) OD
LL- Z
0 ::) OD o
Lli
z
0 z
U a-
U- LLJ
Ld Z
U) z
ZU T
ro
a 0
Of
5E
c-
C)
V 27
C)
V, (D
C
k+- —
C
4
77
D E
S- ru
ru
Cl
CIL rl >
LILJ L) V) +j 73
r c nj cn i3 Ln
73 Ln 4
C 7j In i C
V (_- f" C) T2
ru
vi j T-) ro
U-) G Ln 13 0 E E
0
a) 7) 'T, Ln Z U)
U
C) c C: V)
0 a
4-) flo ill 4- lu CD (D
C-) I O V) J= C 0 C: i 4-) D Cl)
4, LLJ E o
U L 3 u V)
j
C2 W C:
4 T) lu U.
C) t:T) 0 L
V E 7) ru
V) (L
UJ
o ru 1) (a) 4- CL) (a CD
C:L cv -C:) 0 i: U-)* (2) __j C
L/I f
4-
CD 0 C7)
CD ea C (D u ra Q) 1 M: LLJ " V) C) 0 co
1
MEMO
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447
DATE: May 25, 1990
TO: James G. Willis, City Manager
FROM: Blair Tremere, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS' RULING REGARDING
MR. GREGORY BOHNERT (05- 01 -90)
The Board of Zoning considered the variance request by Mr. Bohnert at its
meeting on May 15, 1990, and, on a split (3 -2 -1) vote, approved the variance.
Board review of this matter included discussion of the possible precedent that
may have already been established in this neighborhood regarding two prior
similar requests which were approved.
The Zoning Ordinance provides that a Board action may be appealed by any
party, and, in this case, I find that an appeal by me is warranted.
Mr. Bohnert has been contacted by the Building Official both orally and in
writing; it has been explained that the concern leading to the appeal is not
focused on his specific plan. The concern is that the City Council should
review this case and be aware of precedent that not only may have been set but
would be set with this action. Mr. Bohnert's contractor had not applied for a
building permit as of this writing.
Courts have been clear in zoning decisions that when a municipality grants
variances from the same Ordinance standard numerous times where it is not
clear that the variance criteria have been met in each case and where the
basis for the variance is that previous variances have been granted in similar
cases, the City has effectively altered standard.
The problem is not particularly with Mr. Bohnert or with the other two
variances; the problem is the potential of a similar case where a variance
request would be denied, despite the precedent.
Therefore, we concluded that it would be appropriate to appeal the Board's
action and to refer this matter to the City Council on June 4. The agenda
packet for that meeting will include the detailed information about this and
the previous cases as well as the minutes of the Board action.
Memo (Cont.)
May 25, 1990
Page 2
The policy question that will be before the Council essentially is whether the
Ordinance should be amended if a variance is deemed appropriate in this case
on the basis (totally or partially) that it is the latest of several in the
same area under similar circumstances.
Attachment
1. Letter from Joe Ryan to Mr. Bohnert
pl /bt /app:dl)
May 23, 1990 PUMOUTR
Mr. and Mrs. Gregory Bohnert
845 Ranchview Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55447
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Bohnert:
This letter is to inform you that the Director of Community
Development, Blair Tremere, has reviewed the action taken by the
Board of Zoning Adjustments and Appeals on your Variance request
on May 15, 1990, and has determined that staff will appeal the
Board' Ruling. This appeal will be considered by the City
Council, at their meeting on June 4, 1990.
The basis of the appeal which is provided for in the ordinance is
the possible precedent- setting pattern which this action may
represent. The appeal is not based upon your specific plans but
upon the Board action which was not unanimous and which followed
consideration of other similar requests.
Please be advised that a building permit will not be issued by
our office for your proposed garage addition until such time
final determination and authorization has been granted by the
Plymouth City Council. Please feel free to contact me at 550-
5031 should you have any further questions.
Sincerely,
Joe R
Building Official
cc: Community Development Director Blair Tremere
File
Enclosure
jr /bohnert:tw)
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD, PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447, TELEPHONE (612) 550 -5000