HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Packet 08-22-1990k
SSA.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 16, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 22, 1990
FILE NO.: 90071
PETITIONER: Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Plymouth
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat and Final Plat for Glacier Meadows Second
Addition for a Single Family Lot of 21,522 Square Feet
LOCATION: Southwest Corner of Fernbrook Lane and County Road 6
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Residential)
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential)
BACKGROUND:
On November 4, 1984, the City Council, by Resolution 84 -790, approved the
Final Plat and Development Contract for the "Glacier Meadows" subdivision for
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Plymouth. One parcel of that Final
Plat was a "Outlot A" of 9,078 square feet.
Subsequent to the Glacier Meadows plat, road construction acquisition related
to County Road 6 resulted in a remnant parcel after acquisition of an existing
home adjacent to "Outlot A" of the Glacier Meadows subdivision. This remnant
parcel had a gross area of nearly 21,000 square feet, but a reduced net area
of 12,444 square feet after the right -of -way taking for County Road 6. The
remnant, however, remained in the ownership of the City of Plymouth.
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority proposes a Preliminary and Final Plat
the two parcels (Outlot A of Glacier Meadows and the remnant parcel from the
County Road 6 taking) to create single building lot served by the cul -de -sac
at the north end of.Glacier Lane. The Housing and Redevelopment Authority
plans to develop a home consistent with the existing neighborhood.
Notice of this Public Hearing 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.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. The lot proposed by this platting action will be 21,522 square feet, in
excess of the 18,500 square foot minimum lot size in the R -1A Zoning
District in which it is located. In addition, the lot design will permit
the construction of a home that will maintain the R -1A setback standards
of 15 feet for side yard; 35 feet for front yard (to Glacier Lane,
Fernbrook Lane, and County Road 6); and minimum lot depth in the
see next page)
File 90071
Page Two
north /south orientation. The proposed plat meets the minimum subdivision
code and Zoning Ordinance standards for design in all respects.
2. The plat is located in the Bassetts Creek Watershed District and contains
no wetlands, Flood Plain Overlay District, Shoreland Overlay District, or
City of Plymouth designated storm water holding areas. The site does not
contain woodlands or steep slopes considered significant by the Physical
Constraints Analysis. The plat is suitable for urban development with
municipal utilities, consistent with the Plymouth Physical Constraints
Analysis.
3. Section 500 of the Plymouth City Code provides that the Planning
Commission shall hold a Public Hearing with respect to the proposed
Preliminary Plat and submit its recommendations with respect to the
proposed plat to the City Council. The Final Plat may be approved by the
City Council if it is consistent with the Preliminary Plat.
4. The Grading Plan presented for the Preliminary Plat provides for a berm of
5 feet located at the extreme northeast corner of the lot to screen the
new residential structure from the impacts of County Road 6 and the
intersection of County Road 6 with Fernbrook Lane.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The proposed plat, in all respects, responds affirmatively to the
standards of both the Zoning Ordinance for R -1A zoned property and the
Subdivision Ordinance with respect to overall subdivision design.
2. The natural site features observed on the site are limited, and the design
reflects the preservation of those natural site features to the extent
feasible.
3. The Final Plat is consistent with the Preliminary Plat.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend aiaDr oval of the Prelimina
subject to the st a conditions plata—
Submitted by:
Char es E. Dil eru ommunity
ATTACHMENTS:
and Final Plats as designed,
I4s type.
veiopment Loorainator
1. Draft Resolution Approving Preliminary Plat
2. Draft Resolution Approving Final Plat
3. Draft Resolution Setting Conditions Prior to Recording
4. Engineer's Memorandum
5. Location Map
6. Large Plans
pc /cd /90071:dl)
0
APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF
PLYMOUTH FOR GLACIER MEADOWS 2ND ADDITION (90071)
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Plymouth has requested
approval for a Preliminary Plat to create a single family lot of 21,522 square
feet for property located at the southwest corner of Fernbrook Lane and County
Road 6; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called
Public Hearing and recommends approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Plymouth for a Preliminary Plat to
create a single family lot of 21,522 square feet for property located at the
southwest corner of Fernbrook Lane and County Road 6, subject to the following
conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Memorandum.
2. Removal of all dead or dying trees from the property at the owner's
expense.
3. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication in accordance with
the Dedication Policy in effect at the time of recording of the Final
Plat.
4. Street names shall comply with the City Street Naming System.
5. 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.
6. No building permits shall be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
7. Incorporation of tree protection provisions in the Final Plat and
Development Contract approval.
APPROVING FINAL PLAT FOR THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF PLYMOUTH
FOR GLACIER MEADOWS 2ND ADDITION (90071)
WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Plymouth has requested
approval for Final Plat for the creation of a single family lot of 21,522
square feet for property located at the southwest corner of Fernbrook Lane and
County Road 6; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request and recommends
approval; and,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the Final Plat for
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Plymouth for Glacier Meadows 2nd
Addition consisting of a single family lot of 21,522 square feet for property
located at the southwest corner of Fernbrook Lane and County Road 6; and,
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO FINAL PLAT FOR
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF PLYMOUTH FOR GLACIER MEADOWS 2ND
ADDITION (90071)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the Final Plat for the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority of Plymouth for Glacier Meadows 2nd Addition
consisting of a single family lot of 21,522 square feet for property located
at the southwest corner of Fernbrook Lane and County Road 6;
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
City Policy in effect at the time of recording of the plat.
3. No yard setback variances are granted or implied.
4. Submittal of required utility and drainage easements as approved by the
City Engineer prior to filing the Final Plat.
5. No building permits to be issued until the Final Plat is filed and
recorded with Hennepin County.
6. Access shall be limited to Glacier Lane and prohibited from County Road 6
and Fernbrook Lane.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M O
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: August 16, 1990
FILE NO.: 90071
PETITIONER: Milt Dale, Housing Redevelopment Authority, City of Plymouth, 3400
Plymouth Boulevard, Plymouth, MN 55447
FINAL PLAT: GLACIER MEADOWS 2ND ADDITION
LOCATION: South of County Road 6, west of Fernbrook Lane in the southeast 1/4
of Section 28
N/A Yes No
1. XX Watermain area assessments have been levied based on proposed use.
2. _ XX Sanitary sewer area assessments have been levied based on proposed
use.
3. _ X SAC and REC charges will be payable at the time building permits
are issued. These are in addition to the assessments shown in No
1 and No. 2.
Area charges are subject to change periodically as they are
reviewed annually on January 1. The rate assessed would be that
in effect at the time of final plat approval.
4. Area assessments: None
5. Other additional assessments estimated: None
LEGAL /EASEMENTS /PERMITS:
N/A Yes No
6. _ XX Complies with standard utility /drainage easements -
The City will require utility and drainage easements ten feet
10') in width adjoining all streets and six feet (6') in width
adjoining side and rear lot lines.
1
t
N/A Yes No
7. X All standard utility easements required for construction are
provided -
The City will require twenty foot (20') utility and drainage
easements for proposed utilities along the lot lines where these
utilities are proposed to be installed. This item has been
reviewed with the final construction plans and the following
changes are necessary:
8. X Complies with ponding requirements -
The City will require the dedication of drainage easements for
ponding purposes on all property lying below the established 100
year high water elevation and conformance with the City's
comprehensive storm water drainage plan.
9. X All existing unnecessary easements and rights -of -way have been
vacated -
It will be necessary to vacate the obsolete easements /right -of -way
to facilitate the development. This is not an automatic process
in conjunction with the platting process. It is the owner's
responsibility to submit a petition as well as legal descriptions
of easements proposed to be vacated. The existing street right -
of -way for Glacier Lane north of the Glacier Lane cul -de -sac.
10. X The Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title has been submitted to
the City with this application - If it is subsequently determined
that the subject property is abstract property, then this
req- uirement does not apply.
It will be necessary for the property owner to provide the city
attorney with the Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title in order
that he may file the
11. _ _ X All necessary permits for this project have been obtained -
The following permits must be obtained by the developer:
DNR X Bassett Creek
Mn DOT Minnehaha Creek
X Hennepin County Elm Creek
MPCA _ Shingle Creek
State Health Department _ Army Corps of Engineers
Other
The developer must comply with the conditions within any permit.
2 -
N/A Yes No
12. X
13. X
14. X
f
Conforms with the City's grid system for street names -
The names of the proposed streets in the plat must conform to the
City grid system for street names. The following changes will be
necessary.
Conforms with the City's adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan -
The following revisions must be made to conform with the City's
adopted Thoroughfare Guide Plan.
Acceleration /deceleration lanes provided -
Acceleration /deceleration lanes are required at the intersection
of and
15. _ X All existing street rights -of -way are required width -
Additional right -of -way will be required on as shown on the Final
Plat.
UTILITIES:
N/A Yes No
16. X Conforms with City standards requiring the developer to construct
utilities necessary to serve this plat -
In accordance with City standards, the developer shall be
responsible for constructing the necessary sanitary sewer, water,
storm sewer and streets needed to serve this plat. A registered
professional engineer must prepare the plans and profiles of the
proposed sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer facilities and
streets to serve the development.
3 -
i
N/A Yes No
17. X
18. X
19. x --
20. X
21. X _
Final utility plans submitted comply with all City requirements -
The developer has submitted the required construction plans for
the proposed sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer facilities;
and has also furnished profiles of these utilities as well as the
proposed street system (public and private).
Per developer's request final plans will be prepared by the City.
If it is their desire to have the City construct these facilities
as part of its Capital Improvements Program, a petition must be
submitted to the City. The cutoff date for petitions is October 1
of the year preceding construction, if the developer is paying
100% of the cost.
Minimum basement elevations -
Minimum basement elevations must be established for the following
lots.
The construction plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Water Distribution Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
The construction plans conform to the City's adopted Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan -
The following revisions will be required:
4 -
N/A Yes No
J
22. X It will be necessary to contact Bob Fasching, the City's public
utility foreman, 24 hours in advance of making any proposed
utility connections to the City's sanitary sewer and water
systems. The developer shall also be responsible for contacting
Jim Kolstad of the Public Works Department for an excavating
permit prior to any digging within the City right -of -way. All
water connections shall be via wet tap.
N/A Yes No
23. _ _ X Complies with Storm Drainage Plan - •
The grading, drainage and erosion control plan has been submitted
to the City's consulting engineer for review to see if it is in
conformance with the City's Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan.
All of their recommendations shall be incorporated in a revised
plan. The grading and drainage plan shall also indicate proposed
methods of erosion control, including the placement of silt fence
in strategic locations. Additionally, the following revisions
will be necessary: Silt fence shall be provided along the north
east and south property lines.
24. A. The developer shall be responsible for extending the sanitary sewer service
from the mainline north of the Glacier Lane cul -de -sac.
Submitted by: ,/
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
5 -
1
r
I
z•
i
i
1
I
i
t4566
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 16, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 22, 1990
FILE NO.: 90074
PETITIONER: Independent School District #284 /Crossroads Community
Church
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit to Allow Church Use of a School
Facility as a Temporary Site for Worship and Religious
Education
LOCATION: Southeast Corner of Teakwood Lane and Sunset Trail
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: Public /Semi- Public
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential)
BACKGROUND:
By Resolution 89 -288, the City Council on June 5, 1989 approved a Site Plan
and Conditional Use Permit involving an addition of 2,387 square feet to the
Sunset Hill School. As a part of this Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit
action, fire lanes and a fire hydrant water loop were constructed to serve the
school facility consistent with current fire code requirements.
Proposed by this application is the utilization of the 4,000 square foot
cafeteria area and the school parking facilities for worship services on
Sunday mornings.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in official City newspaper,
and all property owners within 500 feet have been notified.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Proposed is the use of the cafeteria portion of the Sunset Hill School for
worship services between 9 a.m. and 12 noon on Sundays with an average
attendance of 40. The entire 120 stall off - street parking area of the
Sunset Hill School would be available for use of church attendees.
2. The proposal must respond positively to the six Conditional Use Permit
criteria to allow a place of worship in the R -1A Zoning District. We have
attached a copy of the six criteria that must be addressed and the
petitioner's narrative regarding these criteria.
see next page)
File 90074
Page Two
3. The school site meets current Zoning Ordinance standards for
nonresidential uses (as both a school and a place of worship are defined)
in the R -1A Zoning District.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The application is responsive to the requirements of a Conditional Use
Permit for a place of worship. There should not be a parking problem on
this site with the current membership of the church. The site meets
Zoning Ordinance standards for "place of worship ".
2. The Conditional Use Permit should be reviewed annually to assure that the
needs of the congregation do not exceed the parking limitations of the
site or the occupancy limits of the building.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit consistent with the
list of conditions on the attache aft reso 'on of approval.
J
i Y r
Submitted by: 'J .i j;
Charles E. Dili erud-, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Approving Conditional
Existing School
2. Petitioner's Narrative
3. Location Map
pc /cd /90074:dl)
Use Permit for Place of Worship at an
N
I
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
284 /CROSSROADS COMMUNITY CHURCH AT SUNSET HILL SCHOOL (90074)
WHEREAS, Independent School District #284 /Crossroads Community Church has
requested approval for a Conditional Use Permit to allow church use of a
school facility as a temporary site for worship and religious education for
Sunset Hill School located at the southeast corner of Teakwood Lane and Sunset
Trail; 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
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does
Independent School District #284 /Crossroads Community
Use Permit to allow church use of a school facility
worship and religious education for Sunset Hill
southeast corner of Teakwood Lane and Sunset Trail,
conditions:
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
approve the request by
Church for a Conditional
as a temporary site for
School located at the
subject to the following
1. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, regulations and ordinances,
and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation.
2. The permit is issued to Independent School District #284 for the proposed
Crossroads Community Church use.
3. The site shall be maintained in a sanitary manner.
4. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within approved designated
areas.
5. No signage is allowed relative to the use.
6. The permit shall be reviewed annually to assure compliance with the
conditions.
7. All parking shall be off - street in designated areas which comply with the
Zoning Ordinance.
7z
JUL 1
REQUEST: C T`1'` 0Q
To: City of Plymouth C0WAUNITYL'
By: Crossroads Community Church, Richard Doebler, pastor
For: Conditional Use Permit to allow our congregation to use the Sunset
Hills Elementary School cafeteria to conduct worship services until
we can move to permanent facilities.
DETAILS:
Our young congregation (incorporated in 1985) desires to rent facilities at
the Sunset Hills Elementary School for its weekly Sunday morning worship
services between 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon. Our current average attendance is
about 40, with moderate growth expected over the next year. The cafeteria
approximately 40, x 1001) should serve our needs well over this period.
For church worship services to be conducted in this R -2 Zone, we feel that we
would meet the following criteria from Section 9, Subdivision A of the
Plymouth Zoning Ordinance:
1) Compliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
Our limited use (three hours per week) requires no property or structural
charges. We plan to use the existing educational facilities as they are.
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.
Our goals as a chiurch are to worship God, to support and encourage the
members of our own congregation, and, where we can, to offer hope,
physical comfort and spiritual benefit to any of our neighbors who desire
it. In general, we desire to enhance the community and its standards, not
to be detrimental to it.
3) The co:ditional 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.
Our physical impact on surrounding properties will be negligible. Much
less traffic and far fewer people would be involved in our Sunday worship
services than during the weekday activities held in conjunction with
school and extra - curricular activities.
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.
Our congregation plans to meet at the time least likely to interfere with
regular activities and area development so that no problem should be
caused for surrounding property owners.
5) Adequate measure have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress,
and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public
streets.
Traffic patterns indicate less use on Sunday mornings than on regular
school days. With an average of only twelve to fifteen cars using the
school parking lot, all parking will be off street and no traffic
congestion should occur.
6) Th-- conditional use shall, in all other respects, conform to the
applicable regulations of the district in which it is located.
Our desire is to work with our neighbors and the City of Plymouth to
continue to uphold community standards and to further improve this area.
We intend to comply with all city ordinances and to cooperate with all
reasonable requests made by the city, neighboring property owners and
residents, and Independent School District #284.
pp
slim
W AT
ME
r
mml
4p
mWE9
Sp i
i
1' ' I•• Z 1 V WN V• 77 'F
ISM S6CMCN 9, S[IEDr%rmc O A
2. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Commission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recormendation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Commission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) Conpliance with and effect upon the Ccmprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will prcmmote 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.
forns:o >pl /cup.stnd /s) 10/89
mac.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 16, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 22, 1990
FILE NO.: 90075
PETITIONER: Independent School District #284 /Woodridge Church
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit to Allow Church Use of a School
Facility as a Temporary Site for Worship and Religious
Education at Wayzata Sr. High School
LOCATION: Northwest Corner of Vicksburg Lane and Gleason Lake Road
305 Vicksburg Lane North)
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: Public /Semi- Public
ZONING: R -1A (Low Density Single Family Residential)
BACKGROUND:
There have been a number of Community Development applications processed for
the Wayzata Sr. High School for the past several years. Most recent was an
amended Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit together with Zoning Ordinance
variances to construct a press box in excess of the permitted height for
accessory structures. This action was approved by the City Council on
November 20, 1989. A Conditional Use Permit is also in force permitting the
use of portable classroom facilities at the high school structure. Review of
that Conditional Use Permit is to take place during 1990.
This application proposes the use of the auditorium and cafeteria areas of the
Wayzata Sr. High School, together with the entire Wayzata Sr. High School
parking lot as a parking resource for Sunday morning worship services and
related educational activities.
Notice of this Public Hearing has been published in the official City
newspaper, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Use of the 900 -seat auditorium and large cafeteria of the Wayzata Sr. High
School is proposed for Sunday mornings from 9 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. The
church indicates that Sunday morning attendance could average 200. The
Wayzata Sr. High School site provides 526 off - street parking spaces that
would be available for use by church service attendees.
see next page)
File 90075
Page Two
2. A Conditional Use Permit for this facility must respond positively to the
six Conditional Use Permit criteria to allow for a place of worship in the
R -1A Zoning District. We have attached a copy of the six criteria that
must be addressed. We have also attached the petitioner's narrative
regarding these criteria.
3. The school site meets current Zoning Ordinance standards for
nonresidential uses (as both a school and a place of worship are defined)
in the R -1A Zoning District.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. The application is responsive to the requirements for a Conditional Use
Permit for a place of worship. No parking problems should result from the
use of the site at the scale proposed due to the extensive off - street
parking currently available.
2. The site meets Zoning Ordinance standards for a "place of worship ".
3. The Conditional Use Permit should be reviewed annually to assure the needs
of the congregation will not exceed the parking limitations of the site or
the applicable code occupancy regulations for the building.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit consistent with the
attached list of reoormnended conlLti ons .
Submitted by:
ryes E. -DiTlerua, Community Development Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Resolution for Approval of Conditional Use Permit
2. Location Map
3. Conditional Use Permit Criteria
4. Petitioner's Narrative
pc /cd /90075:dl)
APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
284 /WOODRIDGE CHURCH AT WAYZATA SR. HIGH SCHOOL (90075)
WHEREAS, Independent School District #284 /Woodridge Church has requested
approval for a Conditional Use Permit to allow church use of a school facility
as a temporary site for worship and religious education for Wayzata Sr. High
School located at the southeast corner of Teakwood Lane and Sunset Trail; 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 /Woodridge Church for a Conditional Use Permit
to allow church use of a school facility as a temporary site for worship and
religious education for Wayzata Sr. High School located at the southeast
corner of Teakwood Lane and Sunset Trail, subject to the following conditions:
1. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, regulations and ordinances,
and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation.
2. The permit is issued to Independent School District #284 for the proposed
Woodridge Church use.
3. The site shall be maintained in a sanitary manner.
4. All waste and waste containers shall be stored within approved designated
areas.
5. No signage is allowed relative to the use.
6. The permit shall be reviewed annually to assure compliance with the
conditions.
7. All parking shall be off - street in designated areas which comply with the
Zoning Ordinance.
wOf"
WOODDALE CHURCH
TO: City of Plymouth
FROM: Woodridge Church
DATE: 20 July 1990
SUBJ: Conditional Use Permit for the use of Wayzata Senior High
School by Woodridge Church
Woodridge Church would like to rent from the Wayzata School System
the Wayzata Senior High School from 9 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. every
Sunday morning for the purpose of holding our worship service.
This service would take place in the high school auditorium with
an average expected attendance of 200. Besides the auditorium,
Woodridge would also rent a room for nursery, and several rooms
for Sunday School classrooms.
This rental agreement with the Wayzata School System for the
Wayzata Senior High School complies with the Conditional Use
Permit Standards from Section 9, subdivision A of the Plymouth
Zoning Ordinance in the following ways:
1. In terms of the comprehensive plan for the usage of the
Wayzata Senior High School, the rental of Woodridge Church
will in no way deviate from that plan. Woodridge Church will
not alter in any way the high school facility. Our usage
will be limited to the weekly rental on Sunday mornings.
2. Woodridge Church is committed to providing ongoing programs
that will be beneficial for the public welfare of citizens in
Plymouth. The usage of the Wayzata Senior High School will
in no way endanger public health or safety since the group
of people attending at Woodridge will in no way tax the
building facilities of the senior high school.
3. Since Woodridge Church is renting the property of the Wayzata
School System only on Sunday mornings, it should have no
substantial impact on property values within the
neighborhood. Also, all of our parking will be off - street
and should not be detrimental to the use of property by the
other property owners in the immediate vicinity.
4. Since Woodridge Church will only be renting the Wayzata
Senior High School on Sunday morning, it will in no way
impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of
surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. We
will not alter in any way the high school facility.
5. All parking for Woodridge Church will be in the parking lot
adjacent to the auditorium at the Wayzata Senior High School.
The anticipated attendance at Woodridge Church is
approximately 200 and the parking lot adjacent to the
auditorium holds 365 cars.
6. Since Woodridge church is renting the Wayzata Senior High
School and will make no changes to the property, it should in
all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of
the district in which it is located.
Thank you for your consideration
FR M SAX.` CN 91 A
r • 1 A 6.,W/-k III I eff# •.I
2. Before any Conditional Use Permit may be granted, the
application therefore, shall be referred to the Planning Cannission for
purposes of evaluation against the standards of this section, Public
Hearing, and development of a recommendation to the City Council, which
shall make the final determination as to approval or denial.
a. The Planning Co mission shall review the application and consider its
conformance with the following standards:
1) Coupliance with and effect upon the Comprehensive Plan.
2) The establishment, maintenance or operation of the conditional
use will promote and enhance the general public welfare and will
not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety,
morals or comfort.
3) The conditional use will not be injurious to the use and
enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the
purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
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
6,v A40
CITY OF PLYMOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING APPLICATION STAFF REPORT
REPORT DATE: August 16, 1990 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: August 22, 1990
FILE NO.: 90035
PETITIONER: Clinton Asche and Gary Yanish
REQUEST: Division of Platted Property and Zoning Ordinance Variances
LOCATION: Northeast Corner of 12th Avenue North and County Road 101
GUIDE PLAN CLASS: LA -1 (Low Density Single Family Residential)
ZONING: R -1A (Single Family Residence District)
BACKGROUND:
On June 3, 1974, the City Council, by Resolution 74 -261, approved a division
of platted property regarding the same parcels of land that are the subject of
this application. By that action, Lots 28 and 27, Block 1, Cityview Acres
were divided to create two parcels, both fronting 12th Avenue North, one of
29,092 square feet and one of 18,750 square feet. This is the manner in which
the property is currently divided.
The 1974 action by the City Council differed from the request made by the
petitioner at that time. The petitioner had proposed creation of three
parcels from existing Lots 27 and 28. Two parcels, one of 14,432 square feet
and one of 14,660 square feet would have fronted County Road 101, and a third
parcel of 18,750 square feet would have fronted 12th Avenue North. Staff
recommended only two lots be created in a manner similar to that which was
finally adopted by the City Council.
The present proposal is to divide the two existing parcels, created by the
1974 lot division into three parcels. In terms of lots sizes, the resulting
parcels would be almost identical to the parcels that were proposed in 1974,
but orientation of all three parcels would be to 12th Avenue North. Variances
are requested for lot area and lot width for two parcels.
The third parcel would remain exactly as previously approved. The petitioners
are the current owners of the property, but were not the owners in 1974.
Property owners within 100 feet have been notified of this application as a
courtesy.
PRIMARY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
1. Section 500.37 of the City Code (the Subdivision Ordinance) provides for
the division of platted lots. The lots created by such an action are
subject to the lot area, lot width, lot depth, and setback provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance.
Page Two
File 90035
2. This proposal would create parcels of 14,943 square feet, 14,272 square
feet, and 18,761 square feet. All three parcels would front 12th Avenue
North, with existing homes on the east and west parcels, and a substandard
accessory structure on the center parcel. The center parcel would be a
new building lot.
3. Variances applied for concurrent with this application to divide platted
property are as follows:
a. Lot area for Parcel A (14,943 square feet) and Parcel B (14,272 square
feet) from the 18,500 square foot Ordinance minimum.
b. Lot width at the setback line for Parcel A (103.25 feet) and Parcel B
95 feet) from the Ordinance standard of 110 feet.
4. Nonconforming setbacks for principal and accessory structures existing on
Parcel A and Parcel C which would not be affected by the proposed
division. Specifically, the house on Parcel A is 45.5 feet from the
County Road 101 property line versus the Zoning Ordinance standard of 50
feet; and, an existing accessory structure in Parcel C is 3 feet from the
west property versus the Zoning Ordinance standard of 6 feet.
5. Section 11 of the Plymouth Zoning Ordinance states six findings that the
Planning Commission and City Council must make with respect to any
variances granted to Zoning Ordinance provisions. A copy of the Ordinance
standards is attached to this staff report, together with the applicant's
narrative response to those standards.
6. The original platting of this general neighborhood - -on both sides of
County Road 101 -- resulted in lots that are in excess of 18,000 square
feet, but with some frontages as low as 85 feet. Little, if any,
redivision of properties has taken place in the general vicinity.
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS:
1. During informal Development Review Committee meetings concerning this
proposal - -prior to a formal application being submitted by the
petitioners - -the petitioners were advised of the 1974 action concerning
this property, where an application to divide the property in a manner
similar to that now proposed resulted in a City Council action to divide
the property into only two lots, as it now is. At that time, staff
advised the applicant that we could discern no substantiative changes in
conditions since 1974 other than the current proposal to orient the lots
to 12th Avenue North rather than County Road 101.
2. The creation of two building lots of less than 15,000 square feet will
create an effective increase in spot density inconsistent with that
existing in the neighborhood several hundred feet in any direction from
the site. The existing two lot configuration -- although oriented
north /south rather than east /west results in average lot area identical to
lots that now front County Road 101 several hundred feet to the north.
3. The proposed lot width, even though at variance from the R -1A standard of
110 feet, is consistent with the lot widths of most lots in the immediate
vicinity.
Page Three
File 90035
4. We find no particular physic
that constitutes a hardship
result should the owner not
Further, we do not find the
particular parcel of land in
Zoning classification in the
al circumstance regarding the existing parcel
other than the economic hardship that would
be permitted to create a new building lot.
circumstances presented to be unique to this
this neighborhood, nor other parcels of R -1A
City.
5. The applicant states that the purpose for the variances is the desire to
prohibit future owners from erecting a large garage on the existing
property. The Zoning Ordinance specifies that accessory garages are
subject to the aggregate 20 percent lot coverage specification of the R -1A
Zoning District, but in no case can exceed 1,000 square feet in size or 30
percent of the rear lot area of the lot. We find that a garage of the
maximum 1,000 square foot dimension would be as probable on the proposed
new lot of 14,272 square feet as on the existing lot. We do not find the
probability of a large garage structure to be significantly greater in the
existing situation than it would be after creation of the new lot proposed
by the petitioner.
6. The single distinguishing circumstance between the 1974 application and
the current application for division of this property is the current
proposal to direct the "new" lot access to 12th Avenue North rather than
County Road 101.
The proposal to divide the property, without consideration of the Zoning
variance actions addressed above, is responsive to the City Code Section
500.37 with respect to the division of platted lots. The intent of the
Code, to allow the division of a platted lot (versus platting) is perhaps
being stretched to divide by metes and bounds description a lot created by
an earlier division.
RECOMMENDATION:
I hereby recommend adoption of the attached draft resolution providing for the
denial of this application to divide platted property, based on a finding that
the variances required to support the division as requested, do not meet the
criteria for Zoning Ordinance variance provided by Section 11 of the Plymouth
Zoning Ordinance.
Consistent with
attached a draft
required Zoning
recording of the
Submitted by:
ATTACHMENTS:
past direction of the Planning Commission, we have also
resolution providing for the approval of the lot division and
Ordinance variances including conditions to be met prior to
lot i ision action.
arses t. uiiierua, community nator
1. Resolution Denying Lot Division and Zoning Ordinance Variances
2. Resolution Approving Lot Division
3. Resolution Setting Conditions Prior to Recording and Granting Zoning
Ordinance Variances
4. Engineer's Memorandum
5. Location Map
6. Petitioner's Narrative
7. Large Plans (pc /cd /90035:dl)
DENYING LOT DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCES FOR CLINTON
ASCHE AND GARY YANISH (90035)
WHEREAS, Clinton Asche and Gary Yanish has requested approval for a lot
division /consolidation and required lot dimension for the creation of three
parcels of 14,943 square feet, 14,272 square feet, and 18,761 square feet and
Zoning Ordinance variances for lot area and lot width for Parcel A and Parcel
B located at the northeast corner of 12th Avenue North and County Road 101;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does deny the lot
division /consolidation and required lot dimension for Clinton Asche and Gary
Yanish for property located at the northeast corner of 12th Avenue North and
County Road 101, based on the following findings:
1. No particular hardship to the owner would result from strict application
of Zoning Ordinance standards because no particular physical surroundings,
shape, or topographical conditions of the specific parcel of land involved
are found.
2. There are no conditions upon which this petition for variation is based
that are unique to this parcel of land that are not applicable generally
to other property within the same zoning classification.
3. The alleged hardship is not caused by this Ordinance and would be created
by persons presently having the interest in this parcel of land.
4. No substantial basis for the requested variances has been presented beyond
the desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of
land.
5. Specific variances denied are:
a. Parcel A - Lot area of 14,943 square feet versus the Zoning Ordinance
standard of 18,500 square feet; and, lot width on 12th Avenue North of
103.25 feet versus the Zoning Ordinance standard of 100 feet.
b. Parcel B - Lot area of 14,292 square feet versus the Zoning
Ordinance standard of 18,500 square feet; and, lot width of 93 feet
versus the Zoning Ordinance standard of 100 feet.
w
APPROVING LOT DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCES FOR
CLINTON ASCHE AND GARY YANISH (90035)
WHEREAS, Clinton Asche and Gary Yanish has requested approval for a lot
division /consolidation and Zoning Ordinance variances for the creation of
three parcels of 14,943 square feet, 14,272 square feet, and 18,761 square
feet located at the northeast corner of 12th Avenue North and County Road 101;
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 /consolidation and Zoning Ordinance variances for Clinton Asche and
Gary Yanish for property located at the northeast corner of 12th Avenue North
and County Road 101.
EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS
PARCEL A
Lot 27, except the east 125 feet thereof, and Lot 28, except the east 125
feet thereof, Block 1, City View Acres, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL B
The easterly 125 feet of Lots 27 and 28, Block 1, City View Acres,
Hennepin County Minnesota.
To be divided and consolidated as follows:
PARCEL A
Lot 27 and Lot 28, Block 1, City View Acres, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Except the East 220 feet as measured along the North line of said Lot 28
and the South line of said Lot 27.
PARCEL B
The West 95 feet of the East 220 feet of Lot 27 and Lot 28, as measured
along the North line of said Lot 28 and the South line of Lot 27, Block
1, City View Acres, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL C
The East 125 feet of Lot 27 and Lot 28, as measured along the North line
of Lot 28 and the South line of Lot 27, Block 1, City View Acres,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
FURTHER, that the City Manager be authorized to make the necessary special
assessment corrections based upon City Policy when the division /consolidation
is approved by Hennepin County.
SETTING CONDITIONS TO BE MET PRIOR TO FILING OF AND RELATED TO LOT
DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION FOR CLINTON ASCHE AND GARY YANISH (90035)
WHEREAS, the City Council has approved a lot division /consolidation and
variances for Clinton Asche and Gary Yanish for property located at the
northeast corner of 12th Avenue North and County Road 101;
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. Payment of park dedication fees -in -lieu of dedication prior to issuance
of building permit for Parcel B in accordance with City Policy in effect
at the time of building permit issuance.
3. No building permit is to be issued until the division is filed with
Hennepin County.
4. Submittal of all necessary utility easements prior to filing with
Hennepin County.
5. Approved variances are:
a. Parcel A - Lot area of 14,943 square feet versus the Zoning
Ordinance standard of 18,500 square feet; and, lot width on 12th
Avenue North of 103.25 feet versus the Zoning Ordinance standard of
100 feet.
b. Parcel B - Lot area of 14,292 square feet versus the Zoning
Ordinance standard of 18,500 square feet; and, lot width of 93 feet
versus the Zoning Ordinance standard of 100 feet.
City of Plymouth
E N G I N E E R' S M E M 0
to
Planning Commission & City Council
DATE: August 16, 1990
FILE NO.: 90035
PETITIONER: Mr. Clinton Asche, 18005 - 20th Avenue North, Plmouth, MN 55447
LOT DIVISION /CONSOLIDATION:LOTS 27 AND 28, BLOCK 1, CITY VIEW ACRES
LOCATION: East of County Road 101, north of 12th Avenue in the northwest 1/4
of Section 32.
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. _ _ --2L 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
r,
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
13. A. An extension of the sanitary sewer along with restoration of 12th Avenue is the
responsibility of the developer.
B. Installation of the water service from the main to the property line is the
responsibility of the developer.
C. A financial guarantee shall be provided to the .City for the sanitary sewer
installation prior to a lot division being filed with Hennepin County.
2
D. The seven foot street and utility easement along County Road 101 shall be shown
on the survey (Document 44092986).
E. No access shall be permitted to County Road 101.
4Z-7Submittedby: UA
Daniel L. Faulkner, P. E.
City Engineer
3
N
Irs,
32 —
A1
31
30
29
p r
16640)
moo
0
Z •
19
0
21
32 (6650
1-
31 (6620;
30
29
LOCMION MAP 9003&NO
13TH I AVE. ! h4.
t IT".
Ii254q(:,S5o ,2420' 234;,.,2220) ;212C:
1,
2v10) IU910)I(1610) (ITIOilit6201i11S25111142 • •"32' ! 220,;1:12C! 602C1 1915) I
2SSOai25.5111N1CIt272 •122 O;i12140?42040)i1t91011(16201 0720 n640M!t5r, +0440 3101 111.• '( 011( 0'0'; 192
I'2TH i .-1_L AVE 1 I N'D
AV - - - - -- - -- - — -
I ^\
i20
66301
I,.A • I •
1 (5485,546C)' (5320''(5210) 5120)1( 4900 1 4610 ?•472'311146101•(450%"10) 1431011(
4700) (4020)
iIj(50,01 594Sb(3620)'(5625; (54901(5475)i(
531011,
15220)1151#0; ,( 5000 1:146201t14710)I(46201;4510) (4420)(4320
2.— c,
6ea•i•i•I• *1* '•l•I•j• ••1o'••
I
27 I i 11TH 1 I_ AY=_. I I N4
ioi•lo•1• • • • oit•l ••io oIl• •1
16 I IS 1 14 I 73 12 i 11 I0 ;1 9 I 7 I 6 I S i• 3
22 I I '
25)50)
2S
2
J9
4
2001'(4010)
I•
6
C
1 1 '. 39 •. • 25 iS}
y •
26
27 1 26 1 29 130 31 32 133 34 i 35 36 37
2 \\\
I ¢
1 i I o 9
19 . I • o •
I -
I
A -C . i • • \ • 10 i..
20 11
21 I i ( •/
0350)
17 a 14 I 13 1! 11 I 10 9 • 7 6 S 4 I 3 (10) \ /O
14 p
I I I 2 •
Ii (,1201 \
ilw•
a
5600)
60451
6015)
16030) /
v
i_ L
TO: CITY OF PLYNIOUTH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT D ( Ii -15 t
FROM; GARY YANISH AND CLINTON ASCHE
RE; LOT DIVISION AT HIGHSWAY 101 AND 12th AVE
on
The present lot was divided creating its size about sixteen years
ago. It appears at that time a variance was desired to create two
lots but that request was denied. As a result this lot retained a
square foot base of ovver 29,000 square feet, excessively large by
area comparisons, with over 150 foot frontage on Highway 101.
Most other homes on Highway 101 have driveways leading directly
to Highway 101. In our request ore will have a safer exit from the
properties by driveways to 12th Avenue.
This petition for a variation on this parcel of land is based
upon the premise that this is the largest lot on the street, and if
the variance is granted it would provide frontages on 12th Avenue
larger than the majority of the lots and still would not have the
least square footage of all the nearby lots. We find no other
property that fits this criterion in the area.
The purpose of the variation is based on a desire to prohibit
future owners from erecting a large 1000 square foot garage on the
property. It is our understanding the present garage ordinance will
allow a building of 1000 square feet or 209 of the rear yard area,
which ever is less, to be built in the rear of a lot.
The present hardship, a neighborhood nuisence of unsightly
building, that have deterioai -cd for some time, was caused by not
granting the lot division in 1974. We are asking for a variance to
solve this problem and to insure within reason that this property
will be an asset to the neighborhood.
We have been able to contact many people who live in the
immediate area. All of the people we have contacted have
supported our proposal. We haT .re taken a petition to these people
to e:.-press their wishes.
The proposed variation will create a lot in which we would
build a house that would be located 15 ft. from the east lot line and
40 ft. from the proposed west lot line. This would create a 64 ft.
distance between the first two houses from Highway 101 and a 30
ft. distance between the second two houses. This will allow both
houses a pleasant view and increase safty exiting the property.
We feel this improvement will not decrease, but probably increase
the value of the surrounding properties as well as improve the
appearance of the present house and lot.
In conclusion we recognize certain problems will exist
concerning securing sewer to the newly created lot. However even
though it appears to be quite substantial in dollar amount it will
be a benefit for the surrounding homes. Also since disposing lawn
and leave debris is becoming a problem, smaller size lots should
become more desirable.
Even though a proposal similar to this request has not been
granted before, we feel the conditions today support our request.
To Charles Dillerud, Community Development Coordinar
From Gary Yanish and Clinton Asche -
Re: Lot division of property at 1210 Highway 101
DEN
It is our intent to improve the appearance of this piece of
property and to insure within reason that this property will be an
asset to the neighborhood. (See exibit A: pictures of the property
when it was purchased)
We have purchased this property and are making
improvements to the present home by putting on an addition and
improving the exterior.
We are asking for a lot division to prohibit future owners from
erecting a 1000 square foot garage and parking vehicles and other
items in this large space.
Most of the lots along 12th Ave on the same side of the street
have 85 ft. frontages except Parcel 2710, the Gary Yanish residence,
which has 125 ft. frontage. (See exibit H ) We are proposing at 103
ft. and a 95 ft. frontage lots on 12th Ave. The two lots we are
planning to create will have approximately 14,880 and 14,250 square
feet per lot. The lots directly across the street have less that
14,000 square feet. (171 x 80 = 13,680)
The house to be built on the proposed lot would be located 15
ft. from the east lot line and 40 ft. from the proposed west lot line.
This would crest a 64 ft. distance between the first two houses
from highway 101 and a 30 ft. distance between the second two
houses. {See exibit C) With the garage addition to the first house,
the houses all along 12th Ave. would have the same set back from
12th Ave.
A major expense in creating a buildable lot for a house would
be to bring sewer to the lot. In conferring with the Engineering
Department we proposed extending the 8 inch sewer pipe from the
street along the present path that services the Gary Yanish
residence to the sewer cleanout, then parallel to the street another
100 ft. to the proposed lot. (see exibit D) There would be two clean-
L it - ait --7, one -at the location -,,-,-here there is one no '7 and one ;=-tt the
en-:1 of the line. '%,%.7e are proposing an 8 inch pipe for the run to
the .(J - -orpo-sed lot %-7ith 4 inch lines connecting: from the hou.:-,es.
4-'
e pimop! -. in he area that have been contacted haveOt- .-1 -1
q_-:rcjv,:,me.nt. (See exibit E) 'We have taken aai-Yrjor'-ed 'hi:: in.
i--ie'r-iticin around for tl e.. e people to express their wis-hes.
The C-it. , of Plymouth, -as well as the neighborhood, 4ill have
DDme '_-'enefits::. from this propose al. The fees !.-S' enerated from the
lot dig.7i.sion as as the t,-_-t2c revenue on a -'>rearly bet:sis are
PI-!C-i+''Te --on:::equerIcs-es. 41 _-
this: ti me --t claim f inancial hardship in asking for a
d' ri='on -,-.rhere the lot.+S erould be substandard in size. However,
hould the area have -,--% Large garage built on it, and trucks parked
ft, -neatinc:: -a :--_.-itx,=_it4.on in -,,rhich property values decreased
bec:;:_=tu Se of a nuisence, it ;,A,,ould become -a financial hardship to
t -e - -ie. Unf ortunately it- would theno -]ell ;at that tin
be toci 1--ate to remed ,T the. problem.
HHence, -=tr'r..7 7;-nish and Clinton Asche., are asking that you
ipprove +- h - ab o- r=que- t 'or the lot di'vison. I
1 4trrIX
rJ 1. 1
1'
1
t
1 iV
1
I le
ow
t- Y
i•..i - fit• f!`.1 ,• {' F l 'X -. {•
4
ra (C 10 Sl,,3,7-
vT a& { p try TP _
34) (
32) — (
31)
33)
60
M
25)x.
3= (30) A I
3, (29) x^'(23) (22) (20) (18) . (16) (13) (I I) (9) (7) (5) (3) ( ) I --(20)
S 30 (28) A R S _ S _ S;t R
311,62 t6 _ ;' 2 •- _ - _ -- -- -- -------------------- s - - - - - --
e : p (27) A
62) 3, s
21) (19) (17) (15) (14) (12) (10) (8) (6) (4) (2) x(21)'
A
Is1
A
45) es '
A-20 $ 12TH A
3 L 65 65 85 85 93 e es e a e
e3 -(46) ; (45)A '
2) 31(58) (53) (51)• 3(43) (41) (40) (37) (36) (33) 3 3(43
197.93 33102 ' • -
2 30(57) $ 8
3) 339. - --` --
17 16 -- 14
29 ( 56 )
4) 343,38 \\ 6 (49) (48) (47)
44) (42) (39) (38) (35) (
34) M j(4
55) (
52) (50) h N
g A 54T. 57 I
R,20 ; n ( 54)
as as 95 as as as
2') AVE N11TH
aT" A06. JOTS o? ?Ne f4AOE &S -Pr- FEJXrI 4Gf-
GT 5 ffr45 i S •Gr Qd,JT 4 (cE .
ITS s9 A- N l D 40F_ SU8 STWibA R D S 1x5 AmouxIT5
i
t
ARLEIiJH (.. SMITH i I
nia':rc. rot. -.ions EnSin:cr and ar. Jan•:,o-
030 Ea:.-. Wavzara Botitevard Wad• =ara, Mintxes,,ta
i
Lt c v
i
4
i
Ci
t
ARLEIiJH (.. SMITHiI
nia':rc. rot. -.ions EnSin:cr and ar. Jan•:,o-
030 Ea:.-. Wavzara Botitevard Wad• =ara, Mintxes,,ta
PLAT OF SURVEY LIP IW91
OF PROPERTY OE c "_ . ::, f,`i.. 1'Ll> > "' t ±_:•:Ca_ ^_.;:.; -y ^
described as I011ow.. f UCH _ +: t.qr-# —; l 9i:ay v 2..
Scale: +1 inc:L._ ._:: "_feet.
t
i
PLAT OF SURVEY LIP IW91
OF PROPERTY OE c "_ . ::, f,`i.. 1'Ll> > "' t ±_:•:Ca_ ^_.;:.; -y ^
described as I011ow.. f UCH _ +: t.qr-# —; l 9i:ay v 2..
Scale: +1 inc:L._ ._:: "_feet.
t
U7
0 3. s _ ---- y 5 ---- -
T)
9r,
epal APJI%O 1
Resrrzxk xZ- 1
t
3 CERTIFICATE OF LOCATION OF BUILDING CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
I hereby certify that on_l- ! - 19 i I I hereby certify that one`! ' +'', 19_'J_ I }
i made a surrey of the:pr-.tp( e&1ocation of the building surveyed the property described abovq -#nd that the !!
or. the above described property and that tht: location abo g lat is a correct rgpresenta_tiottb``.psaid- sur•:ey. 1
of said building :s correctly shown on the above plat. , n
Lt c v
C
i
140 USE__
U7
0 3. s _ ---- y 5 ---- -
T)
9r,
epal APJI%O 1
Resrrzxk xZ- 1
t
3 CERTIFICATE OF LOCATION OF BUILDING CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
I hereby certify that on_l- ! - 19 i I I hereby certify that one`! ' +'', 19_'J_ I }
i made a surrey of the:pr-.tp( e&1ocation of the building surveyed the property described abovq -#nd that the !!
or. the above described property and that tht: location abo g lat is a correct rgpresenta_tiottb``.psaid- sur•:ey. 1
of said building :s correctly shown on the above plat. , n
I
T
Thus, jetition refers to the property of 1210 12th Ave.
No., the otC tin place. We have purchased this property
with the intentions of improving the appearance of this
neighborhood. It is my concern that if this property is not
sub - divided it may be used for a storage area. We would not
like to see a big 1000 sq. ft. garage put up and a bunch of
machinery and trucks parking on this property. We would like
to sub - divide this land, improve the existing house and use
the remaining lot for another home. It's time to spruce up
this corner!
NAME ADDRESS
17 4 C '
l
h
1`2 z C0 / 74W
73,de .Aoo!7.. a,
PZZO k, N .
7.;7. /O - 2 Z`' 1 .'
7Z i Sri
0 v P, iz- 4/G
7 3 -
T v ..E . nl 0